BoosterGold said:
MGS4 wasnt greatly different but its gameplay in todays time is still up to par and is actually good and has more to it than jumping and moving across the sceen, Donkey Kong is still stook in the 80s. Fight Night Champion was a sports game that had a story so there you go. Sports games dont need a story to begin with (you made a pretty stupid point here) Mario attempts at a story somewhat as does Zelda yet its always terrible, its always about saving some princess in a castle. As for Red Dead Redemption it was basically a GTA game but like you said the game was "great" Donkey kong and Kirby are not great. Even if it changed nothing it still played good and better than most games, Donkey Kong and Kirby are worse than most HD games. The game looked great and was in HD, Donkey Kong and Kirby are no better than PS2 games. The game had a story with characters that could talk, Donkey Kong and Kirby have neither and are aimed for the under 11 crowd. Nintendo doesnt make good games. Look at the 2011 metacritic high scores, the console struggles to get games that are considered good, it has one game over the score of 90. 2010 it has 2 games that got over 90, one was a Rockband games with mediocre a user score. In 2009 it had only one game over 90. They dont compare to PS3 or Xbox, its just a console for small children and families. |
Wait, you're using Metacritics in your argument? Really?
Ok then. Let's have a look at Metacritics now, shall we.
Here is a list of Nintendo developed games with their Metacritics scores:
- Super Mario Galaxy: 97
- Super Mario Galaxy 2: 97
- The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess: 95
- Super Smash Bros Brawl: 93
- Metroid Prime Corruption: 90
- New Super Mario Bros Wii: 87
- Donkey Kong Country Returns: 87
- Kirby's Epic Yarn: 86
Now, if Nintendo doesn't make great games anymore, how come the 2 Galaxy games are among Metacritic's highest rated games of all time?



















