It's not so bad if you ignore the cutscenes

New Super Metroid Gals when?

and one the lowest rated Metroid game on the stie

because most Metroid games are very good

Other M has a Zelda-tier Nintendo Bonus, 15+ bonus points at the bare minimum

Does this mean Macarena of Time is actually mid-80s?

Macarena of Time was amazing in 1998, it deserved the 99 score back then

Macarina of Time 3D should've been rated 79 instead of 94 though

It is literally the same game with better graphics and menu interface. How does it rank that much worse?

because game design improved massively in 20 years

So OoT is considered a good game not because it is good, but because it came out a long time ago.

In the sense that it's squarely mediocre instead of an abject disaster, so to an extent I suppose I agree.

t. son of dob

Attached: dobson.jpg (800x619, 148K)

because it was good in 1998 when most developers weren't all that familiar with 3D game design, nowadays it's just decent

Super Mario World is as good now as it was during its release date because 2D game design was already very mature by 1990

Standards have changed and aspects of OoT have aged such as its scale and some of its simpler puzzle design, but overall it's still rock solid and a surprising amount of modern action adventures still aren't as good. I'd say it's more of an 8.5/10 these days which is fantastic for a 20 year old title.

Shouldn't the scores reflect that then?

Attached: 1356194559083.png (912x1434, 902K)

If Nintendo released 'pong' for 80$ USD would you buy it? Probably not. It's a simple game that's been done a million times. But when it first came out it was a 9/10 game because it had multiplayer and great graphics and fun gameplay. The time it was released plays a big factor into the score.

yes and they actually do, just compare Jet Set Radio's scores on Dreamcast and X360

Nintendo games are a different story because of the Nintendo Bonus

But Nintendo did sell an overpriced Pong clone in the 70s

The story wasn't even the biggest problem . And even if this were it's own standalone game with no association with Metroid at all, it would still be a pirce of shit game. It just a badly designed game overall.

In the 70's that is fine. But in 2019 I would expect something better.

A lot of these complaints sound like a whiney fanboy but if you play the game you will understand where they are coming from and that it's all valid. I thought the 2d controls were done well and the storyline was good but the FPS missile shooting had me ready to turn the game off the first time I did it. I eventually turned the game off after being stuck on a screen for 15 minutes not being able to look at the specific pixel and then not being able to do the quick time event properly later in that section. All they had to do was keep it 2d, give you multiple paths to take and remove all dialogue. That's it. It was so simple but they fucked it up after so much hype.

there's no real nintendo bonus
there's just an omnipresent "big publisher" bonus
same bonus Nintendo games get also applies to EA just for one

Everyone bitches about EA

there's indeed a "big publisher bonus", but the Nintendo Bonus is by far the biggest one

unless you want me to believe the rushed Mario Kart 7 is better than Sonic Transformed

Attached: Bonus.png (668x304, 84K)

don't really know about that, EA has gotten some very high rated real stinkers over the years
and guys like Rockstar get consistently heavily overrated as well

>because game design improved massively in 20 years

Attached: 1379941437538.jpg (260x260, 10K)

it's true
take movies: Matrix level CGI was groundbreaking back in the days and helped boost the movie's scores significantly
nowadays using it would actively be a negative

same goes for those early 3D games

>It's not so bad if you ignore the bad parts
>It's not so bad if you ignore the main thing the devs wanted you to pay attention to.

Attached: 1542904434099.png (620x581, 16K)

It's shit youtube.com/watch?v=o_nS1ADTJY0