I did not expect this thread to be 55 pages.
Oh!, we're just getting warmed up.
I did not expect this thread to be 55 pages.
For uk customers, the game is 41.99 (39.99 prime) digitally too. Same price as retail.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B071G9VTY1/
It'd be the first 11/10 in video game history.Oh, man. And this game could be even better if Nintendo just shoehorned some complex story and character development into it.
So. Much. Better.
They have a rubric, it's called the review.
My chess game has no cars in it. 0/10.
I mean its a game, not a movie. Wacht movies if you want stories. Or buy the related game genres if thats your thing.
**** i would even give it min points for having to much cutscenes or story in it.
I think your premise on what I want from a review is flawed beyond having any value. I'm not buying a car or a hammer, which I need to function in certain ways.
A rubric for games would be absurd. Games are so different that a standard rubric would be absurd. A spectacular puzzle game doesnt need to be evaluated 0/10 on story.
It doesn't make sense for movies or any artistic medium. It's not a ****ing test with a specific goal in mind
lololol. The amount of salt in this thread, just reminds me the BOTW 10/10 Edge review threat, but this time is bigger and more salty. 98 MC incoming.
A review is not a rubric, but a format. It is a persuasive essay.
By review, I meant number. There is value in someone saying "ugh, game plays at 10 fps, or some other critical feature is important to whether the game justifies a purchase." And even then, that can be wrong (Alpha Protocol...technical mess, still awesome).
Oh hype is fun, I recognize that. But (to no one's surprise) a gaming website can really swallow hole the hype train.
Case and point.
and another
If you only have a quoted text, then it is too short. You can solve that by adding one character, like a dot, after the quote.
Agree with you, that's why i love the Nintendo philosophy on making games. But for some people its all just about nostalgia and bias...And the worst part, some of them doesnt even have a Nintendo system.It is quiet astonishing that both series are able to adapt, reinvent, and innovate their respective genres and the whole industry as well. Can't say many other franchises has the creative talent and vision to consistently release great entries for over 30 years.
I think that is obvious that main Mario games doesn't need that. You have plenty of games doing that...Oh, man. And this game could be even better if Nintendo just shoehorned some complex story and character development into it.
So. Much. Better.
Yeah it's funny how for example people on GAF act like Zelda fans are the obnoxious people in Horizon threads and not vice versa when you just have to look at the metacritic user score and see which game got waaaay more troll reviews and lines like: "If this was called Belda then..." or "if this wasn't made by Nintendo then...". It's ridiculous.
Way too many people can't handle it lol.
As I have said, a puzzle game would not receive a story score. I have also already said that one should consider that many review outlets already use a rubric. I've just revealed mine to scrutiny...which is why said outlets oftentimes don't.
On the flip side, you probably won't see anyone DoS attack a person's website if they gave Horizon a poor score, but you saw it with Zelda. There's also those people who couldn't handle that 8.8 score years ago.
If you think no game deserves a 10, then you're using a 9 point scale. And 9/9 is the same as 10/10.Damn. Another high score in the Super Mario franchise. Even though i find it too high (no game deserves a 10 in my opinion), I understand the enthousiasm.
I think this is the issue people have with many Nintendo fans. Its not enough that Nintendo make great games. We also have to put down all the other game developers that actually make incredible games.It is quiet astonishing that both series are able to adapt, reinvent, and innovate their respective genres and the whole industry as well. Can't say many other franchises has the creative talent and vision to consistently release great entries for over 30 years.
Most franchises peak with the 2nd game and don't know how to innovate or change past the 2nd game. Usually they just keep amping up the elements of the game that made it successful (Megaman is a perfect example of this).It is quiet astonishing that both series are able to adapt, reinvent, and innovate their respective genres and the whole industry as well. Can't say many other franchises has the creative talent and vision to consistently release great entries for over 30 years.
YouTube advertising seems pretty strong. The other day I got the full musical ad before a video and earlier today my home page was telling me when the game is releasing and suggested Odyssey related videos. Not seen that before on YT!
Unless Mario Odyssey all of a sudden has a story like Witcher 3, it can't score a 10/10...I'm not sure if any game can. And that's a problem.
The bundle comes with a Switch case which has 20$.
The first post you quoted has some merit because if you look at shit like "If it was called Belda" and other ridiculous nonsense then there obviously are people who can't handle these games reviewing well. You don't see any of this shit on gaming franchises not related to Nintendo.
Nintendo was almost nonexistent the last 5 or 6 years or even longer when it comes to the bigger picture, and those game series come across as rehashing if you didn't play more than one of them, so people mistake 3D Mario and Zelda games with something like Assasins Creed or CoD and wonder why people go crazy about them.
The second point you quoted is just an opinion. And going by actual quality of the games series and their reception over the last 30 years he has something to support his opinion. Whats wrong about that? You saying you don't like the weapon breaking in BotW and someone else saying that he think's it's integral to keep the player going and making each weapon valuable (or just:"you're wrong imo") is just differing opinions, not you being reasonable and the other being a fanboy.
Yeah there still seems to be a bug though, because what shows up in your quoted message is what I actually wanted to write haha. Thanks though!
I don't take these Nintendo 10/10s very seriously especially after how enormously flawed and limited BOTW was, but I do expect Mario to be a fun game and I intend to play it.
I don't take these Nintendo 10/10s very seriously especially after how enormously flawed and limited BOTW was, but I do expect Mario to be a fun game and I intend to play it.
You're both wrong!I think this is the problem with people thinking like this.
I don't like storylines that you can't control and exist out of 1000 scenes. I believe a perfect score depends on what the game has to offer you in experience. You have to create your story while playing the game,that makes the game memorable.
If I want to watch a story, I'll prefer to watch a movie or reading a book.
Game score shouldn't be based on story or how realistic it is. It should be on game design, gameplay, music and art. I believe this mario game will nail this.
I really don't want to drag this thread back to the BotW score debate but I just have to say I hate the use of the term "flawed" to describe your opinion on a game. The consensus seems to clearly show that BotW was not enormously flawed, you just didn't like a lot of what it did, which is perfectly fine and understandable.
I would be surprised if he actually answers you.I'd love to know which games you think are not limited if you think BOTW is enormously so.
I think this is the problem with people thinking like this.
I don't like storylines that you can't control and exist out of 1000 scenes. I believe a perfect score depends on what the game has to offer you in experience. You have to create your story while playing the game,that makes the game memorable.
If I want to watch a story, I'll prefer to watch a movie or reading a book.
Game score shouldn't be based on story or how realistic it is. It should be on game design, gameplay, music and art. I believe this mario game will nail this.
I would love it so much if it got an even more perfect score than BotW. Not because I want Mario to do well, I just love the idea that this is such a good time for gaming.This review is tearing us apart lisa. Were all gonna feel pretty silly when it gets more tens
Super Mario Odyssey |OT| Hatful of Hollow
Super Mario Odyssey |OT| Capfight
Super Mario Odyssey |OT| The Hat Controller
Super Mario Odyssey |OT| The World's Most Hatted
I don't take these Nintendo 10/10s very seriously especially after how enormously flawed and limited BOTW was, but I do expect Mario to be a fun game and I intend to play it.
Caphead
It's still more expensive, though?
Holy shit post.I don't take these Nintendo 10/10s very seriously especially after how enormously flawed and limited BOTW was, but I do expect Mario to be a fun game and I intend to play it.
I'd love to know which games you think are not limited if you think BOTW is enormously so.
I really don't want to drag this thread back to the BotW score debate but I just have to say I hate the use of the term "flawed" to describe your opinion on a game. The consensus seems to clearly show that BotW was not enormously flawed, you just didn't like a lot of what it did, which is perfectly fine and understandable.
Holy shit post.
Did any of you happen to catch that piece from Erik Kain on Forbes about Edge's score?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikka...uper-mario-odyssey-review-score/#1e1fb07e453f
Is it just me, or does it sound like he's accusing Edge of Paid Reviews?
Because the last game Edge gave a 10 to was BotW. How is it not relevant?Why the hell do some of you people keep bringing up BotW? we get it, you didn't like BotW, we also got it the last 20 times you told us in completely unrelated threads.
Because.Why the hell do some of you people keep bringing up BotW? we get it, you didn't like BotW, we also got it the last 20 times you told us in completely unrelated threads.
Its too much for the haters, in less than a year.Both series are the pinnacle of gaming.
You really can't just let him have his opinion can you?
I liked BOTW and thought it was gorgeous, but it fell short of the promise it laid out in its opening hours. The world is oversized without nearly enough meaningful things to find or do, and a severe lack of bosses and dungeons and a general lack of enemy variety (as well as other things like terrible combat and no real story and the worst finale I've ever experienced in a game). I'm sure some of you disagree with that statement but I don't want to pollute this thread with a back and forth, so if you want to know what my reasoning is for thinking it's flawed -- that's my reasoning. If reviewing it I'd give it a 7/10.
I think it's possible reviewers have a special affection for Nintendo and approach their flagship games with something of a bias. I'm not sure how else to reconcile some of these scores. I'm sure Mario will be fun, but I'm not going to amp my hype levels up higher just because it got a 10, especially after my experience with BOTW.
Because the last game Edge gave a 10 to was BotW. How is it not relevant?
No its a statement of opinion. Like 95% of posts on neogaf. We don't need to preface everything we say as "in my opinion" when it's clearly their opinion.I'm pretty sure you didn't read my post. I'm saying his opinion is fine and he's welcome to it, but calling something flat-out "flawed" is not a statement of opinion, rather it's a statement of fact. I'm literally just nitpicking the word he used (and many others tend to use erroneously).
This is the thing people are missing with the comparisons and why i center more with the Sunshine ones, because saying that it's "similar to 64" doesn't mean much when 64 DNA is across all the 3D games in the series (arguibly the entire industry XD) except for the 3D Land mold that aspires to be a hybrid of the 2D and 3D games.
Another thing: Galaxy did have open explorable levels like the ones in 64. i don't understand why this is usually brushed over. One of these "Open Levels" that might have Mario collecting star shrads, ends up working more or less like any traditional Mario 64 level. Not to mention these levels also housed secret stars so that took them even closer to the traditional 64 stapple.
Funny enough, a significant amount of Odyssey Moonshines work like 3D World's green stars, it's basically fusing those collectibles with the more structured Stars of 64, Sunshine and Galaxy.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying this game doesn't deserve it! I'm super hyped for this game. The concept of removing power ups in favour of possessions is a significant mix up. I am on board this train and I ain't getting off.Damn! Edge still don't see flaws in a new Nintendo games.