By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Renna Hazel on 19 March 2017
Edit Thread
MTZehvor said:
Renna Hazel said:

Frustrating? lol I don't care what Jim or anyone else thinks about the game. Someone merely asked me why I thought he was biased and I answered. As stated in my first post, people can just ignore him and move on after reading the review, which is what I do. As for your points. 

1-I personally made it through every area of the game without worrying about one hit KOs. A few of the boss characters can do that to you, but you're not really encouraged to fight them. The strongest enemies are probably the guardians and the lynels, I did Zora's Domain as my first dungeon and killed the Lynel rather than sneaking around him, even with only 6 hearts he couldn't kill me in one hit. I assume the guardians can early in the game but it's definitely rare. 

2-I'm aware he mentions the fire, which is why I said you're rarely in an area where you can't start one. Even when scaling mountains, there are still plenty of shelter to start a fire, you may have to deviate a bit from your path, but you never have to completely jump off a mountain and go to an inn to pass the time. I honestly don't think anyone playing the game does that...that's extreme hyperbole. 

3-"Too many times does Breath of the Wild paint its players into corners rather than encourage “varied” playstyles. Too many times does Breath of the Wild force its players into performing mundane tasks or sidetrack their way out of the experience. Too few bosses are anything approaching memorable or exciting, while we’re at it."

This is the quote I was referring to. Again, just not sure how this can really apply to this game. I guess if you really are gliding to an inn every time is starts raining....sure, but seriously, who does that?

4-He says you will lose track of the shrines....that HEAVILY implies that you can't track which ones you've completed. I'll apologize if I'm interpreting that incorrectly but I don't understand the complaint otherwise. 

I definitely didn't claim he said things that he didn't say, and since you can seemingly find the quotes I'm referring to for each point, I clearly read the review. I'm all for open debate but you can cut the condescending stuff out of your post. If you don't see anything wrong with his review, more power to you. I certainly see someone trying to exaggerate or create problems that aren't really there. 

At the point where you accuse a reviewer (or anyone) of having bias and providing "blatantly incorrect information" in a review, then no, you've moved far beyond "open debate." If you want to make the argument that he's exaggerating the flaws with a game, fine. But the difference between the former and the latter is one is going after a person's journalistic integrity, which is just a step below a direct attack on a person's character, whereas the latter is simply arguing how much a certain flaw affects a person.

And perhaps the biggest thing to note in that line (going to group all of these points together to save time) is that just about every response here is based on your personal experience with the game. At the very most, you can say that his skill level makes his review not as applicable for the average gamer (although I've watched quite a few people play this game, and, along with my own playthrough, I think I'm pretty safe in saying you're in the minority for never worrying about getting one hit KO'd). But the accusation of willfully providing misinformation as a result of bias is nothing short of baseless.

This shows bias in my opinion. I do find exaggerations lead to misinformation. 

And obviously my responses are based on my personal experience. As are Jims I would assume? I'm not sure what else I can base it on. But if we're past having an open debate about the review (that's what this topic is about) because I think it's inaccurate, there really isn't much else to say. I don't want to get into a condescending back and forth because that's just not my style.