Giving Great Genesis games low scores.

[steephen1]

If you mean the Saturn version, than no Jhon, your not alone. The control was better. But the genesis version, it deserves a C grade, but the saturn version B±

[Blueguy1]

[QUOTE=steephen]If you mean the Saturn version, than no Jhon, your not alone. The control was better. But the genesis version, it deserves a C grade, but the saturn version B±[/QUOTE]

MY NAME IS JOHN!!!!!

Anyways, I played the Genesis version on Sonic Mega Collection (Gamecube), where you can use an analog stick. This makes the game much more enjoyable to play because it's easier to control. I recommend playing it on there. It's one of those cases where a game is actually better when played on a newer console.

[supersoundwave1001]

Ok i was a little hard on you video game critic. its your opinion. i'm sorry dude. I will say Cool spot is a really good game.

[darkrage61]

I enjoyed Sonic 3D Blast as well, I bought it back when it was new and I liked the new isometric style.

[txsizzler1]

I agree with Dave on the fact that if I am getting frustrated, and repeatedly die all the time, the game certainly isn't fun, much less something I would award a high score to. I don't play games to be miserable; I play games as a diversion from everyday life, and to enjoy. If I find a game to be miserably tough, without any recourse (Ghouls N Ghosts is very hard, but at least you get unlimited continues!), I will put it down and walk away, with a foul taste in my mouth. I think the VGC is pretty spot on with his reviews of the said games.

[stika1]

yeah seriously

Ranger X
Comix Zone
Rocket Knight Adventures
and Contra Hardcorps

need new reviews, I can't believe these awesome games scored so low

[ShadowAngel1]

[QUOTE=txsizzler]I agree with Dave on the fact that if I am getting frustrated, and repeatedly die all the time, the game certainly isn't fun, much less something I would award a high score to. I don't play games to be miserable; I play games as a diversion from everyday life, and to enjoy. If I find a game to be miserably tough, without any recourse (Ghouls N Ghosts is very hard, but at least you get unlimited continues!), I will put it down and walk away, with a foul taste in my mouth. I think the VGC is pretty spot on with his reviews of the said games.[/QUOTE]

I guess that's the reason why games today are so stupidly easy, hold your hand, give you unlimited lives, regenerating health: Because gamers today lack skill and patience.
I don't know, but when i buy a new game, i want a challenge. I want something for my money and to me that's a challenging game, that dares you to master it. Not some Skyrim "I show you where to go, what to do and basically you just follow my arrows around, no freedom, no challenge, no nothing" gameplay.

And most older games can be beaten with a little patience and skill. Learn the patterns, don't be stupid and then i wonder what's so challenging about Comix Zone. I've beaten it several times without problems, so did thousands of other gamers.

Rocket Knight Adventures is a great game (proven by it's legacy and popularity to this day), the rating here is a bad joke.

I sometimes get the impression that the VGC doesn't go for objective reviews of games but rather the old saying "Controversity creates Cash". Examples of ratings where i think "WTF did he smoke?" are Mutant League Hockey, Grand Theft Auto, Ecco the Dolphin (Dreamcast), Contra: Shattered Soldiers, Armored Core 2, Alex Kidd in Miracle World and Chip & Dale Rescure Rangers, to name a few. He's at Moby Games, they have the ratings and if you for example look at Armored Core 2, you'll see a bunch of ratings in the 90's, 80's, 70's (the lowest are 60 out of 100) and then the VGC with 0 out of 100 or a "F"....0? You think "What is going on", become curious, click on the website...bang, another visitor and unique visitors are so important to some website owners, they try everything to get them.
Other reason can be to start discussions and keep this forum alive, seeing how many "Please review this game again" or "What ratings are wrong" threads can be found here.

I mean "F" should be reserved for the ultimate crap, unplayable, buggy, games that are no fun to play whatsoever. The ton of F-ratings on this site is crazy, most of the games aren't good by any means, others are decent, others are actually good games where i wonder how they got rated that way

[VideoGameCritic]

I don't think your "controversy creates cash" line applies here.  This site has not even made a fraction of what I've sunk into it.  I will admit that I do value my readers and hope to attract as many as possible. 

If you look at my grades though, I think 90% fall in line with most other sites, so I don't think I'm too radical.  As for F's equaling zero, I don't see it that way.  More like F = 60%.

I agree that today's games really hold your hand, but I think there's a reason for that.  In the old days you didn't mind replaying levels because they were short and sweet.  It was actually fun to play them over and over.  In today's sprawling games, forging through 3D environments for a half hour is not something you really want to repeat.

[steephen1]

Look, I come to this site to hear Mr. Mrozeks opinion, not to have someone concur (my old reviews, still readable if you have the link to the old "reader reviews" thread (bring it back Dave!) you can see people being biased beyond belief!). Sometimes, people have different opinions. I am grateful that Dave doesn't sell himself out like some damn street whore (I hope I'm not pushing the envelope there). His site has few or no ADS, just the friends of VGC section (thanks for letting me discover heavy seas!), and just one AD space on the forums. Dave tends to be tough on games that déserve it (we Maryland folks are all alike eh Dave?). I can disagree, and I can express it, but I won't go off either!

[txsizzler1]

[QUOTE=ShadowAngel]
I guess that's the reason why games today are so stupidly easy, hold your hand, give you unlimited lives, regenerating health: Because gamers today lack skill and patience.
I don't know, but when i buy a new game, i want a challenge. I want something for my money and to me that's a challenging game, that dares you to master it. Not some Skyrim "I show you where to go, what to do and basically you just follow my arrows around, no freedom, no challenge, no nothing" gameplay. [/QUOTE]
 
Generally, I work 12 hour shifts, that rotate. I have 2 kids, a wife, and a butt load of responsibilities. So, when I actually do have time to game, I want to be able to play without having games lead to pounding frustration. Dave made a point about games being alot more immersive and complex these days, which leads to the point that you simply don't have alot of new games nowadays that have that simple pick up and play capability. If I have to play a really tough as nails type game, make it with an option to quick save! Is that so hard? Then I can pick up where I left off a week later when I get a chance to play again for a few hours!

[QUOTE=ShadowAngel]
And most older games can be beaten with a little patience and skill. Learn the patterns, don't be stupid and then i wonder what's so challenging about Comix Zone. I've beaten it several times without problems, so did thousands of other gamers. [/QUOTE]

I envy your level of prowess in gaming. Some of us don't have that level, even if "thousands of other gamers" do. Again, I harken back to the "quick save" point I made in the paragraph prior.

[QUOTE=ShadowAngel]
Rocket Knight Adventures is a great game (proven by it's legacy and popularity to this day), the rating here is a bad joke.

I sometimes get the impression that the VGC doesn't go for objective reviews of games but rather the old saying "Controversity creates Cash". Examples of ratings where i think "WTF did he smoke?" are Mutant League Hockey, Grand Theft Auto, Ecco the Dolphin (Dreamcast), Contra: Shattered Soldiers, Armored Core 2, Alex Kidd in Miracle World and Chip & Dale Rescure Rangers, to name a few. He's at Moby Games, they have the ratings and if you for example look at Armored Core 2, you'll see a bunch of ratings in the 90's, 80's, 70's (the lowest are 60 out of 100) and then the VGC with 0 out of 100 or a "F"....0? You think "What is going on", become curious, click on the website...bang, another visitor and unique visitors are so important to some website owners, they try everything to get them.
Other reason can be to start discussions and keep this forum alive, seeing how many "Please review this game again" or "What ratings are wrong" threads can be found here.

I mean "F" should be reserved for the ultimate crap, unplayable, buggy, games that are no fun to play whatsoever. The ton of F-ratings on this site is crazy, most of the games aren't good by any means, others are decent, others are actually good games where i wonder how they got rated that way[/QUOTE]

I enjoy reading Dave's reviews. Although I certainly don't agree with each and every one, his reviews are subjective to his own feelings about the game, and give me a different perspective to look at when it comes to my own thoughts about the game. You shouldn't bash someone for having an opinion; look at it as a way to make your own opinion better with knowledge.