errorpwns said:
Your point was they complained there weren't gameplay improvements. For what those games are they don't really need improvements. Mario 64 is still played by a ton today. Just because by your standards it didn't age well doesn't mean it isn't widely played and enjoyed by tons of people. Sunshine and Galaxy also were. |
Crash gameplay was never an issue either
Most critics praised it actually
The critics now state it didn't aged too well and needed some improvements, what I for sure agree or at least accept as a legit reason to give it a 6/10 or 7/10
What I find amusing is how lenient are critics when it comes to review Nintendo "classic" games
A critic won't be intellectually honest to state a 24 years old game don't need any graphic or gameplay improvements and is as good and enjoyable as it was in 1996, not when the same critic point this as a negative aspect in another review just because it's from a a far less acclamied franchise
Of course, scores for this trilogy aren't out yet, so I can be wrong and critics can be intellectually honest this time, I just doubt it. It will score 90+ again like anything with Super Mario in the title
