Kirby Star Allies Bombs With Critics

[Cloudman]

Jumpin said:

Cloudman said:

I mean high standards in the sense that a general score of 73 is considered 'bombing' for a game. in the 70-80 range, a game would still be considered 'good'. Even games in the 60 range can still be enjoyable. It's not a matter of settling for something that is 'lesser' than previous games, but enjoying, or not enjoying said game, and look forward to the next game.

I have already explained exactly what is wrong with the reasoning in your argument multiple times, including with the post you are responding to. You are trying to assess "this is what a good game is" completely out of context of quality expectation of the game in question.

 

Let me try to put it to you another way: for book reviews, books in the 65% to 75% range are generally considered good.

Fans of Song of Ice and Fire have waited 6 years for the next book in the series. The books generally score about 85%-88% by reviewers and are expected to offer a certain amount of length. If GRR Martin, in all that time, and with the television show present, only released a book of perhaps 480 pages and had a 73% rating with reviewers; should readers be happy and satisfied that they got a good book? Of course not, this is the first book in the Song of Ice and Fire series in 6 years, the expectation is for something more substantial and of higher quality.

In this situation, I'm not sure really. I'd have to read the book for myself and see if it's really like critics claim. The other books in the series have been good more-or-less, so I don't have much reason to doubt the series now. Although, the last entry in the Kirby series was Robobot, which released 2 years ago, so it hasn't really be that long.

Either way, I can see where you're coming from with expecting a consistent level of quality, but it's not one I can follow, at least in the sense that if doesn't match the previous entry to a certain extend, it is considered terrible. Although I wouldn't really be sure what would make it be considered 'satisfactory'. That's why I find it kind of strange. If I were to set my bar to what I consider the best Kirby game in the series, every game after Super Star I would consider a failure, since none of them have matched the standards placed by that one, and that doesn't make much sense to me. Most of the Kirby games have been good to great overall.