- Joined
- May 10, 2004
- Messages
- 3,993
- Awards
- 6
Wait a minute, so how is IGN not credible? From what I can recall, IGN had the most accurate mainstream review for KH2 when it came out. Most people hanging out in the KH sections here were bawwwwwwwwwing their eyes out about it, much like now. (Coincidence? You decide!) People went on tirades (loose exaggeration), calling IGN "IGNorant" for days without end because apparently, giving a KH game a less than spectacular review was unheard of at the time.
Reality is, IGN's review for the game is a bit off, but mostly correct: it wasn't/isn't the greatest game ever, nor did it last long. Let's be honest, people: 23 hours or so should be enough to complete the entire journal. Worlds were short, and it was incredibly easy to get to treasure chests; not like in its predecessor, where you had to come back when you learned the x-ability. No matter how pretty looking it became or greatly the music improved, there really isn't any excuse for how simple the game's mechanics were. Sure, you'd occasionally get to press /\ whenever it appeared, but admit it: the battle system became incredibly repetitive, even with the fancy visuals. Now honestly, who's really being biased here?
Now that I've pretty much covered its flaws that for some reason every KH2 fanboy seems to overlook, there's absolutely no reason IGN should be called biased, nor should the review be ignored. It's not the best score, but it's still a good score. Much like KH2, the graphics (I still think Nariko has N64 hair) and sounds were praised. Gameplay sounds about accurate, since it is a SLASHAN game. If the extras really are going to be put up as free downloads, then I guess I don't have that much to say about their lasting appeal section of the review besides the obvious.
Like blinkboy said earlier, I'm a bit peculiar on the final rating it was given, since it's a flat 7, and not the 7.8 it's actually getting. Still, I can safely say that it wouldn't hurt for me to give the game at least one playthrough when I buy it.. used.
Reality is, IGN's review for the game is a bit off, but mostly correct: it wasn't/isn't the greatest game ever, nor did it last long. Let's be honest, people: 23 hours or so should be enough to complete the entire journal. Worlds were short, and it was incredibly easy to get to treasure chests; not like in its predecessor, where you had to come back when you learned the x-ability. No matter how pretty looking it became or greatly the music improved, there really isn't any excuse for how simple the game's mechanics were. Sure, you'd occasionally get to press /\ whenever it appeared, but admit it: the battle system became incredibly repetitive, even with the fancy visuals. Now honestly, who's really being biased here?
Now that I've pretty much covered its flaws that for some reason every KH2 fanboy seems to overlook, there's absolutely no reason IGN should be called biased, nor should the review be ignored. It's not the best score, but it's still a good score. Much like KH2, the graphics (I still think Nariko has N64 hair) and sounds were praised. Gameplay sounds about accurate, since it is a SLASHAN game. If the extras really are going to be put up as free downloads, then I guess I don't have that much to say about their lasting appeal section of the review besides the obvious.
Like blinkboy said earlier, I'm a bit peculiar on the final rating it was given, since it's a flat 7, and not the 7.8 it's actually getting. Still, I can safely say that it wouldn't hurt for me to give the game at least one playthrough when I buy it.. used.
