Topic: Exclusive: Konami confirms Castlevania 25th anniversary project

[Claimh Solais]

Lol, no. Just look at the previews for Rayman Origins. That game is fucking beautiful, and it's 2D. Only idiots give bad reviews based on the game being 2D or 3D.

1) Note I said eventually. I even made it clear saying it again right afterward.

2) Note that many of the big review magazines are full of idiots.

[Maedhros]

And I didn't agree with your eventually. The games could remain 2D forever, if they have good graphics/art, great gameplay, great story, music, etc. no one would really care and they would still have good ratings.

In other words: Being 2D or 3D have nothing to do with the ratings. Being lazy or bad, that's what make reviewers give bad ratings for games.

[Claimh Solais]

And I didn't agree with your eventually. The games could remain 2D forever, if they have good graphics/art, great gameplay, great story, music, etc. no one would really care and they would still have good ratings.

In other words: Being 2D or 3D have nothing to do with the ratings. Being lazy or bad, that's what make reviewers give bad ratings for games.

Most reviewers are stupid.
It's like how SotN was rated down for having "primitive graphics", when those were some of the best 2D graphics around.
Basically, most reviewers are those Call of Duty/Halo fanboys who think graphics make the games, and won't give a rat's ass whether or not the gameplay's good.

[Maedhros]

Still, SOTN is regarded as one of the best games of all time. Reviews are not relevant. They serve to give you an idea of how the game is, but the rating... that's up to yourself, not someone else.

[KaZudra]

2) Note that many of the big review magazines are full of idiots.

Gamepro magazine.

[Claimh Solais]

Still, SOTN is regarded as one of the best games of all time. Reviews are not relevant. They serve to give you an idea of how the game is, but the rating... that's up to yourself, not someone else.

Reviews are relevant. The ratings from the "professional" reviews are what Konami sees, not one of my reviews/ratings that I post on various forums or on GameFAQs.

Gamepro magazine.

Yup.

[Maedhros]

Reviews are relevant. The ratings from the "professional" reviews are what Konami sees, not one of my reviews/ratings that I post on various forums or on GameFAQs.

No, Konami only see the sales. If the sales are good, does it matter that IGN gave them a 3.0? You know the answer.

[Claimh Solais]

No, Konami only see the sales. If the sales are good, does it matter that IGN gave them a 3.0? You know the answer.

It does matter. Say the next few Castlevania games were to sell, but only receive ratings of like... say, 3.0 or 2.5. People will start to notice that and some will even be turned off by the ratings.

There are also people that actually only judge games by the ratings and reviews it gets, rather than actually playing it for themselves. These people will not buy the game if it received a 3.0. Pretty much everyone where I live is like this.

And thus, less sales.

[thernz]

is this the mentality that fostered lords of shadow

[KaZudra]

is this the mentality that fostered lords of shadow

Dumbass reviewers and retard filled magizines, Yeah, I owe the watered down success to that.
If they treated this game like the next best thing it would have succeeded.

To prove my point, GoW3 is one of the shittiest games I've ever played, this thing was treated like the holy grail when it came out.

[Maedhros]

It does matter. Say the next few Castlevania games were to sell, but only receive ratings of like... say, 3.0 or 2.5. People will start to notice that and some will even be turned off by the ratings.

No, it doesn't. Lots and lots of examples where the games had amazing scores and low sales and vice-versa.

[Claimh Solais]

No, it doesn't. Lots and lots of examples where the games had amazing scores and low sales and vice-versa.

But there are lots and lots of more examples that follow what I said.

Thus bringing us totally underrated games like Sengoku Basara, Breakdown, Monster Hunter, and many more.

[DarkPrinceAlucard]

Fact is that if reviews from popular gaming sites did not matter then there probably would not even be a need to have them am I right?

There are alot of fans that really value what those gaming sites have to say such as IGN for example.

If fans did not care about what they said then those types of sites would not have as many followers or members for that matter.

Say for instance IGN where to give a game a very low rating.

Alot of the fans who actually trust IGN's opinion on the game will probably not even bother buying it which obviously would hurt sales if enough fans did the same.

So in short it is pretty obvious that game reviews does indeed matter.

Although it does not necessarily guarantee that the game in question will not sale.

[Maedhros]

Fact is that if reviews from popular gaming sites did not matter then there probably would not even be a need to have them am I right?

No.

Sorry, I'll drop this subject. I just think you guys are damn wrong, and since we're getting nowhere, it's for the better.

[DarkPrinceAlucard]

No.

Sorry, I'll drop this subject. I just think you guys are damn wrong, and since we're getting nowhere, it's for the better.

Classic case of differing opinions at work here.

I think you are also "damn wrong" but like I said its just my opinion.