It's not a bad game, it's just a bad [insert series name] game

That's definitely a bad in general game

Samefag

There is no correct take. It's a logical fallacy and you're dumb if you think otherwise.

Nuts and bolts

doom 3 is both correct and incorrect?

>Thing I don't like

Attached: d90.png (644x800, 13.04K)

>you can't judge a game both on its own merit and with the expectations it carries as part of a series

You can only judge a game on its merits. That game is also part of the series it belongs to which is painfully obvious and undisputable.

Breath of the Wild
Except it's also a bad game just in general

>NOOOOOOOO THE SERIES CANT CHANGE THE FORMULA EVER, IT NEEDS TO BE ENDLESS REHASHES

Attached: 1585110622427.jpg (600x800, 52.73K)

ya gotta have SWAG (Style While A Gamer)

Invisible war.

>>it's not a bad game, it's just a bad [insert series name] game

Attached: retard.jpg (537x720, 121.22K)

>buy Resident Evil game
>bought Resident Evil game expecting zombies and horror
>fire it up
>it's a kart racing game featuring chibi versions of all the RE characters
>NOOO user, NO YOU CAN'T COMPLAIN! DON'T YOU KNOW A SERIES IS SUPPOSED TO EVOLVE? IT'S YOUR OWN FAULT FOR BUYING A GAME IN A PARTICULAR WELL-ESTABLISHED FRANCHISE AND REASONABLY EXPECTING IT TO HAVE ITS WELL-ESTABLISHED GAMEPLAY? HONESTLY WHY WOULD YOU EXPECT TO BUY A RESIDENT EVIL GAME AND ACTUALLY GET RESIDENT EVIL, WHAT ARE YOU CLOSED-MINDED?
Retards. People buy games with "franchise name" in the title because they expect "franchise name". If they didn't, they would buy some other shite. That's the whole fucking selling point.

That game sucked and so did the rest of them.

Civilization 6

It's a good game and it's a God of War game, therefore it's a good God of War game.
It's a good game and it's a Doom game, therefore it's a good Doom game.
It's a good game and it's a Mass Effect game, therefore it's a good Mass Effect game.
It's a good game and it's a Zelda game, therefore it's a good Zelda game.
It's a good game and it's a Kirby game, therefore it's a good Kirby game.
It's a good game and it's a Dark Souls game, therefore it's a good Dark Souls game.
It's a good game and it's a Banjo Kazooie game, therefore it's a good Banjo Kazooie game.
It's a good game and it's a Zelda game, therefore it's a good Zelda game.
It's a good game and it's a Deus Ex game, therefore it's a good Deus Ex game.

Resident Evil 6

Breath of the Mild

Attached: header[1].jpg (460x215, 75.85K)

>

halo reach

Licensed games have an additional criteria of being judged based on how well they represent their parent franchise. The Simpson's for example have plenty of video games throught the ages. While Bart's Nightmare is an incredibly bad game, it's entertaining that it presents as a piece of Simpsons media. Simpsons Hit and Run, however, will give 2 different experiences based on familiarity with the Simpsons. Someome unfamiliar would find a half decent albeit somewhat repetitive and simple GTA clone, but a Simpsons fan would adore not only the attention to detail put into reconstructing the world of Springfield but also throwing each of these characters into scenarios that fit them perfectly as if they're watching another episode.
DBZ Kakarot is said to be filled with busywork and filler yet it's got so much DBZ universe shit in it. They put Launch in it, fucking Launch.

of course but any given series has its own standards
a hypothetical grimdark m-rated kirby fps could somehow be the best game of all time but it still would go against everything that the kirby series represents, making it a shit kirby game.

>caring about sonic for any reason at all, ever

Attached: autism area.jpg (300x225, 15.04K)

Who are you quoting?

>would go against everything that the kirby series represents
no it wouldn't
this game would now represent the kirby series and vice versa