mZuzek said:
Yeah. At this point I thought everyone would understand critic scores are always biased by franchise. Most franchises just have a base score critics give it, and it doesn't budge much regardless of how much a game might have gotten better or worse when comparing to its predecessors. I know back on the Wii U days I'd have a hard time trying to say MK8 was better than Splatoon, but today I couldn't possibly bring myself to say that about MK8D over Splatoon 2 - it's just what the critics are like. Mario Kart is a 9 out of 10 franchise, Splatoon is a 8 out of 10 franchise, and so on. It's why franchises like Zelda or GTA for example still have crazy high scores even when people don't like the games (Skyward Sword and GTA IV, for example). That is to say, there is a very strong bias that runs largely based on reputation. I'm pretty sure most of the complaints critics had with ARMS and Splatoon 1/2 were related to a possible lack of content, but when it's Mario Kart they just don't care. Granted I don't think MK8D lacks content, but it doesn't have too much more to offer either. |
lol, we just had this conversation. But your arguments don't hold up well. Mario kart 8 was easily the best mario kart in years, so it getting an 89 made sense. Splatoon was very bare bones when it came out, and while I found it to be very enjoyable, not everyone did. I'd say an 81 was fair. Lol, skyward sword. Skyward sword was mechanically the best zelda, and it easily the best motion control game at the time. This was also the time that getting a mid 90's score was rather easy, so Zelda getting a 93 made sense. And GTA V sold 10's of millions, bad games don't sell that much lol. You have to realize that it's not because of the franchise, but because of the developers that games are getting these scores. Naughty dog learned a lot from the first uncharted and since then has consistenly put out phenomal games.
It just happens that many of the franchises are made by the same devs.
Something...Something...Games...Something
