I mean... just go through the top 20 games on metacritic, for all of them you will find people saying "its overrated" and "its aged poorly".thats what i mean-so, in essence, even if a better game in the series did come along, the fact that it would not be as "impactful" would mean it would not be received as well?
I mean... just go through the top 20 games on metacritic, for all of them you will find people saying "its overrated" and "its aged poorly".
You CANT remove the reception of a media from its position in time.
Tony hawk? Great game, but you will be hardpressed for certain types of gamers to give such an arcady game such high praise.
OoT? people are pissing on it for peing obsolet and needing a remake for years now. (not the majority mind you, just a sizable chunk)
Red dead Redemption 2 has 97 and even after release people said its overindulgent and that it prioritizes its hyper realistic animations over gameplay/feel...
BotW? "has no dungeons" "has no music" "empty world" "bad zelda game" "ugly graphics"...
Just wait for BotW2 , when that checks most of those boxes it probably will be lower in scores than the first one, since it wont have that "wow" effect.
Having inpact gives an artistic piece a lot of leavay and pushes it past its flaws.
Over time the impact gets lost (since others do it as well, imitate it, so you dont associate the inpact with the game anymore), and then the game itself is maybe standing worse than some of its succesors, while having a higher metacritic rating.
You can play it on 360 and One/Series through backwards compatibility.Game is 10/10 even today. Wish there was a way to play it on modern consoles.
Oh, okay.Yep that's kinda what I was getting at- can a subjectively better game actually be received worse than a previous entry simply because it wasn't as "impactful"? It's a really interesting thing to me :)
That's not the same version.You can play it on 360 and One/Series through backwards compatibility.
Check this out OP, it provides a great analysis and good context. They describe it as one of the few perfect games they've ever played and say that even today plays and looks brilliantly.
Still my favorite fighter series. I've played SC2 to pieces and it is still my favorite of the series. But then again, I haven't played SC6. How is it? To be honest, I don't like all the emphasis on guest characters (yeah I know, SC2 also had it).
This thread makes me sad. Soul Calibur used to be so good.
I tried to latest one on gamepass and oof. Something just felt and looked wrong with it.
It WAS that good. The single player content was unrivaled as well with art and fan art to get as well.
Tekken 3 was the set, and this was the spike, in terms of the late-'90s streak of better-than-arcade fidelity and fluidity. Add the fact that they built so much single-player content (something severely lacking in most home arcade-fighter ports), and you really had something head-and-shoulders above the fray.
SameI put SC2 over SC1 personally.
I still have the GC version. What a game.
Ah, a cultured person, I see.SoulCalibur was a 10/10, absolutely.
SC2 on the Gamecube was an 11/10
What was wrong with VF3's port? I've never seen a breakdown but I thought it was an excellent port - just not very much to it.
30 FPS, for starters...What was wrong with VF3's port? I've never seen a breakdown but I thought it was an excellent port - just not very much to it.
Dude, Scores are always tied to the current state of the industry and what was capable on the platform.SC1 has a NINETY EIGHT META
thats OBSURD
SC2 has a 93, which is still fantastic, but it definitely wasnt received as well as SC1 by publications anyway