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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Super Mario3D World + Bowsers Fury ~ IGN Review

JWeinCom said:
OTBWY said:

The only problem I have is that he gave Sticker Star a higher score.

That actually kind of makes sense. Sticker star gives you no reason to engage in combat, and thus there is generally no consequence to death. Apparently, this reviewer doesn't like it when games provide some semblance of challenge.

Do you remember the guy that used to make posts here about trying games but always complaining they were too hard when he clearly didn't bother to learn the mechanics of it? Well, I think that guy got himself a job at IGN.



Signature goes here!

Around the Network
dx11332sega said:

I'm still perplexed why a 7?

Non effort port and a smallish DLC for full price and full release. I mean its a great game but a low-key effort from Nintendo that not everyone will appreciate. Particularly if you already played it already on on Wii U. Otherise, its a must have for any Switch owner.



Hynad said:
Azzanation said:

Too much Bowser.
7/10 - IGN

Would be clever... if you hadn’t ripped it off Verter...

Maybe... I don’t know, come up with your own stuff?

I have to admit that it's a joke we both could've made independently, but I'll send him my cohort of lawyers just in case.

But seriously, thanks for the intervention.

Now that I'm posting here, I'll say that, even if it's weird that a remaster with more content has a lower score that the original game, it's true that the reviewer may not be the same person and has probably a different taste in games and maybe even a different reviewing methodology, so that 7 is also understandable. In the end, reviews are just opinions.



I have periods of social disconnection, it's a part of me that I need and keenly embrace. I'll still log in and read news and threads during those times, but I won't be (very) active on the site, so I apologize for any inconvenience that this may cause (late answers, bumps or the like).

Also...

Please, feel free to correct my English.

Okay, I only watched the 3D World's portion of his review, and if I remeber correctly, he complained about the multiplayer, fixed angles and animations (some of them). Was Bowser's Fury that much of a deal to lower the score to 7?



My bet with The_Liquid_Laser: I think the Switch won't surpass the PS2 as the best selling system of all time. If it does, I'll play a game of a list that The_Liquid_Laser will provide, I will have to play it for 50 hours or complete it, whatever comes first. 

BraLoD said:

How much does it costs? Knowing Nintendo it must be full price, and If it's a 2013 game at full price in 2021 that might have a lot to do with it.
I love 3D World, and the fully cat themed Bowser's Fury feels like a nice expansion.

Metallox said:

Okay, I only watched the 3D World's portion of his review, and if I remeber correctly, he complained about the multiplayer, fixed angles and animations (some of them). Was Bowser's Fury that much of a deal to lower the score to 7?

They actually seemed to say they liked Bowser's Fury better. The complaints all seem to revolve around the game being too hard. They even complained that when you die too many times the game gives you a golden leaf which gives you incincibility and the Tanooki suit. But, apparently being invulnerable and having a crazy good jump isn't enough because you could still potentially fall down a hole. 

Any challenge is apparently too much for this reviewer.



Around the Network
hinch said:
dx11332sega said:

I'm still perplexed why a 7?

Non effort port and a smallish DLC for full price and full release. I mean its a great game but a low-key effort from Nintendo that not everyone will appreciate. Particularly if you already played it already on on Wii U. Otherise, its a must have for any Switch owner.

So we are reviewing the correlation between price and quality now and not just quality? What madness is this?

Scores are assigned to the quality of the game. It should have nothing to do with the cost of the game.



People need to stop being so invested in review scores.

At the end of the day, a reviewer is a mere human being like you or me, and a review is just their opinion.

Honestly, the hysteria that goes on whenever a popular or hyped game scores less than a 9/10 has gotten pretty ridiculous. 



Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023. (And over 130 million lifetime)

TruckOSaurus said:
JWeinCom said:

That actually kind of makes sense. Sticker star gives you no reason to engage in combat, and thus there is generally no consequence to death. Apparently, this reviewer doesn't like it when games provide some semblance of challenge.

Do you remember the guy that used to make posts here about trying games but always complaining they were too hard when he clearly didn't bother to learn the mechanics of it? Well, I think that guy got himself a job at IGN.

You might be on to something, maybe its the same guy.



我是广州人

Dulfite said:
hinch said:

Non effort port and a smallish DLC for full price and full release. I mean its a great game but a low-key effort from Nintendo that not everyone will appreciate. Particularly if you already played it already on on Wii U. Otherise, its a must have for any Switch owner.

So we are reviewing the correlation between price and quality now and not just quality? What madness is this?

Scores are assigned to the quality of the game. It should have nothing to do with the cost of the game.

I'm not a reviewer so I wouldn't know. However value is one aspect a lot of people consider in reviews (in general) so it should be applicable to someone reviewing video games.

Say for example, a smaller scale game like Spiderman Miles Morales (an expansion) would be a rip off at full price and even at $50 its not that great value for money when it is essentially a 10 hour game, it might reflect or have an impact a persons review.

However this isn't a 7/10 game imo, but this is an opinion piece from an outlet. No need to get over up in arms over a single digit or two in a review score, yeesh. (Not directing this at you btw)



hinch said:
Dulfite said:

So we are reviewing the correlation between price and quality now and not just quality? What madness is this?

Scores are assigned to the quality of the game. It should have nothing to do with the cost of the game.

I'm not a reviewer so I wouldn't know. However value is one aspect a lot of people consider in reviews (in general) so it should be applicable to someone reviewing video games.

Say for example, a smaller scale game like Spiderman Miles Morales (an expansion) would be a rip off at full price and even at $50 its not that great value for money when it is essentially a 10 hour game, it might reflect or have an impact a persons review.

However this isn't a 7/10 game imo, but this is an opinion piece from an outlet. No need to get over up in arms over a single digit or two in a review score, yeesh. (Not directing this at you btw)

I agree no one should be up in arms. I said my last comment amusingly btw, not annoyed lol. Internet doesn't detect tone of voice sadly.

I don't connect review scores and value, personally. If I want to know the value of the game I do research on it. The review score, to me, tells me how well the game did at what it was trying to do in the genre it fits inside. But that's just me and that's fair we all look at review scores differently. Thank you for explaining your perspective.