Why would you not celebrate such amazing scores, deservedly or not?
Gaming Nintendo keeps on drooling over and over, over the perfect 10's BotW scores
I would give it a 6/10 maybe 7/10 at a push, it's an average game to me. In its defence I have funky tastes...
Some people aren't happy that reviewers chose to blatantly ignore downsides, or that a 10/10 game needs to be one without flaws. The score of the reviewer needs to be taken with a grain of salt, though I can understand why some people are irritated at this. People need to start ignoring the numbered score entirely.
Then he didn't do his job as attention seeking troll well enough.
Seriously, he's obviously joking. The joke is that he's acting like a fanboy.
Meanwhile in the Milky Way Galaxy, I thought the game was damn good. It isn't 10/10 worthy, but it's close. I personally have had minimal issues with lag. Death Mountain gave a bit of lag, but otherwise the game's fine.
Remember that the reviews have a shorter time to do a review for the game. So they can't do as much paddling around and doing all kind of sidemissions etc. Therefore they might not seen as many flaws as we have.
I don't know how much time they got on Zelda however, but Nintendo is often kind on how much time they have, they seem to send out very early. But since this is a launch game for the console, it might not been much time.
I don't know how much time they got on Zelda however, but Nintendo is often kind on how much time they have, they seem to send out very early. But since this is a launch game for the console, it might not been much time.
For a nintendo produced game i give it a score of 8.25/10. For Zelda game, i gave it solid 9. Now if it was a 3rd party game for xbox one and ps4..i would give a c-. Just below average.
Which brings an interesting point or subject matter. If nintendo had gone 3rd party for home consoles and acted only as a first party for a true 3ds like many wanted, they would of had to up their game up for all future zelda titles. Compare botw to witcher 3. How bad would botw loose in sells if both were released at the same time as xbox one and ps 4 titles?
Which brings an interesting point or subject matter. If nintendo had gone 3rd party for home consoles and acted only as a first party for a true 3ds like many wanted, they would of had to up their game up for all future zelda titles. Compare botw to witcher 3. How bad would botw loose in sells if both were released at the same time as xbox one and ps 4 titles?
The need to use /s is strong in these boards. Either that or you can assume that everyone is being sarcastic at any given point.
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2011
- Messages
- 31,284
- Trophies
- 2
- Age
- 38
- Location
- Dr. Wahwee's castle
- XP
- 18,969
- Country
No, but 20 fps even for 1998, is pretty bad, most N64 games ran at 30, some even ran at 60.
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2007
- Messages
- 12,009
- Trophies
- 3
- Location
- In the Murderbox!
- Website
- www.twitch.tv
- XP
- 16,153
- Country
So, this thread was for attention?
.. Or? You don't agree with the reviews? Cool.. Your opinion..
.. Or? You don't agree with the reviews? Cool.. Your opinion..
10/10 doesn't mean no flaws. It means than the enjoyment provided by the game's awesomeness overflows the small details like framerate.
11/10. Collecting all 900 seeds gives you an amazing reward of a golden turd. Or gift, as the game likes to call it.
i think its paid for, take Wind Waker how it also got 10/10 or 5/5 yet tho it was a decent game it had parts that spoiled it, similar to BOTW which i think is worse than WW your mainly running aimlessly around an overly sized map finding shrines and doing side quests.
the game itself is very short and pretty dull to be fair, the divine beats are repetitive, the boss battles are also repetitive its like fighting the same boss over and over, then you face ganon which is rather dull and when the game is compleated what do you get...... nothing you just start back at your last save point.
The game is buggy as hell and cant beleive this is why nintendo delayed releasing a new zelda title.
the game itself is very short and pretty dull to be fair, the divine beats are repetitive, the boss battles are also repetitive its like fighting the same boss over and over, then you face ganon which is rather dull and when the game is compleated what do you get...... nothing you just start back at your last save point.
The game is buggy as hell and cant beleive this is why nintendo delayed releasing a new zelda title.
As someone that has played Witcher 3 and BoTW, I would say they are actually both quite different in what they are trying to do. BoTW is much more accessible and there is a greater emphasis on puzzle solving (particularly physics based ones). The Witcher 3 is much more story driven, and as an ARPG there is a lot more emphasis on combat (which is supposed to be a major point in this game, but I personally found the combat system to be below par) and leveling up. The thing is that there have always been games with more complex mechanics than Zelda (including on Nintendo systems), and yet Zelda remains competitive because it is relatively easy to pick up and play. Based on my experience with both I would give both Witcher 3 and BoTW a solid 9/10, and I think BoTW could have easily held its own with regards to sales even if released on other systems (In fact, I would say it could easily outsell Wither 3, since BoTW is far more accessible).
Last edited by sonicfan1373,
* WW better than BOTW?!?*
*taking a breath and counts to 3. 1...2...3*
*deletes initial post*
* leaves this thread because remembers that opinions are like a-holes...*
tis kinda funny xD
but heck if i was among the devs. of the creation of the game i'd also show off everywhere and shitpost everywhere about this game.
botw. is good fun, and sidon's grins is lovely.
but heck if i was among the devs. of the creation of the game i'd also show off everywhere and shitpost everywhere about this game.
botw. is good fun, and sidon's grins is lovely.
If you look at the top metacritic games list, a great deal of them have frame rate issues. GTA IV has got the one score higher than Zelda, and it had similar framerate fluctuation issues (particularly on the PS3). It is the same with GTA V (again namely on PS3 and X360; but even the XOne version and more rarely the PS4 version dips to the mid-20s from time to time), which got the same score as Zelda. I think most reviewers realize that the consoles that these games are running on are not exactly power houses, and so they accept compromises so long as the game is playable and does not really bother them while they are reviewing it.
Everyone's complaining about framerate, but I personally have never had any issue with it. It dips a little in some areas. Wow. Completely destroys the entire experience of the game. The framerate issues are "meh, they're a bit annoying I guess" at worst. And they barely happen outside of a few areas. Seriously??
Similar threads
rolling?
] On Guard 
