Why doesn't Nintendo make a game that looks like Uncharted 2/3??

[DonFerrari]

Kai_Mao said:

DonFerrari said:

So you can't use the reviewers giving good scores to Nintendo as a way to say Nintendo games have great graphics or that graphics doesn't matter (because for PC, PS and Xbox they are sure to take out score on graphics) it is more like that reviewers give a free pass to these games and change the scope of evaluation.

I think reviewers take a game's graphics for what they are instead of what they could've been, at I would like to think that. Just because the graphics aren't as clean or as enhanced or as realistic as other games in stronger hardware, doesn't mean the scores have to be significantly changed. It doesn't make a game like Mario 3D World an 8 compared to UC4 getting a 9 or something just because, technically, UC4 looks better. I mean, Sonic Mania has been praised from the heavens in 2017 and in a technical sense, its within the style of 16-bit Sonic/Sonic CD, games that were released in the 90s. Just because a game like Mario Odyssey, BotW, Splatoon, etc. aren't great looking games on a technical standpoint compared to say Uncharted 4, Last Guardian, The Witcher 3, Final Fantasy XV, etc., doesn't mean they aren't great to look at in general. I think Odyssey looks incredible, both in presentation and in gameplay, and I've played games like Uncharted, Overwatch, Gears of War, Street Fighter, and the what not. If you don't think so, then that's fine; you judge it the way you want to judge the game. If you think games like Odyssey or BotW should be docked significantly just because, technically and graphically, they aren't up to par to Titanfall, Uncharted, Overwatch, etc., then more power to you.

The issue on that is the complete lack of standard for reviewers.

To ignore all the shortcomings in the Nintendo games to them bitch and moan on the other games is obtuse. Also on the "what could have been", a lot of reviewers don't evaluate what the game is or try to accomplish, but what they wanted the game to achieve. Both aren't present when they give plethora of high scores for some Nintendo games.

On the case of BTOW it became so ridiculous that some reviewers pointed to several down points on the game, with severe criticism, and still gave a 10. Not a 9.5 (like, it is almost perfect, but have these big issues) but a 10. And for other games they will pick minor nitpicks and down the score to 80. In both cases "because of reasons". And that is why it's useless to discuss reviewers. Same on discussing GOTYs. A game can win the "game of the year" award on the platform and lose on the category it represents for a game that is on the same platform.