By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Latest EDGE reviews in, Donkey Kong scores a 7

Somini on 13 February 2014
Samus Aran said:
osed125 said:
Samus Aran said:
osed125 said:
Somini said:

That's like saying Angry Birds is bigger than Mario, completely false and highly biased.

Angry Birds is indeed bigger than Mario. The only difference between the two is that one has lasted for almost 30 years and the other will most likely die in a couple of years.

But at the moment there's no denying that both Angry Birds, Flappy Bird and Candy Crush are bigger than Mario.

Bigger in terms of what? Mario probably makes more money than all these games combined. More people will also know Mario than those 3 games. 

If Nintendo released free IOS games they'd destroy Angry Birds. 

The Candy Crush guys make ~700k a day. Before taking it down, the Flappy Bird guy made ~50k a day. Can't remember how much money the Angry Bird guys are making, but is a lot.

Angry Birds has been downloaded 1.7 billion times, and as of November 2013 Candy Crush has been downloaded 500 million times.

Both Angry Birds and Candy Crush have a lot of merchandise outside of their games, be it toys, board games, shirts, etc, etc

So Angry Birds and Candy Crush are bigger in both how much money they make and popularity.

People really buy Angry birds toys, shirts, etc? 

That's kinda sad lol. But anyway, I still think Mario is better known and unlike the games you mentioned, he'll still be around for years to come. 

I have an Angry Birds pillow and it's pretty cute actually haha even though i've never played the game more than 10 minutes.



Around the Network
TheLastStarFighter on 13 February 2014

7 seems low from the graphical and sound quality we've seen so far. The gameplay would have to be utterly broken, which seems very doubtful coming from Retro and Nintendo, especially with them using the same engine as their last well-reviewed entry.



Samus Aran on 13 February 2014
Somini said:
Samus Aran said:
osed125 said:
Samus Aran said:
osed125 said:
Somini said:

That's like saying Angry Birds is bigger than Mario, completely false and highly biased.

Angry Birds is indeed bigger than Mario. The only difference between the two is that one has lasted for almost 30 years and the other will most likely die in a couple of years.

But at the moment there's no denying that both Angry Birds, Flappy Bird and Candy Crush are bigger than Mario.

Bigger in terms of what? Mario probably makes more money than all these games combined. More people will also know Mario than those 3 games. 

If Nintendo released free IOS games they'd destroy Angry Birds. 

The Candy Crush guys make ~700k a day. Before taking it down, the Flappy Bird guy made ~50k a day. Can't remember how much money the Angry Bird guys are making, but is a lot.

Angry Birds has been downloaded 1.7 billion times, and as of November 2013 Candy Crush has been downloaded 500 million times.

Both Angry Birds and Candy Crush have a lot of merchandise outside of their games, be it toys, board games, shirts, etc, etc

So Angry Birds and Candy Crush are bigger in both how much money they make and popularity.

People really buy Angry birds toys, shirts, etc? 

That's kinda sad lol. But anyway, I still think Mario is better known and unlike the games you mentioned, he'll still be around for years to come. 

I have an Angry Birds pillow and it's pretty cute actually haha even though i've never played the game more than 10 minutes.

Well, I don't even have a smartphone, so I guess I'm not the right person to be talking about this. :o



kidvizious on 13 February 2014
TheLastStarFighter said:
7 seems low from the graphical and sound quality we've seen so far. The gameplay would have to be utterly broken, which seems very doubtful coming from Retro and Nintendo, especially with them using the same engine as their last well-reviewed entry.


Honestly, I doubt this game will get another 7. Edge is notorious very being very strict with their scoring. Also, why is 7 considered so bad? To be a 7 requires it to be broken... Which is crazy...



Samus Aran on 13 February 2014
kidvizious said:
TheLastStarFighter said:
7 seems low from the graphical and sound quality we've seen so far. The gameplay would have to be utterly broken, which seems very doubtful coming from Retro and Nintendo, especially with them using the same engine as their last well-reviewed entry.


Honestly, I doubt this game will get another 7. Edge is notorious very being very strict with their scoring. Also, why is 7 considered so bad? To be a 7 requires it to be broken... Which is crazy...

We're fanboys, a 7 is bad for us! :p

But honestly, I'm not bothered at all with a 7 from Edge. 



Around the Network
kidvizious on 13 February 2014
Brii said:
Scores mean very little now, since apparently a 7/10 is considered 'bad' and not worth anyone's time. I wish I could take scores at face value, where a 7 would mean well above average/good and a 4/10 means flawed but not irredeemably awful. 10/10s should frankly not exist, because there's always SOMETHING about a game that isn't perfect. It's just impossible. 8s and 9s shouldn't be handed out so liberally, and saved for great games and amazing ones.

I have DK preordered, and if it really IS a 7/10... I'd still feel very good about my purchase. But because the scoring system is so flawed, I don't even know what the numbers truly mean anymore. Part of it is our own fault as gamers, for foaming at the mouth any time someone dares to give game we've been anticipating or love a 6 or 7, both being ABOVE average. Guys, it's okay to love a game that's not wonderful, great, or even GOOD. I like plenty of games I would score a 4 or 5 overall, and no game I've ever played I would give a 10. Because perfection does not exist.


Actually a 10/10 doesn't mean it is perfect. A 10/10 could mean it is a Masterpiece which is different from Perfect unless the reviewer explicitly states this game is perfect which is impossible since opinions aren't facts.



TheLastStarFighter on 13 February 2014

In review scores, a 6 or 7 is average, or more good than bad. Sometimes people like to say a 5 is average because it is half way between 0 and 10 - but that's not the case. A 5 would mean there are equal parts bad and good. "Average" games should still have more good than bad, and thus should score a 6 or 7. 8's and 9's mean almost everything is good about the game while a 10 would say there is nothing that you would reasonably improve at this time.

So a 7 would be a "bad" review when you are Retro since almost everything about the game should be good. I suspect it's just a reviewer looking for a little attention, or one who isn't a fan of the genre. Everything I've seen about the game looks high-end. Of course, I need to play it first.



TheLastStarFighter on 13 February 2014

The Castlevania review also seems harsh. I wonder if the game is truly broken.



Carl on 13 February 2014

I really enjoyed the original Lords of Shadow, can anyone tell me what score it got?



                            

orniletter on 13 February 2014
hinch said:
*sigh* not looking gooking good for Castlevania. Might sit this out one.

Curious why DK only got a 7 from EDGE. They usually rate Nintendo games pretty high (9-10).


Their 10s are usually hard to come by.

The big Nintendo titles are mostly in the 8-9 category.