mZuzek said:
thismeintiel said:
It's all in here. It basically boils down to how his opinions don't matter because "that's how the game was supposed to be" or "the weapons breaking adds variety." As for the defending of the attack, they speculate he lowered the review two points on purpose, just for attention or because he's trolling and he wanted the DDOS attack for more attention. Basically, he was asking for it. Some even saying it's understanable to be mad because it lowered the Meta and they would have been fine if it hadn't lowered the score. I guess cause a 97 is a shit game or something.
|
To be fair, weapon durability complaints are actually pretty sad. The durability system is crucial to a lot of the fun aspects of Breath of the Wild's gameplay, and it would be completely broken if it wasn't for it - it would get boring as soon as you got 1 good weapon.
The game has lots of other things that could be considered problems for some. Saying the story is average, or the ending is underwhelming, or talking about the inconsistent framerate, among other things are actually pretty valid points. Weapon durability is just... not. I get that some people will never like a system like that where the weapons break all the time, but it simply isn't an issue within the game design - if anything, it makes the game better.
|
Let's be honest, regardless of how the weapon system was, I'm sure you would like it. Unless you hated the old one and were constantly posting about having easily destructible weapons added to Zelda. Though, I could probably go back in your comments and wouldn't find such posts.
And no, they aren't sad. They are a differing opinions. Just because someone hates easily destructible weapons, doesn't make them sad or that they are just not enlightened enough to get it. It's that they don't like them, regardless of what game they are in.
Boberkun said:
thismeintiel said:
Of course it should be considered, as it is also a fact. Most notably when decent games get 4's or lower, which is below average. I believe someone gave UC4 a 4, which is completely ridiculous. Sure, the game may be average to you, gameplay-wise, but you can't ignore its graphical/technical achievements. IMO, the lowest that game should get is a 6, or above average. Unfortuanely, though, a 4 for a huge AAA title is guaranteed traffic to your site from fans who are going to voice their anger/disapproval for the score.
And it is somewhat concerning for gaming companies to advertise on gaming sites, as they may lead to skewed reviews. However, I don't think that is too much of a concern. Even if the site gives your game a lower score than you think it should have gotten, crying about it will only give you bad press, which could affect sales. It also stands to reason that the vast majority of site goers are going to be gamers, so you are going to want to advertise on them, anyway, to reach the largest number of gamers. Scores be damned. And not all of those gamers go off of reviews. Or think 6s or 7s make a game unbuyable.
|
4/10 - pretty reasonable score for UC4 though. This game is scripted boredom.
|
Well, good then. You should have no problem with BOTW getting a 7 and two 6's.
