16th April 2003, 10:17 PM
Let me just make a quick run through a few of their "quality" reviews.
-Castlevania: SotN for the PSX gets an 8.9. Pretty good, right? But then they give the inferior Castlevania: CotM for the GBA a 9.6. Great game, but not as good as SotN. Worse yet is their score for Castlevania: HoD, which is much better than CotM and just about as good as SotN. They give that a measly 8.2.
-They give Mario Kart 64--one of the best racing games ever made--a 6.4!! They also give the super-awesome Diddy Kong Racing a 6.6. What a shitty site.
-They give San Francisco Rush--a very, very poor racing game--a 7.1. The next Rush games get better but the scores get lower. Rush 2 gets a 5.1 from them.
-F-Zero X--the best N64 racer--gets a crappy 7.5. And what did they say was wrong with it? That it lacked soul. If that doesn't make you lower you head in shame then I don't know what will.
Shall I continue?
-Castlevania: SotN for the PSX gets an 8.9. Pretty good, right? But then they give the inferior Castlevania: CotM for the GBA a 9.6. Great game, but not as good as SotN. Worse yet is their score for Castlevania: HoD, which is much better than CotM and just about as good as SotN. They give that a measly 8.2.
-They give Mario Kart 64--one of the best racing games ever made--a 6.4!! They also give the super-awesome Diddy Kong Racing a 6.6. What a shitty site.
-They give San Francisco Rush--a very, very poor racing game--a 7.1. The next Rush games get better but the scores get lower. Rush 2 gets a 5.1 from them.
-F-Zero X--the best N64 racer--gets a crappy 7.5. And what did they say was wrong with it? That it lacked soul. If that doesn't make you lower you head in shame then I don't know what will.
Shall I continue?