| Jumpin said: If comparing it to other games, perhaps, but 73% stinks for a Kirby game. Historically the mainline franchise does much higher. Considering this is the first major console release in around 6 years, it should have done 85% at the least. Pokemon is a critically comparable series to Kirby. No one would be happy if the mainline debut of Pokemon on Switch did 73-78%. Even if it is considered "good" by how the scale should be, most would consider it a bomb. Sure you'll get the apologists who try to suggest "How is 73% bombing? That's a good score." But relativity and expectation are everything, and a 73%-78% would be a bomb. Basically, what I am saying is that with the "good" label, that is still below adequacy given the franchise; a mainline Kirby game SHOULD be nothing less than great. The first mainline Kirby game on home console in 6 years should be a must play; especially after the rise in expectations from the Wii era. |
How are Kirby and Pokemon "critically comparable?" Aside from the fact that their scores are usually in the same range, give or take multiple points, I don't see how you can come to this conclusion in order to use it to support your already wobbly main point.
