By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Torillian on 20 December 2013
Edit Thread
Aielyn said:
Torillian said:
ugh.....can't believe you want to agree with this self indulgent masturbatory drivel.  The idea that any fanbase has higher flipping standards than another is the stupidest thing I've heard in a while.  Particularly when your proof is just "that's how I feel" and a single example of a well selling poorly reviewed game.  Here's a check of a couple of the games that topped the Wii charts and their metas.

Wii Play 28.75 million sales Meta score: 58

Mario Party 8      7.97m sales Meta score: 62

Michael Jackson: The Experience  4.24m sales Meta Score 56

You're a mod, you should NOT be making that sort of statement. If you can't be respectful when posting, perhaps you should give up your mod-ship, or have a second account for that sort of talk.

Anyway, I like how you use meta scores, which are averages across a group of hardcore gamers who rated games, to show that pick-up-and-play games are low quality. I have both Wii Play and Mario Party 8 - both are very good games. And you can see the effect of "this is casual, therefore it's not as good" by looking at the distribution of ratings. Mario Party 8 averages 63% on Gamerankings... but GamePro gave it 9/10, and JIVEMagazine gave it 5/5.

On the flipside, IGN gave it 5.2/10... and here's the first line of their verdict: "Hudson and Nintendo really need to rethink the Mario Party formula, but will they?". And here's the last line: "In spite of our issues with the game, people who loved Mario Party 7 will probably enjoy Mario Party 8, too, but we've chosen not to reward Nintendo with an undeserved high score for a copy/paste sequel."

In the case of Michael Jackson: The Experience, a look at what reviewers actually said is rather revealing. For instance, in the Destructoid review (5/10), the main complaints are the difficulty (it's too hard), the lack of unlockables (everything is available from the start), and the fact that it uses the Wii Remote rather than doing full-body tracking a la Kinect. IGN's review (3.5/10) said "The biggest problem with Michael Jackson: The Experience is obvious when you consider the Wii's control setup. This platform wasn't designed to read a player's entire body, so a dance game that tasks players with moving their entire body presents an inherent disconnect."

So you tell me - are these reviews reasonable? Are they being evaluated from the perspective of a fan of these types of games? Or are they being evaluated according to "hardcore" sensibilities, and thus being given relatively low scores as a result?

People need to realize the difference between something said about a post and something said about a person.  I can't call you stupid that's against the rules, but if I have good reasoning I can call your post stupid without any issue.  Can't go crazy with it but it's reasonable to toss out there for a particularly repugnant post/stance (aka yours)

Why can't I use metacritic?  That's exactly what you used in your own analysis.  Pretty convenient stance you're taking that all those high selling Wii games were actually just misunderstood while Haze is a pile of crap that Sony fans bought because they don't know what a good game is.  



...