| colafitte said: Pretty graphics and charming atmosphere...., but characters and story were boring and underdeveloped (the 2 characters beside oliver that you can control were absolutely pointless at every level, and secondary characters didn't improved the story neither), and battle system was not fun at all. I expected a lot more from this game..., too childish for my tastes...., if at least it was fun but that was another disappointment. Very basic and repetitive gaming design, with sidequests that were very boring and tedious too. I can't understand the praise this game received from a lot of sites. JRPG were critizised for years for becoming too predictiful, stuck in the past, repetitive,.... and suddenly Ni No Kuni was praised for doing the old same again. It's not a bad game, but it's very far to be considered a classic. For me, a 7 out of 10, and i'm being generous.... |
And this is why the review system as it is now is broken. No offense to you, and this response isn't really exactly to you, it's to everyone. It's just video game journalists have the majority of people thinking 6/10 is bad and anything less is just a broken unplayable game. There's a reason that there is a scale of 1-10, but any video game that's remotely good gets a minimum of 7/10. While Metacritic gives the average, there are a lot of websites that hand out 100s like candy on Halloween. Just how many perfect games are out there? 100s should be almost impossible to attain. A 6/10 is a good game, as is a 3/5. 2.5/5 or 5/10 is the very middle, meaning it'd be the average and 6/10 would be the games that got to that upper half of the average.
. My opinion sounds more like a 5 or 6 out of 10, if I unterstand you right.... I was giving a 7 considering something between average and good, so maybe is more apropiate a 6 out of 10 being generous....
