| gamingsoul said: Some Nintendo franchises get especial treatment from critics(rockstar too but that𠏋 for another topic) for example the original wind water had a very tedious sailing mechanic still it got many 10s, skyward sword had terrible motion controls ign gave it a 7 but still the game has a 93 at metacritic, that𠏋 higher than ff7, Metroid prime had awkward controls, terrible platforming, very boring Scan everything gameplay but it has like 98 at metacritic, Breath Of The Wild had terrible voice acting, boring story, boring music, similar enemies, repetitive fetch quest , but it got a 97. Meanwhile great games like resi2 and sekiro barely reach 90 at metacritic, and some people say there𠏋 no Nintendo bias? |
I agree with everything up there except Metroid Prime. It was a complete revamp of a series done extremely well and excelled in atmosphere^.
Nintendo games have a consistency to them yes, but shouldn't a true 10/10 be able to satisfy as many gamer tastes as possible? A good story/narrative should be required then. Or at least revolutionary/highly innovative gameplay to bump it up more like Metroid Prime did.
Games have LONG been able to include great stories with great gameplay. It's not necessary to have a story, but for satisfying as many tastes and preferences as possible it is. To make sense more as a true 10/10 experience I'd argue it is.
Sometimes I don't want to play a game with a story and sometimes I do. I enjoy plenty of Nintendo games that don't have a note worthy story, but I wouldn't consider many of them past the the revolutionary games they evolved from to have much worth in the reviews department. Once that revolutionary well has been dried up you need to focus on value, and the vast majority of Nintendo games are missing quite a bit of story value to them.
Lube Me Up
