• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

how and why is brawl any worse then melee???

N

n64dude

Smash Cadet
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
34
o.k. ign gave brawl a 9.5 and melee a 9.6 i am wondering wat is worse aout brawl because brawl does nothing worse than mele right. only better?

graphics brawl better then melee
characters more characters and better
stages better ,than melee more stages

it has more trophies, it has stickers
it has online
it has stage builder

so I think it should of gotten above a 9.6 if it has everything melee has or better. it should have gotten better than that like a 9.7 or 9.8 . i am just wondering which one to get, because acording to them melee is better wat do u think???:confused::mad::urg:
 
D

DancingZombies

Smash Rookie
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
16
They probably just forgot about their Melee rating. Besides, personal bias or feelings can affect a rating, so a 0.1 difference is nothing.
 
G

GordoBaggins

Smash Rookie
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
8
This is IGN, the same website that wanted Koopalings over all else in SSB4. Yet we still question their logic? >.<
 
C

ConeZone

Smash Ace
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
619
Location
Salem
well the koopalings were some of the original villians in mario bros. snes, and bowsers main henchmen back in the day before bowser jr. appeared. I liked the koopalings, but it would be hard to include all of them as a playable character. perhaps they could do some swap out sort of thing like PT, but i don't know how unique each could have been considering there are 8 of them i think. anyways, ign doesn't know what they are talking about, everywhere else i have read has given brawl a perfect score.
 
G

GordoBaggins

Smash Rookie
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
8
It's not really a matter (for me, at least) of whether they give it a perfect score or not. I just don't see IGN as a credible source OR opinion for... much of anything. I tend to disagree with them on just about everything. >.>
 
T

TheMuffinMan0311

Smash Apprentice
Joined
Jul 5, 2007
Messages
147
Scores are based on a games content in the context of today, not in any way coordinated in relation to the scores of other games apart of that series, you can not compare scores made in different contexts. Just because Melee got 9.6 in 2001 and Brawl got 9.5 in 2008 does not mean that they are saying Melee > Brawl, because the scores are not -meant- to be compared, the scores were given in different contexts and different periods in gaming history.

Just because someone gave Mario Galaxy a 10/10 does not mean that they're saying Mario Galaxy is a better game than every other Mario game ever, don't be stupid stupid. It just means that in the context of the gaming industry today, Mario Galaxy was a 10/10 game. This is no way a reflection of how Mario Galaxy compares to any other Mario game, it is simply a review of Mario Galaxy, not Mario Galaxy in comparison to every Mario game.
 
V

Vántaj

Smash Rookie
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Messages
3
Location
Cancun, Mexico.
Also, you shouldn't look at videogame websites/magazines/etc. as your "ULTIMATE CREDIBLE SOURCE OF LIKING A GAME OR NOT". Thore reviews are normally from one part of the reviewing staff (Sometimes including mora than 1 critic review, and they make an average.)

So, some people might hate Brawl for being different, because they were acustomed to the fast gameplay Melee has.

GET OVER IT (?)
 
Iwan

Iwan

Smash Ace
Joined
Feb 12, 2008
Messages
826
Location
Leesburg, VA
I haven't read the review yet, but more than likely it got a lower score because of the lag issue. There's a serious connection problem in some games.
 
D

DeuceBlade

Smash Champion
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
2,291
Location
New York City
Ign isn't a very good source for reviews... this became clear when they gave Kingdom Hearts 2 a 7.6 when it was atleast 9.5 worthy
 
Thino

Thino

Smash Master
Joined
Apr 7, 2006
Messages
4,845
Location
Mountain View, CA
no game site will tell me what game is better than the other , I prefer having my own opinion once I played the game myself lol
 
Gindler

Gindler

Smash Champion
Joined
Feb 26, 2008
Messages
2,442
Location
Orlando (UCF)
Ever hear of metacritic.com? I recommend you go there, it combines ratings from all the sites and brawl has a 97% where as melee has a 92%.
 
S

Scion

Smash Cadet
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
42
Location
St. Louis
Especially because that random reviewer person probably spent a lot of time trying out every character and stage, and went fully in depth into all of the game modes, and played most of the game by themselves.
 
Chaosblade77

Chaosblade77

Smash Lord
Joined
Nov 1, 2007
Messages
1,958
DeuceBlade said:
Ign isn't a very good source for reviews... this became clear when they gave Kingdom Hearts 2 a 7.6 when it was atleast 9.5 worthy
Click to expand...
Eh... I agreed with their score for KH and I also seem to agree with their score for Brawl... just not their issues with the game.

They said in the review that Brawl was the best game in the series, so don't just look at the scores. The rating system is just different.
 
O

OrlanduEX

Smash Lord
Joined
Aug 6, 2006
Messages
1,029
DeuceBlade said:
Ign isn't a very good source for reviews... this became clear when they gave Kingdom Hearts 2 a 7.6 when it was atleast 9.5 worthy
Click to expand...
Can't agree with you there. KH 2 had one of the most ridiculous and nonsensical stories I've ever seen in a video game. The dialogue was all poetic BS about hearts and doors and such. The game just didn't make sense, and the gameplay wasn't much better. You pretty much mash on X the whole game. I think 7.6 is about right.

I'd like to point out that this post is also pretty hypocritical considering my sig.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom