Jump to content

The Legend of Zelda: Spirit Tracks


Flame Dragon

Recommended Posts

WW and PH are directly related while ST features a new Link.

 

Thanks for the info. All i really knew about the 3 was that they happen in the same general part of the Zelda time line.

 

 

Also I find this very odd' date=' and very funny

"GameSpot gave Spirit Tracks an 8.5/10, lower than the 9/10 for Phantom Hourglass, although Spirit Tracks was said to improve on all aspects of Phantom Hourglass."

 

If it improved on everything from the first game, why is the score lower?

[/quote']

 

because gamespots reviews are either A)Biased, or B)Generated to create controversy

 

in this case, and in all cases in my opinion, take what the written review says. Numbers are pointless.

 

Or you're just an angry fan-boy. :/

 

And you're supposed to ignore reviews anyways. Every one bashes on Monster Hunter, yet I love it to death.

 

D= in this case I'm not an angry fanboy, I'm fine with the score and I thought this review was fair. I'm describing the reason for the scores bieng different is that there stupid and don't comare scores or anything.

 

a review score is just a number, if there's no written review theres no point.

 

Gamespot does have a horrible habit of bieng biased though, they gave the Kane & Lynch game it's only good review becaused they got paid to do it.

 

That's not being biased. That's getting payed.

 

There's a difference.

 

If your a gaming website, and your supposed to give honest reviews, so gamers know what is worth thier money and what is not, and you give favor to a particular game, even if it's bad, that is called bieng biased. whether or not you get paid is irrelevant.

 

Bias: a particular tendency or inclination, esp. one that prevents unprejudiced consideration of a question; prejudice.

 

If you get paid for it, that's adding Bribery to the list, which is worse.

 

No, biased is typically when picking something over another. If they said the game was better than another, then that's being biased. Specifically if they're getting paid to say that.

 

and nobody said they were saying it was better than anything, but if they lie about a game bieng good because they got BRIBED, not paid, that is bieng biased.

 

It's also noteworthy that bieng bribed to lie about a game is probably going to detract some readers. wether or not you think they were biased.

 

1; That isn't exactly being biased, seeing as they were getting payed.

 

2; Obviously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WW and PH are directly related while ST features a new Link.

 

Thanks for the info. All i really knew about the 3 was that they happen in the same general part of the Zelda time line.

 

 

Also I find this very odd' date=' and very funny

"GameSpot gave Spirit Tracks an 8.5/10, lower than the 9/10 for Phantom Hourglass, although Spirit Tracks was said to improve on all aspects of Phantom Hourglass."

 

If it improved on everything from the first game, why is the score lower?

[/quote']

 

because gamespots reviews are either A)Biased, or B)Generated to create controversy

 

in this case, and in all cases in my opinion, take what the written review says. Numbers are pointless.

 

Or you're just an angry fan-boy. :/

 

And you're supposed to ignore reviews anyways. Every one bashes on Monster Hunter, yet I love it to death.

 

D= in this case I'm not an angry fanboy, I'm fine with the score and I thought this review was fair. I'm describing the reason for the scores bieng different is that there stupid and don't comare scores or anything.

 

a review score is just a number, if there's no written review theres no point.

 

Gamespot does have a horrible habit of bieng biased though, they gave the Kane & Lynch game it's only good review becaused they got paid to do it.

 

That's not being biased. That's getting payed.

 

There's a difference.

 

If your a gaming website, and your supposed to give honest reviews, so gamers know what is worth thier money and what is not, and you give favor to a particular game, even if it's bad, that is called bieng biased. whether or not you get paid is irrelevant.

 

Bias: a particular tendency or inclination, esp. one that prevents unprejudiced consideration of a question; prejudice.

 

If you get paid for it, that's adding Bribery to the list, which is worse.

 

No, biased is typically when picking something over another. If they said the game was better than another, then that's being biased. Specifically if they're getting paid to say that.

 

and nobody said they were saying it was better than anything, but if they lie about a game bieng good because they got BRIBED, not paid, that is bieng biased.

 

It's also noteworthy that bieng bribed to lie about a game is probably going to detract some readers. wether or not you think they were biased.

 

1; That isn't exactly being biased, seeing as they were getting payed.

 

2; Obviously.

 

Well the original story wasn't that they were "paid" so much as they were given money on the side, in secret, to prevent a bad review, so thats my bad for not bieng clear at first. It happend like 2 years ago I think.

 

This whole thing wasn't to say the Spirit tracks review was biased, just that Gamespot has been, well, spotty, and that I usually go to otehr websites first anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's better than Phantom Hourglass. Has a nice difficulty level, too. There are still a few design flaws, like a lacking overworld and a few insta-death events, but overall I liked it a lot. I'ts probably my second favourite handheld Zelda game, after LADX.

 

Plus, I'm staff for the largest Zelda fansite on the net, so I should know. =P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...