Release date...
That's just NintendoEnthusiast as of now - but I think more 70ish scores will follow.
It could be that Nintendo-centric review sites actually have a higher standard of quality. Back me up Rol.
I predict NX launches in 2017 - not 2016
$30.
| spurgeonryan said: @Teeqoz People say the same thing for 1 dollar games. It is soo much fun but only lasts a few hours. 3/10. But....you said it was fun? "Oh, well just because it was a dollar does not mean we do not expect more content." Some would agree with you here, but many will not. It should not matter if it is 10 dollars more if everything is the same game. That has never stopped anything before. Plus now there is off screen play and all the expansions are available. So it is much more than the original. They gave it a 70 because it ...arrived on Wii U last. THe game is owned by Microsoft! We were lucky to even get it let alone make all the extras they want happen. |
So are you saying that 10$ games should be judged on the exact same criteria 60$ games are?
Did they fix the game pad thing yet, there was a mini outrage over it last time I checked.
In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank
spurgeonryan said:
Ok, I fixed the code the best I can make it. Metacritic seems to have something strange going on.
@Teeqoz People say the same thing for 1 dollar games. It is soo much fun but only lasts a few hours. 3/10. But....you said it was fun? "Oh, well just because it was a dollar does not mean we do not expect more content." Some would agree with you here, but many will not. It should not matter if it is 10 dollars more if everything is the same game. That has never stopped anything before. Plus now there is off screen play and all the expansions are available. So it is much more than the original. They gave it a 70 because it ...arrived on Wii U last. THe game is owned by Microsoft! We were lucky to even get it let alone make all the extras they want happen. |
Price has always been a sticking point for a game. Hell, look at the outrage over The Order for the laughably short campaign.
When a game takes so long to get ported it takes a hit. Especially if it doesn't bring anything new or unique to the table. Some reviewers will look at it and say "same game I play on (insert console/PC here) for more money. That isn't as good as the other version."
Because it's more of the same, misses out on excellent use of the lower screen, and is $10 more.
Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!
Check out my Twitch Channel!:
www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames
Could be because it's a lazy port from the 360 version, which means the map size is really small. Also, no gamepad exclusive features too.
It's a late and lazy port. The PS4 and Xbox One versions actually included updated features to make the game more worthwhile (like the much larger maps). The PS3 and Xbox 360 editions were the first on consoles. The Vita edition is so far the best of the mobile Minecraft versions out there. The PC version was of course what started it all.
What is the Wii U version?
It is a basic port from a last gen console. It doesn't have increased map sizes, and doesn't use the gamepad in one of the obvious and best ways it could have been used. I mean, the gamepad was basically built for a game like this, and so it is completely skipped over for another run of the mill Minecraft experience. It is clearly a port of a three year old version of the game, and that is incredibly underwhelming. Not to mention it is out now a year later after the game had released on even the PS4, Xbox One, and Vita.
The timing is bad. The port is lazy. A 7/10 is appropriate.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
