I personally wouldn't give it a 10, but it was an important game in terms of how it redefined adventure game controls and presentation for the 3D generation.
already a thread on this. game deserved to get 6, not 10apolloluke
well someone is jealous its a classic now shut up i bet if they made halo with the same stuff on the xbox after 360 u'd give it a ten so please don't be a jerk
Yeah, if anyone denies that this wasn't a bias review, you are a truly a Nintendo fanboy. Those graphics are no way in hell a 10. IGN loses all credibility. No offense to Zelda fans, but this review is bias.
yes it should still get a bad *** score despite being old because its still the same great game. same thing with oblivion when it comes out on ps3 - if its not AAA at least, then maybe theres some credibility issues at GS.
Yeah, if anyone denies that this wasn't a bias review, you are a truly a Nintendo fanboy. Those graphics are no way in hell a 10. IGN loses all credibility. No offense to Zelda fans, but this review is bias.Kayrod29
I think it's rated a 9 in graphics because as they said that it set the standard for all 3D Zelda games. It also pushed the N64 hardware so they are probably just saying that they hold up well.
It's my favorite game of all time. It deserved a ten back in the N64 days, but it doesn't really deserve one when it's a downloadable game on the Wii. That's pretty dumb, just like IGN.
Yeah, if anyone denies that this wasn't a bias review, you are a truly a Nintendo fanboy. Those graphics are no way in hell a 10. IGN loses all credibility. No offense to Zelda fans, but this review is bias.Kayrod29
Those graphics most definitely deserve a 10. They were the best of all time at the release of the game. The game itself deserves a 10 because the scores are supposed to tell you how much value you get for a game. I dare you to find me a better 10$ game.
Yeah, if anyone denies that this wasn't a bias review, you are a truly a Nintendo fanboy. Those graphics are no way in hell a 10. IGN loses all credibility. No offense to Zelda fans, but this review is bias.Kayrod29
graphics got a 9, and when OOT came out for N64 graphics were the best
[QUOTE="Kayrod29"]Yeah, if anyone denies that this wasn't a bias review, you are a truly a Nintendo fanboy. Those graphics are no way in hell a 10. IGN loses all credibility. No offense to Zelda fans, but this review is bias.Dark_Link142
I think it's rated a 9 in graphics because as they said that it set the standard for all 3D Zelda games. It also pushed the N64 hardware so they are probably just saying that they hold up well. It's IGN man, that's all I need to say, even with thier broken review system. Give the game a 10, even though it's graphics are a 9. This is leads me to believe leave that a 1998 game like Zelda OoT looks better then most Wii games, which is quite sad. Again, no offense to Zelda fans, I repsect the series, but this review is the worst.
Yeah, if anyone denies that this wasn't a bias review, you are a truly a Nintendo fanboy. Those graphics are no way in hell a 10. IGN loses all credibility. No offense to Zelda fans, but this review is bias.Kayrod29
you don't have respect for classic games. don't you?:|
[QUOTE="Kayrod29"]Yeah, if anyone denies that this wasn't a bias review, you are a truly a Nintendo fanboy. Those graphics are no way in hell a 10. IGN loses all credibility. No offense to Zelda fans, but this review is bias.SmashBrosLegend
Those graphics most definitely deserve a 10. They were the best of all time at the release of the game. The game itself deserves a 10 because the scores are supposed to tell you how much value you get for a game. I dare you to find me a better 10$ game.
I can point out any $10 game I want and say it's better. It's all opinions, I don't understand what your are trying to prove here.
[QUOTE="Kayrod29"]Yeah, if anyone denies that this wasn't a bias review, you are a truly a Nintendo fanboy. Those graphics are no way in hell a 10. IGN loses all credibility. No offense to Zelda fans, but this review is bias.KeV-Unreal
you don't have respect for classic games. don't you?:|
I don't have respect for the idiot who wrote this bias review. You seriously give a game like this a 10 by todays standards? Come on dude, I need at least one Nintendo fan who will admit this wasn't a proper review.
[QUOTE="apolloluke"]already a thread on this. game deserved to get 6, not 10Dark_Link142
Sorry for the second thread. And no it deserves a 10 as it is truly a masterpiece.
It most definitely DOES NOT deserve a 10 today. The audio is severely limited by the hardware it was originally made on (though extremely impressive for that hardware), graphically its aged better than lots of 3D games but has certainly lost lots of its appeal over these years and virtually every gameplay aspect has been improved upon elsewhere by now too.
[QUOTE="Kayrod29"]Yeah, if anyone denies that this wasn't a bias review, you are a truly a Nintendo fanboy. Those graphics are no way in hell a 10. IGN loses all credibility. No offense to Zelda fans, but this review is bias.Kayrod29
you don't have respect for classic games. don't you?:|
I don't have respect for the idiot who wrote this bias review. You seriously give a game like this a 10 by todays standards? Come on dude, I need at least one Nintendo fan who will admit this wasn't a proper review.
wow dude..is it really that big of a deal? if it was TP that got a ten then yeah since thats an acutaly wii game, but this is a vc game its for fun..jeez game deserves it
[QUOTE="Dark_Link142"] I think it's rated a 9 in graphics because as they said that it set the standard for all 3D Zelda games. It also pushed the N64 hardware so they are probably just saying that they hold up well. Having a 9 in both graphics and audio should have some effect upon the overall score and still a 10 in gameplay? Sorry..but just no. Megaman Legend's targeting system was superior to begin with and it hasn't aged well either. The scope of LoZ: OoT also seems much smaller by now compared to when it was released...less "epic" if you will. [QUOTE="SmashBrosLegend"] Those graphics most definitely deserve a 10. They were the best of all time at the release of the game. The game itself deserves a 10 because the scores are supposed to tell you how much value you get for a game. I dare you to find me a better 10$ game.Zombies Ate My Neighbors there you go.
[QUOTE="Kayrod29"]Yeah, if anyone denies that this wasn't a bias review, you are a truly a Nintendo fanboy. Those graphics are no way in hell a 10. IGN loses all credibility. No offense to Zelda fans, but this review is bias.Kahuna_1
you don't have respect for classic games. don't you?:|
I don't have respect for the idiot who wrote this bias review. You seriously give a game like this a 10 by todays standards? Come on dude, I need at least one Nintendo fan who will admit this wasn't a proper review.
wow dude..is it really that big of a deal? if it was TP that got a ten then yeah since thats an acutaly wii game, but this is a vc game its for fun..jeez game deserves it
Your right, I am making a big deal out of this, my apologies. I will say this though, Gamespot reviews>I>>>>IGN reviews by a landslide
vc games ARE NOT being reviewed by today standars but by the value of this games and a lot of nostalgic. if vc games were reviewed by today standars no one would score more than 4!!! this is obvious people!! this games are being ttreated like forbidden>
[QUOTE="Kayrod29"]Yeah, if anyone denies that this wasn't a bias review, you are a truly a Nintendo fanboy. Those graphics are no way in hell a 10. IGN loses all credibility. No offense to Zelda fans, but this review is bias.Kayrod29
you don't have respect for classic games. don't you?:|
I don't have respect for the idiot who wrote this bias review. You seriously give a game like this a 10 by todays standards? Come on dude, I need at least one Nintendo fan who will admit this wasn't a proper review.
wow dude..is it really that big of a deal? if it was TP that got a ten then yeah since thats an acutaly wii game, but this is a vc game its for fun..jeez game deserves it
Your right, I am making a big deal out of this, my apologies. I will say this though, Gamespot reviews>I>>>>IGN reviews by a landslide
i like some reviews from here and some from ign, gamespot def seems tougher though
vc games ARE NOT being reviewed by today standars but by the value of this games and a lot of nostalgic. if vc games were reviewed by today standars no one would score more than 4!!! this is obvious people!! this games are being ttreated like forbidden>chinoceron
No, clearly they are being reviewed by the standards of today or you wouldn't hear some of the comments made about how a game "hasn't aged well" ect, and by today's standard OoT is an 8-9.
Yeah, if anyone denies that this wasn't a bias review, you are a truly a Nintendo fanboy. Those graphics are no way in hell a 10. IGN loses all credibility. No offense to Zelda fans, but this review is bias.Kayrod29
Every review, on every single website, ever, is bias. Unless the review was somehow written by someone who isn't a human (which is not possible), it will always be bias. No person that has emotions can be 100% objective. What is your point?
[QUOTE="SmashBrosLegend"][QUOTE="Kayrod29"]Yeah, if anyone denies that this wasn't a bias review, you are a truly a Nintendo fanboy. Those graphics are no way in hell a 10. IGN loses all credibility. No offense to Zelda fans, but this review is bias.Kayrod29
Those graphics most definitely deserve a 10. They were the best of all time at the release of the game. The game itself deserves a 10 because the scores are supposed to tell you how much value you get for a game. I dare you to find me a better 10$ game.
I can point out any $10 game I want and say it's better. It's all opinions, I don't understand what your are trying to prove here. And the reviewer also had an OPINION, so do you. What exactly are you trying to prove?
[QUOTE="chinoceron"]vc games ARE NOT being reviewed by today standars but by the value of this games and a lot of nostalgic. if vc games were reviewed by today standars no one would score more than 4!!! this is obvious people!! this games are being ttreated like forbidden>Runningflame570
No, clearly they are being reviewed by the standards of today or you wouldn't hear some of the comments made about how a game "hasn't aged well" ect, and by today's standard OoT is an 8-9. no they are not. i mean kirbys adventure had a 9.5 in the score and that game by today standards doesnt reach the fit of many plattaformers of today, but still 9.5!!! i dont see anyone making a big deal of this... this games are definitely treated like forbidden>
[QUOTE="Kayrod29"]Yeah, if anyone denies that this wasn't a bias review, you are a truly a Nintendo fanboy. Those graphics are no way in hell a 10. IGN loses all credibility. No offense to Zelda fans, but this review is bias.nickscho
Every review, on every single website, ever, is bias. Unless the review was somehow written by someone who isn't a human (which is not possible), it will always be bias. No person that has emotions can be 100% objective. What is your point?
Since when did the graphics get a 10? I believe ign gave them a 9.0... :?
[QUOTE="Runningflame570"][QUOTE="chinoceron"]vc games ARE NOT being reviewed by today standars but by the value of this games and a lot of nostalgic. if vc games were reviewed by today standars no one would score more than 4!!! this is obvious people!! this games are being ttreated like forbidden>chinoceron
No, clearly they are being reviewed by the standards of today or you wouldn't hear some of the comments made about how a game "hasn't aged well" ect, and by today's standard OoT is an 8-9. no they are not. i mean kirbys adventure had a 9.5 in the score and that game by today standards doesnt reach the fit of many plattaformers of today, but still 9.5!!! i dont see anyone making a big deal of this... this games are definitely treated like forbidden>
why the heck does it apear forbidden every time i tipe klazikz and why do i apear as a level 1?
[QUOTE="chinoceron"][QUOTE="Runningflame570"] No, clearly they are being reviewed by the standards of today or you wouldn't hear some of the comments made about how a game "hasn't aged well" ect, and by today's standard OoT is an 8-9. no they are not. i mean kirbys adventure had a 9.5 in the score and that game by today standards doesnt reach the fit of many plattaformers of today, but still 9.5!!! i dont see anyone making a big deal of this... this games are definitely treated like forbidden> What the heck are you saying to keep getting the "forbidden>" put in there? "Ten years later the Crash phenomenon has died down, but it's quite a testament that the original game still holds up fairly well. An obvious star of the first-run downloadable "PS One Classics," the first Crash Bandicoot has made its transition from old-school console to new-fangled PSP with few hitches." "To be fair, Crash Senior can't compete with today's bigger and more ambitious platformers in terms of size and scope. The world's dimensions are comparatively small when measured against modern competitors, and it's also an entirely-linear experience." "Ironically, if Crash Bandicoot has one glaring flaw when played for today's fans, it's the very simplicity that makes it interesting. Indeed, it's the age-old case of a double-edged sword. More specifically, twitch gamers will likely gravitate to the game's need for fast reflexes and precision jumps (which can be frustrating if you don't re-map the controls to the analog stick), but fans of platformers like Super Mario Bros. aren't going to like the complete lack of puzzles. Crash is all about avoiding things and pushing forward -- nothing more, and sometimes it does come across as repetitive and shallow." Sound like its being judges on yester-year's standards? Heres IGN's comments about the original: "Crash Bandicoot is Sony's first attempt at a "mascot game," and while the verdict is still out on whether Crash can compete with Sonic and Mario as far as marketability is concerned, Crash as a game certainly can." "First, there's a surprisingly deep depth of field, and second, you're not always moving from left to right. In fact, you hardly ever side scroll. Instead, Crash's designers have decided to change the perspective from level to level, so sometimes you're looking at Crash from behind, sometimes from the top, and sometimes from all around, as the perspective often shifts within the level." Yet they gave both a 7.5 oddly enough..it seems like they are revising their thoughts but not bothering to revise the scores on the downloadable games.
[QUOTE="nickscho"][QUOTE="Kayrod29"]Yeah, if anyone denies that this wasn't a bias review, you are a truly a Nintendo fanboy. Those graphics are no way in hell a 10. IGN loses all credibility. No offense to Zelda fans, but this review is bias.princeofshapeir
Every review, on every single website, ever, is bias. Unless the review was somehow written by someone who isn't a human (which is not possible), it will always be bias. No person that has emotions can be 100% objective. What is your point?
Since when did the graphics get a 10? I believe ign gave them a 9.0... :? I don't think I said the graphics got a 10. The IGN final score is not an average though. The graphics could get a 1, and the final score could still be a 10.
[QUOTE="Runningflame570"][QUOTE="chinoceron"][QUOTE="Runningflame570"] No, clearly they are being reviewed by the standards of today or you wouldn't hear some of the comments made about how a game "hasn't aged well" ect, and by today's standard OoT is an 8-9. no they are not. i mean kirbys adventure had a 9.5 in the score and that game by today standards doesnt reach the fit of many plattaformers of today, but still 9.5!!! i dont see anyone making a big deal of this... this games are definitely treated like forbidden> What the heck are you saying to keep getting the "forbidden>" put in there? "Ten years later the Crash phenomenon has died down, but it's quite a testament that the original game still holds up fairly well. An obvious star of the first-run downloadable "PS One forbidden "To be fair, Crash Senior can't compete with today's bigger and more ambitious platformers in terms of size and scope. The world's dimensions are comparatively small when measured against modern competitors, and it's also an entirely-linear experience." "Ironically, if Crash Bandicoot has one glaring flaw when played for today's fans, it's the very simplicity that makes it interesting. Indeed, it's the age-old case of a double-edged sword. More specifically, twitch gamers will likely gravitate to the game's need for fast reflexes and precision jumps (which can be frustrating if you don't re-map the controls to the analog stick), but fans of platformers like Super Mario Bros. aren't going to like the complete lack of puzzles. Crash is all about avoiding things and pushing forward -- nothing more, and sometimes it does come across as repetitive and shallow." Sound like its being judges on yester-year's standards? Heres IGN's comments about the original: "Crash Bandicoot is Sony's first attempt at a "mascot game," and while the verdict is still out on whether Crash can compete with Sonic and Mario as far as marketability is concerned, Crash as a game certainly can." "First, there's a surprisingly deep depth of field, and second, you're not always moving from left to right. In fact, you hardly ever side scroll. Instead, Crash's designers have decided to change the perspective from level to level, so sometimes you're looking at Crash from behind, sometimes from the top, and sometimes from all around, as the perspective often shifts within the level." Yet they gave both a 7.5 oddly enough..it seems like they are revising their thoughts but not bothering to revise the scores on the downloadable games. every time i tipe klazikz it apears as forbiden in the post and i apeared as a level 1...at least in my monitor(odd):?. yes i know what you mean this games have obviously got some age on them. but this shouldnt take the merit out of them. i mean ocarina was a master piece back then why soul it be diferent if i play it 10 years later? the pyramids of egypt are still seen as a wonders of architecture, even when now we can do even bigger and better things
every time i tipe klazikz it apears as forbiden in the post and i apeared as a level 1...at least in my monitor(odd):?. yes i know what you mean this games have obviously got some age on them. but this shouldnt take the merit out of them. i mean ocarina was a master piece back then why soul it be diferent if i play it 10 years later? the pyramids of egypt are still seen as a wonders of architecture, even when now we can do even bigger and better things chinoceron
Things should be gauged relative to the current environment upon their release. The original Virtua Fighter was astounding at the time but isn't as great today and the same is true of OoT. Theres no reason for games with such age and differences in commentary to both receive the same score after all this time (although I personally think Crash was a solid AA game at launch).
It's my favorite game of all time. It deserved a ten back in the N64 days, but it doesn't really deserve one when it's a downloadable game on the Wii. That's pretty dumb, just like IGN.Conanfan1
It's being rated compared to VC games, not current-gen games. On the Virtual console, N64 graphics is the highest you get. You all need to think of it this way. They are not rating it based on current games. They are rating it based on games available on the VC.
Log in to comment