Media outlets have a new reason to fear the ire of angry Nintendo fanboys, and this time it's not related to Mario, Zelda, or any other Nintendo properties. Rather, the problem stems from certain inaccuracies, or shall we say, disagreements that gaming publication GamePro posted in its recent review of the Wii's blockbuster FPS title, The Conduit. And it essentially has little to do with the score.
There’s a consensus about Splatoon 1 that cannot be disputed: motion controls are the way to play. The Wii U Gamepad had its many problems on the system as a whole, but along with the way in which the touch screen was implemented in the first game like I mentioned in my last piece, using the Gamepad’s gyroscope was deemed a superior way to play compared to traditional joystick control.
Rustyshell.com: The Conduit strived to be the quality FPS experience Wii owners were missing out on, with quality graphics and a robust online multiplayer component.
Hardcore Gamer: The Conduit was an interesting first-person shooter that sneaked its way onto the Wii amid a deluge of shovelware and "family" games.
Who cares, people act like these scores are the Scarlet Letter branding.
So why not slam Edge instead? Not like I disagree with Edge but if the Nintendo fanboys feel like slamming someone, then Edge should be their target. Gamepro is impartial.
just because both game reviewers and gamers can see their words in print does not mean that they have equal weight.
its all opinion, but fake controversies like this one are great for comment section fighting.
I really liked Bionic Commando, but it got mediocre reviews and no one purchased it. Should run screaming into every gamestop (actually that sounds fun) yelling at gamers to buy the game just because its awesome in my opinion?
The worst part of gaming culture are the vocal minority of gamers who have nothing better to do than b@tch and moan in comment sections.
high voltage got what they deserved
There are definitely people complaining about the score, which should just be ignored in all cases, but there are also those that are complaining that the guy obviously didn't just play the game - which in turn affected his score. This reminds me of GameDaily's MGS4 review by the dumbass Chris Buffa. He got a lot of backlash for his review and while a lot of people did complain at the low score, the majority were just pointing out that in his review, you could tell he didn't even actually play the game by making such statements along the lines of the game being stupid because you have Octocamo suit but nothing for your face (you get the facemask at the end of the very first chapter, which is pretty sure first chapter). And then he got all defensive about it saying people were whining about the score when it was actually just that he didn't even play the game properly.
Some people it's a moral issue. You go to sites because you trust their opinion so when they just lie to you because they didn't do their job, that's a bit insulting.