contestgamer said:
The guy peed in a bottle to make the witness. Whatever else he worked on, he sure as heck spent a lot more time on the witness than on braid and thats not even counting the hours of his team. If you divide the metacritic score with the hours worked by everyone involved in the project to difference between braid and the witness is staggering. They're both good games, but Blows peak was during the making of Braid. He created a better game in a fraction of the amount of time. Michael jordan still won three rings after retirement, but his peak was still during the first threepeat. |
Sorry mate, but you're logic is bust. Very bust in fact. I will reply to you once because it's going nowhere and you keep using this logic even though people keep pointing out why is doesn't make sense.
Facepalm 1. Trying to form a trend based on 2 games
Facepalm 2. Why are you trying to split development time with Metacritic score to judge how good a game is? It just doesn't work. Game A takes 2 years, gets metacritic score of 90. That's 45 points a year. Game B takes 3 years gets a metacritic score of 99, that's 33 points a year. Game B, using your logic, is far inferior which in reality it isn't.
If you want to look at it more simple, Metacritic says that Braid is a few points better and even then that doesn't mean Braid is a better game, most reviewers take in to account the price of the game when the review.
But if you've played it and you think that it's a lot worse than Braid. That's your opinion and nobody can take that away from you.
