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

Forums - Nintendo - Shame on you if you didn't buy Madworld. You need to reconsider.

Madworld gets boring and repetitive in 5 minutes, you will never bring yourself to play that game again after your first playthrough.



 

                      "The Common Cold Isn't So Common During The Cold"     

Around the Network

I did not even play all the way threw it. MY friend and I rented it one night and within two hours we took it back.



Well, I finally finished the game. Area 66 was the most difficult level. Despite its flaws, it was a fun game and the last boss was a nice surprise to me XD

I started it on hard mode, and I have to say it's a thousand times MORE enjoyable. You really have to be careful with your movements or else will be easily killed, unlike normal mode where most enemies were just waiting for you to kill them.

I think that's a big issue with the game, being to easy you just get bored of pressing A and doing the same stuff over and over again. It's no different from Final Fight for example, but at least Final Fight was challenging so it wasn't boring.

I recommend everyone to play it on hard mode at least, it is more enjoyable and have that feel of accomplishment after passing a level.



Castlevania Judgment FC:     1161 - 3389 - 1512

3DS Friend Code:   3480-2746-6289


Wii Friend Code: 4268-9719-1932-3069

dougsdad0629 said:
Video_Game_Critic said:
dougsdad0629 said:

Funny how so many Wii users are so willing to heap praise all over the Conduit (which I hated) which has a metacritic score of 70, yet most of those same people put down Madworld with a metacritic score of 81.

Why do I care what metacritic thinks?  I like "The Conduit" and I do not like "Madworld".

Metacritic is a collection of all reviews.  The general concensus (among reviewers) is that Madworld is significantly better than the Conduit.  Obviously, your mileage may vary.

Correct.

I don't happen to be a reviewer, and particularly with Wii games I tend to disagree with them somewhat.

IGN and ONM seem to be closest to what my view of games is, but they too can be drastically off if they don't like a particular feature..... most of the rest of reviews I don't trust to score anything. So putting them on MetaCritic just means it's a bigger pile of BS than it was looking at 1 reviewer.
The Conduit for instance has reviews included for MetaCritic from 9, which I would agree is a bit high for it, all the way down to 4.... so many Wii games are split like this (on other consoles it is unusual for such a discrepancy unless a really hyped game turns out badly) I am guessing a number of them have not played for very long.... I know it took me 6-7 hours to get The Conduit how I liked it, the controls just didn't feel right for me in the begining and trying the extremes for sensitivity/dead-zone and unusual camera options only made it worse... but I honed it in and love the game. If I were to score it I think it would be about 8-8.5... MetaCritic would have me believe the game is below average, the Metacritic user votes seem much more inline with me, an 8.6.
(Oddly, a lot of Wii games have higher user scores than their Metascores... while PS360 games are usually about even, or below, I could blame it on spamming of the system except I would have thought that MetaCritic... the bastion of many HD gamers opinions... would have a community more swayed toward PS360 than Wii, so the spamming should be the other way around)

For me, I prefer first to find information about a game (genre, gamplay, perhaps some videos of it) usually while it is still in development, then if it interests me I might check a review or two when they start appearing (reading the review, not looking at the score) then when the game comes out I wait for some proper gamer opinions (ie people who bought a Wii because they like it, rather than reviewers who don't like the console, but are "forced" to review it's games)