sc94597 said:
Maybe the reviewers felt they did towers better in Zelda than Horizon? All of the arguments you can use to justify inconsistency in his reviews can be used with respect to Horizon and Zelda. Ask yourself why it is the case that you didn't see that. You mentioned a 5 for a game that otherwise got 9's or 10's. No Man's Sky has a 71% Metacritic. A 5 is about as far from 71% as a 7 is from 98% (or now 97%.) Also a 7 is not good on Metacritic. They label that as "mixed", which is obviously not "positive". |
Except, going by that thread, they are pratically the same. Only the ones in Horizon are moving creatures. Of course, that ignores my 2nd guess. Maybe he just doesn't like the new additions to this Zelda, which is his right to not like.
Yes, I do wish it got an 89, not because I think it deserves that, but it would be hilarious to see how apeshit some fans would be for it getting a great score. I mean if they are going this nuts over a 7 lowering it to 97, I'm guessing the internet would blow up if they got an 89. Hell, a 94 may have the same reaction.
And I don't care what Metacritic lists a 7 as. It matters what the reviewer lists it as, which to many is just plain good. Of course, that doesn't really matter, since the Metacritic is still 97.