Goodnightmoon said:
What? Of course I'm not gonna give any importance about the 4 Washington post gave to Uncharted 4 because I don't even care about Uncharted 4 to begging with and I haven't played it so I have absolutely nothing to say. And I don't understand that expression "did you spend this much time" what are you talking about? You guys waste more time than those that disliked the review themself lol Last time it was the same story, I said Jim review was very suspicious, ONE simple comment, and people started disscussing me about it and creating a debate just to finnish with "you shouldn't waste so much time about it"...wtf? I'm not wasting any more time than you. |
It's not about whether or not you've played the game, it's about the conspiracy theories that always start flying around when someone scores a Nintendo game lower than expected and it's about the fact that you claim that games with lots of perfect scores and high metascores can't be objectively flawed in such a way that it detracts to the gamer's experience.
Also, you'll note that I wrote "did you spend this much time" rather than "did you waste this much time", big difference. You're just polarizing the argument and refusing the see the weak logic in the "games with high scores can't be objectively or even subjectively flawed because I say so". And the reasons I ask about your time spent doing that is simple; the first is that I would expect some consistency in critique against reviews that seemingly exist solely to harvest clicks, even if it's about games you haven't played, if your stance is that this is a poor practice, it should be in your interest to have an opinion on such matters and the same skepticism should be applied to other cases involving other games. Whether or not you've played UC4 isn't as relevant when the score in question was a 40%, just like anyone who ever saw BotW or even read about it any any reviews of it would be skeptical about a 40% score. You're sure quick enough to shoot down anyone who suggests that Horizon has better combat than BotW (for the sake of clearing that matter up right now, I'm not sure I personally agree with that, both games have some pretty major combat issues, but they're different issues) and every time someone makes a remark on possible design weaknesses or flaws in BotW, the shouts and angry index finger spring up right away from the same old group, people are accused of not having spent enough time with the game, having played the wrong section, flat out just being wrong because the game has no flaws or simply accused of not having played the game at all. I never saw anyone go this nuts defending any games in the GTA series, for instance, despite its huge installed base, which leads me to believe that perhaps, just maybe, sometimes, possibly, the problem might not be everyone else in the world who don't get it, but rather the vocal minority who shun any and all criticism of a product or company they love.
Having been a member here for almost a full decade now, I can tell you that this is far from a fresh practice, the tone was much the same in the 7th and 8th gen.
Hey, I agree with the last part, you're not wasting more time than me, but you're making a whole lot less sense, with your metascore arguments and rhetorical lockdown on opinions that differ from yours, whether it be from Jim Sterling or anyone else.
PS: No matter what anyone writes from here on out; can we at least agree that it's ridiculous to dub someone a Nintendo hater for giving a Nintendo game a 9/10? I think it's the most unsound line of reasoning I've seen all year.
