So.........Paper Mario TTYD earns a 6.75 from GameInformer?

Uggg, GI and their wonderful scores. I swear I lost every bit of respect for GI when they gave Mario Party 4 a 3/10 and Mario Party 5 a 2/10 and literally said in the Mario Party 4 article "Don't buy this game". It's one thing if they do not like the game, and I do understand the games were not perfect, but saying loud and clear not to buy the game can make people sway from it (I should know, I did until I finally rented and loved the game).
 
What a dumbass. His opinion on why he gave the game such a score was completely retarded and not thought out.

"Kiddie" is not = to shitty review.
"Kiddie" = to personal bias.
Bad gameplay, graphics, sound, or controls would be = to shitty review.
 
[quote name='Trakan']Some people say that one review can make or break the magazine. I really hope that if this is true, that a magazine never gives a game a better score than it deserves just to make fanboys happy. If the magazine or reviewer decide that the game scores a 6.5, I think they should give it that score even if I personally don't agree with it. If I owned the magazine, I wouldn't want to give "highly anticipated" games higher reviews just to sell more copies of the mag. I'd want it to be an honest and quality magazine. That's my take on it anyway.[/quote]

I agree with you too, however, GI did not give a review based on their personal opinion, even if they thought it was fun they based it on if they thought it was good for the general masses or not. That is NOT how a review is supposed to be written, just because a game is a little kiddie doesn't mean you have to cringe from embarassment admitting that you had fun playing it and rating it lower because it won't "appeal to everyone". ALL games won't appeal to everyone. The same thing goes with "a little kiddie" movies, etc. They should've based it on their own fucking opinions, not become complete pushovers and put down shit that they didn't even believe the game to be. That's why it makes me angry. :x
 
Looks like I'm nmot renewing my Gamestop card.

Gamespy 4 out of 5 80.0%
GameSpot 9.2 out of 10 92.0%
GMR Magazine 9 out of 10 90.0%
eToyChest 10/10/2004 100 out of 100 100.0%
Planet Gamecube 9/15/2004 9.5 out of 10 95.0%
Cube UK 9/1/2004 9.4 out of 10 94.0%


Game Informer TOO BUSY FAPPING TO STATE OF EMERGENCY
 
I want to get Paper Mario 2 but It's $50. Might just stick with MAT2 this week, unless I do some trades.

And they can give whatever score they want, but it also can make us think they're catering to what they think their readers want to hear. They overestimated that typically vocal anti-nintendo group that can't stand to play "kiddie" games, and rated the game low to tell them what they wanted to hear. They didn't anticipate that most gamers are over the age of 20 and don't care about if a game is kiddy they just want something fun. Now their readership is going to suffer for it.
 
[quote name='Platypus Stan']
I swear, I'll never understand this rabid anti-Nintendo attitude that seems to permeate every corner of the Internet these days. If you don't like the type of games Nintendo makes, that's fine, but you have to realize that they've always made that type of game and they probably always will. If you don't think their games (either internally developed or otherwise) have generally gotten better since last gen, I can only imagine that you haven't given them the chance they deserve.
[/quote]

The rabid anti-Nintendo attitude is to a large degree a backlash against their fans. There's tons of PS2 and XBOX fanboys, but the GC has the most hysterical fan base I've ever seen, probobly because they realize Nintendo is nearing its end as a console maker. If you even dare to suggest anything with the Nintendo name on it is anything less than a gift from God, then these people will rant and rave at you until you go deaf. Which I think is what we're seeing here.

The other part of it is that whatever you think about their games, Nintendo has always been about screwing developers and retailers so alot of people are eager to see them get theirs.

I'd agree that Nintendo's games are better than the N64 gen, but that's not that impressive a feat really. I loved the NES and SNES but thought the N64 deserved a spot in the console graveyard next to the CDI. I'd also argue that Nintendo's games have gotten more childish this generation than in years past as they try and hold onto the one market segment they still have clout in.
 
[quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll'][quote name='Platypus Stan']
I swear, I'll never understand this rabid anti-Nintendo attitude that seems to permeate every corner of the Internet these days. If you don't like the type of games Nintendo makes, that's fine, but you have to realize that they've always made that type of game and they probably always will. If you don't think their games (either internally developed or otherwise) have generally gotten better since last gen, I can only imagine that you haven't given them the chance they deserve.
[/quote]
The rabid anti-Nintendo attitude is to a large degree a backlash against their fans. There's tons of PS2 and XBOX fanboys, but the GC has the most hysterical fan base I've ever seen, probobly because they realize Nintendo is nearing its end as a console maker. If you even dare to suggest anything with the Nintendo name on it is anything less than a gift from God, then these people will rant and rave at you until you go deaf. Which I think is what we're seeing here.

The other part of it is that whatever you think about their games, Nintendo has always been about screwing developers and retailers so alot of people are eager to see them get theirs.

I'd agree that Nintendo's games are better than the N64 gen, but that's not that impressive a feat really. I loved the NES and SNES but thought the N64 deserved a spot in the console graveyard next to the CDI. I'd also argue that Nintendo's games have gotten more childish this generation than in years past as they try and hold onto the one market segment they still have clout in.[/quote]
The N64 had poor 3rd party support, but it was far from a console that "deserved a spot in the console graveyard next to the CDI." That statement brings your credibility into question. Perhaps it was an exagerration; given the nature of your recent posts in regards to Nintendo, I doubt it. A console that sold over 30 million units world-wide, had several critically acclaimed million sellers, and widely popularized multiplayer games is not a console that should be grouped with the CDI. :)
 
I'd rather have points taken off for bad control, bad graphics, bad sound, rather than a reviewer telling me I wouldn't like it due to the concept.

Like we said in the review, it's a very kiddie game - it's target audience is clearly young gamers
Click to expand...

By that rationale, Kingdom Hearts featuring primarily Disney characters, is a great kiddie game.

I think there is a Nick Rox level of bias in this review. [/quote]
 
[quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll']The rabid anti-Nintendo attitude is to a large degree a backlash against their fans. There's tons of PS2 and XBOX fanboys, but the GC has the most hysterical fan base I've ever seen, probobly because they realize Nintendo is nearing its end as a console maker. If you even dare to suggest anything with the Nintendo name on it is anything less than a gift from God, then these people will rant and rave at you until you go deaf. Which I think is what we're seeing here.[/quote]

People who are blindly loyal to any company at the expense of their respect for other companies are all equally annoying and their opinions are equally useless. However, the vast majority of these "hysterical" Nintendo fans you're talking about are simply responding to the overwhelming amount of anti-Nintendo propaganda that shows up on the Internet. For example, the recurring claim that Nintendo is nearing its end as a console maker.

Back to the issue at hand, complaints about this Game Informer review were relatively few before they posted their ridiculous explanation. If they'd reviewed Half-Life 2 and said they recognized it was a great game but gave it a 6.75/10 because it won't appeal to younger gamers, I can almost guarantee that the response would've been far worse.

[quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll']The other part of it is that whatever you think about their games, Nintendo has always been about screwing developers and retailers so alot of people are eager to see them get theirs.[/quote]

I'd say they've already "got theirs" wouldn't you? They used to almost have a monopoly in this industry. Now they simply have a fanbase just like every other company. They're still one of the more successful companies in the industry, but now they're in that position mainly by just creating games people want to play. There's absolutely no reason for anyone to want to see them sink any lower.

[quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll']I'd agree that Nintendo's games are better than the N64 gen, but that's not that impressive a feat really. I loved the NES and SNES but thought the N64 deserved a spot in the console graveyard next to the CDI. I'd also argue that Nintendo's games have gotten more childish this generation than in years past as they try and hold onto the one market segment they still have clout in.[/quote]

I definitely agree that the N64 period was Nintendo's worst yet, but it still deserved most of the respect and success it received. The CDI on the other hand, was almost completely useless. Comparing the two is more of that inflammatory rehetoric we've been talking about.

Also,what do you mean when you say Nintendo's games are getting more childish? If you mean they're getting simpler, I'd say that's a good thing. If I were to create a list of my all time favorite games, I'm sure hardly any of them could be described as "complex". I'll play just about anything, but games that are simple and easy to pick up and play are almost exclusively the type of games I keep coming back to year after year.
 
just go with your gut on this one. almost every other media gave it a good review so that probably means that it is. don't let one bad review spoil a potential good time. if i had a gamecube, i'd snatch that game up in a second.
 
ba... with what the internet is these days, it's amazing why anyone would want any sort of gaming magazine, regardless of if it was free or not.
 
[quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll'][quote name='Platypus Stan']
I swear, I'll never understand this rabid anti-Nintendo attitude that seems to permeate every corner of the Internet these days. If you don't like the type of games Nintendo makes, that's fine, but you have to realize that they've always made that type of game and they probably always will. If you don't think their games (either internally developed or otherwise) have generally gotten better since last gen, I can only imagine that you haven't given them the chance they deserve.
[/quote]

The rabid anti-Nintendo attitude is to a large degree a backlash against their fans. There's tons of PS2 and XBOX fanboys, but the GC has the most hysterical fan base I've ever seen, probobly because they realize Nintendo is nearing its end as a console maker. If you even dare to suggest anything with the Nintendo name on it is anything less than a gift from God, then these people will rant and rave at you until you go deaf. Which I think is what we're seeing here.

[/quote]

By your statement above, you are saying that it is not Nintendo that poeople dislike but its fans. Why should anyone dislike a company because of their fans. The only reason why these people rant and rave at your for suggesting something about a Nintendo game is because they understand that unless you have reasons to bakc up your argument, you probably are just saying that to just say it. The same thing can be said with this GI article. IF they had given some good reasons as to why this game deserved its score (for you since I'm not to sure you understand how games should be rated, i.e. graphics, gameplay, sound, etc, etc,) then I would feel fine with their argument on why it deserves this low of a score but it has been made obvious that they just came up with a number that they thought sounded good for their readership and not soemething based on truth or facts. Just face it already, they lied and came back with the reasons why they lied as someone posted earlier. I've seen Nintendo Power review better than this, and they plenty of times give pretty high scores. What they did is the equivalent of saying a game like Kingdom Hearts is kiddie becuase it has Disney characters in it, so it dserves a score of a 5. There are plenty of Disney movies that I like and obviuos they are intended for a younger audience, so does that make me believe that their movies deserve a 4/10. What would you say if I saw a Disney movie when I was 5 and it deeply impacted me and I thought it was the best movie of all time, would you just disparage that because you thought it were kiddie.I thought after Square came out with Kingdom Hearts that all this "kiddie" game sentiment had gone away as they had shown the world that games can look fun but still look sort of kiddie. I don't have to blow stuff up to deem a game fun.
 
[quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll'][quote name='Platypus Stan']
I swear, I'll never understand this rabid anti-Nintendo attitude that seems to permeate every corner of the Internet these days. If you don't like the type of games Nintendo makes, that's fine, but you have to realize that they've always made that type of game and they probably always will. If you don't think their games (either internally developed or otherwise) have generally gotten better since last gen, I can only imagine that you haven't given them the chance they deserve.
[/quote]

The rabid anti-Nintendo attitude is to a large degree a backlash against their fans. There's tons of PS2 and XBOX fanboys, but the GC has the most hysterical fan base I've ever seen, probobly because they realize Nintendo is nearing its end as a console maker. If you even dare to suggest anything with the Nintendo name on it is anything less than a gift from God, then these people will rant and rave at you until you go deaf. Which I think is what we're seeing here.

The other part of it is that whatever you think about their games, Nintendo has always been about screwing developers and retailers so alot of people are eager to see them get theirs.

I'd agree that Nintendo's games are better than the N64 gen, but that's not that impressive a feat really. I loved the NES and SNES but thought the N64 deserved a spot in the console graveyard next to the CDI. I'd also argue that Nintendo's games have gotten more childish this generation than in years past as they try and hold onto the one market segment they still have clout in.[/quote]

This has been said and defended time and time again. I orginally was going to come into the post with a list of reasons why your statement was wrong, ie Nintenedo being the most profitable of the current gen companies etc. But decided against it.

Your fight is old and not going to change anyones opinion except their opinion of you. Your not very smart are you?
 
Not to incite anything but they do have something against nintendo. Although the mario party games are not the greatest in the world they don't deserve the 1.0 to 3.0 score range the last one got. Im not saying they are 8 or 9 level games but surely no lower than 5
 
[quote name='jlarlee']Not to incite anything but they do have something against nintendo. Although the mario party games are not the greatest in the world they don't deserve the 1.0 to 3.0 score range the last one got. Im not saying they are 8 or 9 level games but surely no lower than 5[/quote]

Mario Party 1/2 were sheer brilliant...too bad I can't speak about 3 and higher as I haven't played them yet, even though I own Mario Party 4 from the CC sale.Yes they don't deserve a 1-3. I wonder what GI gave Crash Bash, I should go and check that out.
 
I admit the first two mario party games were spectacular. I have played 3-5 and IMHO they sucked. It's the same thing over and over and don't deserve anything higher than a 5.
 
[quote name='Trakan']I admit the first two mario party games were spectacular. I have played 3-5 and IMHO they sucked. It's the same thing over and over and don't deserve anything higher than a 5.[/quote]

i agree that the MP went downhill but I play them all witht he wife and #5 while not great was defiently not a 1.0 or 2.0 game. It seemed to me that they finally found a subpar game and took great glee in giving it absolute horrid reviews.
 
[quote name='hiccupleftovers']
By your statement above, you are saying that it is not Nintendo that poeople dislike but its fans. Why should anyone dislike a company because of their fans. The only reason why these people rant and rave at your for suggesting something about a Nintendo game is because they understand that unless you have reasons to bakc up your argument, you probably are just saying that to just say it. The same thing can be said with this GI article. IF they had given some good reasons as to why this game deserved its score (for you since I'm not to sure you understand how games should be rated, i.e. graphics, gameplay, sound, etc, etc,) then I would feel fine with their argument on why it deserves this low of a score but it has been made obvious that they just came up with a number that they thought sounded good for their readership and not soemething based on truth or facts. Just face it already, they lied and came back with the reasons why they lied as someone posted earlier. I've seen Nintendo Power review better than this, and they plenty of times give pretty high scores. What they did is the equivalent of saying a game like Kingdom Hearts is kiddie becuase it has Disney characters in it, so it dserves a score of a 5. There are plenty of Disney movies that I like and obviuos they are intended for a younger audience, so does that make me believe that their movies deserve a 4/10. What would you say if I saw a Disney movie when I was 5 and it deeply impacted me and I thought it was the best movie of all time, would you just disparage that because you thought it were kiddie.I thought after Square came out with Kingdom Hearts that all this "kiddie" game sentiment had gone away as they had shown the world that games can look fun but still look sort of kiddie. I don't have to blow stuff up to deem a game fun.[/quote]

Actually if you read my whole post, I give a number of reasons people don't like Nintendo, including: their games, their fans, their business practices. If you were 20 and had teletubbies posters all over your apartment, yes I would make fun of you. Nintendo Power reviews have high scores? Say it ain't so! Think maybe that could be because it's owned by Nintendo? It's hilarious that the same people who read Nintendo Power are complaining that GI is partisan.
 
I don't read magazines so I can be pleased to see a game made by a company I like getting a good score. I read it because I want to see someone's opinion on the game. If that person didn't like the game, I'm not going to jump down their throat like an idiot. I'm going to be pleased that I can examine the game from a different viewpoint rather than seeing the same scores from every publication who fears the retribution of ignorant fans.

You people are the reason game journalism doesn't go anywhere, because all you care about is making sure big budget games get the reviews you want to see, and then you complain when they don't.

Personally, I wish someone had told me that Kingdom Hearts blows before I wasted $50 on it. But alas, we need to keep fanboys happy.

Oh, and a 6.75 is a pretty good score in my book. You asshats.
 
[quote name='Snake2715']
This has been said and defended time and time again. I orginally was going to come into the post with a list of reasons why your statement was wrong, ie Nintenedo being the most profitable of the current gen companies etc. But decided against it.

Your fight is old and not going to change anyones opinion except their opinion of you. Your not very smart are you?[/quote]

That's exactly what I mean about rabid fans. If you say anything that could even remotely be construed as negative about Nintendo they take it as a personal attack and respond in kind. I'm pretty sure this isn't the place for personal attacks, but we can call each other names if that's what you're looking for.

Nintendo has only been profitable of late in that they have made an enormous amount of money on the currency markets.

If my "fight is old" and "won't change anyone's opinion" then couldn't the same be said of your post? At least mine contained some content besides personal attacks. Yours simply consists of "I could give you an intelligent argument but I won't" followed by some name-calling.
 
[quote name='EndlessChris']I don't read magazines so I can be pleased to see a game made by a company I like getting a good score. I read it because I want to see someone's opinion on the game. If that person didn't like the game, I'm not going to jump down their throat like an idiot. I'm going to be pleased that I can examine the game from a different viewpoint rather than seeing the same scores from every publication who fears the retribution of ignorant fans.

You people are the reason game journalism doesn't go anywhere, because all you care about is making sure big budget games get the reviews you want to see, and then you complain when they don't.

Personally, I wish someone had told me that Kingdom Hearts blows before I wasted $50 on it. But alas, we need to keep fanboys happy.

Oh, and a 6.75 is a pretty good score in my book. You asshats.[/quote]

Did you read what their response was? They didn't rate it based on what they thought. They rated it based on what they thought most people would want to hear about it. It's not an honest evaluation at that point, it's a prediction. And who wants to pay for a guess like that? You can get the same thing for free if you ask some store employee what they think you'll like.
 
man..i think some of you guys are taking this way to seriously....

a review is one persons opinion of a game....

not everybody is going to like the same things
 
[quote name='jmcc'][quote name='EndlessChris']I don't read magazines so I can be pleased to see a game made by a company I like getting a good score. I read it because I want to see someone's opinion on the game. If that person didn't like the game, I'm not going to jump down their throat like an idiot. I'm going to be pleased that I can examine the game from a different viewpoint rather than seeing the same scores from every publication who fears the retribution of ignorant fans.

You people are the reason game journalism doesn't go anywhere, because all you care about is making sure big budget games get the reviews you want to see, and then you complain when they don't.

Personally, I wish someone had told me that Kingdom Hearts blows before I wasted $50 on it. But alas, we need to keep fanboys happy.

Oh, and a 6.75 is a pretty good score in my book. You asshats.[/quote]

Did you read what their response was? They didn't rate it based on what they thought. They rated it based on what they thought most people would want to hear about it. It's not an honest evaluation at that point, it's a prediction. And who wants to pay for a guess like that? You can get the same thing for free if you ask some store employee what they think you'll like.[/quote]

I didn't really pay to get the mag though I paid so I could get the Gamestop discount card, as I'm sure most of their readership did. And aparrently you decided to breeze by the guys retraction where he states that he made that post in haste and he actually did include his opinion of the game.

Plus has everyone actually read the review? I mean 6.75 isn't a bad score and IMO without reading the review I can't make a full judgement about what the review has to say. My point is that everybody is overreacting to one score that isn't even all that bad.
 
[quote name='Duo_Maxwell'][quote name='jmcc'][quote name='EndlessChris']I don't read magazines so I can be pleased to see a game made by a company I like getting a good score. I read it because I want to see someone's opinion on the game. If that person didn't like the game, I'm not going to jump down their throat like an idiot. I'm going to be pleased that I can examine the game from a different viewpoint rather than seeing the same scores from every publication who fears the retribution of ignorant fans.

You people are the reason game journalism doesn't go anywhere, because all you care about is making sure big budget games get the reviews you want to see, and then you complain when they don't.

Personally, I wish someone had told me that Kingdom Hearts blows before I wasted $50 on it. But alas, we need to keep fanboys happy.

Oh, and a 6.75 is a pretty good score in my book. You asshats.[/quote]

Did you read what their response was? They didn't rate it based on what they thought. They rated it based on what they thought most people would want to hear about it. It's not an honest evaluation at that point, it's a prediction. And who wants to pay for a guess like that? You can get the same thing for free if you ask some store employee what they think you'll like.[/quote]

I didn't really pay to get the mag though I paid so I could get the Gamestop discount card, as I'm sure most of their readership did. And aparrently you decided to breeze by the guys retraction where he states that he made that post in haste and he actually did include his opinion of the game.

Plus has everyone actually read the review? I mean 6.75 isn't a bad score and IMO without reading the review I can't make a full judgement about what the review has to say. My point is that everybody is overreacting to one score that isn't even all that bad.[/quote]

I'm sorry, I don't really buy retractions of that nature. I'm sure he wants to take back what he said, yeah, but who knows if it's because it's damaging to the magazine or he really does like the game.
 
[quote name='Duo_Maxwell'][quote name='jmcc'][quote name='EndlessChris']I don't read magazines so I can be pleased to see a game made by a company I like getting a good score. I read it because I want to see someone's opinion on the game. If that person didn't like the game, I'm not going to jump down their throat like an idiot. I'm going to be pleased that I can examine the game from a different viewpoint rather than seeing the same scores from every publication who fears the retribution of ignorant fans.

You people are the reason game journalism doesn't go anywhere, because all you care about is making sure big budget games get the reviews you want to see, and then you complain when they don't.

Personally, I wish someone had told me that Kingdom Hearts blows before I wasted $50 on it. But alas, we need to keep fanboys happy.

Oh, and a 6.75 is a pretty good score in my book. You asshats.[/quote]

Did you read what their response was? They didn't rate it based on what they thought. They rated it based on what they thought most people would want to hear about it. It's not an honest evaluation at that point, it's a prediction. And who wants to pay for a guess like that? You can get the same thing for free if you ask some store employee what they think you'll like.[/quote]

I didn't really pay to get the mag though I paid so I could get the Gamestop discount card, as I'm sure most of their readership did. And aparrently you decided to breeze by the guys retraction where he states that he made that post in haste and he actually did include his opinion of the game.

Plus has everyone actually read the review? I mean 6.75 isn't a bad score and IMO without reading the review I can't make a full judgement about what the review has to say. My point is that everybody is overreacting to one score that isn't even all that bad.[/quote]

I'm sorry his retraction and reply just made it worse. because he did it in haste we should ignore it? Obviously he meant it to some degree or he wouldn't say that. he would have been better off just sticking to his guns about his review
 
In the end I'll just not factor their review in. I want low reviews of games, though. They'll have picked the game apart and presented all the flaws. Then I can see what I can live with and what I can't, but they need to be honest about why they don't like the game.
 
[quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll'][quote name='Snake2715']
This has been said and defended time and time again. I orginally was going to come into the post with a list of reasons why your statement was wrong, ie Nintenedo being the most profitable of the current gen companies etc. But decided against it.

Your fight is old and not going to change anyones opinion except their opinion of you. Your not very smart are you?[/quote]

That's exactly what I mean about rabid fans. If you say anything that could even remotely be construed as negative about Nintendo they take it as a personal attack and respond in kind. I'm pretty sure this isn't the place for personal attacks, but we can call each other names if that's what you're looking for.

Nintendo has only been profitable of late in that they have made an enormous amount of money on the currency markets.

If my "fight is old" and "won't change anyone's opinion" then couldn't the same be said of your post? At least mine contained some content besides personal attacks. Yours simply consists of "I could give you an intelligent argument but I won't" followed by some name-calling.[/quote]

Well I dont know how long you have been on the internet or following game systems. But this topic of "Nintendo nearing the end" , the topic of them being in trouble because a huge company like Microsoft is giving them good competition, etc has been done a million times.

I did give information letting you know what it seems you dont. You are arguing mis information which leads me to believe one of two things.
A) your not very smart
OR
b)You are terribly misinformed and have yet figured it out

I have called you no names and dont plan on it. What is irritating is that you are on a website discussing blatently wrong info like its the truth.

So They just raised their profit estimates. and until about a year ago they in their 108 year history had never EVER reported a loss. So I would assume that they do indeed know what they are doing.

There were many big companies that tried to sink them and alas they are still around. If the whole pointless "kiddie" (as its called which is totally dumb itself) image wears off then you will see an increase in sales. Killing people can be fun in a game but there has to be alternate games to play.

Nintendo has always been a pioneer and they are once again rying new things. The day that the tides turn for Sony is the day you will read stuff like "its about time Nintendo was a major competitor" etc. Because secretly almost all the publishers and reivewers out their played a Nintendo as a child and to be honest playing games is a way of escape and going to have fun which most people associate as "childesh" or "kiddie" anyway.

Your posts basically said

1. Nintendo has a bunch of rabid fanboys, all companies, stars, groups do sorry.

2. Nintendo is nearing the end. This is obviously false and you yourself said tehy are making money. Of course the exchange rate effects them they are a japan based company.

3. I do remember reading any solid information from you besides that. Who cares what the reviewer gave the point was he stated himself that he gave a particular number on what he thought the average consumer would give it. Which is not right.

Now here we are doing what I didnt want to do. I dont have the time or patience for it. Do what you want buy the systems you want and decide by yourself what you like. The reason the "Nintendo fanboys" are so tense is becuase of the unecessary attacks on one of their passions.
 
[quote name='hiccupleftovers']Mario Party 1/2 were sheer brilliant...too bad I can't speak about 3 and higher as I haven't played them yet, even though I own Mario Party 4 from the CC sale.Yes they don't deserve a 1-3. I wonder what GI gave Crash Bash, I should go and check that out.[/quote]

They gave Crash Bash a 6.5 and Sonic Shuffle a 7. Both were significantly less impressive than Mario Party 5 (which received a 2).

[quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll']Actually if you read my whole post, I give a number of reasons people don't like Nintendo, including: their games, their fans, their business practices. If you were 20 and had teletubbies posters all over your apartment, yes I would make fun of you. Nintendo Power reviews have high scores? Say it ain't so! Think maybe that could be because it's owned by Nintendo? It's hilarious that the same people who read Nintendo Power are complaining that GI is partisan.[/quote]

But if I were 20 and had a Sam & Max poster, would you make fun of me? How about a Simpsons poster? I don't see how you can compare Nintendo to Teletubbies while claiming that your attitude stems from Nintendo's overly defensive fans. Perhaps they're defensive because of the type of ridiculous inflammatory comments you've been throwing out there in every post in this topic so far.

Also, I believe his point was that Nintendo Power is obviously biased and he was surprised to see an even less trustworthy review in a supposedly unbiased magazine.

[quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll']That's exactly what I mean about rabid fans. If you say anything that could even remotely be construed as negative about Nintendo they take it as a personal attack and respond in kind. I'm pretty sure this isn't the place for personal attacks, but we can call each other names if that's what you're looking for.

Nintendo has only been profitable of late in that they have made an enormous amount of money on the currency markets.

If my "fight is old" and "won't change anyone's opinion" then couldn't the same be said of your post? At least mine contained some content besides personal attacks. Yours simply consists of "I could give you an intelligent argument but I won't" followed by some name-calling.[/quote]

When people make up facts in order to make Nintendo look worse than they are, they're insulting the intelligence of their fans. Snake2715 just took a more direct approach. If you honestly expect someone to believe that Nintendo is only making money because of fluctuations in the international currency markets, you're basically saying, "You're not very smart, are you?"
 
[quote name='Platypus Stan']But if I were 20 and had a Sam & Max poster, would you make fun of me? How about a Simpsons poster? I don't see how you can compare Nintendo to Teletubbies while claiming that your attitude stems from Nintendo's overly defensive fans. Perhaps they're defensive because of the type of ridiculous inflammatory comments you've been throwing out there in every post in this topic so far.

Also, I believe his point was that Nintendo Power is obviously biased and he was surprised to see an even less trustworthy review in a supposedly unbiased magazine.[/quote]

I wasn't comparing Nintendo to Teletubbies. All I said was that if he had a Teletubbies poster I'd make fun of him. The point was to illustrate my point about age differences and the magazine reviewer taking them into account. Don't put words in my mouth.

I didn't claim my attitude comes from Nintendo's fans. I replied to the poster that there is a pervasive anti-nintendo attitude in part due to their rabid fanbase. I think my point was abundantly clear so please stop trying to twist my words.

How is GI even less trustworthy than Nintendo Power exactly?

When people make up facts in order to make Nintendo look worse than they are, they're insulting the intelligence of their fans. Snake2715 just took a more direct approach. If you honestly expect someone to believe that Nintendo is only making money because of fluctuations in the international currency markets, you're basically saying, "You're not very smart, are you?"
Click to expand...

What facts have I made up? I admit I should have phrased my remark about the currency markets better as I didn't mean to imply they wouldn't be profitable without that income, but certainly much less profitable.

If my goal was just to make Nintendo look bad I certainly wouldn't have to make up facts, as I go to a school run by Nintendo.

In short, I realize you feel passionately about the subject, but please stop telling me what I'm trying to say.
 
[quote name='x0thedeadzone0x']Wholy ****. As if the first game wasn't kiddie? The shaq-fuing graphics are made of PAPER. This should not affect the score. If they ENJOYED playing it, they should put that in their review some how, some way. Not "well, the graphics were looking a little papery and kiddie, and I didn't see any headshots, so it won't appeal to most gamers. I rate it teh 6!!!!11!!1111 one". Christ, I'm gonna be pissed when my mag comes in the mail.

Oh yeah, and the first was a shaq-fuing AWESOME game. One of my favorites of all time. Nothing will change that... unless this one is better in every way.[/quote]

I totally agree. The whole deal is, a game is to be scored for how well it measures up to the type of gameplay it was designed to deliver. This kind of ludicrous rational for one's obvious bias would lead to someone giving Madden 2005 a 4.0/10 because "...everyone doesn't like football". Or what if someone had given Final Fantasy III (VI) a 5.2/10 because "...I like Pez." Of course there are going to be people who don't like a particular game. But if you're biased, just let it show so that people know where you are coming from. I think it was Ocarina of Time that one of the EGM Review Crew gave a 9.5. There probably hasn't been someone in all of videogame history who got more hate mail. But .5 short of perfection is still an awesome score (as long it isn't from NP who throws perfect scores out like their going out of style...). And he had good reason for the score and he stood by it. There were things he just didn't like about the game. But a 6.75 for a game that is almost universally loved is awful. A 6.75 is swimming in the depths of the mire of mediocrity for such a title. But he is still entitled to his opinion (however wrong it may be :twisted: ). What makes this such a terrible tale is how he then gives a terribly awkward and incompetent reason for his score. He then retracts that and pretty much says, "Now, I can see I've enraged you all and many of you are going to end your subscription for my stupidity. I also am afraid of losing my job. Therefore, here is another piece of crap explanation to my score." That's what I have a problem with; someone making a blunder, trying to explain it away, realizing they have made it worse and giving yet an almost opposite answer out. With such vacillation, it's amazing he isn't leading the polls for President.
 
[quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll']I wasn't comparing Nintendo to Teletubbies. All I said was that if he had a Teletubbies poster I'd make fun of him. The point was to illustrate my point about age differences and the magazine reviewer taking them into account. Don't put words in my mouth.

I didn't claim my attitude comes from Nintendo's fans. I replied to the poster that there is a pervasive anti-nintendo attitude in part due to their rabid fanbase. I think my point was abundantly clear so please stop trying to twist my words.

How is GI even less trustworthy than Nintendo Power exactly?[/quote]

OK, so you were indirectly comparing Teletubbies to a Nintendo game, not to Nintendo itself. Super Mario RPG was a game that could be enjoyed by everyone. Paper Mario was a game that could be enjoyed by everyone. And according to every non-GI Paper Mario 2 review I've read, it's also a game that can be enjoyed by everyone. On the other hand, Teletubbies is specifically designed to appeal to children and only to children. Nintendo has only produced one game along those lines this generation (Pokemon Channel).

Your point about the anti-Nintendo attitude and its relation to Nintendo's fans is perfectly clear, but it's also completely backwards. I maintain that Nintendo fans appear overly defensive merely because Nintendo is the most common target for attack. I defend everything I love, but I obviously have far more opportunities to defend Nintendo than I do companies like Treasure or Blizzard.

As far as the trustworthiness of Nintendo Power or Game Informer, I'd say they're about equal after this incident. While we can assume NP's reviews are biased since they're owned by a videogame company, we now know GI's reviews are biased because the reviewer told us as much.

[quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll']What facts have I made up? I admit I should have phrased my remark about the currency markets better as I didn't mean to imply they wouldn't be profitable without that income, but certainly much less profitable.

If my goal was just to make Nintendo look bad I certainly wouldn't have to make up facts, as I go to a school run by Nintendo.

In short, I realize you feel passionately about the subject, but please stop telling me what I'm trying to say.[/quote]

1) You said Nintendo games are given high scores to avoid pissing of the fans. If anything, Nintendo's games tend to be at a disadvantage since many reviewers hold them up the the ridiculously high standards set by their previous games.

2) You said, "Nintendo's "hard work" these days is giving another developer a stack of cash and telling them to do their work for them." What about all the games they internally develop? They are no fewer and no less amazing than in the past.

3) You said that Nintendo is "nearing its end as a console maker". Barring a significant, unprecedented shift in both the handheld and home console markets, there is simply no way that will happen in the foreseeable future.

4) You said that Nintendo's games have gotten "more childish" lately. Depending on what you meant by that, it's either untrue or it's a change for the better.

5) You continue to stress the impact that foreign currency markets have on Nintendo's profits. Excluding the impact of the currency markets, Nintendo would still be about as profitable as the whole of Sony. The same Sony which is also doing better than expected because of those same markets, yet isn't being routinely chastised for it.

Also, from reading your earlier comments in this topic, you seem to be misunderstanding why people are upset. We aren't upset about the score, we're upset about a review that doesn't sufficiently support their verdict, and a response to the review that is nothing short of devastating to the magazine's credibility if it is indeed true.
 
[quote name='jlarlee'][quote name='Duo_Maxwell'][quote name='jmcc'][quote name='EndlessChris']I don't read magazines so I can be pleased to see a game made by a company I like getting a good score. I read it because I want to see someone's opinion on the game. If that person didn't like the game, I'm not going to jump down their throat like an idiot. I'm going to be pleased that I can examine the game from a different viewpoint rather than seeing the same scores from every publication who fears the retribution of ignorant fans.

You people are the reason game journalism doesn't go anywhere, because all you care about is making sure big budget games get the reviews you want to see, and then you complain when they don't.

Personally, I wish someone had told me that Kingdom Hearts blows before I wasted $50 on it. But alas, we need to keep fanboys happy.

Oh, and a 6.75 is a pretty good score in my book. You asshats.[/quote]

Did you read what their response was? They didn't rate it based on what they thought. They rated it based on what they thought most people would want to hear about it. It's not an honest evaluation at that point, it's a prediction. And who wants to pay for a guess like that? You can get the same thing for free if you ask some store employee what they think you'll like.[/quote]

I didn't really pay to get the mag though I paid so I could get the Gamestop discount card, as I'm sure most of their readership did. And aparrently you decided to breeze by the guys retraction where he states that he made that post in haste and he actually did include his opinion of the game.

Plus has everyone actually read the review? I mean 6.75 isn't a bad score and IMO without reading the review I can't make a full judgement about what the review has to say. My point is that everybody is overreacting to one score that isn't even all that bad.[/quote]

I'm sorry his retraction and reply just made it worse. because he did it in haste we should ignore it? Obviously he meant it to some degree or he wouldn't say that. he would have been better off just sticking to his guns about his review[/quote]

I didn't buy his retraction either. It sounded more like he was trying to do damage control but in the end failed and only incited angry readers as most of us (minus sheik rattle enroll and a couple others) are. He probably just did it so that he could try to give his ass a little protection before it goes on the chopping block and he is fired.
 
[quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll'][quote name='hiccupleftovers']
By your statement above, you are saying that it is not Nintendo that poeople dislike but its fans. Why should anyone dislike a company because of their fans. The only reason why these people rant and rave at your for suggesting something about a Nintendo game is because they understand that unless you have reasons to bakc up your argument, you probably are just saying that to just say it. The same thing can be said with this GI article. IF they had given some good reasons as to why this game deserved its score (for you since I'm not to sure you understand how games should be rated, i.e. graphics, gameplay, sound, etc, etc,) then I would feel fine with their argument on why it deserves this low of a score but it has been made obvious that they just came up with a number that they thought sounded good for their readership and not soemething based on truth or facts. Just face it already, they lied and came back with the reasons why they lied as someone posted earlier. I've seen Nintendo Power review better than this, and they plenty of times give pretty high scores. What they did is the equivalent of saying a game like Kingdom Hearts is kiddie becuase it has Disney characters in it, so it dserves a score of a 5. There are plenty of Disney movies that I like and obviuos they are intended for a younger audience, so does that make me believe that their movies deserve a 4/10. What would you say if I saw a Disney movie when I was 5 and it deeply impacted me and I thought it was the best movie of all time, would you just disparage that because you thought it were kiddie.I thought after Square came out with Kingdom Hearts that all this "kiddie" game sentiment had gone away as they had shown the world that games can look fun but still look sort of kiddie. I don't have to blow stuff up to deem a game fun.[/quote]

Actually if you read my whole post, I give a number of reasons people don't like Nintendo, including: their games, their fans, their business practices. If you were 20 and had teletubbies posters all over your apartment, yes I would make fun of you. Nintendo Power reviews have high scores? Say it ain't so! Think maybe that could be because it's owned by Nintendo? It's hilarious that the same people who read Nintendo Power are complaining that GI is partisan.[/quote]

"Perhaps they're defensive because of the type of ridiculous inflammatory comments you've been throwing out there in every post in this topic so far. "-Platypus Stan.

So far in your argumnet, you have shown me no factual evidence of what your allegations of Nintendo.

[quote name='Platyppus Stan'][quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll']Actually if you read my whole post, I give a number of reasons people don't like Nintendo, including: their games, their fans, their business practices. If you were 20 and had teletubbies posters all over your apartment, yes I would make fun of you. Nintendo Power reviews have high scores? Say it ain't so! Think maybe that could be because it's owned by Nintendo? It's hilarious that the same people who read Nintendo Power are complaining that GI is partisan.[/quote]

Also, I believe his point was that Nintendo Power is obviously biased and he was surprised to see an even less trustworthy review in a supposedly unbiased magazine. [/quote]

Platypus Stan seems to have hit the nail on the head while you continually chase your tail and give us the same rhetoric. It doesn't take a 3rd grader to understand that Nintendo Power has its biases towards NIntendo (i knew that at least at that time) as does OPM, OXM, Xbox Nation, but GI which is supposed to be a multiplatform magazine with no allegiances and is supposed to be third person perspective of games and is supposed to give us an honest opinion on what they felt the game, not as has been shown in his rebuttals, "what the readership wants to hear". I would want no less lets say from a car magazine to give me their honest true opinions on a car product or how a car truly is.
 
[quote name='hiccupleftovers']
So far in your argumnet, you have shown me no factual evidence of what your allegations of Nintendo.

Platypus Stan seems to have hit the nail on the head while you continually chase your tail and give us the same rhetoric. It doesn't take a 3rd grader to understand that Nintendo Power has its biases towards NIntendo (i knew that at least at that time) as does OPM, OXM, Xbox Nation, but GI which is supposed to be a multiplatform magazine with no allegiances and is supposed to be third person perspective of games and is supposed to give us an honest opinion on what they felt the game, not as has been shown in his rebuttals, "what the readership wants to hear". I would want no less lets say from a car magazine to give me their honest true opinions on a car product or how a car truly is.[/quote]

What are my allegations against Nintendo exactly? If you're talking about how I mentioned that many people dislike them because of their business practices, then a simple google search will enlighten you as to how they used to blackmail retailers. A little more digging and you'll understand how they've treated third party developers and why they abandoned Nintendo in droves as soon as there was viable competition. I also reccommend the book "Game Over", even though it's more from a pro-Nintendo perspective, it tells you a lot about how Nintendo operates. If you're referring to the fact that I thought the N64 had weaker software than the SNES and NES, then you realize that I was just stating my opinion and not a fact, right?

I'm giving you the same rhetoric because my point is the same no matter how people try and twist what I say. They took their readership into account and gave a review they thought would be meaningful to them. They're supposed to tell you what they think about the game and they did, they just took the "kiddiness" of it into account in the final score, which you disagree with. I'm sorry if my thinking hasn't changed to your liking.


If anybody feels the need to continue to call me stupid or anything more vile, feel free to do so in PMs, as I won't be responding to this thread any longer, as it's obvious that just by pointing out that the magazine might not be the tool of the anti-Nintendo satanists, I've touched some kind of nerve and caused this thread to degenerate into people pulling my posts apart instead of actually talking about the topic.
 
[quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll'][quote name='hiccupleftovers']
So far in your argumnet, you have shown me no factual evidence of what your allegations of Nintendo.

Platypus Stan seems to have hit the nail on the head while you continually chase your tail and give us the same rhetoric. It doesn't take a 3rd grader to understand that Nintendo Power has its biases towards NIntendo (i knew that at least at that time) as does OPM, OXM, Xbox Nation, but GI which is supposed to be a multiplatform magazine with no allegiances and is supposed to be third person perspective of games and is supposed to give us an honest opinion on what they felt the game, not as has been shown in his rebuttals, "what the readership wants to hear". I would want no less lets say from a car magazine to give me their honest true opinions on a car product or how a car truly is.[/quote]

What are my allegations against Nintendo exactly? If you're talking about how I mentioned that many people dislike them because of their business practices, then a simple google search will enlighten you as to how they used to blackmail retailers. A little more digging and you'll understand how they've treated third party developers and why they abandoned Nintendo in droves as soon as there was viable competition. I also reccommend the book "Game Over", even though it's more from a pro-Nintendo perspective, it tells you a lot about how Nintendo operates. If you're referring to the fact that I thought the N64 had weaker software than the SNES and NES, then you realize that I was just stating my opinion and not a fact, right?

I'm giving you the same rhetoric because my point is the same no matter how people try and twist what I say. They took their readership into account and gave a review they thought would be meaningful to them. They're supposed to tell you what they think about the game and they did, they just took the "kiddiness" of it into account in the final score, which you disagree with. I'm sorry if my thinking hasn't changed to your liking.


If anybody feels the need to continue to call me stupid or anything more vile, feel free to do so in PMs, as I won't be responding to this thread any longer, as it's obvious that just by pointing out that the magazine might not be the tool of the anti-Nintendo satanists, I've touched some kind of nerve and caused this thread to degenerate into people pulling my posts apart instead of actually talking about the topic.[/quote]

They didn't take the kiddiness into regard. They took what they percieved as their readership's bias against it and rated the game low so as to match up with what they thought their more adult crowd would want to hear.

Frankly, it's good that you're running away from the discussion, since you can't seem to grasp the point that the score isn't what people don't like, it's how they arrived at the score.
 
Well, I have played the game, and I can now officially say that GI fucking sucks ass. They have no taste in games whatsoever.

*dives back to GC*
 
Flip-floppin, I say.

What Mario game DOESN'T look kiddie? I mean, c'mon. Friggin' fat plumber with a mustache shooting fireballs out of his hand... got bullets flying everywhere named Bullet Bill... clouds with FACES ON THEM. Geeze. It's like saying Katamari Damacy is crappy because it's too kiddy/the graphics are like seven polygons (I love it, by the way).

Pfft.

Now if American McGee took a stab at Mario or something, then it'd be different.

Aw, I'm just blowin' smoke outta my butt anyway.
 
[quote name='x0thedeadzone0x']Well, I have played the game, and I can now officially say that GI shaq-fuing sucks ass. They have no taste in games whatsoever.

*dives back to GC*[/quote]

It's become all the more obvious with that one guy's post and the fact that as I look through their mag. a little more in-depth, I see that they don't know how to give just scores. Anyway I'm done with my ranting and would like to say congrats deadzone on finding a copy of PM2 after I haerd you weren't able to. I myself am waiting to pick it up once this alleged TRU sale starts since it will be my opportunity to save some money that I don't have. Well it's good to hear that about PM2.
 
[quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll'][quote name='hiccupleftovers']
So far in your argumnet, you have shown me no factual evidence of what your allegations of Nintendo.

Platypus Stan seems to have hit the nail on the head while you continually chase your tail and give us the same rhetoric. It doesn't take a 3rd grader to understand that Nintendo Power has its biases towards NIntendo (i knew that at least at that time) as does OPM, OXM, Xbox Nation, but GI which is supposed to be a multiplatform magazine with no allegiances and is supposed to be third person perspective of games and is supposed to give us an honest opinion on what they felt the game, not as has been shown in his rebuttals, "what the readership wants to hear". I would want no less lets say from a car magazine to give me their honest true opinions on a car product or how a car truly is.[/quote]

What are my allegations against Nintendo exactly? If you're talking about how I mentioned that many people dislike them because of their business practices, then a simple google search will enlighten you as to how they used to blackmail retailers. A little more digging and you'll understand how they've treated third party developers and why they abandoned Nintendo in droves as soon as there was viable competition. I also reccommend the book "Game Over", even though it's more from a pro-Nintendo perspective, it tells you a lot about how Nintendo operates. If you're referring to the fact that I thought the N64 had weaker software than the SNES and NES, then you realize that I was just stating my opinion and not a fact, right?

I'm giving you the same rhetoric because my point is the same no matter how people try and twist what I say. They took their readership into account and gave a review they thought would be meaningful to them. They're supposed to tell you what they think about the game and they did, they just took the "kiddiness" of it into account in the final score, which you disagree with. I'm sorry if my thinking hasn't changed to your liking.


If anybody feels the need to continue to call me stupid or anything more vile, feel free to do so in PMs, as I won't be responding to this thread any longer, as it's obvious that just by pointing out that the magazine might not be the tool of the anti-Nintendo satanists, I've touched some kind of nerve and caused this thread to degenerate into people pulling my posts apart instead of actually talking about the topic.[/quote]

I'm really getting tired of responding to you, becase it has already been made apparent your allegations, etc. by me and other posters such as Platypus Stan and the lengthy argument given by Snake2715, so I just won't and let you go by since I see that you have come to understand that GI's review of a game by giving "what the readership wants to hear".
 
[quote name='hiccupleftovers'][quote name='x0thedeadzone0x']Well, I have played the game, and I can now officially say that GI shaq-fuing sucks ass. They have no taste in games whatsoever.

*dives back to GC*[/quote]

It's become all the more obvious with that one guy's post and the fact that as I look through their mag. a little more in-depth, I see that they don't know how to give just scores. Anyway I'm done with my ranting and would like to say congrats deadzone on finding a copy of PM2 after I haerd you weren't able to. I myself am waiting to pick it up once this alleged TRU sale starts since it will be my opportunity to save some money that I don't have. Well it's good to hear that about PM2.[/quote]

Thanks for that, I wanted it yesterday but couldn't find it anywhere since it was columbus day (holiday) so nobody had any in-stock. Today though I just went straight to the store, I'm so happy
 
[quote name='hiccupleftovers']It doesn't take a 3rd grader to understand that Nintendo Power has its biases towards NIntendo (i knew that at least at that time) as does OPM, OXM, Xbox Nation, but GI which is supposed to be a multiplatform magazine with no allegiances and is supposed to be third person perspective of games and is supposed to give us an honest opinion on what they felt the game, not as has been shown in his rebuttals, "what the readership wants to hear". I would want no less lets say from a car magazine to give me their honest true opinions on a car product or how a car truly is.[/quote]

To be fair, I haven't noticed any distinguishable bias in XBN. They're actually one of the more trustworthy magazines out there, which is amazing considering they're platform specific. I'd say OPM is about on the same level as Nintendo Power, while OXM is just plain disgusting and insulting (I want to know why I should be enjoying my Xbox, not why I should hate my GameCube or PS2).

[quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll']What are my allegations against Nintendo exactly? If you're talking about how I mentioned that many people dislike them because of their business practices, then a simple google search will enlighten you as to how they used to blackmail retailers. A little more digging and you'll understand how they've treated third party developers and why they abandoned Nintendo in droves as soon as there was viable competition. I also reccommend the book "Game Over", even though it's more from a pro-Nintendo perspective, it tells you a lot about how Nintendo operates.[/quote]

I realize you said you're no longer participating in this topic, but allow me to reply anyway. I used to be one of the people who was disgusted by Nintendo's practices and loved seeing people fight against them (Tengen, Game Genie, anti-trust lawsuits, etc.) However, as it stands right now, Nintendo is exactly where they should be. They used to have the muscle to fight unfairly and give themselves an advantage over companies who deserved a better chance. Now they've been "reduced" to simply giving gamers what they want in order to make money. The playing field is level, and the only reason Nintendo is still one of the more successful companies in the business is because they create some of the best games in the business. I can see no reason why anyone would want that to change.
 
Ugh, I cringe whenever I see someone describing a game like this as "kiddie." Paper Mario 2 is not "kiddie," it has universal appeal. Just because a 10 year old can pick up and enjoy Wind Waker doesn't mean that it's a kiddie game made for little children only. If anything, games like Paper Mario are harder to make than games you might consider more adult-oriented because you're not trying to appeal only to a specific target audience with similar preferences and tendencies. Don't get me wrong, I love games with adult themes and content too(I usually like them better actually), but Paper Mario and Wind Waker invoked feelings in me that I couldn't get from getting 20 headshots in a row in a violent FPS. I played Wind Waker with a huge smile on my face and thought the game was fucking magical, and I'm well over 20. Am I immature or stupid? You decide. My girlfriend is in a PhD program and she loves playing Animal Crossing GC despite its N64-era graphics and simple dialogue. They're not for kids, they're for everyone who enjoys a good time. In fact, I'm gonna preserve these games so I can play them with my kids someday.

You know what games I do consider "kiddie" though? Games like BMX XXX, Panty Raider, and DOA Beach Volleyball. They're shallow, immature, and tailored to the biological urges of teenagers in puberty. Ironic, isn't it? Well if they think Paper Mario and Wind Waker are too "kiddie," screw 'em. They can keep stuffing their faces with crappy ESRB Mature Rating games. I'm not the one missing out.
 
yo, sheikrattlenroll..Got some advice for you..

shut-up.jpg


and stop acting as if youre not being inflammatory with your comments.
have a good day. :eek:


Paper mario..Is..a well designed game which has universal appeal, an interesting graphics style, addicitve rpg elements, and a very good story.. You cannot brand a game 'kiddie' without even having had played it. Thats just..well, idiotic.

Everybody hell bent on flaming Nintendo..how about this Scenario:
If it werent for Nintendo, the videogame industry after the first crash in the Atari age, would have never recovered. How about that? ....And wed be sitting around in 2004 on 'Cheapassboargamer.com' discussing the new Risk.

-eclipse
 
So, by their rationale, a game like Resident Evil targeted at adults would have to be docked points since not everyone (i.e. kids) can enjoy it? Last I saw they were giving games like Grand Theft Auto Game of the Year awards.

The next reviewer that docks points off a good game because he thinks it's "kiddy" needs a bat to the face. If a game has gameplay that is entertaining to adults then it's not a kiddie game, no matter how many cute little creatures and rainbows it's packing. Game Informer are a bunch of Playstation-sucking virgin assholes.
 
Well, I have read GI for a long time and I normally agree with there reviews. However, I know that I must normally ignore the review if it is Mario game. They allways rate them lower. I don't know why but they have a strong, unprofessional bias against those games. I have Paper mario and it is a good game esp. if you like the GBA Mario and Lugi game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top