However, now that the blog has a) plans to review Nintendo titles of all sorts and b) an archive, I now find it imperative to construct a scoring system, which you can see below. However, "word" scores may not immediately establish a game's measure of quality for some readers, so for the purposes of this page, each score is accompanied by decimal numbers to approximate their value in more familiar terms. Personally, I find number scores to be more trouble than they're worth, but if you as a reader prefer them, I've included the handy guide below to grant context.
Masterpiece (9.5-10)
Awarded to the finest of games that are, more or less, flawless in design. Maybe there's no such thing as perfection, but what does that matter when such impeccable design, control, aesthetic, and sound come together to form a game that'll inspire generations to come?
Awarded to the finest of games that are, more or less, flawless in design. Maybe there's no such thing as perfection, but what does that matter when such impeccable design, control, aesthetic, and sound come together to form a game that'll inspire generations to come?
Near-Masterpiece (9.0-9.4)
Granted to games that're just on the cusp of masterpiece status. There might be a misstep here or there that prevents entry in the hallowed realm, but such games remain rare treasures, and they should be rewarded as such.
Really Great (8.5-8-9)
Really great games are in a niche of their own. They're not quite masterpiece-tier, but they're a step above good or even simply great titles, as a wealth of super-fun game design, music and character await your arrival.
Great (8.0-8-4)
A spot kept for games that aren't simply good; they're great! Maybe some flaws prevent it from being really great, but who cares? True to the title, you're in for a great time.
Good (7.0-7.9)
A broader score used for games that're just simply "good." Many games of this ilk exist out there, be they fun first efforts from burgeoning companies, purposely unambitious titles designed merely for amusement, or even games that simply fall short of promised greatness (but not so flawed as to fall into the realm of neutral mediocrity). Regardless, games with this score remain well-worth your time.
Okay (6.0-6.9)
This score's reserved for games hanging on the precipice of "good" quality. For whatever charm or appeal they might possess, such potential is often squandered by a myriad of confounding design choices. This isn't necessarily bad design, mind you, but design choices that aren't beneficial to the game whatsoever. Basically the equivalent of gaming junk food: tasty in small bursts, but not particularly fulfilling.
Mediocre (5.0-5.9)
We're entering murky waters here. Games that fall under this category are often of disappointing quality, yet they tend to not leave much of an impact on us. There may be a saving grace here or there, but such potential is quickly erased by boring game design. Mediocre games, for better or for worse, are simply "games that exist".
Bad (4.0-4.9)
Games that're just plain bad. They may not be irredeemably awful, but quality is typically only found in peripheral elements (be it eye-candy graphics or an unusually superb music score). Unfortunately, that's not enough to render a game actually good, and bad games have no choice but to rest here.
Really Bad (3.0-3.9)
Here we arrive at "irredeemably awful". Okay, maybe games placed in this broad spectrum might fall into the "so bad it's good" territory thanks to glitch-ridden level design or hilariously poor voice acting, but those games don't grow on trees.
Terrible (2.0-2.9)
As evidenced by the name, these games are often devoid of appeal and hardly ever in a playable state. It's best not to get tangled in these games unless you're looking for a quick laugh.
Abysmal (0-1.9)
What else can be said? Absolutely little to no enjoyment can be derived from these sorts of titles. While there's a scant amount of games that'd fall under this rotten category, you know what they say: avoid at all costs.
A spot kept for games that aren't simply good; they're great! Maybe some flaws prevent it from being really great, but who cares? True to the title, you're in for a great time.
Good (7.0-7.9)
A broader score used for games that're just simply "good." Many games of this ilk exist out there, be they fun first efforts from burgeoning companies, purposely unambitious titles designed merely for amusement, or even games that simply fall short of promised greatness (but not so flawed as to fall into the realm of neutral mediocrity). Regardless, games with this score remain well-worth your time.
Okay (6.0-6.9)
This score's reserved for games hanging on the precipice of "good" quality. For whatever charm or appeal they might possess, such potential is often squandered by a myriad of confounding design choices. This isn't necessarily bad design, mind you, but design choices that aren't beneficial to the game whatsoever. Basically the equivalent of gaming junk food: tasty in small bursts, but not particularly fulfilling.
Mediocre (5.0-5.9)
We're entering murky waters here. Games that fall under this category are often of disappointing quality, yet they tend to not leave much of an impact on us. There may be a saving grace here or there, but such potential is quickly erased by boring game design. Mediocre games, for better or for worse, are simply "games that exist".
Bad (4.0-4.9)
Games that're just plain bad. They may not be irredeemably awful, but quality is typically only found in peripheral elements (be it eye-candy graphics or an unusually superb music score). Unfortunately, that's not enough to render a game actually good, and bad games have no choice but to rest here.
Really Bad (3.0-3.9)
Here we arrive at "irredeemably awful". Okay, maybe games placed in this broad spectrum might fall into the "so bad it's good" territory thanks to glitch-ridden level design or hilariously poor voice acting, but those games don't grow on trees.
Terrible (2.0-2.9)
As evidenced by the name, these games are often devoid of appeal and hardly ever in a playable state. It's best not to get tangled in these games unless you're looking for a quick laugh.
Abysmal (0-1.9)
What else can be said? Absolutely little to no enjoyment can be derived from these sorts of titles. While there's a scant amount of games that'd fall under this rotten category, you know what they say: avoid at all costs.
You know, the lack of a direct scoring system never bothered me all that much about this place. Now, obviously my love for all things Kirby meant I dissected both your articles, the information within, and your specific opinion on each game quite heavily. As such, I was never in doubt as to what kind of concise opinion you had at the end of each and every article. Hence, the precise ranking you gave to each and every Kirby surprised me not one bit. I already have a similar broad internal scoring system, upon which I had ranked both my opinion and my (correct) expectations of all yours. While I have not yet finished every Kirby game I own, I've played every one at least a decent bit by now, except for Canvas Curse. Oh, and Rainbow Curse. No Wii U yet, but it's coming!
ReplyDeleteBut your scoring system has merit, Anthony. I especially like having two separate classes for great and masterpieces. As Kirby Air Ride taught us, it's not always easy for some games to be reviewed in a traditional manner (AKA a time-pressured job), and some games will get higher opinions from fans then critics, or vice-versa, and it always varies from person to person. I consider Tilt N' Tumble to be the opposite example, as though it received a largely "really great" critical opinion, the consumer opinion was more in the line of "good." Not nearly as big a gap as the Air Ride critic/fan gap, but still...
Of course, this blog is about you, not me. That, and the character limit would prevent me from discussing every opinion. Best save that for the actual articles!
But, if I were to give my ranking using your system (excluding Canvas Curse and Rainbow Curse)...
Okay Kirby games: Kirby's Pinball Land, Kirby's Avalanche, Kirby's Star Stacker, Kirby Squeak Squad
Good Kirby games: Kirby's Dream Land, Kirby's Block Ball, Kirby's Dream Land 3, Kirby And The Amazing Mirror
Great Kirby games: Kirby's Dream Land 2, Kirby's Dream Course, Kirby Tilt N' Tumble, Kirby 64: The Crystal Shards
Really Great Kirby games: Kirby Air Ride, Kirby Mass Attack, Kirby: Triple Deluxe
Near-Masterpiece Kirby games: Kirby: Nightmare In Dream Land, Kirby's Epic Yarn, Kirby's Return To Dreamland (once played, Canvas Curse will probably go here too)
Masterpiece Kirby games: Kirby's Adventure, Kirby Super Star, Kirby Super Star Ultra
It hardly needs clarifying, but this is all my opinion, and not simply derived from yours, even if they do echo each other often. While I do prefer Dream Land 2 to Dream Land 3, I still rank the former slightly lower and the latter slightly higher then the consensus opinion. Other then that, you'll notice I cared very little for the spin-offs into which Kirby was poorly integrated, though that's not the reason why. I agree on Squeak Squad being only marginally rousing, have an especially affectionate opinion for Mass Attack and Tilt N' Tumble, two under-appreciated entries, side with you in preferring, though only just, Return To Dream Land to Epic Yarn and consider the gap between Adventure and Nightmare In Dream Land even smaller then you do. Otherwise, our opinions overlap quite a lot!
Anyway, keep plugging away, both at more Kirby entries and other incoming reviews, Anthony! As always, I can't wait, though I will. Don't have much of a choice, do I?
- Mike.
As always, Mike, it's scary how much you read me. I'm glad to know my earlier reviews had a clear opinion to you, but I'm more happy to see my review system is up to your tastes.
DeleteThe rankings for the rest of the Kirby games have already been decided, so please look forward to the next several months.