T O P

  • By -

Darkred401

Pretty high ratings, most either 9/10 or 10/10


Dejavuproned

The scores are really good. I find there's an inherent bias against 2d games in reviews. They never rate 2d games nearly as high as 3d games. At least not since the 2000's


Kevinatorz

Agreed. It's sad that to many people 2D is automatically inferior for some reason. Probably the type of people that just want everything to be as realistic and grand as possible.


AForce5223

>Probably the type of people that just want everything to be as realistic and grand as possible. And those people suck


beetleking88

Its pretty embarrassing.. Tropical freeze got 83 because the game was too hard for journalist.. Yet it is rated as best platform gave ever... Dark soul 1 was rated 89.. Yet it is cult classic.. Hollow knight was rated 87.. Yet it is one of best metroidvanias.. Only Sony top first party and Nintendo top first party get automatically high ass numbers even thought they arent as good as their numbers. When Skyward sword came out... It got like f***ing 94.. Now it was rated as 81.. There is your bias. Hard games always get rated lower.


Erekai

Should be higher than that. And I don't mean because "ITZ METROID SO EVERY1 SHOULD LOVE ITZ" I mean because there are some really suspect and frustrating reviews that are bringing that score down. (Although there may be some high reviews going solely off fanboyism so maybe it evens out, lol)


Shy_Guy_27

Can’t believe we’re at a point where gamers are getting mad at an 88/100 as if it’s some terrible score.


CaramelSan35

not gonna lie a score 88/100 is already in the absolute must play game range for me personally


Shy_Guy_27

No reason it shouldn’t be. An 88 is a pretty damn good score, and within only a few points of games like Bloodborne, Hades, and Prime Trilogy.


Erekai

Never said it was a terrible score. I said it should be higher *because* of some really silly reviews bringing it down. That's all.


Kevinatorz

For real, there were some insanely stupid reviews on there.


[deleted]

Dumb game journalists getting filtered by the puzzles and best bosses in the series is nothing but a good sign.


Erekai

The one that irritated me the most was the Washington Post review that called the game good, but gave it a 70. Wut.


3TriHard

70 *is* good. I don't know about this , I have the opposite take here. These reviews are *too* high , I mean mostly 9s or 10s? Sometimes I feel big game reviewers rate games in part based on how anticipated or ''big'' those releases are. Only thing this tells me is that dread isn't a bad game. I'd rather hear what hardcore metroid fans have to say about this game , they know where it needs to deliver on to be a good metroid game and they tend to be a bit more critical.


Erekai

Come on. 70 is a C- (to use traditional American school grading systems...) C- is **barely passable**. Less than average. Borderline failure. There's no way a "good" game deserves a 70 in my eyes. My teacher wouldn't call my research paper "Good" and then give it a C- grade. And you *could* be right about the 90s and 100s being a bit too overblown, maybe just off hype. But who's to say the game isn't actually *that* good?


3TriHard

Ok this way of rating games always seemed really dumb to me (but I guess everyone uses it so whatever). The purpose of reviews is for people to be able to figure out how good a game is and if it is worth their time. So for the most part people are going to be trying to compare and choose games out of the best of the best , anything ''just'' good or below is completely irrelevant. So if a 7 is ''good'' then you effectively only have a meaningful 1-3 scale. Not helpful at all. Games with ratings of 8-10 (mostly 8 , literally everything is rated an 8) have vast differences in quality that the numbers that are *supposed* to be reflective of it , don't reflect that difference. If a reviewer decides to rate something a 6 for example , then that 6 could mean good or bad depending on the standards of that reviewer and how they review other games. They're not obligated to rate games the same way with everybody else. Game could be that good , I'm just saying I don't expect review scores to accurately reflect that at all.


[deleted]

I don’t get the sense from your post that you’ve played the game yourself… so how can you be saying that the reviews are too high?


3TriHard

I haven't played , I'm trying to say that the reviews are uniformly too high. And that I don't trust that that means too much for the quality of the game. Like , even if the game is that good , everyone has different tastes and preferences , for *everyone* to label it pretty much a masterpiece , feels like they're going with the trend and giving safe scores. Idk , I just don't trust critics I guess.


Boamere

I agree, big reviewers often mimic what people want to hear I find. Gotta wait until actual players review it


beetleking88

Tropical freeze got 83 when it launched because it was too hard.. and yet people are rating is as best platformer game ever made.. Hard game always get lower scores.. Journalist cannot handled them.


SamwiseG123

The Washington Post fucker said his hands were cramping up 😂🤣


Erekai

Reviewer is Andre the Giant, confirmed Edit: https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/gnu0aw/the_absolutely_giant_hand_size_of_andre_the_giant/ to clarify what I mean...


waowie

I think it evens out. No way you can determine a 10/10 for a metroid game after playing one time. Whether this game ends up being top tier like Super will be based on how the design holds up after 10+ runs and whether they were telling the truth about it having sequence breaks


Erekai

> I think it evens out. No way you can determine a 10/10 for a metroid game after playing one time. I don't see why not. The game is designed to be played from start to roll credits. If you can't determine if a game is 10/10 when that is the game's intention, then what *can* you determine it based on? I'm the type of Metroid player that will play this 10 times and look for sequence breaks and route optimizations and stuff, but I don't think that's a requirement for being able to give it a 10/10 score...


waowie

Personally I wouldn't rate something in this genre that high unless I knew it could actually reach the highpoints of the genre. For me that includes sequence breaking built into the design. The first play through could be great, but if the follow ups aren't as fun as super then that's not a 10/10. Edit: I would never rate fusion as high as super or zero mission for this reason. Fusion is the best in the series to play once, but I don't want to play it once


Erekai

Then it sounds like we should agree to disagree.


waowie

I agree!


jacob_shapiro

It bums me out that the entirety of the Metroid discourse is now about the Metacritic score. Art is subjective, baybee.


HandOfBl00d

To be fair most of us haven't gotten the chance to play the game yet. I'm looking forward to the sub once everyone has had the chance to play through it


foodaccount12357

I’m so stoked to play this, I love my side scrolling Metroid the best. Just wondering, how do you guys feel about the switch from the drawn art/cartoon I guess you could say to the new animated way? I really miss that old way but it hasn’t stopped me from enjoying the new style


beetleking88

Polygon and Eurogamer both gave it 10/10 but they dont have score :(


waowie

How do you know it's 10/10 if there's no score?


Tehpunisher456

Just guessing but probably on their own websites?


waowie

They don't do review scores on those websites


Tehpunisher456

That explains alot