stirring
Gender: Female
Rank: Ace Attorney
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 5:26 pm
Posts: 4791
PhunkyPhazon wrote:
Holy Hell wrote:
And Phunky Phazon, what else are they supposed to do? Pretend it just came out and give it points for being a crappy classic?
No, that's the problem. They DO pretend it just came out. I don't mind a crappy score if it truly is a crappy game, it's just that most of their complaints stem from graphics and sound, which they seem to think should be like it is in a newer game. Gameplay is a bit more understandable, but even then expectations have changed for that since the old days, which is why it's crappy to bash an older game just because it isn't as fun as some of todays games. They should either: A. Lower their expectations a bit B. Come up with a totally new rating system specifically for older games C. Just not review them and let the fans who played the game way back when tell the younger folks if it's good or not.
You're missing the point. They don't deduct score for bad graphics, they deduct score for outdated, crappy looking graphics that suck by today's standards. There are some old games that they say have graphics that have withstood time and look charming. If the sound is tinny, they'll deduct points for it. If the control style has been improved since the game came out, they can complain about that too. Those kind of things. The entire point in reviewing those old games
is to judge them by today's standards.
If they didn't, it wouldn't be a proper review.
If you come across an older post of mine, sowwy