Shameless said:
It's not 'my logic', it's obvious. I surely shouldn't have to explain that to you. |
So in other words, the 60 dollar PS3 port of Ninja Gaiden for the original Xbox with tons of new content is actually inferior to the Xbox original I can dowload off of XBL for 10 dollars?
I think you just don't want to understand. It's simple. Let me explain it for you.
Your opinion isn't obvious, it's silly. Games gets points taken off because they are derivitive, that doesn't mean they are inferior to their predecessors. The Wii version of RE4, for instance, is a better game than the original gamecube version, but it scored lower because it was a port, plain and simple. Scores are progressive, and just because Devil May Cry 3 might have had a higher review than DMC4 on IGN(dunno if true) at the time, it might not mean that it's a better game.
Your black and white look at reviewing has obvious flaws, for instance the original Ninja Gaiden had significant camera and technical issues, and the PS3 port is actually extremely superior to the original game. There is no question. However, since it got .1 point lower, you say that it's "obviously a better game."
Frankly, that's a little childish, and ignorant. That or your just trolling, but know this, if you ever do stop trolling and want to have a serious conversation about this, you will have absolutly no argument. There is no way you could even get a significant point of opinion in, because you are just plain wrong.
Now, it might be true that Ninja Gaiden Sigma is better than Ninja Gaiden II. However, the princible that games that score higher than other versions of itself are always the superior version of the game, are rediculious. Refined games such as Sigma are better than their original games, they simply are derivitive. That is why the score is lower.
In your simplistic view of the world, I'm sure that it doesn't make sense, but if you think for a moment, then you'll realize that a common sense approach is best in this situation.
Just to fill everyone in, this guy is saying Ninja Gaiden for the Xbox, the original version, is better than Ninja Gaiden sigma, which is virtually the same game wiith new content, a new single player campaign, refined controls, next gen visuals, a fixed camera, and no frame-rate issues with absolutely no new drawbacks of which to speak. His reason for saying this is that the original Ninja Gaiden scores .1 points higher than Ninja Gaiden Sigma on IGN.com
I contend that the reason the game scored worse could be for a number of different reasons, none of which are due to it actually being worse, being that perhaps the game is derivitive(or a port so called), or perhaps a different reviewer reviewed the game, or more importantly maybe Ninja Gaiden at the time was the end all action game, but when it was rereleased as Sigma it has some competent competition, so the score was lowered to reflect that.
Flawed reasoning and flawed logic, but you apparently have the nerve to get snarky about it when it's just so freakin' wrong, I can hardly believe it. How shallow can an argument get, cause this sets a new record.
I don't need your console war.
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor.
You're power hungry, spinnin' stories, and bein' graphics whores.
I don't need your console war.
NO NO, NO NO NO.
