Printable View
Are you fluent in Japanese? If not, I can understand why you wouldn't care- you don't know what's going on. If you are fluent, forget it.Quote:
Originally posted by Technosphile
I just didn't care anymore.
As for the scores, they're still pretty damn good. Although, for those of you who hated Majora's Mask- EGM gave it a platinum, so take that for what it's worth.
There was nothing wrong with Majora's Mask... it wasn't as good as OoT but it was still fun.Quote:
Originally posted by Tyler_Durden
As for the scores, they're still pretty damn good. Although, for those of you who hated Majora's Mask- EGM gave it a platinum, so take that for what it's worth.
That's *entirely* too generous. I love shooters and Gunbird 2 sucked only a little less ass than the Giga Wing series. Thank goodness for Mars Matrix. Redeemed the little Sega box after all the other shooter travesty.Quote:
Originally posted by Frogacuda
Nice.
Though this is the magazine that gave Gunbird 2 a 5.0...
I can understand why, that game was a 7.0 at best.Quote:
Originally posted by Orta
Greg Sewart gave Chrono Cross a 9.5, and he got tons of death threats and hate mail.
I agree, but there are a lot of people that were dissapointed with the game for some reason.Quote:
Originally posted by bbobb
There was nothing wrong with Majora's Mask... it wasn't as good as OoT but it was still fun.
New sigQuote:
Originally posted by burgundy
It's not Nintendo. It's you.
The reason is that Majora's Mask is the anti-Zelda. Miyamoto himself has always said that Zelda was about exploring and seeing new things whereas Majora's Mask was so limited to what could be accomplished within the 3 days that it felt like Shenmue 0.5. Running here to do this by this time, that by that time, etc. I tried several times to play it, but never could make it through before becoming incredibly bored.Quote:
Originally posted by Tyler_Durden
I agree, but there are a lot of people that were dissapointed with the game for some reason.
Having played through and completed the import myself awhile ago already. My own personal rating would be a 9.5. The main gripe I have is that the game was a little short(and I don't like giving out a perfect 10 really), but overall it was classic zelda gameplay and a predictable story....not that the story has ever been the high point in any Zelda game.
:lol: When I saw the title of this thread I thought the scores would be bad, and the first thing that flashed through my mind was the words of the EB employee as he handed me my OoT disc...."just so you know, the money you put down on Zelda is non-transferable now."
What kind of retard (and I hesitate to insult the mentally infirm by including them in this) could complain about a 9.5?
And they also gave Mars Matrix an 8.0. They're not all bad.Quote:
Originally posted by Frogacuda
Nice.
Though this is the magazine that gave Gunbird 2 a 5.0...
Good, you got it! I was worried I had the wrong address ;)Quote:
Originally posted by thray-walsh
Best angry mail I've gotten for a review = a kid sent me an email worm virus over my Suikoden III score.
I had a great time with Majora's Mask... I guess the whole 3 day system was just too radically different for some people... I personally thought it was unique and didn't really hinder my enjoyment of the game. If it had been another OoT rehash, people would find something else to complain about it anyway, you can't please everyone 100% of the time. BTW, the dungeon puzzles were on par to any of the previous Zeldas... that's the meat of what I consider anything to be a faithful "Zelda" game...