RolStoppable said:
We've had dozens of people on VGC playing and commenting on Metroid Dread in the last couple of weeks and none of them said anything about the graphics being disappointing. You are really the odd one out and you don't live by your own mantra of "play games, not systems." Otherwise you wouldn't keep going on about Metroid Dread needing better hardware to run on. I don't know whether or not time gets reset after a death. But if it does get reset, then the displayed completion time excludes even more than the time spent on the map screen, meaning the game is even longer. What I said is that no other Metroid-like game is receiving the AAA treatment. F.I.S.T. looks like a similar deal as Shin'en games where the graphics make a good impression on a technical level, but are rather sterile as far as the artstyle is concerned, plus the gameplay is standard fare. Nintendo should absolutely get credit for investing in a big variety of genres, including a 2D Metroid, when the AAA industry limits itself to so few types of games. Do you honestly think people here are giving Metroid Dread a pass because it's made by Nintendo? |
I'm really shocked to see you trying to somehow take the mantra of "play games, not systems" and permutate that into a review thread about Metroid Dread lol... I mean, I already explained it, but it's been pretty clear to most people: if a game is good, it's good; if it's bad, it's bad. I don't care what system it's on or who made, I'm here for the games. That DOESN'T read as "love games, not systems" which is how you're interpreting it. Valid criticism is valid criticism (sure, people may not agree, but that doesn't change what it is), and I'll criticize any of the piles of plastic just as equally as any other because, again, "not systems". I have no preferential treatment DESPITE the fact that I grew up on Nintendo and my top two franchises are Zelda and Metroid...
And do I think there is a general sentiment in gaming communities towards games BASED ON the platform? Abso-fucking-lutely, it's the VERY thing I'm working AGAINST. Hence, ironically, the "play games, not systems". The Switch hardware being weak, NSO+ being over-priced, those critcisms of mine have no bearing on whether I WILL or WON'T play a game on the Switch... I almost can't believe I'm explaining this 
And look, to everyone else, including mZuzek, I have no intention of making anyone agree with me, but I stand my ground. We'll disagree or agree on things, we'll debate about it, and some dude will make personal attacks on me even though he/she was not attacked by me or my content in any way (lol on so many levels), but what in the hell would I be doing reviews for if I waver and change my opinion just because everyone else says different? I'd have less respect for me, even, if under the pressure of disagreement, I change my mind. *I* wouldn't even watch me if I was that type of person, and the reality is many of you shouldn't expect that from anyone, either. Disagreement, debates, arguments, that's how the world moves forward. But that move forward isn't because a bunch of people had their minds changed, it's because they had their perspectives challenged. This is also why I fight myself so hard to remain neutral, so my perspective remains inclusive of *ahem* all the systems: it offers up a greater overall perspective of how gaming is moving forward (and how some... aren't).
