Gaming has this problem where people think more about the outlet than the reviewer.
It's like the Edge review topics. Good god if one game people loved got a bad score while another "bad" game got a better score. You'd think Edge was one person who could review 10 games at a time when you're in that topic.
Yeah, people sometimes tend to frame them as "Nintendo biased" but they always point out flaws in games even if they like them.
i don't know if I'd call it Nintendo bias as that makes it sound like an agenda, they just like those types of games. But to be honest I steer clear of GameXplain reviews of Nintendo games because they're (almost) always so positive. There may be token negatives in there but they're always glossed over 'but hey that doesn't matter because the game is so much fun'. That's their genuine opinion, but it just makes it hard to find the review useful.
That's what our scale aims to avoid. Saying we "Love" a game shouldn't be the equivalent of a 9/10, we see it more as how you would describe a game to someone in casual conversation. Steve loved Goose Game & Andre liked Breath of the Wild a lot - I think those can co-exist without contradicting each other
I need any bit of Toby Fox's composing I can get in my life.
Dunno haven't played many. It's just something I observed from the Pokemon games where there's tons of s class of trainers that look the wxact same and the look only differs between gender. Guess you're right.
always looked kinda unremarkable so we all just... forgot.
Jesus christ Gamexplain hahaha
I guess I need to go back and listen to the original reveal... I was always under the impression a game named "Town" in which a character protects his home town always sounded kinda small to me...
