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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Kirby Star Allies Bombs With Critics

The only reason the game is yellow in Meta is because the expectations of this title were way higher than that of Robobot or *insert Kirby game here*  it introduced a bunch of hype mechanics but didn't implement them properly + lack of content + lack of difficulty- coupled with the novelty of being one of the first new AAA titles on the system.

So yeah, this game had no chance with critics. But I'm pretty sure HAL didn't have much time to develop this game, so I don't care. At least they're giving us free updates, like Splatoon 2 is doing to compensate for the mediocre launch content.



Around the Network
friendlyfamine said:

The only reason the game is yellow in Meta is because the expectations of this title were way higher than that of Robobot or *insert Kirby game here*  it introduced a bunch of hype mechanics but didn't implement them properly + lack of content + lack of difficulty- coupled with the novelty of being one of the first new AAA titles on the system.

So yeah, this game had no chance with critics. But I'm pretty sure HAL didn't have much time to develop this game, so I don't care. At least they're giving us free updates, like Splatoon 2 is doing to compensate for the mediocre launch content.

what kind of free updates? i haven't heard about this



Baddman said:
friendlyfamine said:

The only reason the game is yellow in Meta is because the expectations of this title were way higher than that of Robobot or *insert Kirby game here*  it introduced a bunch of hype mechanics but didn't implement them properly + lack of content + lack of difficulty- coupled with the novelty of being one of the first new AAA titles on the system.

So yeah, this game had no chance with critics. But I'm pretty sure HAL didn't have much time to develop this game, so I don't care. At least they're giving us free updates, like Splatoon 2 is doing to compensate for the mediocre launch content.

what kind of free updates? i haven't heard about this

New dream friends characters.

It was plastered all over their twitter and YouTube last week. They even got a mention in the last Direct.

 

And more are to come, so it's nice



Switch Friend Code : 3905-6122-2909 

Mar1217 said:
Baddman said:

what kind of free updates? i haven't heard about this

New dream friends characters.

It was plastered all over their twitter and YouTube last week. They even got a mention in the last Direct.

 

And more are to come, so it's nice

cool  my kids have been pestering me to buy it but i have been hesitant spending 60 on this..but knowing it has free updates is certainly nice to hear



Jumpin said:
Cloudman said:
You have high standards if a game falling in the 70s is considered 'bombing'. Plus, I associate a game 'bombing' with sales, rather than metascore. Lesser scoring games can still sell well, after all.

Why is it high standards to expect consistent quality from the franchise? Do you think fans should settle for a game that is substantially worse than expected because it’s not terrible?

So, for example, Pokemon games are comparable to Kirby games in that they generally score around the same as Kirby games. Do you think fans have standards too high of the first outing of a mainline Pokemon game on Switch is merely a 73%?

I mean high standards in the sense that a general score of 73 is considered 'bombing' for a game. in the 70-80 range, a game would still be considered 'good'. Even games in the 60 range can still be enjoyable. It's not a matter of settling for something that is 'lesser' than previous games, but enjoying, or not enjoying said game, and look forward to the next game.



 

              

Dance my pretties!

The Official Art Thread      -      The Official Manga Thread      -      The Official Starbound Thread

Around the Network

Reviews are just guidelines. Ill still pick this up because its Kirby



Cloudman said:
Jumpin said:

Why is it high standards to expect consistent quality from the franchise? Do you think fans should settle for a game that is substantially worse than expected because it’s not terrible?

So, for example, Pokemon games are comparable to Kirby games in that they generally score around the same as Kirby games. Do you think fans have standards too high of the first outing of a mainline Pokemon game on Switch is merely a 73%?

I mean high standards in the sense that a general score of 73 is considered 'bombing' for a game. in the 70-80 range, a game would still be considered 'good'. Even games in the 60 range can still be enjoyable. It's not a matter of settling for something that is 'lesser' than previous games, but enjoying, or not enjoying said game, and look forward to the next game.

I have already explained exactly what is wrong with the reasoning in your argument multiple times, including with the post you are responding to. You are trying to assess "this is what a good game is" completely out of context of quality expectation of the game in question.

 

Let me try to put it to you another way: for book reviews, books in the 65% to 75% range are generally considered good.

Fans of Song of Ice and Fire have waited 6 years for the next book in the series. The books generally score about 85%-88% by reviewers and are expected to offer a certain amount of length. If GRR Martin, in all that time, and with the television show present, only released a book of perhaps 480 pages and had a 73% rating with reviewers; should readers be happy and satisfied that they got a good book? Of course not, this is the first book in the Song of Ice and Fire series in 6 years, the expectation is for something more substantial and of higher quality.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Jumpin said:
Cloudman said:

I mean high standards in the sense that a general score of 73 is considered 'bombing' for a game. in the 70-80 range, a game would still be considered 'good'. Even games in the 60 range can still be enjoyable. It's not a matter of settling for something that is 'lesser' than previous games, but enjoying, or not enjoying said game, and look forward to the next game.

I have already explained exactly what is wrong with the reasoning in your argument multiple times, including with the post you are responding to. You are trying to assess "this is what a good game is" completely out of context of quality expectation of the game in question.

 

Let me try to put it to you another way: for book reviews, books in the 65% to 75% range are generally considered good.

Fans of Song of Ice and Fire have waited 6 years for the next book in the series. The books generally score about 85%-88% by reviewers and are expected to offer a certain amount of length. If GRR Martin, in all that time, and with the television show present, only released a book of perhaps 480 pages and had a 73% rating with reviewers; should readers be happy and satisfied that they got a good book? Of course not, this is the first book in the Song of Ice and Fire series in 6 years, the expectation is for something more substantial and of higher quality.

But as I pointed out earlier and you conveniently ignored, gamers are clearly happy and satisfied with Star Allies as the sales show, proving their expectations are not what you claim them to be. It's a bit silly to try and speak for the fanbase while ignoring that fact. The "what if" examples you keep making don't hold any weight against cold hard numbers of the actual game in question here. I'd say most people's expectations are simply good games, which Star Allies is whether in a vacuum or compared to it's predecessors.



wouldn't say that it's a bad game, i bought games with lower scores that i really enjoyed



Shiken said:
73 is not bombing. 70+ is a GOOD game. 80+ is a GREAT game, and 90+ is a MUST PLAY game.

People have such a twisted and sad view on what these scores mean. Kirby did fine with critics, some fans just do not understand the concept of a 10 point score system (which is why it needs to be done away with because there are even critics that do not get it or abuse it).

It's 2018. for the past decade the standard has been:

< 80  Ass-tier

80-89 Good games

90-93 Great games

94-95 Masterpieces

>95 Over-Hyped Trash



4 ≈ One