| Samus Aran said: Lmao, your arguments are beyond stupid. First of all, metacritic user scores for Nintendo games are often very accurate (the average of them I mean). Second of all, did you even read anything in this thread? It's not about whether or not GTA is a better game or not than SSB, it's about remakes of one year old games scoring higher. |
I like how he ignored your first point basically or didn't understand it.
I saw a post earlier in this thread stating that it makes sense that GTA 5 got such good scores. I mean only a year ago it got 9.? and this improved upon that game, so obviously it should get a 9.? due to that.
Clearly this argument is slapping IGN in the face. How did they give OR/AS such a pitiful score. You listed before all the HUGE changes made to the game, not the paltry changes made to GTA5, but HUGE changes since their remake. Yet it dropped a whole 2 points in score. And no you can't say becuase the game mechanics or whatever suck, cause clearly you were fine with them in X/Y when that came out not too long ago. So how did this remake get docked 2 points, yet GTA5 stayed the same or raised.
I'm so sick of games around a year old gettting remade and getting such praise. Personally I think that games being remaked or ported within a year or 2 should not even warrant a review. They should just copy/paste the prior review and say "it's now available on this system" Put a little * on the bottom listed anything new. The only thing worth noting is if a game has glaring faults that make it uplayable. If it has better fps, or better resolution, ect that means shit. Any bonus those things would add should be deducted due to essentially delaying the game for a year.
