It's better to take the summation of all credible reviews as a measure of greatness rather than one singular review. Although, at the end of the day, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. A lot of people like it, some people don't.used44 said:Are we to take Game Rankings as being the official moderator of this conflict of greatness? I think not.
I agree with you there. I honestly hoped it would be a lot better than it turned out to be.Boringman54 said:I still am confused on how Galaxy got so high, I just don't think it's as good as reviewers say it is.
Though the concept was the same as Mario 64, I somehow felt that it was incredibly innovative. It had such a fresh feel to it and it was just plain fun. That's why I enjoyed it at least.Longo_2_guns said:I agree with you there. I honestly hoped it would be a lot better than it turned out to be.Boringman54 said:I still am confused on how Galaxy got so high, I just don't think it's as good as reviewers say it is.
I myself think OOT is the closest we will get to true perfection for a video game, it had enough in it to be full of depth, but didn't go overboard with features. It had a plethora of features, weapons, NPC's that all had a function and personality, and it had the perfect balances of difficulty in terms of puzzles, challenge for the players and dungeons. For me, it was a total package.
Boringman54 said:Alot of glitches? In OoT? I haven't ever experienced a glitch in it and I still have the original N64 version.