• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Metroid Prime: Federation Force Review Thread

Jun 12, 2013
7,639
2
0
It's also not like Other M was a cheap cash grab effort, they gave it to an acclaimed studio and with a lot of input from the Metroid franchise lead, Sakamoto.

An acclaimed studio who had no business making a Metroid game. Where in Ninja Gaiden did Team Ninja demonstrate any semblance of the complex level/world design and ambience that is so crucial to Metroid? Sakamoto's biggest failure, in my opinion, even more than the story, was thinking Team Ninja would be a good fit to handle the bulk of development. They argued over the control scheme and whether it should be 2D, and came up with terrible compromises. Hell, the gameplay and story were even created separately and didn't come together until the end. Unlike most people, I think the game is ok, but Nintendo should have stepped in and slapped some sense into the whole situation. The whole project was not managed very well.
 

goldenpp72

Member
Nov 29, 2005
14,369
381
1,735
An acclaimed studio who had no business making a Metroid game. Where in Ninja Gaiden did Team Ninja demonstrate any semblance of the complex level/world design and ambience that is so crucial to Metroid? Sakamoto's biggest failure, in my opinion, even more than the story, was thinking Team Ninja would be a good fit to handle the bulk of development. They argued over the control scheme and whether it should be 2D, and came up with terrible compromises. Hell, the gameplay and story were even created separately and didn't come together until the end. Unlike most people, I think the game is ok, but Nintendo should have stepped in and slapped some sense into the whole situation. The whole project was not managed very well.

While it's true Team Ninja has never made a game similar to Metroid, I think at the time it made some sense to onlookers to be excited. We assumed Nintendo would be involved enough to make sure things were done right, and it's not like TN was entirely foreign to making a world. While not nearly as well connected and handled as a Metroid game, remember that Ninja Gaiden (Xbox) was actually largely one big interconnected world and had its share of puzzles/adventuring to do as well. It wasn't until 2 and beyond that all of that was ripped away, but I consider NG to be an action adventure game, with the rest just being action games. I still remember being blown away when you could traverse through the levels and find out they were all a connected world (even if pretty disjointed in hindsight, heh)

Still, Team Ninja was an amazing studio capable of putting out polished games, and Nintendo was too, I was pretty excited myself. I consider Other M to be pretty average, it's ok as a game, terrible as a story, and not a good Metroid game at all.
 

AntMurda

Member
Sep 30, 2006
3,262
0
0
An acclaimed studio who had no business making a Metroid game. Where in Ninja Gaiden did Team Ninja demonstrate any semblance of the complex level/world design and ambience that is so crucial to Metroid? Sakamoto's biggest failure, in my opinion, even more than the story, was thinking Team Ninja would be a good fit to handle the bulk of development. They argued over the control scheme and whether it should be 2D, and came up with terrible compromises. Hell, the gameplay and story were even created separately and didn't come together until the end. Unlike most people, I think the game is ok, but Nintendo should have stepped in and slapped some sense into the whole situation. The whole project was not managed very well.

I really think they were unprepared to make a cinematic game in the modern day video game world. This isn't the PSX era were bad voice acting or writing were easily dismissed or tolerated. I mean, there are lhundreds of blog writers foaming at the mouth to expose some underlying sexist/racist/homophobe/capitalist agenda that a game is supposedly feeding the consumer.

Sakamoto thought that the action elements of Fusion would work with Team Ninja's technology and expertise. Needless to say, the action soap opera just didn't cook well with all the chefs and some of the ingredients all the parties were sprinkling.
 
Jun 12, 2013
7,639
2
0
Unfortunately, it didn't work out. Fusion sold alright and Prime sold nearly 3 million on a userbase that was relatively small, which is impressive. Unfortunately many people (myself included, a hardcore Metroid fan) were not as thrilled with Prime as the media and some fans were. As a shooter it's a weak game (keep in mind the game was compared to Halo routinely back then, anyone around then would recall this), and people were not impressed with the game as a shooter. As a Metroid game, it was almost perfect outside of the clunky shooting/slow movement, but it had the music/tone/map design/etc down perfect making it still quite good, but not near what I had hoped for it to be (a 3D version of Super Metroid)

This doesn't make much sense. The whole first person perspective was based off of Miyamoto's idea that, when you want to look around and explore, you enter a first person mode and pan the camera. It was never meant to be a first person shooter. The Halo comparisons did not come from Nintendo. You even had Retro Studios who insisted Prime was not a first person shooter but a first person adventure. Metroid Prime never tried to be Halo, and it ended up being BETTER than Halo.

Even Corruption, which was shooty due to being (superbly) designed around the Wiimote controls, still felt more like an adventure game to me than anything, which is what Metroid is. Halo is a shooter. Gears of War is a shooter. Vanquish is a shooter. I don't think you can label Metroid one though. It does too many other things to just consider it that.
 

Spieler Eins

Member
Sep 18, 2011
12,153
1
530
At some point you gotta wonder what certain people even get out of being backseat lawyers for a faceless electronics company they have absolutely no stake in.

God forbid real fans that still put money down for their increasingly irritating hardware and software decisions actually speak up against the anti-gamer behaviour of the past years. Nintendo wants your money, so one shouldn't be supposed to shut up, nor eat up crappy projects like Federation Force in hope that they ,,bless us" with a hypothetical good project in the future.
What an absolutely ludicrous idea. We are the consumers and Nintendo isn't some kind of family you have to protect. If this kills Metroid, so be it. If they want to continue their strategy of straight-up mocking fan feedback at every opportunity, instead of being in touch with the industry, then good luck with NX. At least I won't feel bad when they go down by the end of this decade, when the last batch of fanboys contorts to defend 2D platformer #100, Sticker Star 3 and some F-Zero revival in the vein of Nintendoland (while complaining about the evil ,,toxic" discourse, lol).
 

Toxi

Banned
May 29, 2013
41,538
1
0
An acclaimed studio who had no business making a Metroid game. Where in Ninja Gaiden did Team Ninja demonstrate any semblance of the complex level/world design and ambience that is so crucial to Metroid?
Well there was that one horrible sewer area in Ninja Gaiden Xbox.
 

goldenpp72

Member
Nov 29, 2005
14,369
381
1,735
This doesn't make much sense. The whole first person perspective was based off of Miyamoto's idea that, when you want to look around and explore, you enter a first person mode and pan the camera. It was never meant to be a first person shooter. The Halo comparisons did not come from Nintendo. You even had Retro Studios who insisted Prime was not a first person shooter but a first person adventure. Metroid Prime never tried to be Halo, and it ended up being BETTER than Halo.

Even Corruption, which was shooty due to being (superbly) designed around the Wiimote controls, still felt more like an adventure game to me than anything, which is what Metroid is. Halo is a shooter. Gears of War is a shooter. Vanquish is a shooter. I don't think you can label Metroid one though. It does too many other things to just consider it that.

Oh I didn't mean to imply it began development as a FPS to compete with other FPS, I even recall later in Nintendo marketing it as a First Person Adventure if I recall. However at the time, Halo fever was real and every first person game with a gun was compared to it. I believe Prime in part sold a lot because it was the big 'shooter' on the system, not on the merits of what it actually was (this would be backed up from the sales of the sequels as well).

I guess I just meant to say Nintendo was positioning it as a big series to hang with the big boys and it filled a different void as well, and the media was at times pushing it as a Halo competitor of sorts. Prime isn't a good FPS or action game, it's a good adventure game, and I just don't think that resonated well with the media and buyers back then. I guess it could be argued that it could be realigned, but I don't think the majority want a game like Prime.
 
Jun 12, 2013
7,639
2
0
Oh I didn't mean to imply it began development as a FPS to compete with other FPS, I even recall later in Nintendo marketing it as a First Person Adventure if I recall. However at the time, Halo fever was real and every first person game with a gun was compared to it. I believe Prime in part sold a lot because it was the big 'shooter' on the system, not on the merits of what it actually was (this would be backed up from the sales of the sequels as well).

I guess I just meant to say Nintendo was positioning it as a big series to hang with the big boys and it filled a different void as well, and the media was at times pushing it as a Halo competitor of sorts. Prime isn't a good FPS or action game, it's a good adventure game, and I just don't think that resonated well with the media and buyers back then. I guess it could be argued that it could be realigned, but I don't think the majority want a game like Prime.

I get what you are saying, and I agree. I definitely think that the sales of a game reflect not only the game at hand, but it's predecessor as well. As absolutely incredible as Prime was, it wasn't a game for everyone. And then Echoes came out and those that didn't vibe with Prime didn't buy it.
 

Jinketsu

Member
Mar 30, 2016
301
0
0
What the hell are we all talking about anymore? What is this thread about, really?

I've gotten to mission 3 in Federation Force and I'm really liking it so far. I like the gyro controls but wish there were more than two control options. I don't want to have to hold R down to use them.

The story in this one is good enough for a spin-off. I like that it takes place soon after Prime 3, and I hope its existence plays a part in gearing up for another Prime game (yes, I've seen the ending). I don't like how the Federation seems to be trying to perfect the technology behind Samus's suit... Before too long we're going to have Metroid games where we play as a space pirate trying to survive the onslaught of the Federation threat.
 
Jun 12, 2013
7,639
2
0
While it's true Team Ninja has never made a game similar to Metroid, I think at the time it made some sense to onlookers to be excited. We assumed Nintendo would be involved enough to make sure things were done right, and it's not like TN was entirely foreign to making a world. While not nearly as well connected and handled as a Metroid game, remember that Ninja Gaiden (Xbox) was actually largely one big interconnected world and had its share of puzzles/adventuring to do as well. It wasn't until 2 and beyond that all of that was ripped away, but I consider NG to be an action adventure game, with the rest just being action games. I still remember being blown away when you could traverse through the levels and find out they were all a connected world (even if pretty disjointed in hindsight, heh)

Still, Team Ninja was an amazing studio capable of putting out polished games, and Nintendo was too, I was pretty excited myself. I consider Other M to be pretty average, it's ok as a game, terrible as a story, and not a good Metroid game at all.


While it's true Team Ninja has never made a game similar to Metroid, I think at the time it made some sense to onlookers to be excited. We assumed Nintendo would be involved enough to make sure things were done right, and it's not like TN was entirely foreign to making a world. While not nearly as well connected and handled as a Metroid game, remember that Ninja Gaiden (Xbox) was actually largely one big interconnected world and had its share of puzzles/adventuring to do as well. It wasn't until 2 and beyond that all of that was ripped away, but I consider NG to be an action adventure game, with the rest just being action games. I still remember being blown away when you could traverse through the levels and find out they were all a connected world (even if pretty disjointed in hindsight, heh)

Still, Team Ninja was an amazing studio capable of putting out polished games, and Nintendo was too, I was pretty excited myself. I consider Other M to be pretty average, it's ok as a game, terrible as a story, and not a good Metroid game at all.

Good points guys. They did have Itagaki though heading the Ninja Gaiden games. I wonder how Other M might have turned out if he was a co-director with Sakamoto rather than Hayashi.

Well there was that one horrible sewer area in Ninja Gaiden Xbox.

I should have said complex yet elegant :p.
 

Toxi

Banned
May 29, 2013
41,538
1
0
What the hell are we all talking about anymore? What is this thread about, really?

I've gotten to mission 3 in Federation Force and I'm really liking it so far. I like the gyro controls but wish there were more than two control options. I don't want to have to hold R down to use them.

The story in this one is good enough for a spin-off. I like that it takes place soon after Prime 3, and I hope its existence plays a part in gearing up for another Prime game (yes, I've seen the ending). I don't like how the Federation seems to be trying to perfect the technology behind Samus's suit... Before too long we're going to have Metroid games where we play as a space pirate trying to survive the onslaught of the Federation threat.
Considering the intro of the game says the only solution to the Space Pirates is wiping them out, that's not that crazy.
 

Regiruler

Member
Jun 4, 2013
28,975
9
620
The only time they've tried to show a bit of sympathy for the pirates was in some of the logs for Prime 1, although they read more like comic relief.

As of now there's not a whole lot of dramatic tension at that level, as for now the pirates are still the aggressors. That could be something changed by the ending of federation force, as I haven't beaten it.
 

tryptobphan

Member
Mar 22, 2012
536
0
635
Okay, I'm a bit frustrated by Nintendo mismanaging the Metroid IP personally despite having interest in Federation Force & really liking the gameplay I saw of it. But you are coming of too antagonistic and bile toward the Metroid fan base.

They got NOTHING for six years and many people loved & enjoyed the games you listed that people had issues with.
-The first two Metroids are iconic games and despite aging, are fun titles
-Super Metroid IS a fantastic game and desirves the reception it got
-The Prime trilogy is great and while Echo's & Courrption have issues, they are still fantastic games
-Other M is horrible if you count the story but if you can ignore it (very hard for me personally :() its a fun mindless action game. Just a very poor Metroid game sadly but not a bad game overall.

Metroid is a series that does alot right and people have a right to want more. People were sour about AM2R being taken down because it was a NEW 2D Metroid game, something Nintendo hasn't produced in 12 years.....of course the fan base will be pissed that the only new traditional game in ages got DMCA takedown's (even if Nintendo had the legal right to do this & that the developer behind the fan game could have pitched the game to Nintendo).

Federation Force shows the darker side of the Metroid fan base, as the backlash it got is a blend of three things; pent up anger toward Other M's issues, the lack of a mainline game in a long time, & the game not being a traditional Metroid game.

Critics state that the game is mixed; you either love the game or you hate it, but in the end Federation Force is just a 'okay' or 'good' game. Not the horrible waste of a game its made out to be online.

You have the right to be upset with the sometimes 'silly' reaction of Metroid fans have toward the series now, but look at it this way; what happens if your favorite franchise is put on hiatus for years after a game you might dislike releases in that same series and the only new game in the series is a spin-off you might not be super interested in.

But this is NeoGaf, one of the most toxic places in the gaming community sometimes, so what do I know, right?

I think it's great his post criticized the fan base a bit. His post shows his thoughts and is still in s respectful written tone. Very similarly, even if you disagree, your post is also written in a polite and respectful tone. However, not all Metroid fans or online posters are as respectful as both of you.

I can understand the frustration the fan base feels like you said but if posters were more respectful and polite in their written posts, I'd take them more seriously. Anyways, it's just my two cents. You both bring up good points.
 

Moon_frogger

Member
Jul 22, 2013
4,992
10
360
Prince Edward Island
There's nothing "mixed" about this. The game is reviewing terribly, which is indicative of the quality. Everyone basically predicted the game would suck the instant Nintendo announced it. So not only did no one ask for this game, but the game doesn't even seem to have much to offer regardless.

The absolute best Metroid fans can hope for when it comes to this game is that when it sells poorly, Nintendo wont use it as justification for neglecting the possibility of a real Metroid game in the future.
It has mostly positive reviews on metacritic lol. Even with an equal mix of positive and negative the game still has an average of 70. It's only 'reviewing terribly' because you're doing the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and going 'I CANT HEAR YOU'
 

Garlador

Member
Mar 31, 2015
9,994
1
410
Oklahoma
Good points guys. They did have Itagaki though heading the Ninja Gaiden games. I wonder how Other M might have turned out if he was a co-director with Sakamoto rather than Hayashi.
More Aerosmith music and larger breasts on all the women, I assume.

It has mostly positive reviews on metacritic lol. Even with an equal mix of positive and negative the game still has an average of 70. It's only 'reviewing terribly' because you're doing the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and going 'I CANT HEAR YOU'
Pretty much. There are legitimately GOOD REVIEWS for this game. Take 'em or leave 'em.

I had fun with what I played, for what it's worth. But I never expected it to be the next Super Metroid or Prime 4. It's a delightfully harmless and enjoyable spin-off, I think.
 

gafneo

Banned
Jun 2, 2013
3,998
1
0
Reggie said that to defend their poor decisions regarding the Wii U when there was deserved negative feedback at E3 2012. People weren't excited for the second New Super Mario Bros. game in six months and were not blown away by Pikmin 3 and he tried to make it look like the fans were the problem.

Reggie says it from time to time. It's an old saying of his.
 

gafneo

Banned
Jun 2, 2013
3,998
1
0
...What is "modern gameplay and streamlined mechanics"

And I don't think any Single-player only FPS will ever sell CoD numbers

1. Modern control schemes on pro controllers or something beyond that and revolutionary.

2. Gameplay where the common gamer can figure out what to do and where to go with the least amount of hints.

3. Boss fights that don't take too long to kill, require constant ammo refills, awkward to maneuver for the non hardcore.

4. Not placing the map button so far apart from a wii controller so you need to long reach with thumb or other hand. As for gamecube, scanner button on dpad mapped in odd place when it's used in most parts of the game.

5. Having a map that isn't zoomed all the way the hell in where you need to lock into a 2d overview every time you want to check something.

6. One button beacon sets with a GPS arrow tracker

7. Fast travel to locations that where already discovered.

8. No long fetching for lost artifacts to progress towards the final level.

9. No long distant traveling all the way around to areas that are blocked by an object even after shortcuts are unlocked.

10. No swarms and swarms of enemies hitting from all directions that enter rooms that have already been cleared while end game beam should just wipe out everything like in 2D games.

11. No mini obstacle challenges in locations that have already been beaten.

12. No dark world sections that deplete health of any kind.

13. A wider rage of arsenals that give more variety to the your firing abilities.

14. Also, who said sp only? Prime2 and Hunters had DM
 

gafneo

Banned
Jun 2, 2013
3,998
1
0
While it's true Team Ninja has never made a game similar to Metroid, I think at the time it made some sense to onlookers to be excited. We assumed Nintendo would be involved enough to make sure things were done right, and it's not like TN was entirely foreign to making a world. While not nearly as well connected and handled as a Metroid game, remember that Ninja Gaiden (Xbox) was actually largely one big interconnected world and had its share of puzzles/adventuring to do as well. It wasn't until 2 and beyond that all of that was ripped away, but I consider NG to be an action adventure game, with the rest just being action games. I still remember being blown away when you could traverse through the levels and find out they were all a connected world (even if pretty disjointed in hindsight, heh)

Still, Team Ninja was an amazing studio capable of putting out polished games, and Nintendo was too, I was pretty excited myself. I consider Other M to be pretty average, it's ok as a game, terrible as a story, and not a good Metroid game at all.

Ninja Gaiden on Xbox I think should be considered a Metroidvania. Even back on it's original release, I felt like I was playing Metroid more than the 2D NES Gaidens. I think Other M is a replica of that game. I think if Itagaki had helped make it, people would have complained a lot less. He is a master regardless of what people think. Maybe there are bursts of his genius in Devil's Third. I still want to play that.
 

nynt9

Member
Jun 7, 2013
10,852
3
620

PtM

Banned
Jan 7, 2015
6,127
18
405
This isn't a review thread, it's like fucking BMI shaming or something. Fuck metascores.
 

ASIS

Member
Apr 7, 2008
8,483
0
0
31
I can't think of anything more misogynistic than a woman thanking a man for shooting her in the back for no good reason.

Please tell me how that garbage fits under normal military authority. Is it generally acceptable in the military for officers to assault their subordinates and get themselves and most of their units killed due to incompetence?

The entire Sector Zero scene is one of the most vile things I've seen in a video game.

I don't remember this at all. Link?
 

KingBroly

Banned
Mar 18, 2015
23,759
1
0
What does it change to anything I said? It's been six years that part of the fanbase hurls insults at Nintendo and developers such as Sakamoto, Tanabe or Next Level Games saying they shouldn't touch the series ever again, and that any attempt at doing anything with Metroid, even something as mundane as releasing Other M on the eShop or having a Metroid themed activity in Nintendo Land, is met with over the top harassment, peaking with the sabotaging of the Federation Force launch even before anybody could touch the game. If that's not being toxic, what is? Were Mario fans harassing Nintendo when they released a Mario spin-off, when Yoshi's Story released on the eShop, or when Nintendo Land was revealed to have a Mario activity?

As for the other games, in the latest Metroid Fusion NeoGAF thread I've read, people who said they really liked the game were trashed by many people who also trashed Federation Force without playing it, because you see, Fusion is way too linear and has too much dialogue and story and is therefore a disgrace to the Metroid name. The same purists generally go like this:

- NES Metroid is now unplayable.
- Metroid II is now unplayable, and Nintendo are bastards for not allowing AM2R, a game which straight rips Metroid II's level design and concept and Metroid Zero Mission's visuals.
- Super Metroid is God incarnate, but nobody should buy it on the eShop because Nintendo are bastards and released an unplayable version of the game.
- Metroid Fusion is too linear and has too much story and dialogue.
- Metroid Prime Echoes is too slow and purple and painful and derivative.
- Metroid Prime Corruption is too linear and has too much story and dialogue.
- Metroid Other M is Satan incarnate.

... which leaves only three games in the whole series that satisfy them, that are basically all variants of Super Metroid.

If you add to this that Metroid doesn't sell, that its maze/"figure out where to go next" design is nowadays really unpopular and even the Metroid Prime Trilogy sold poorly despite being full of amazing content on Nintendo's most popular console, that makes the series a risky bet for development money. Some people can victimize themselves as customers all they want, from a producer's point of view, their money can be better invested elsewhere given all those circumstances, nobody wants to invest in a niche audience when that audience repeatedly trashes you. In fact, at this point their best bet is to ignore that base entirely, ironically.

First on MPT. It was pegged as a Limited Edition during a time when "Limited Edition" didn't mean jack to anyone. It was only until after people found out it was on clearance/not being printed anymore than people made a run on it. It was a re-release at budget pricing (kinda) with new controls. It did get a reprint in a normal case, but I don't know how significant that really was.

As far as Federation Force goes, don't give players a spin-off that looks nothing like the rest of the series (on multiple levels) six years after the worst game in the series released with nothing in-between or nothing to look forward too. It's a simple recipe for disaster that Nintendo clearly didn't think was possible, especially given how they reacted to fan responses for the game.

Nintendo's mantra for a long time has been to 'give fans what they don't know they want yet.' The problem is that you have to give your fans what they want to know where they stand first, otherwise you're losing any understanding of what they could want. In that regard, Nintendo hasn't given Metroid fans what they've wanted for 12 years at this point. Federation Force feels like a complete shock reaction to Other M in that it's the complete opposite of what that game was, but ultimately looped back around to another Other M situation, but this time the fans knew what it was before it was released (In a very general sense I mean).
 

redcrayon

Member
Dec 5, 2011
11,413
3
625
Review scores aren't uniformly distributed and their mean isn't 50, so it's actually in the bottom 46% of games: http://www.opencritic.com/game/3134/metroid-prime-federation-force
You can't really talk about non-uniform distribution and then expect to pass off that it's 'in the bottom 46%' , as if that drags it down when you've chosen that number because it's at the top of that bracket. You could just as easily say that it's 'in the top 55%' if you're intent on obfuscating that much.

A more honest description of your point would be that it's hitting mixed or average review scores, as the various game review scoring systems go.

Even then, the aggregate sites are pretty useless at anything other than pointing out universal disdain/admiration for something, as the plural of scores collated from raw numbers attributed to wildly different scoring systems, and ignoring all those troublesome words full of nuance, is not data. There's maybe a handful of sites that the aggregate sites use that I would personally give any weight to, and even then some individual reviewers more than others.
 
Jan 18, 2013
10,402
4
0
Regardless of his "agenda" it honestly seems pretty spot on from the majority of the fanbase.


I don't agree at all. I'd bet a vast majority of the fanbase like prime 2,3, zero mission, fusion in addition to super and prime 1. (Also am2r). Age might have gotten to the original metroid 1 and 2 though. It certainly did for me.

I don't know what can be objectively said on that matter though.
 

Dremark

Banned
Sep 1, 2011
6,191
0
625
Connecticut
An acclaimed studio who had no business making a Metroid game. Where in Ninja Gaiden did Team Ninja demonstrate any semblance of the complex level/world design and ambience that is so crucial to Metroid? Sakamoto's biggest failure, in my opinion, even more than the story, was thinking Team Ninja would be a good fit to handle the bulk of development. They argued over the control scheme and whether it should be 2D, and came up with terrible compromises. Hell, the gameplay and story were even created separately and didn't come together until the end. Unlike most people, I think the game is ok, but Nintendo should have stepped in and slapped some sense into the whole situation. The whole project was not managed very well.

That literally has nothing to do with his point. They collaborated with an acclaimed studio which had a great track record. You can argue that it didn't come together well and that's fine, as a matter of fact I'll even agree with you, but it's irrelevant as he was talking about the fact Nintendo was heavily behind it.

Also if Team Ninja wasn't qualified to work on the game because of thier track record Retro was even less qualified so should they have not been allowed to touch it either?

Honestly I'd have preferred it that way, I only care for the ones that Nintendo did internally. Despite the fact I don't care for it, it's kind of hard to deny it's a solid game.
 

Spladam

Member
Jun 12, 2015
2,245
9
460
I think the amount of variation in the reviews scores is a case study in how our bias of brands and our nostalgic attachment to them influences our opinions, even when we make an effort for it to not be so.

Other M remains the best Metroid game in years.

Good to know.
Hahahaha
 

Nerrel

Member
Oct 13, 2014
1,631
0
0
It has mostly positive reviews on metacritic lol. Even with an equal mix of positive and negative the game still has an average of 70. It's only 'reviewing terribly' because you're doing the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and going 'I CANT HEAR YOU'

Your sentences aren't communicating with one another... and going by metacritics own data, most of the reviews are "mixed," not positive.

A Nintendo published game getting scores in the 5/10 range from multiple reviewers is terrible. That's what a bad reception looks like. Most of the scores are 7/10, which is a middling score that usually suggests the game is average- it's not bad, but it's not very good. I consider positive to be 8 or higher, and the game didn't get as many of those. Very few reviewers gave it a 9- there were more scores in the 4-5 range.

I'm just saying that your argument that fans are delusional for thinking the game didn't review well is ridiculous. By Nintendo standards, this is a very mediocre reception for a game to get.
 

nynt9

Member
Jun 7, 2013
10,852
3
620
You can't really talk about non-uniform distribution and then expect to pass off that it's 'in the bottom 46%' , as if that drags it down when you've chosen that number because it's at the top of that bracket. You could just as easily say that it's 'in the top 55%' if you're intent on obfuscating that much.

A more honest description of your point would be that it's hitting mixed or average review scores, as the various game review scoring systems go.

Even then, the aggregate sites are pretty useless at anything other than pointing out universal disdain/admiration for something, as the plural of scores collated from raw numbers attributed to wildly different scoring systems, and ignoring all those troublesome words full of nuance, is not data. There's maybe a handful of sites that the aggregate sites use that I would personally give any weight to, and even then some individual reviewers more than others.

I mean, I don't believe in aggregators (or review scores at all really) beyond statistical curiosity, but the person I quoted was explicitly talking about aggregation and scores as they relate to each other so responding to my comment with the position of "aggregation is flawed" (which I agree with) it's kind of an irrelevant comment. Direct it to the original person I quoted if you must.

As for what I meant by bottom 46%, that's literally quoting the point on OC. They have all their scores, and this one falls into that point on their score distribution. So the game isn't an "average" game (however loosely defined that may be), it's below average.
 

Rambler

Member
Jul 19, 2007
941
0
1,235
Winning the fans back after Other M should have been the easiest thing in the world.

The game didn't need to be a masterpiece, it just needed to get things back on track.
 

redcrayon

Member
Dec 5, 2011
11,413
3
625
As for what I meant by bottom 46%, that's literally quoting the point on OC. They have all their scores, and this one falls into that point on their score distribution. So the game isn't an "average" game (however loosely defined that may be), it's below average.

Fair enough, but I doubt I'd look at a game sitting just above 54% in their score distribution and then use that to say 'but it's above average!' either. I think it's easier to look at the whole middling chunk and term it as 'mixed', either way, rather than use a specific point at which there is only a binary 'above average' or 'below average' result for landing near it. That just seems like a way of making two games landing at 49 and 51 respectively sound like they got a much better or worse reception than they did for landing a few points apart either way, especially when it's such an inaccurate way of compiling data anyway.

Regardless, it seems like neither of us care to argue that aggregates aren't flawed, so happy to concede the point here.