GoOnKid said:
Well, if people really play it only once and never again I can probably understand why they cry about the price. But then again, they would spend another 60 bucks for the next game they play after SF0 and never touch that one again after beating it once. And again with the next one after that. And again after that. I think they spend more in the long run. As far as I know The Order 1886 consists mostly of cutscenes and walking, belighted by some generic shooting sequences. After you finished it, there is absolutely no value in watching the same custcenes and listening to the same story again. |
The first paragraph only makes sense for single player games not multiplayer games. Once I beat all the Grand Prix for Mario kart, I still come back because of the multiplayer (the multiplayer is what helps replayability). On the other hand, once I beat xenoblade chronicles, I don't think I'll play it again, but that's fine because the story is huge and the game takes long to finish. Starfox zero has neither.
As far as I know Starfox Zero consists mostly of set paths and generic bosses. After you finish it, there is absolutely no value in flying through the same paths and facing the same enemies again.
Do you see how I can shut down starfox by over generalizing it like you do to the order 1886 (this can be done with most games good or bad). Point is, starfox isn't special. The order was deemed bad because of a short campaign and content. The same problems are in starfox, so to say starfox isn't bad but the order is bad is hypocrisy at its finest
