Is it just me, or are the IGN Nintendo crew the only reviewers at IGN that actually
enjoy playing games still? To me they' re the only ones who understand that a game is quite often more than the sum of its parts. Sure Brawl has some minor problems but I know this game kicks ass, and it deserves its 9.5 score despite it being near identical to Melee.
No doubt there are a lot of average games out there, but I' ve seen countless other games that were still very good, get marked way down for being ' too similar' to its predecessors. I' ve seen games get marked way down for having a weak ass single player/story mode, despite having brilliant multiplayer. I' ve seen games get marked down for having awkward load times (ala the 20 second load times in Brawl), despite being great fun to play.
While these issues were present in Brawl, they aren' t considered harmful to the overall experience (and rightly so). Yet in so many other games these issues are brought to the forefront and paraded around, making the game appear crippled. I wonder why that is?
< Message edited by UnluckyOne -- 5 Mar 08 10:33:23 >