Search results for query: *

True, but it's worth bearing in mind that Amazon Japan is rife with negative game reviews. For instance, Sun got 197 1 star reviews out of 851, which seems quite unfair. But SM did have lower sales in Japan than XY, so there is probably some connection. I'll read those SM reviews when I have the...

There is no reason to complain about a certain extreme behavior if it doesn't apply to this forum.

If a website consistently gave Nintendo games a bad score, then eventually Nintendo would lose incentive to send them pre-release copies. How would that benefit the website? Not that I'm saying this is the reason for the high scores, but it's an alternative to conspiracy theories.

USUM were released as separate games to generate the most profit. Nothing more and nothing less. I can't see these games tiding anyone over for two years, except for competitive players.

Then it should have been DLC.

Just bear in mind that it's been five years since B2W2 were released and review scores aren't what they used to be. So the content of the review is more important, and I haven't seen any review that overlooks the games' rehashed nature. Hopefully USUM's sales will be a fair bit lower than...

I am not a big B2W2 fan, but not because they weren't worthy of being called sequels. They're praised for their features and I respect that, but they simply weren't great sequels from a story perspective. A post-game episode in N's faraway region would have been a lot nicer than retreading...

I'd say that SM have a better story than USUM, too. It's just that the base template is still the same, so the differences don't stand out for better or worse. As for the B2W2 reviews, they aren't all critical, but here are two examples: Game Informer gave USUM an 85: "As a revisiting of the...

It sends a misleading message to people who have already played SM, which is the majority of potential consumers. It's baffling that B2W2 got a lower score than BW (80 vs. 87) for being too similar, and yet USUM get a free pass. Times have changed.

I doubt that, but it's certainly possible that a lot of reviewers want to stay on Nintendo's good side so that they keep getting pre-release copies to review for their own selfish reasons. Not to mention how rabid Pokemon and Nintendo fans can get when a game gets a "bad" score (7.8/10 comes to...

It's funny how the games haven't been released yet and I already feel over them. I am not looking forward to a break year in the vein of 2015, though.

The Metacritic reviews are favorable for whatever that is worth. To me that isn't saying much, since most reviewers give main series games around the same score no matter what. A lot of them also thought that SM were the best games. They gave them a 90.

You can already watch playthroughs.

I am not discounting them. Some people may think that the additions are worth $40, which is okay I guess. I suspect that this mindset has more to do with not wanting to wait two more years to play a new game, but I digress. I am personally not interested in comparisons to Emerald/Platinum...

He said "not that much better" and never claimed that his opinion was fact. Calm down.

They're a significant downgrade from B2W2, unless you're obsessed with Ultra Space. How they compare to previous third versions should be beside the point in 2017.

I'm saying that the added content is akin to DLC for SM, but is much more expensive.

I wouldn't call them a cash grab so much as glorified DLC. I'm sorry that I don't consider the added content equivalent to what SM offered.

What is this "everyone" business? I see one person complaining.

Okay, but if you're on fence due to the muddy story details, then relying on reviews could be problematic. Some people thought that the Distortion World alone was a selling point. Did you? Anyway, I'm almost sure that the plot changes before Poni Island are just exposition.