Are you basing this on the 3D Zeldas? 2D Zelda is a completely different beast than the 3D Zelda's.

What would you be saying if this game was on the DS? Because if it was it wouldn't be a whole lot different from say Phantom Hourglass or the Oracle games. Especially the Oracle games.

Just because something is old school doesn't mean it is bad. Look at Lost Odyssey Metascore compared to user reviews if you need to understand where I am coming from. The game is rated 79 I believe and many believe it is the best JRPG this generation and one of the best to come in to home consoles in quite a while, even with a gameplay style that mimics the late 90's-early 2000's.

Not every game needs to have a ton of micro-managing and 2M+ things to do just to be considered "good" and worthy of praise. 

The game has fun factor, normal game mode, From game mode, Spelunker game mode, differing dialogue based on game mode and/or gender preference, a full blown tower defense game with 30+ stages each on 5 different occasions as well as bonus Tower defense levels, 2 dash race minigames, multiple levels of Breakout spanning over different occasions as well. Let us not forget the large number of sidequests and ~30+ hours of play time if you choose to try and do everything (according to reviewers). I can tell you right now that if you try to do everything in 1 playthrough, getting all swords, complete all minigames, completing bestiary, etc... you are looking at an easy ~40-50 hour playthough.

The game offers a lot and all that shouldn't be ignored ONLY because it is similar to Zelda, even though it clearly has plenty of differences.

I dont think he is trying to say its as good as old school Zelda. I think he is trying to say that is getting docked a few too many points for trying to recreate that feel. Its like he thinks some reviewers dont understand its SUPPOSED to be like Zelda. I cant say if the reviews are valid or not, I havent played the game.

Now that is complete bull, the change in perspective for Zelda games has practically little significant changes to the games only difference is the 3d games can utlize more mechanics they're not completely different beasts at all, your JRPG example is a joke as well because JRPGs have been mediocre this gen. This isn't like 2d and 3d Mario where the is a big difference.

There is a big difference between old school 2D and new 3D styles Zelda's.

JRPG's have been pretty mediocre, but when a game as great as Tales of Vesperia rated lower than 80 I notice a problem with the reviewers. That game is downright AWESOME, and don't be surprised when Xenoblade and Last Story get manhandled by the critics as well. I will be here to give you all a big "Told ya so" when it happens.

Back to the point though, the game had a plan, something it set out to do, a specific audience it set out to attract. Problem is that the game was rated based on who it DOESN'T attract, although to be fair many reviewers said that if you enjoy old school Zelda, which I do, add an extra 1.0-2.0.

I don't like that style of reviews, especially considering many don't read reviews these days, only the score.

My argument mimics that of the people who complain about people not rated "casual" games correctly and only rating them based on what the "hardcore" would expect.

Not to try and go too off-topic but look at RDR, the game has a 95 Meta score. Have you all played the game?

I ask this because 50% of the time you are traveling from one area to the next just to initiate and new mission and during that time you are either running or riding on horseback with NOTHING what so ever to do! Seriously, so much of the time in RDR there isn't shit to do, but the game is rated high because it is more "modern" or more "hardcore", even if the fun factor only exists 50% of the time.

When the fun factor is there however, IT IS THERE!

3D Dot Game Heroes fun is almost always there. Too bad though that the fun factor gets ignore because it is similar to something else. Almost everything these days is similar to something else.

Let us see if Metroid Other M gets knocked for being like Shadow Complex. I bet it doesn't, simply because of the 1st person view that has no bearing on the combat portion of the game. 

Which gets me to thinking, why didn't Shadow Complex get beaten down for playing similar to old school Metroid? Hmm, will Other M get bashed for playing like old school Metroid? Or is it alright since it IS Metroid?

Sorry but the are flaws all over your argument, if someone makes a sex simulator aimed at porn fanatics should it be given a 10/10 and be rated as high as industry greats like OOT and GTA? No, reviews have to review the game for everyone as a whole, you'd often see in most reviews they'd say if a game is good for it's intended audience whether casual or not but a review has to give an overall picture. I've got 3DDH and I have Vesperia it's a good game with the problem of dragging on needlessly at points and an often standard predictable story, problems most Tales games have (I have all of them Imported)

Almost all JRPGs have stories that drag on.

Vesperia is the only Tales game I have completed, mainly because of the cast of characters.

I also don't agree with rating something based on everyone, just because of the fact that many games have specific audiences, and that audience should be ones who it is rated towards.

Just because majority of gamers don't enjoy Disgaea doesn't mean it should be rated as shit. That in fact is a flaw with the review system.

Review companies should have employees spread across many genres, especially nice genres, and they should have those people review those games since they know who they are aiming their opinions towards.

Have a CoD fan review Disgaea and you're sure to end up with a 6/10, which like I said is a HUGE flaw with the system we currently have, because it is a no brainer that most FPS fans wouldn't play a grind fest like Disgaea, even though grind fest fanatics such as my girlfriend see these as the greatest games ever to grace a console.

They should let people know who it is aimed towards and why it is rated what it is, or better yet, discard the whole idea of number scores, because without numbers it wouldn't be so flawed since someone like me who sees the words "Too much like Zelda NES" would say "OMFG I WANT I WANT!!"

Euphoria in your opinion Is 3D Dot Game Heroes better than any of the 2D Console Zelda's?

3 words. HELL FUCKING NO!!!

Still doesn't mean I agree with the numerous 60/100 scores it has gotten. 

I believe it is an easy 80-83 Meta games, simply based on it's simple pick up and play style as well as long game length at the price of only $40.

I think my argument is pretty sound, especially considering just how much of a Zelda fan I am.

Gonna go eat some greasy bacon burgers, be right back to see responses.

So the problem your seeing is points have been taken off in places where they should be there because that is the games identity?