How about a criticism that everyone could agree on? Like, "
this bug makes you have to reset", or "this section is impossible without cheats", or "this part doesn't work like it should", rather than going back and forth between esoteric preferences?
You'd think it'd be easy, wouldn't you?
In lieu of virtual space girlfriend character assassination teeth-gnashing, the game
seems to have done ok with the press.
I doubt there's anyone who thought the ridiculous load times, repeated ram-wiping and bugs added to the game in any way. The game [Sonic 2006] is broken at a fundamental level. Fortunately for Other M, whatever you may think of its gameplay or story, it's at least competently programmed and engineered.
This has nothing to do with the question of wether MOM is a good game or not, but seeing as it wasn't mentioned yet in this thread, there is a
game-breaking bug that prevents you from beating the game on that save file, so you'll have to start over. Ironically, the bug is triggered by trying to backtrack at a certain point in the game.
After reading the short
essay on objectivity vs subjectivity Femmeworth posted a few pages ago, I tried to think about these arguments everyone makes that basically come down to "I liked the game, you didn't like it, so it's all subjective".
Obviously, if you like or dislike something, it's a matter of taste and can't be right or wrong (usually).
So, what would be helpful and more constructive to actual discussion is seperating the quantifiable properties of the game from your opinion on why you liked/hated/didn't mind them.
For example, just saying "The controls are bad" is not really helping.
After a short adjustment phase, I personally had no trouble executing any moves, even using missiles in the middle of a fight, and didn't feel handicapped by the omission of an analog stick.
(Though it certainly looked funny when Samus was taking sharp 90° turns all the time.)
But me saying "The controls are good" wouldn't be helpful either.
So, we should find an objective description that everyone (or most people) can agree upon and then add our personal feelings about them.
For example:
Objective: "The controls are unconventional"
Subjective: "After a short adjustment phase, I didn't mind them.
Subjective: "The first-person/3rd person switching felt too jarring to me"
Subjective: "I could never use missiles because you have to stand still to shoot them."
Subjective: "I would have preferred nunchuck controls because the sideways-wiimote feels uncomfortable to me/I like to have full 360° movement in 3D games/etc."
I'm too tired to type all arguments in this way now, but I hope some people will understand what I'm trying to say.