Jim Sterling’s site under attack after Zelda: BotW review

[Mnementh]

potato_hamster said:

Mnementh said:

The Tomb Raider reboot was Damsel in Distress, you were going to save Sam from a cult of cannibalistic worshippers of an ancient deity. It good reviews. Given, it wasn't Microsoft, but Square-Enix isn't Nintendo.

Maybe not the best example to use:

http://www.gamesradar.com/rise-tomb-raider-biggest-problem-may-never-be-fixed/
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/video-games/columns/experienced-points/15405-Rise-of-the-Tomb-Raider-s-Story-Keeps-Interrupting-the-Game

And still I'm not talking about "good reviews', I'm talking about "near perfect reviews". That's what I mean by a free pass, that is, all of the negatives are basically overlooked because they're not really considered negatives if Nintendo is doing it, it's just "Nintendo being Nintendo" as others have put it. Tomb Raider, is treated like the great game that it is but not a perfect one.

Now to be fair, there's other series that seem to also get similar treatment - the Metal Gear Solid series, and the Grand Theft Auto series to name a couple. But that doesn't make it any more acceptable.

Well, your articles have nearly nothing to do with what I said, look here instead: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/video-games/columns/experienced-points/10266-Lara-s-Damsel-in-Distress

But to explain further: the near perfect reviews come because for most (not all people) all the things in BotW click together and make a good experience. Single points don't detract of it, except for some. That's why you see the phenomenom, that people watching Youtube-videos of it dislike it, while people playing it mostly like it. Reviewers have to play it to give a vote.

I don't think the crackpot-theories of a Nintendo-conspiration among the reviewers is true. They sometime catch a good feeling with their games. If they fail, they usually get hell from the reviewers for it. But more: if there was a Zelda-nostalgic that influences reviewers it would have impacted the score of BotW negatively. Because it breaks with a lot of Zelda conventions. So, please, no conspiracy theories, the reviewers are not more likely to support Nintendo than Sony (and the conspiracy theory that reviewers are in league with Sony are also existant). To further my point, just compare this Meta of WiiU and PS4:

http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/score/metascore/all/wii-u/filtered?sort=desc

http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/score/metascore/all/ps4/filtered?sort=desc

Doesn't look like reviewers are generally boosting scores for nintendo games.

No, the thing is just, that many reviewers just liked BotW. Just because it is fun and makes them forget about story, tropes, framerates and stuff like that. Not everyone again, although I think Jim Sterling gave a pretty positive note with 7/10. Maybe some people here have to accept that this Metascore from reviewers is not a result of something sinister but a result of reviewers just liking the game. Even if some people disliked it.

Tl;DR: it's time to accept that reviewers have opinions, and that they maybe really have a good impression about BotW.