[QUOTE="funsohng"][QUOTE="Gamespot"]Master Quest not unlocked from the start. Shinobishyguy
Wut.you have to beat the game once to unlock it It's not a problem for me, but I'm sure there are a lot of people out there buying it just for Master Quest, since it's pretty rare on GC.
Good, glad to finally see an accurate review, it's a 12 year old game and should be treated as such.
StealthMonkey4
The lowest score given to the game today is the "accurate" one? I don't understand the logic. I am not questioning the score but the logic behind your post. The score YOU think the game should get is the accurate one while 14 other scores from reviewers should be thrown out. Sounds like some hatin'
LOL the butthurt has already begun. I agree with the second post. 20 Year old games should not be graded as new games. A remake should never score over 9.0, no matter how good the game is because it's the SAME game.
And @ the person who lol'd @ GS being 1 point lower than the critic average, what's wrong with that? THey scored infamous 2 one point lower, why not OoT? Oh wait, I forgot it's Zelda so it has to be perfect :roll:
8.5? Eight point five??? Are gamespot mad? Don't they relaise just what game they are reviewing? Miyamoto would be turning in his grave, were he dead. The puzzles, along with their dungeons are classics, and the combat system is a precious relic. The music is reminiscant, and the characters just as interesting as 13 years ago. This game should have gotten no ore than 7.0. I love the game. I really do. Nostalgia plays a mjor role. But whenever i play, I do always feel as though soemthings empty. It's just too dated. It is amazing, perfect for its time - but its time to move on. It shouldnt be getting as high scores as it has.
8.5? Eight point five??? Are gamespot mad? Don't they relaise just what game they are reviewing? Miyamoto would be turning in his grave, were he dead. The puzzles, along with their dungeons are classics, and the combat system is a precious relic. The music is reminiscant, and the characters just as interesting as 13 years ago. This game should have gotten no ore than 7.0. I love the game. I really do. Nostalgia plays a mjor role. But whenever i play, I do always feel as though soemthings empty. It's just too dated. It is amazing, perfect for its time - but its time to move on. It shouldnt be getting as high scores as it has. Indie_Hitman
Agreed. Although I wouldn't go as low as 7.0. 8.0 at the highest.
In my opinion,nostalgia makes people think that Zelda is some sort of flawless amazing series when it's really not.
Good, glad to finally see an accurate review, it's a 12 year old game and should be treated as such.
Shinobishyguy
it says alot when this 12 year old game outscores many games released today
It's the same exact game, of course it's good, but it's blocky visuals and archaic gameplay should make it a 7.0 at highest. I don't see how people are excited over something they could've played 12 years ago and can play on the GCN, N64, or Wii.
Good, glad to finally see an accurate review, it's a 12 year old game and should be treated as such.
StealthMonkey4
it says alot when this 12 year old game outscores many games released today
It's the same exact game of course it's good, but it's blocky visuals and archaic gameplay should make it a 7.0 at highest. I don't see how people are excited over something they could've played 12 years ago and can play on the GCN or N64.
[QUOTE="Indie_Hitman"]8.5? Eight point five??? Are gamespot mad? Don't they relaise just what game they are reviewing? Miyamoto would be turning in his grave, were he dead. The puzzles, along with their dungeons are classics, and the combat system is a precious relic. The music is reminiscant, and the characters just as interesting as 13 years ago. This game should have gotten no ore than 7.0. I love the game. I really do. Nostalgia plays a mjor role. But whenever i play, I do always feel as though soemthings empty. It's just too dated. It is amazing, perfect for its time - but its time to move on. It shouldnt be getting as high scores as it has. Cheesehead9099
Agreed. Although I wouldn't go as low as 7.0. 8.0 at the highest. Nostalgia makes people think that Zelda is some sort of flawless amazing series when it's really not.
In your opinion that is.
Really, it's more intellectually honest to say that you disagree with people thinking the Zelda series is amazing instead of trying to deligitimize other people's opinion with the tired "nostalgia" card.
Good, glad to finally see an accurate review, it's a 12 year old game and should be treated as such.
StealthMonkey4
it says alot when this 12 year old game outscores many games released today
It's the same exact game of course it's good, but it's blocky visuals and archaic gameplay should make it a 7.0 at highest. I don't see how people are excited over something they could've played 12 years ago and can play on the GCN or N64.
Someone hasn't played OoT recently. The gameplay holds up extremely well.
LOL the butthurt has already begun. I agree with the second post. 20 Year old games should not be graded as new games. A remake should never score over 9.0, no matter how good the game is because it's the SAME game.
And @ the person who lol'd @ GS being 1 point lower than the critic average, what's wrong with that? THey scored infamous 2 one point lower, why not OoT? Oh wait, I forgot it's Zelda so it has to be perfect :roll:
Cheesehead9099
I don't understand the logic behind scoring. A game should be rated, if it were to be rated at all, based on how fun it is, not on if it is a remake or not. This is exactly why I am always disgusted by scores. They don't make sense, they are flawed, and they are still used. If you want the games to be rated, at least have some kind of coherency of standards--what exactly they are rating--among the reviewers.
Any game that gets a 10 should not be able to be improved, added to, and rereleased to get lower than a 9.0.
In MY (I realize GS is not me) mind, a game that recieves a 10 should be a timeless classic that holds up in almost every way over the years, which OoT does, so how does this get so much lower? I think they are wrong in their score, but whatever.
Good, glad to finally see an accurate review, it's a 12 year old game and should be treated as such.
StealthMonkey4
it says alot when this 12 year old game outscores many games released today
It's the same exact game, of course it's good, but it's blocky visuals and archaic gameplay should make it a 7.0 at highest. I don't see how people are excited over something they could've played 12 years ago and can play on the GCN, N64, or Wii.
Archaic gameplay?
Tell me what makes OoT's gameplay any more "archaic" than most games these days.
Most of today's games are actually more simple in their design than OoT is.
[QUOTE="Shinobishyguy"] it says alot when this 12 year old game outscores many games released today
DarkLink77
It's the same exact game of course it's good, but it's blocky visuals and archaic gameplay should make it a 7.0 at highest. I don't see how people are excited over something they could've played 12 years ago and can play on the GCN or N64.
Someone hasn't played OoT recently. The gameplay holds up extremely well. Yep, doesn't feel 14 years old at all.
[QUOTE="Shinobishyguy"] it says alot when this 12 year old game outscores many games released today
DarkLink77
It's the same exact game of course it's good, but it's blocky visuals and archaic gameplay should make it a 7.0 at highest. I don't see how people are excited over something they could've played 12 years ago and can play on the GCN or N64.
Someone hasn't played OoT recently. The gameplay holds up extremely well.this. Compared to most games made during that era, it's held up marvelously. The updated visuals and extra features sweeten the deal.
[QUOTE="Cheesehead9099"][QUOTE="Indie_Hitman"]8.5? Eight point five??? Are gamespot mad? Don't they relaise just what game they are reviewing? Miyamoto would be turning in his grave, were he dead. The puzzles, along with their dungeons are classics, and the combat system is a precious relic. The music is reminiscant, and the characters just as interesting as 13 years ago. This game should have gotten no ore than 7.0. I love the game. I really do. Nostalgia plays a mjor role. But whenever i play, I do always feel as though soemthings empty. It's just too dated. It is amazing, perfect for its time - but its time to move on. It shouldnt be getting as high scores as it has. GreySeal9
Agreed. Although I wouldn't go as low as 7.0. 8.0 at the highest. Nostalgia makes people think that Zelda is some sort of flawless amazing series when it's really not.
In your opinion that is.
Really, it's more intellectually honest to say that you disagree with people thinking the Zelda series is amazing instead of trying to deligitimize other people's opinion with the tired "nostalgia" card.
Pretty sure the reason OoT 3D did NOT get a 9.0 is because it didn't really get any real upgrade aside from the graphics and easier menu controls and such. Other than that it's essentially the exact same game. Which is fine, but that means you can also get it for 15 bucks off the Wii store. Herp derp. That being said 8.5 is a pretty fair score. I don't disagree with the other reviews either though.
Zelda games haven't really changed too much from OoT. Skyward Sword will probably the largest upgrade it'll get from OoT from the other three 3D console Zelda games.
[QUOTE="Shinobishyguy"] it says alot when this 12 year old game outscores many games released today
DarkLink77
It's the same exact game of course it's good, but it's blocky visuals and archaic gameplay should make it a 7.0 at highest. I don't see how people are excited over something they could've played 12 years ago and can play on the GCN or N64.
Someone hasn't played OoT recently. The gameplay holds up extremely well.
I have, it does hold up well, but not anything above a 7.0 well. If this were not a Zelda game and it weren't for OoT nostalgia, it would be a 7.0 at best. Reviewers are letting nostalgia affect their score and are reviewing it as a remake not as a game released today, which is how it should be reviewed.
8.5? Eight point five??? Are gamespot mad? Don't they relaise just what game they are reviewing? Miyamoto would be turning in his grave, were he dead. The puzzles, along with their dungeons are classics, and the combat system is a precious relic. The music is reminiscant, and the characters just as interesting as 13 years ago. This game should have gotten no ore than 7.0. I love the game. I really do. Nostalgia plays a mjor role. But whenever i play, I do always feel as though soemthings empty. It's just too dated. It is amazing, perfect for its time - but its time to move on. It shouldnt be getting as high scores as it has. Indie_Hitman
Can you actually explain what's "too dated" about it or is that just a buzzword?
[QUOTE="Shinobishyguy"] it says alot when this 12 year old game outscores many games released today
DarkLink77
It's the same exact game of course it's good, but it's blocky visuals and archaic gameplay should make it a 7.0 at highest. I don't see how people are excited over something they could've played 12 years ago and can play on the GCN or N64.
Someone hasn't played OoT recently. The gameplay holds up extremely well. Yes it does. Amzingly well. It is indeed on eof the greatest games ever created. However - not 8.5 great. Surely I cant be the only one that recognises just how empty the world is in comparison to modern games? I'm not even going to use the nostalgia card, because I dont really believe in it. For exampel, people belive MGS1 is only praised due to nostalgia, but I played it for the first time only a year ago and i loved it. It's just, ther's a fine line between praise and blind biasness. Fact is: The reviewer had in mind what they wanted to review it at before they started: regardless of what they wanted to believe.
It's the same exact game of course it's good, but it's blocky visuals and archaic gameplay should make it a 7.0 at highest. I don't see how people are excited over something they could've played 12 years ago and can play on the GCN or N64.
Ravensmash
Someone hasn't played OoT recently. The gameplay holds up extremely well. Yep, doesn't feel 14 years old at all.
I honestly can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.:?
Honestly people say we are upset but its justifable look at the cons. The cons are completly hypocritical. Their con is something that happens in many games. MANY MANY GAMES DO NOT HAVE HARD MODE UNLOCKED at the start. The fact that they did this as a con shows they are just trying now to do anything they can to knock the score down.
Sometimes I do wonder despite being on this site why I even bother looking at a gamespot review.
Log in to comment