d21lewis said: I could fault Zelda for its lack of voice acting or Mario Wii for its lack of innovation but really, I'd be missing the point. If a game sets out to fulfill a specific purpose (be it story, puzzles, platforming, or what have you) then its a good game. If a FPS has a great storyline but sucks as an FPS, the score will show it. If a party game has amazing graphics and voice acting but it sucks as a party game, the score should reflect that. It's not a matter of "getting a free pass". It's a matter of delivering on expectations. |
Neither are 'faults'. In many peoples minds, including the creators, Zelda benefits by not having voices. And again ,many people do think Mario Galaxy did innovate Platformers.
And on the same token, many FPS DO get upscored without bringing much new gameplay content to the table. Just better graphics and 'cinematics'. It fits very well to this threads theme, as many FPS don't improve on other FPS, but have the hype and marketing to become popular and therefore generate the scores and sales from that.