Adam Cook: "While it looks lovely and isn't a bad game by any means, Star Allies is aimed at a very specific age group, and most others will find it far too easy and, sadly, rather dull."
"Not a bad game by any means" "4.5/10" -_-
"While it looks lovely and isn't a bad game by any means, Star Allies is aimed at a very specific age group, and most others will find it far too easy and, sadly, rather dull." Can't this be said for a lot of Nintendo games. I've got Mario odd. And Zelda botw for the switch and this statement applies to them imo. To each his own.
Im not a big Odyssey fan but BotW is wholly deserving of the praise imo. I never felt the game was aimed at anyone in particular. Kirby doesnt have enough substance or difficulty to engage me so i can sympathize with this argument:
no, it doesn't. The thing is that games you mention are aimed for a RANGE of ages, e.g from 6 to 99. But this game specifically made for a smaller group - 6-8, which is obvious if you played the demo. Nobody older would find it appealing. But, anyway, I find it amusing that game scored so low. It should be judged from the point of a Parent, whether it offers enough of intresting content (having 60$ price tag) for a child.
He gave it a 4.5 because he went into it still functioning as an adult. He wrote it as an adult for adults. Perhaps we should have a child play it and tell us what they think. They will probably love it. There is nothing wrong with that but how do you tell an adult what to think about a product designed for a young child anyway? Its like Labo. Of course adults don't want that, but when children see it, they love it so it will be successful.
If you read the review, it's easy to understand why he gave 4.5/10 even if he said it's not a bad game. Star Allies isn’t a bad game, okay? From a technical standpoint, it’s a well made, good looking title that’s clearly been designed to appeal to a younger audience. Very young. Seriously, we’re talking maybe 4-7 as the target demographic here. The trouble is that for everyone else it’s just… well, it’s boring. Really, really boring. .
yeah.. not sure how you can say it's not a bad game, but then give it a bad score. I mean which is it?
Because a 5/10 is average, and a 4.5 is slightly below average. So it's a below average game, but not a straight up "Bad" one for the reasons mentioned in the review :-)
That's not how 10/100 point rating scales work. If it was, that means of the 71 PS4 games in the last 90 days, only 4 are below average on metacritic. Either that math doesn't add up or PS4 game really are that damn good.
I wish the world of gaming remembered this
Logically speaking, yes a 5 out of 10 would be average. However, I've found most games with a 7 rating in most reviews to be average and certainly anything with a 5 or lower not even worth trying. I think thats why a 4.5 is getting pushback. Most reviews don't use that logic.
@GodisaGeek, Actually, a 5.5/10 would be the middle score on a ten point scale. (1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10)/10 = 5.5. That number changes based on the scale used and depending on whether or not the publication considers 0, or anything below a 1, a valid score, but a 5/10 is the lowest the middle number could be. Godisageek operates on a 20 points scale so depending on whether or not 0, or anything below 1, is a valid score, the middle number could vary between 5 and 5.5. Technically, even that wouldn't be the average. The average would be all scores added up and then divided by the number of scores. Considering that games aim to be good the average would be above that 5.5 mark. Godisageek's average is actually a 7.5: http://www.metacritic.com/p... So actually, the review score would be considered 3 points below average for you guys and a point to half a point below the middle score. By your own explanation above of the game being slightly below average (half a point below), that means you'd actually consider it a 7/10 game. I don't really care what you score it, but your reasoning behind your score doesn't make sense and it irks me when people promote the idea that a 5/10 is an average game, which is wrong no matter how you cut it.
No, you are using flawed scoring logic to draw people in with a bad score for clickbait, then say "no we see 5 as ave" just to try to justify the low score that you damn well know is not ave by industry standards. You are using a shady clickbait tactic and I will not be supporting your site. Have a nice day. EDIT On top of that, your site is on metacritic. Using a different score logic that averages in with a site that clearly states anything below a 65 is just plain bad, not ave, not above, not below....BAD. You are unprofessional and a joke. Either get your crap together or quit reviewing. You are misleading consumers with your trash.
I played the full demo, and it was colorful and besides a couple problems I have with controls It wasn't bad. But.. Idk... It lacked something. Idk what it is, but I just didn't leave the demo caring about playing the game more... And that's a shame cus I really liked Kirby Superstar on the SNES.
Kirby Planet Robobot on 3DS is a lot of fun too.
that's exactly it. The demo wasn't bad. And I hate saying this as games are for people of all ages but Kirby is a game geared toward the kiddies. Simple and fun. Something I loved as a kid and something I'd love if I were still one. What it lacked was depth and difficulty for an adult gamer. Though it's not like Mario Odyssey was difficult and that was easily one of the best Mario games ever imho. I was kind of looking forward to Kirby but after playing the demo I realized it just didn't offer enough for me. Though it's still something I'd likely to sit down and play at some point. This also has me concerned about Yoshi though that game appears to have some depth so hopefully. Having said that, to give Kirby a 4.5 is flawed. The game in it's own right, based off it's own merits is likely worth a 7 at the very least. Unfortunately, for as long as I can remember, this is exactly what plagues gaming journalism. Writers don't go into a game and rate it based off it's own merits. They dock it for not appealing to them, etc. Shame on anyone who just looks at a score. The score is for the game. The article is where you state that though it's a solid game it does this, this and this that finds it hard to me/adult/whomever to dig it.
Played the demo and found it very easy to the point of being extremely boring. Seemed like it was aimed at very young kids. I'll pass on this.
thanks for the input. I was looking forward to this too.
Kirby's adventure = nightmare in dreamland > superstar > pretty much everything else imo.
I played the demo, and needless to say, I won't be buying it. It was ok, definitely too easy as well
After playing the demo I’ll be picking this up to play with my young son as he really enjoyed it.
This is for very young children , too bad they didn’t add difficulty levels at least . My 2 youngest would like it but the Switch is too fragile for them to play with it unfortunately
Guys, from the get go, it was obvious WHO are the main audience - kids aged 6-8. It's not a surprise you kind of dissapointed, it's just not made for you. "Power of heart, share it and make friends!" - Thus this game should be revied from the point of a PARENT who wants the kid to have some good time with some game. Does this game provide enough content for the price tag, is the quality good for kid, is it child friendly? I believe it would be 10/10 for a kid...for a lesser price <40$ So 8/10 for 60$ And no value for adult. p.s. KIRBY doesn't run at 60FPS what a lazy ass developers they are. 7/10 for kids
Dude we grew up on Super Star, and it offered challenge. You're selling kids short if you think that a game has to be this braindead in order to be enjoyable by 8 year olds. They don't need "the darksouls of platformers!!1" but coddling them with games like this isn't doing them any good.
Haha. I grew up in the NES era. I had one since I was 5 years old. Talk about frustratingly hard games. Ninja Gaiden. Ghosts and Goblins. Castlevania. We knew what hard games were like back then.
Judging by the demo I can understand this argument, it's way too easy and unappealing to older audience. But to me this is not the main problem. The main problem is that it's gonna be sold for 60$. That's a ridiculously high price for a simple child game, which is also almost identical to Kirby Super Star anyway.
Can't wait for some more relevant games for my switch. Metroid, fire emblem, Bayonetta, smash Bros. This looks fun and all but it's for the kiddies.
Glad Nintendo's finally getting called out for all the dull baby game Kirby titles over the last few years. Give me online co-op and give me a challenge.
Always one troll review.
This site also gave Yakuza 6 a 7. They like to score things low.
"Not a bad game by any means" gives it 4.5/10 lol
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.