VC games: A constant flow of 6.5s?

Has anyone else noticed this? Just look at some of the reviewsVC games: A constant flow of 6.5s?
[QUOTE=''VitamiX'']Has anyone else noticed this? Just look at some of the reviews[/QUOTE]Yeah, I disagree with a lot of the reviews. but eh, I pretty much know what looks appealing to me and base my decision on that.VC games: A constant flow of 6.5s?
I don't trust on any reviews for the VC games.
Same, but like the recent review of adventure island. I clicked it and I was like ''I bet this is gonna be 6.5.'' Same with world sports competition. I can't think of any others right off the bat but there are lots of 6.5 VC games.
They gave Super C a 6.5 I think. They must lack skill, and are frustrated with fast action side scrolling shooters. Honestly, I have trouble playing this game as well, currently. When I was younger, however, I remember kicking but in these types of games.
They're based on the level of gaming today.That most games can score around 6.5-7 20 years later shows just how great many of these games are.
Only go by the reviews on vc-reviews.com for Virtual Console Reviews and IGN for Wii reviews please.
[QUOTE=''ciaran22'']Only go by the reviews on vc-reviews.com for Virtual Console Reviews and IGN for Wii reviews please.[/QUOTE]I don't agree, all those reviews are is fan service to make the people who owned the games before happy.Gamespot is the only place that judges the games on how they hold up today. Not crafting their reviews so they're tame enough for buyers in years gone by.If you spend today's money on these games then you judge them on today's scale. No one should give points for nostalgia.
Some of them deserve the 6.5 but a lot don't. It's all about personal taste and nostalgia.
Personally I think it's pretty stupid to see anyone review a V.C. game, I mean the big media sites anyway. How can they, they already reviewed the game once, nothing has changed since the first release on consoles. It's ''nice'' for some people that don't know what to buy (though they should just read the original review), but certain games were great once and now they think they aren't today. (That might do with their age, but still, to me the integrity of the reveiw depends upon it staying over time) I mean even though they might not be what they'd like now, how can you re-reveiw it, it just shows us that no score matters, the games will always change score over time. So no one should bother about scoring them in the first place. The system must be very faulty if the score changes. You know what I mean? They should just tell us if the game is still fun, and to go read the original review. Though I think I kind of understand why they do reveiw them. Oh well.
[QUOTE=''DSandWii'']Personally I think it's pretty stupid to see anyone review a V.C. game, I mean the big media sites anyway. How can they, they already reviewed the game once, nothing has changed since the first release on consoles. It's ''nice'' for some people that don't know what to buy (though they should just read the original review), but certain games were great once and now they think they aren't today. (That might do with their age, but still, to me the integrity of the reveiw depends upon it staying over time) I mean even though they might not be what they'd like now, how can you re-reveiw it, it just shows us that no score matters, the games will always change score over time. So no one should bother about scoring them in the first place. The system must be very faulty if the score changes. You know what I mean? They should just tell us if the game is still fun, and to go read the original review. Though I think I kind of understand why they do reveiw them. Oh well.[/QUOTE]That just means that you want these graded on nostalgia and that's fine but it's also screwing over the consumer.As for the part where you said if a score changes it's faulty? NoIf a score changes it's because it's measured to the level of gaming today, not 20 years ago.
[QUOTE=''Jaysonguy''][QUOTE=''DSandWii''] Personally I think it's pretty stupid to see anyone review a V.C. game, I mean the big media sites anyway. How can they, they already reviewed the game once, nothing has changed since the first release on consoles. It's ''nice'' for some people that don't know what to buy (though they should just read the original review), but certain games were great once and now they think they aren't today. (That might do with their age, but still, to me the integrity of the reveiw depends upon it staying over time) I mean even though they might not be what they'd like now, how can you re-reveiw it, it just shows us that no score matters, the games will always change score over time. So no one should bother about scoring them in the first place. The system must be very faulty if the score changes. You know what I mean? They should just tell us if the game is still fun, and to go read the original review. Though I think I kind of understand why they do reveiw them. Oh well.[/QUOTE]That just means that you want these graded on nostalgia and that's fine but it's also screwing over the consumer.As for the part where you said if a score changes it's faulty? NoIf a score changes it's because it's measured to the level of gaming today, not 20 years ago.[/QUOTE]Yeah I know, I read your post above after I posted mine. It's cool to be able to see both sets. Today's score and olden days score. Oh and it really only screws over the uneducated consumer. Well the new gamer consumer, new as in they don't know anything about the game from the past, so by going off of the old reveiw they may not like the game like you said.
Thank you for taking the time to read my view :)
I dont really care. I dont think VC games should be reviewed
There is more 7.5s then 6.5s ;), but 6.5 isn't that bad for $5-$10 games.
[QUOTE=''chris3116'']I don't trust on any reviews for the VC games. [/QUOTE] Yeah. If they were good back in the day you should know they'll still be good now just not as technically impresssive.
[QUOTE=''DSandWii''][QUOTE=''Jaysonguy''][QUOTE=''DSandWii''] Personally I think it's pretty stupid to see anyone review a V.C. game, I mean the big media sites anyway. How can they, they already reviewed the game once, nothing has changed since the first release on consoles. It's ''nice'' for some people that don't know what to buy (though they should just read the original review), but certain games were great once and now they think they aren't today. (That might do with their age, but still, to me the integrity of the reveiw depends upon it staying over time) I mean even though they might not be what they'd like now, how can you re-reveiw it, it just shows us that no score matters, the games will always change score over time. So no one should bother about scoring them in the first place. The system must be very faulty if the score changes. You know what I mean? They should just tell us if the game is still fun, and to go read the original review. Though I think I kind of understand why they do reveiw them. Oh well.[/QUOTE]That just means that you want these graded on nostalgia and that's fine but it's also screwing over the consumer.As for the part where you said if a score changes it's faulty? NoIf a score changes it's because it's measured to the level of gaming today, not 20 years ago.[/QUOTE]Yeah I know, I read your post above after I posted mine. It's cool to be able to see both sets. Today's score and olden days score. Oh and it really only screws over the uneducated consumer. Well the new gamer consumer, new as in they don't know anything about the game from the past, so by going off of the old reveiw they may not like the game like you said.[/QUOTE]True, and another point is that if people were to just lower their standards just a bit, (by about 7 to 20 years of technology), there are some really great games that were considered some of the finest games when they were released, (like Super Mario 64, The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Super Mario World, etc). Do realize that these were once actual games that would sell on retail for the same price and have as much depth as games today, and are not just some other simple arcade game on Xbox Live or PlayStation Network. Really, even by today's standards, some of these games still hold up and are great, and $5 or $10 for a 7.0 or 8.5 game is considered a bargain, but if you were to appreciate these games as they were several years ago, you could be buying and playing some of the greatest gaming experiences to this day for the price of a latte at Starbucks.
Why do peope think the reviews are something to abide by? Just because the reviewer says it's not that good of game, doesn't mean you have to listen to it. Rayman Raving Rabbids got what like a 5 on the XBox 360, I rented it, and I loved it! It's all about the players opinion.
GameSpot has no taste.Super Metroid, 8.5? That's a sin.
Dont use GS reviews. I use [url]http://www.vc-reviews.com/[/url]Great resource for Virtual Console games and reviews. They belong to an archive of a defunct british magazine that actually reviewed the games originally when they came out. a lot of the magazine reviews are scanned in and can be viewed on the gamespace of any VC game.