Comparably, almost the entire user response I've seen has been positive, excluding a few people who couldn't get used to the controls. However, compared to the critical ratings, that's much, much less common. Plus other games with clunky controls (GTA, Bit.Trip BEAT on Wii, Bionic Commando Rearmed XBOX version) got equal or greater praise.

And I don't understand the rest. Cheesy dialogue/story/characters? You can turn off the sound, and I found the campy nature of the dialogue to be enjoyable, While that's based off opinion, you really shouldn't expect the dialogue to be serious (thankfully it's not, too many games these days have you laughing at what should be serious).

Mission structure/gameplay style? While I can get down with that, that's like saying "Madden deserves a 60 because a lot of people find it to be not fun and just another rehash."

The graphics and music are undeniably awesome (or, if you don't like the soundtrack, you must admit it's of top-notch quality (see MadWorld)). There's a crapton of lasting appeal, and the difficulty curve is just fine.

The main flaws I see (such as death forcing you to play on an easier difficulty,MUCH MORE annoying before you can quit and keep your hearts and some loot), would detract it down to a 9.5 at least, but again, just my opinion.

Miracle Mask sold very well thus far like every other Layton (except you can't pirate this one). Can't speak about VLR since VGChartz only tracks Japanese sales, but Aksys is very satisfied with sales of 999, I'd assume same for this.

What i was saying is I'm almost positive Kid Icarus Uprising got more sales than both of these games and I think both of them are better and they get hardly as much recognition as Kid Icarus or 3D land.

Well, Kid Icarus had more time then Layton, and I'm pretty sure Miracle Mask sells much faster and will stay that way (At least catching up to DS predecessors).

VLR got too much critical praise IMO (far more then Kid Icarus), but that's subjective. USA sales aren't tracked, but this is a niche game, so it's success should be based purely off of Aksys's expectations.

I really want VLR but I'm waiting for it to come to eShop, that game fits the DL title very well

TBH, I've seen plenty of reviews for Bit Trip Beat that complained about the controls in that game, and I'm personally glad there were reviews out there to warn me about it, since the controls really do make it difficult for me to enjoy that game at times. Just saying.

"You can turn off the sound" is anything but a compliment. And yeah, the dialogue is cheesy as hell. Some people like that, some people don't.

And people say that, since some people actually feel like the score should reflect how broad the appeal of the game is. Like IGN, for instance.

I have no intention of arguing with that, hence why I didn't bring them up.

You're welcome to your opinion, but so are the people like Jim Sterling who didn't enjoy the game. Just because you don't see other aspects as problems doesn't mean no one else should.

Can you explain how you feel it fits the download nature very well? Because I don't see it. I've played and beaten that game, and it is meant to be played in extremely long bursts.

I suggest you just get it, since I really don't ever forsee that game coming to the eShop anytime soon.

I think that Kid Icarus: Uprising was way too underrated. Everyone talked about flawed controls, but I thought that they were perfect. The dialogue was nice in my opinion. I actually enjoyed listening to it.

But...they are the best games on the 3DS.

(my opinion)

Unlike Bit.Trip Beat (which really was awkward on the Wii compared to PC/3DS if it had no lag) though, Kid Icarus Uprising is probably controlled as best as it can on the 3DS. The style of gameplay is too fast for dual-analog, and the camera control would be awkward on Wiimote. However, I do believe they should've included CPP support for dual-analog based on the fact that some jackass thought that face buttons would work but not two sticks. Even if it didn't work, it'd be nice to test it out. Bit.Trip Beat had control complaints, and everyone thought D-Pad would work well somehow (seriously, it takes like 2 seconds to see how that wouldn't f***ing work. How stupid can people be?). 3DS offered something with even more precision, the analog stick. I'm pretty sure nobody touched it after 14 seconds.

As for dialogue, I'm saying it shouldn't hinder the game. If it bothers you that much, just lower it and enjoy the fantastic music. Most considered it really good, and if it's deliberately campy, so be it. It accomplished its goal better then Revelation's hideous-at-times script and Dream Drop Distance's moments of awkwardness, both of which want gamers to take them 100% seriously.

Yes, I think it should be how broad the appeal is based upon factors like genre. But an 83 seems to be inaccurate, since I've seen much higher user reviews. And I only mentioned Jim Sterling because his reviews are ALWAYS terrible. Seriously, at times, he plays the game completely wrong, failing to read the manual or even press a button and thus giving it a low score.

Oh please. Jim Sterling is an excellent game critic. He's not so great when he's commenting on the business side of the games industry, but he always puts forward a well-rounded argument for his opinion on a game.

And furthermore Sterling is one of the very few critics that value games that push artistic boundaries, and is able to recognise that. Case in point: Lollipop Chainsaw. When that game was released I was reading a whole heap of reviews about it, and almost every single one of them ranted on about how it is sexist and so on and so forth. This surprised me because the game isn't really that subtle about being postmodernist and critical of sexism in games. Sterling was the one of the very few that actually seemed to notice that, let alone write about it.

Nintendo fans don't like Sterling because he goes after Nintendo games that quite reasonably do deserve a beat-down. But of course, rather than say "I disagree with Jim Sterling's reviews and therefore I don't read them," the lovely people on the Internet find it appropriate to attack Sterling's abilities as a writer and indeed as a person (pretty sure I've seen you call him "fatass" before). Never mind that the people on the Internet have no proof that they know the first thing about journalism, criticism, or editing, nah, armchair experts don't need these things.

Against the artistic argument (don't know much about art games, but I don't consider any of Suda's recent games to be artistic): http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=141188&page=

Against his failure reviews (Not just Nintendo): http://www.dualshockers.com/2010/03/17/what-exactly-is-jim-st...
http://www.destructoid.com/review-silent-hill-downpour-222794... (His failure to PRESS A BUTTON means he sucks at his job)
MK7 review vs MW3 review (which he used the same (very logical) argument yet get a 4 point score difference)

He was criticising "art games," - games solely made for the sake of being artisitc - not games that feature artistry, such as philosophical theory. There is a difference. If you are going to criticise someone as a journalist, understanding what they write about is a good start. Lollipop Chainsaw is the latter.

I really don't care what you consider to be artistic or not. I suggest that if you can't even follow the thematics and philosophies of a Suda game, you don't aim to get into a career of criticism.

I've read that Silent Hill review and I still don't get what you're on about. Seems perfectly balanced to me. Certainly reflects my experience with the game.

And that trophy thing is why you should never as a critic share your trophy collection. Too many kids think that you can't possibly know if a game is good or not unless you've seen the ending, because the 30 hours you just spent loving/ hating the game are completely invalidated by a five minute cut scene at the end.

I don't always agree with Sterling, I loves FFXIII, but he puts forward articulate arguments. Does he make the occasional mistake? Yeah, of course. Does he deserve to be called a fatass by someone who has failed to prove he is an expert on criticsm? No.

First off, I'd like to believe I understand Suda's games (I loved Killer7 which I consider artistic)but I don't consider them artistic. Games like No More Heroes have a very unique art style, but I'd never call them "artistic". Journey falls under that category. Just because I supposedly don't see the great symbolism of a cheerleader killing zombies doesn't mean I'm inadequate when it comes to reviewing games.

Silent Hill - He couldn't find the lock-on button, when it's clearly described in the manual.
And while you don't have to play through the whole game most of the time to see the quality if it's really obvious, this is a time when you have to see through a bit more then what he did. (For example, a really lazy person could rant about how KI:U was only 9 chapters, or that SM3DL was only 8 worlds long)

You do realise that 'art' means more than pretty pictures, surely? But then why are you only talking about visual presentation? Hmmm.

Lollipop Chainsaw is a brilliant feminist criticsm of the roles and expectations that men have with games. They went in expecting sexploitation, based on the way the game was promoted, as well as expectations of the genre. What they got was a game that turned expectations on its head, presenting players with one of the more empowered female characters in the games industry, while at the same time openly mocking players for trying to enjoy the game as sexpoiltation.

That is why Lollipop Chainsaw is an artistic game. It is perfectly possible to study it as you would a film, as it has deeper meanings beyond the, well, simple, view you posted above. The job of a critic is to recognise and engage with these deeper meanings.

And the combat for Silent Hill still blew chunks even with lock on. Therefore Stirling's point remains relevant even if he didn't use that button.

Wut? Everybody was expecting exactly what the protagonist turned out to be. Who in their right mind would have expected a weak, classic stereotype? Instead, we got a more contemporary stereotype...

Note I said "symbolism", If you're going to try and be condescending then you need to read my damn post first.

Regardless of whether or not he was right about the combat sucking (he actually liked the game) it's still really, really bad if you can't figure out how to press a button. You can't sugar-coat that fact.

/me following suit

No. People expected a grindhouse-style 'cheerleader' - a sexually submissive, largely unintelligent character. The marketing of the game went out of its way to propagate this impression, in fact as right up to the release of the game it was being positioned as classical grindhouse. What they actually got was a highly empowered, intelligent character who was completely dismissive of her peers lecherous behaviours.

The fact that so many critics labelled this game as "sexist" just proves that there are so many critics out there that should not be critics.

Note I said "symbolism", If you're going to try and be condescending then you need to read my damn post first.

I have now asked you multiple times to provide a critical analysis of... anything... to demonstrate you know what you're talking about. All you're providing is random sentences that barely make sense. "I don't see the symbolism" means absolutely nothing.

Regardless of whether or not he was right about the combat sucking (he actually liked the game) it's still really, really bad if you can't figure out how to press a button. You can't sugar-coat that fact.

And you're focusing on a tiny and completely irrelevant part of the review to somehow disprove Stirling's legitimacy as a critic. Stirling says the combat is clunky. He's right, whether you use the lock-on or not. Therefore Stirling's point is reasonable.

People in debates tend to focus in on the miniscule when they've lost the debate. They start looking for the tiny details to somehow try and disprove the grander picture. Stirling is not rendered as an ineffective critic by making one mistake (when his broader point is reasonable anyway) in anything but your own mind.

And again, if you're going to criticise one of the games industry's higher profile critics on such a personal level... well, who the heck are you? Other than a dude that plays some games and reads some reviews and therefore believes he's an expert, I mean?

First off, please link me to somewhere where you would like to finish this. I don't see the point in further derailing the topic as TBD said and is likely soon to say again.

Give me something to provide a "critical analysis" for you. I said I don't see the art in Lollipop Chainsaw, and you say I'm clueless. Yes, there are feminist undertones (which I thought were supposed to be obvious). I consider that social commentary (which isn't directly art unless you count things like Moral Orel to be works of art), not pretentious "artistic gaming".

His point may be reasonable, but if you fail to do basic tasks, I say you are inadequate to be writing a full review.

And furthermore, you really shouldn't try and make "subtle" jabs at someone to try and make it seem like you've won by default.

EDIT:

And I like that you fail to adhere to your own standards, except you prefer to do it in a seemingly subtle fashion.