NoA: "there are more great games on Nintendo platforms than anywhere else!"

Maybe those games just aren't appealing to him/her?

Considering the thread we are posting in i even doubt he owns one.
Just here to make a snarky comment, throwing in a condescending hint that it only has mario and even that was only for little girls. How to be a troll 101.
 
Maybe those games just aren't appealing to him/her? He/She may end up liking some of those games but generally speaking, impulse buying is not really something someone should do.

No, no. God forbid someone doesn't like the selection of 3 worthwhile games released in a year and already played multiplats and old games elsewhere.
 
Isn't it a good sign if people aren't crowding your games to give it 0s though? Like people give the game 0s when they don't like it for whatever reason.

There is not one exclusive (retail) game from Ms that has a user-score of 8.5 or higher on the 360.
No Halo, no GoW, no Fable, no Forza, ...
This ofc has nothing to do with fanboys down-voting everything on the "other" system ...
Sry, but using the user-score of MC is one of the most ridiculous and desperate pr moves i have ever seen.
 
I am a littler confused, people are complaining that nintendo uses user scores, but doesn't it also say regular meta critic score of 85+? So what they're saying is professional reviewers and users agree this game is quality? In my opinion, this makes their claim more credible when both users and reviewers agree.

Eheh, no. User score section of Metacritic proves to be nonsense too many times.
By user scores, Fez is 61, Velocity 2X is 69, Driveclub is 55, Forza Motosport 5 is 57, Towerfall is 68, Pix The Cat is 63 with deep analysis like

This is a very special kind of indie **** It's just like Inception, we have to go deeper; it's a **** within a **** within a **** genre.

not bad, isn't it? Even a big guy like GTAV is 77 because of haters that give 0-1-2-3/10. These jumped to my eyes as they're beyond ridiculous but there are more.

Also, do we want to take numbers in consideration? PS4 big hits have between 1000 and 2000 user scores, One has an average of 500 and Wii U rarely reaches 1000 user scores. No needs to say why and where the childish haters are, right?
This ad is just a not-so-well packed bullshit. As stated more than once, also by myself, saying "Wii U is the best place to play this Holiday", as the competition learned to do, would've been better than a graph based on a direct comparison done with crazy restrictions just to look better. edit: not better for them obviously, just to me.
 
No, no. God forbid someone doesn't like the selection of 3 worthwhile games released in a year and already played multiplats and old games elsewhere.

I am highly entertained by the fact that you are getting angry for Nintendo having the best games this year. ^^*

*Proven by Metacritic lol
 
I agree, Nintendo has by far the best consoles to own if you already have a gaming PC. Without third party games though it's a different story, great complimentary console though with far and away the best exclusives
 
man, remember when people were syaing nintendo was doomed? yes, wii u may not be on the scale of ps4 and xb1 in terms of sales and popularity, but to ever think nintendo would die? that was just dumb. i lost count of how many threads came up with this topic.
 
and it's pretty unreasonable to think that the reason for that is that theres more people giving those games 0 for no reason...

Like others have said, the note that we end up with using user reviews makes more sense than the critic reciews in many cases.

Let me break this down for you. When it comes to something like downvoting games on metacritic by fanboys or just generally disgruntled gamers, it is generally only applicable to Sony/Microsoft games because those people don't care about Nintendo. It's really all about Sony vs. Microsoft.

So if Nintendo games are mostly ignored by those reviewers who tank scores, how is it fair to include them as a criteria for judging game quality? I would hazard a guess that there are more people who score a game on Metacritic without playing the game or with severe bias than actually a somewhat reasonable review from people who have played it.

Quite frankly, I don't see any reason why user reviews should be accepted. They are COMPLETELY useless.
 
Eheh, no. User score section of Metacritic proves to be nonsense too many times.
By user scores Driveclub is 55, Forza Motosport 5 is 57

both Driveclub and Forza asked for it. One with a pathetic launch (months) and the other with microtransactions/content kept out of the game. No?? :p
 
Can someone help me understand the mindset that gets so worked up about this?

MC isn't perfect, but they're using the closet thing we have to collective opinion. User and "professional."

Collective opinion is just that. Collective. You can have a different one. It's okay.

Nintendo's job is to try to sell more games. Certainly they realize they have less third party support. Certainly they realize this means less diversity. So they're doing what they always do.

Focusing on "quality" as best they can. It might mean something different for you. And that's okay. But the best indicator of average quality we have is MC and that's what they've used.

If you personally don't like Nintendo-style games. Great. But a fair amount of people do. And as it turns out the Nintendo systems of this generation have a wide variety of Nintendo-style games that are rated highly.

There's nothing in this ad that's remotely sophisticated or trying to mislead people. It's pretty straight forward. I'm so confused by the response here.

The level of indignation is similar if not more than Ubi using bullshots or the MCC PR spin after.

Those were outright lies. This is, as best, a spin/lens on a Verifiable truth.

In short, Neogaf. It ain't that serious.
 
It is easy to explain why they use user score instead of critic score.

- most of people who bought WiiU are nintendo fans.
- WiiU is neat system that attract specific kind of users.

That explain enough why they give high score for Nintendo games.

With this logic all Nintendo games would have a Metascore of 85+ and a User Score of 8.5 ;) In my opinion they choosed User Score because they wanted the opinions from gamers who actually played the game once and not from gamers who don't ;)
 
Let me break this down for you. When it comes to something like downvoting games on metacritic by fanboys or just generally disgruntled gamers, it is generally only applicable to Sony/Microsoft games because those people don't care about Nintendo. It's really all about Sony vs. Microsoft.

So if Nintendo games are mostly ignored by those reviewers who tank scores, how is it fair to include them as a criteria for judging game quality? I would hazard a guess that there are more people who score a game on Metacritic without playing the game or with severe bias than actually a somewhat reasonable review from people who have played it.

Quite frankly, I don't see any reason why user reviews should be accepted. They are COMPLETELY useless.

But even if any of the comments like this one are true... we don't know for sure. I mean, it's not something that can be proved, right!? I'd like to know but, if it's only anecdotal, theres no reason for nintendo to not get "advantange" of user reviews...
 
I am highly entertained by the fact that you are getting angry for Nintendo having the best games this year. ^^*

*Proven by Metacritic lol

I am entertained by the fact, that the saltiest people in here are actually the accusers. So passive aggressive, lol. Well, not so much passive anymore, considering that we're at a point, in which people with the WiiU console are called lying ,,trolls'' for not sharing an opinion and calling out a comically dumb ad makes you a ,,poor soul'', while the WiiU enlightened are oh so witty. hu,
Final stadium: Hide behind emoticons for alleged superiority in the situation.

Quite frankly, I don't see any reason why user reviews should be accepted. They are COMPLETELY useless.

Because it makes the spinning in an advert easier? Obviously they'd make their own rules in a PR comparison pic, even though it's funny, how the Wii U despite that, still doesn't look very favorable in the image. 3DS is better (obviously), but splitting the Pokemon titles is also pretty amusing. I take it, the remakes are below 8,5?
 
Oh, this is a console war thing *Hugs all 5 current gen systems*

It most definitely is. Metacritic is full of 0/10 and 10/10 user reviews. Now, if this was an Amazon "verified purchase" thing, it wouldn't be so much of an issue. But user scores on Metacritic are a joke.
 
I'm just glad nintendo recognizes that multiplat games are still good games and hope that their fans can begin to also accept this.
 
Considering most games on the list are exclusive games, these games actually have quite a high probability of falling victim of this compared to multi-platform games, where only few players might conceive it as a game for a rival system, no?
No one considers Wii U a rival system.
 
Are you even allowed to include Pokemon X and Y?

might as well have game of the year editions.

Also I have a Wii U. After my little sister finished Mario 3D World it became useless. If sell it I am probably gonna have a 150 dollar lost and I only bought it a month ago or so.

Watch out, the NDF is going to come attack your gaming tastes for not following their own.

Considering the thread we are posting in i even doubt he owns one.
Just here to make a snarky comment, throwing in a condescending hint that it only has mario and even that was only for little girls. How to be a troll 101.

Oh my god. "He doesn't like the same games I like he must be a troll and lying about owning a Wii U because no one who actually owns one would dislike those games". What a crock of shit.
 
Let me break this down for you. When it comes to something like downvoting games on metacritic by fanboys or just generally disgruntled gamers, it is generally only applicable to Sony/Microsoft games because those people don't care about Nintendo. It's really all about Sony vs. Microsoft.

So if Nintendo games are mostly ignored by those reviewers who tank scores, how is it fair to include them as a criteria for judging game quality? I would hazard a guess that there are more people who score a game on Metacritic without playing the game or with severe bias than actually a somewhat reasonable review from people who have played it.

Quite frankly, I don't see any reason why user reviews should be accepted. They are COMPLETELY useless.

So down voting only happens on sony and Microsoft systems. Not nintendo systems. Empirical evidence please.
 
I'm actually pleased to see Nintendo becoming more combative in their marketing. Both MS and Sony really dropped the ball with games this year, with almost every hyped game turning out to be lacklustre.
 
I just got a WiiU and I love it. Are there any good JRPG's out yet?

Pier Solar and the Great Architects is out on eShop, if you like a game that has preserved the mechanics of a 20 year old RPG. Looks gorgeous and they've made pretty good use of the Gamepad, so Wii U sounds like a prime platform to pick it up on.

Child of Light. Again, quite nifty with the Gamepad (but not really worth double-dipping on if you've already played it).

Not sure if I'm missing something here. Obviously there's the Wii and GameCube backwards compatibility, Virtual Console stuff, a lot of back-catalog that is. New Xenoblade next year looks pretty dope, though.
 
every nintendo system of their respective generation have had the most quality games of the whole thing

always

thats the rule

just because theyre the best doesnt mean the masses want them

Of course, in previous generations those quality games have been mostly the third-party ones, not Nintendo's offerings. Hence why the Wii U failed. Not enough hardcore Nintendo fans in the world to replace the fans of third party who would buy Nintendo consoles for those games and then give the exclusive games a chance.

This ad is co-created by and preaching to the choir, which shrinks with each console generation. It's essentially whistling past the graveyard.
 
About this thread... I have yet to see a reasonable reason why user scores shouldn't be taken into account.
I've discussed this earlier, but metacritic are subject to a lot of bias which they don't try to correct for, so I would take any user score with a huge grain of salt.
In fact, i dislike what many are doing in this thread: talking like if taking into account only critic scores is clearly better than also taking into account user scores, because... ??
I like user scores, and regularly browse imdb for movie reviews, and look on neogaf for gaming opinions. I just think metacritic scores are of poor value.
Everyone takes a lot of zeros from users... so?
Not nearly equally so, and it's not the only bias. Niche games with a loyal fanbase rarely get them. One reason Vita games also do so well in user scores.
 
Retail only.
Current gen only.
Meta over 85.
And user review over 85.


Quite specific with numerous qualifiers, especially that retail only garbage. But corporate PR is what it is.

In reality all the systems have a lot of good games, and retail vs digital is absolutely irrelevant to game quality.

And apparently multiplatforms, that aren't available on Nintendo's system, are disqualified as well in order to artificially diminish the number of games the competitors have.
 
People, it's just an ad.

Really forgot that console warz is serious bussines

And apparently multiplatforms, that aren't available on Nintendo's system, are disqualified as well in order to artificially diminish the number of games the competitors have.

Where are you getting this from?

The criteria they used is specific and tailored to show nintendo in the best light possible, but where are they disqualifying multiplatforms? Those simply don't reach the threshold given by the ad
 
Funny part is, they are jerking off AAA publishers who are releasing AAA rushed garbage.

Aye, sad world we live in now isn't it? Sony/MS give AAA publishers essentially a blank schematic and ask them what they want, deliver it, and now are stuck with games that are released in poor state. Oh sure you can repair it, but then what's the incentive to take a chance on a game day one if they're delivered broken? pre-order bonuses and exclusive content? You're chopping up the game in order to appease the early jumpers then AND you'll still foster a 'wait for sale/complete' attitude. It's all a big clusterf**k IMO, but I can't really take a stance other than as a consumer...
 
I dunno, I wouldn't agree. But the WiiU has a lot of unique games at a high quality. But it's not like I expect NoA to not talk up their product.
 
Well they're right. I don't even have a 3DS yet but even I can see the quality on that one platform is above everything else, throw in a Wii U and you're laughing.
 
Top Bottom