People's reaction to negative Zelda reviews reminded me of this gem.

[GOWTLOZ]

Veknoid_Outcast said:

GOWTLOZ said:

His review is very professional and validates his points. I even saw a clip of Zelda gameplay and that weapon durability thing looks annoying and constantly interrupts the flow of gameplay. Also the world looks empty compared to most modern open world games.

Jim is sassy but he always has a point. I have disagreed with his reviews such s Assassin's Creed 2 which he gave a 4.5 out of ten and is one of my favourite games of all time and Killzone 3 which he gave a 10 out of ten but I would give an 8 out of ten. Still the opinion he presented inthose reviews were accurate, like his complaints about Assassin's Creed 2's combat was accurate though that didn't bother me in the game but it did bother him. Also his Horizon Zero Dawn review is accurate and I agree with most of what he said in his review.

That's funny because it was his Assassin's Creed 2 review that first endeared him to me. Everyone was salivating over the game, but Sterling pointed out that its huge open world was populated almost exclusively with filler.

Did he really give Killzone 3 a 10/10? Dude is all over the place.

About BotW: I strongly urge you to play the game. Watching a YouTube clip doesn't do the game justice. Trust me, the game is far from empty. And breakable weapons don't interrupt the flow of gameplay. I'd argue they make combat all the more interesting, unpredictable, and spontaneous. Your mileage may vary, though.

I don't think combat would be interesting if my weapons break in a few hits. That would encourage me to rather than fighting enemies avoid combat situations. ALos weapons shattering just sounds ludicrous.

Breaking weapons are there in the Souls games but the weapons are still intact, they just do way less damage and the damage decreases with each hit. Also the weapons still have significant durability so that doesn't put me away from combat. That is the way to do it in my opinion. I could be wrong as I haven't played the game.

You have a really weird taste in gaming though, liking Killzone 1 more than 2 and 3, Infamous 1 more than 2 and Second Son, God of War 1 more than any of its sequels, Uncharted 2 more than 3, now not liking Assassin's Creed 2. I really can't trust you xD

I'm kidding btw but still you and I have vastly different tastes in gaming even when we do like the same franchises.

irstupid said:

GOWTLOZ said:

His review is very professional and validates his points. I even saw a clip of Zelda gameplay and that weapon durability thing looks annoying and constantly interrupts the flow of gameplay. Also the world looks empty compared to most modern open world games.

Jim is sassy but he always has a point. I have disagreed with his reviews such s Assassin's Creed 2 which he gave a 4.5 out of ten and is one of my favourite games of all time and Killzone 3 which he gave a 10 out of ten but I would give an 8 out of ten. Still the opinion he presented inthose reviews were accurate, like his complaints about Assassin's Creed 2's combat was accurate though that didn't bother me in the game but it did bother him. Also his Horizon Zero Dawn review is accurate and I agree with most of what he said in his review.

Kind of ironic that you point out some of his reviews that are contrary to what you would give games that you have played, yet you say based on clips you have seen of the game his BotW scoris fair.

Just one more person who hasn't played the game jumping on the Sterling bandwagon.

I said he makes valid points in all of his reviews. His point about Assassin's Creed 2's terrible side quests and combat are valid and effected his enjoyment of the game significantly but they don't for me even though I would acknowledge that game does have those problems.

See Zelda may not be seven for me like it was for him but I usually agree with his critique and the points he makes even if those are not a much of a huge deal to me or if they are larger deal to me than him. That's why he is one of the best critics he doesn't just skip over various aspects of a game he says them out loud for you to know and his score is just the way he personally gives weightage to those points.