-
Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
-
Furukawa Speaks! We discuss the announcement of the Nintendo Switch Successor and our June Direct Predictions on the new episode of the Famiboards Discussion Club! Check it out here!
Reviews Metroid Prime Remastered | Review Thread
- Thread starter mazi
- Start date
- Status
Hailinel
Musou Mania!
To be honest, I don't think the conversation before five pages ago was that much better, because this thread had largely been people praising the big number for like ten pages before a single review made a marginal effect on the average that dragged it down a fraction of a percent. (Or rather, only had the appearance of doing so because that review showed up in the average later than most others.)
There's only so much thread to be had from making Daffy Duck woo-hoo noises at a 95.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Metroid Prime is dope and a 7.5/10 is a good review score
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Eh... Yes? IGN has already jumped the shark a few times already. Remember the 2 given at God Hand or the infamous "8.8 too much water"
In particular, that 2 at God Hand made me lose respect for the outlet altogether and i've never gone back to them for reviews.
And yes, same could be said about Steph. The way he handled the BotW 7 aftermath made me stop watching/reading their reviews and limit myself to the jimquisitions.
Some of you are implying that there may be a personal beef agaisnt Steph for whatever reasons, and given the circumstances i would say that that's a heavy accusation to make.
This isn't Twitter, people, we're supposedly debating in good faith here.
There isn't anything inherently wrong with people being happy about a game getting high reviews. If it bothers you that much you could've ignored the thread. The issue is when people take that to another level like they did over one review. To me it's like sporting fans. Some get excited over the team winning a meaningless game, and some harass the other teams players and families. Acting like the two groups are the same or close to the same is asinine. I don't quite get the condescending attitude but you're gonna do you lol.
You say that but I got 3 words for you; "too much water" lol.
In all seriousness I can't believe I woke up to another page of this convo. This is ridiculous. Like this isn't that serious. I don't get the comments that seem to be from a place of anger.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Checkpoint Gaming - 9.5/10
Gameblog France - 9/10
Game Informer - 9.5/10
Down to a 94 on MC, let the meltdowns commence
Gameblog France - 9/10
Game Informer - 9.5/10
Down to a 94 on MC, let the meltdowns commence
/s
Jimmy Joe
Good ol' Jimmy Joe
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I wasn't kidding
I don't think review threads actually serve a meaningful purpose outside of feeding into a toxic hype cycle, whether positive or negative
Games only really need one OT, says I
- Pronouns
- He/Him
To be honest, i'm surprised by the unanimous high praise.
No, this isn't some persecution complex shit, it's just that Prime was a pretty quirky game back then, honestly i always found the scanning to be rythm breaking and off putting, It was novel back then but nowadays it's mostly a chore.
I was expecting around 8.5 on average, and even down to 7.5 would have been fair.
I dunno, maybe it's just me.
No, this isn't some persecution complex shit, it's just that Prime was a pretty quirky game back then, honestly i always found the scanning to be rythm breaking and off putting, It was novel back then but nowadays it's mostly a chore.
I was expecting around 8.5 on average, and even down to 7.5 would have been fair.
I dunno, maybe it's just me.
- Pronouns
- He
This is my point though. These are, fundamentally, bad faith criticisms of an outlet that has multiple reviewers. Pretending like an outlet is a monolith is not "good faith", I can at least get it with a single reviewer, but an entire outlet? Not only that, pretty much every popular outlet has a "jumping the shark" moment. Gamespot for example is often considered much better at reviews than IGN, but the moment they publish something someone doesn't like people will bring up their Zelda track record or their DKCTF review (which as someone who thinks that game is mid, is hilarious).
I don't think this is worth discussing further to be honest, these replies fundamentally boil down to 'Yeah if IGN gave this a 7/10 it would be fair to shit on them because Pokemon review bad and God Hand review bad" and that really tells me all I need to know about how the IGN discussion would go. I used that example because you can use that or just about any outlet, as people do for Gamespot, Slate, and Edge.
At the very least we can all agree the convo should be over now, I just felt like replying to this because I could see people further having the IGN point fly over their head
But imagine getting a 79 lmao.I still think my earlier comparison to American school grades rings true as I distinctly recall my parents roasting me for an 80 in Algebra II despite my 100s in Latin and English.
Which funnily enough....has quite the history in game reviews
Hailinel
Musou Mania!
I'm not saying people shouldn't be happy. It doesn't bother me that much. I'm saying that there's only so much thread to be had when it comes to this. And this is not the first review thread to derail over a review with a score well outside the average.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Since i've been running my own small outlet and writing reviews both within It and as a freelance writer, i personally am pretty anal about it.
I've learned by experience that there's an editorial line and that something doesn't make it to the front page without being approved. So yeah, i blame God Hand and Pokémon RS on IGN as a whole (same with the DKCTF review. Jesús, that was a disaster)
You're right on this discussion having overstayed its welcome. I'm leaving it rest and just wait eagerly for pay day to get my Metroid Prime copy. I just wanted to see what was the general consensus, found about Sterling's review and wanted to give my opinion, but got a bit too excited
Plus, as Magic-man said, this is starting to get some toxic undertones, better leave It be.
The scanning is just a very small part of it. I know some folks don’t bother with it, only to open paths.
There’s much more to this game then the scanning.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I know, i have played It to completion a couple of times
On, Then I’m surprised you’re surprised that the game is get such great reviews lol.
Metroid prime was just a game I felt was ahead of its time.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I mean, back in the day it was a stellar game, and while today it's still great, there are some aspects where It shows its age.
I guess Retro has done a great job updating it where it counts.
- Pronouns
- Any
99% of scans are optional. And the game has a lot of things people value these days: Openness, non-hand holding, superb level design, an immaculate atmosphere, art direction, sound design, and music. It runs at a locked 60. It's mechanically solid. It's also a game that doesn't really feel like anything else these days. It definitely has it's quirks, but the majority of it's design is so solid that it doesn't feel like it's aged at all even over 20 years later.
I was thinking the game would be probably fall squarely on a 90, definitely not below that though.
Aether
Kremling
Stephanie never gave much about scores, aggregation sites and the "industry crap" (or theater, or how you would call it)
so a review where points are docked for a bad practice with Credits seems on brand and nothing suprising.
Is it a big deal? eh, im not going to their site to read insightful reviews (then again, we had probably way better
insightful criticism of MP1 in video essays over the last decade then what most of those remaster reviews had to say).
Its fine. If you are taking the review out of context of the general work of them, then its rather pointless,
and if you get annoyed by them ruining the metacritic score... i feel like that's also to their delight.
(thats disregarding my opinion on them. I still follow for the handful of videos that do seem interesting,
am happy about any anti capitalistic voice in that field, but am not a fan of a lot of the rethoric/wording used about the topics.
So im mostly indifferent (except when people are clearly not arguing against the persons point but are just hateful/queerphobic)
Oh: and mp on todays scale would not be 10/10 anymore anyway =P
so a review where points are docked for a bad practice with Credits seems on brand and nothing suprising.
Is it a big deal? eh, im not going to their site to read insightful reviews (then again, we had probably way better
insightful criticism of MP1 in video essays over the last decade then what most of those remaster reviews had to say).
Its fine. If you are taking the review out of context of the general work of them, then its rather pointless,
and if you get annoyed by them ruining the metacritic score... i feel like that's also to their delight.
(thats disregarding my opinion on them. I still follow for the handful of videos that do seem interesting,
am happy about any anti capitalistic voice in that field, but am not a fan of a lot of the rethoric/wording used about the topics.
So im mostly indifferent (except when people are clearly not arguing against the persons point but are just hateful/queerphobic)
Oh: and mp on todays scale would not be 10/10 anymore anyway =P
Supreme Overlord
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
- Pronouns
- he/him
For whatever reason, I'd thought people were generally expecting it to get docked somewhat for the underlying systems, really everything except the visuals and additional control options, being unchanged and that the higher review rankings were a surprise. Perhaps that was a fabrication of my mind.
It does present a question, though, regarding how games that are essentially re-releases should really be reviewed. After 20 years, certain elements are likely to differ from how they would have been handled had the game initially released today. I could see the possibility for reviewers to explore this, how these elements were handled, how that differs from contemporary titles -- whether the reviewer thinks the potential modern take is actually an improvement, what else that might impact --, how it fit among games of its time, what that all means for it now, and so forth. (And of course, how any changes from its previous version work). It seems such an exploration might even be more useful overall than what a lot of reviews would otherwise be.
Of course this doesn't really help address how number rankings would work, and perhaps even makes that particular subject murkier. I wouldn't say I'm too terribly concerned about formulating that at the moment, though. I never did much care for number rankings myself, except for the entertainment value and the usefulness in signposting what one might expect in reading the review.
There might sometimes be a reasonable element of that, but I'd have to largely disagree with this. What one expects going into a game or movie or book can impact the immediate perception. Oftentimes, that's not fair to the piece itself, as it leads to resentment that the item in question isn't what the reviewer wanted, regardless of what it actually is.
The real trick is to learn to differentiate the two, whereas many an amateur reviewer, whether on forums or video or on their own site, and even one who might be a professional, will allow what they expected to override entirely the actual merits of a piece.
This is where one would question why they dis/liked something, which is much more insightful than simply saying that they did.
That's not to say there aren't times where the art in question has reasons baked into it to expect one thing or another. It's part of a larger whole, of which it betrays entirely the themes or design ethos, for instance. And there the trick is to question why one comes to that conclusion. Perhaps there's something there actually worth holding against it.
In general, though, I'd suggest the idea of reviewing simply against what one expected usually isn't the best course of action. At the very least, one should examine why they think the piece in question should be held to that.
Hey, SpaceBetween, I appreciated your post as a whole but wanted to really highlight this part. It fits in with what I typed up above, with the whole question of how it differs from what might be expected and considered the right way to do things these days.
Sometimes things are just different, and you can like or dislike that.
Thread Locked
- Status
