Baggins said:
Reasonable said:
Baggins said: This is such a load of balls.
When SOTC was "in print" nobody gave to bat shits about it...Now you people who most likely have never even owned a genuine copy of it, worship it as the second coming of christ.
Tell me I'm wrong, but I can't remember ANYONE making a big deal of it back in the day.
You guys just like the elitist association imo. |
Strange, I remember it getting lots of attention, lots of 90% plus scores and lots of articles, front page spreads, etc. etc. and was seen as a pretty big deal for the PS2 (which only had a small install base of course and whose games got little coverage)...
Personally, I bought it right away and would rate it around 98%. So I guess I'm telling you you're wrong. 
|
That is fair comment, I'm not really sure I must have missed it or something. Was it that big in the EU? I can't remember anywhere in the UK making a big deal of it. I'll keep my nose out of this thread except to say I'm sure there are more people who claim to have liked it now than people who actually played it when it was released.
You're obviously not one of them but there doesn't seem to be a PS2 owning person alive who doesn't bow before this game. Smells a bit fishy to me, could be wrong, just a feeling like I said before.
|
I know what you mean. I think with anything that attains a certain level of praise there are those that fawn over it, sometimes without even having played the game in the case of something like SOTC.
In this case the game is genuinely great, although not everyone would like it which is fine and their preference. I think both ICO and SOTC were both so different, yet clearly the work of the same creative mind, that they have attained an even greater mystique than most games, hence the perhaps excessive fawning that can surround them.
Again, though, the game really is good, which is the main thing IMHO.