LogFAQs > #970967977

My point was not to defend the review but to point out that its a ridiculous thing to bring up and taken out of context anyway. And yeah, not using the Wiis features is a valid criticism when taken in the context of the game not being technically impressive, which it wasnt. Like a lot of Wii games of that era it was a jumped up Gamecube game.

However, having actually read the review before posting, the claims around it are just a load of rubbish. For reference here is the review:

https://www.gamespot.com/amp-reviews/fire-emblem-radiant-dawn-review/1900-6182826/

Kenri posted...

Sure but the other complaints were dumb too. Also IIRC the person said they barely even played the game. Weird thing to defend.

They didnt. The review clearly refers to the late game and references the entire game. All evidence is they finished it.

UshiromiyaEva posted...

Pretty sure the Radiant Dawn review was the one where people sussed out from their comments that they didn't get past the tutorial segments, or at least did not get to base management in chapter 8 since they complained it wasn't in there.

Been a loooooong time though.

Radiant Dawn reviews are also skewed by the localization screwing up the difficulty selection.

There is no reference to base management at all in the review. I think this might be misunderstanding a quote about support conversations thinking its about base conversations but its not. Also while I agree with the last point generally this reviewer seems to have tried it on easy as well.

Mewtwo59 posted...

Yeah, I think they said something like it causes a game over if anyone dies, which means the reviewer didn't get past the first few chapters.

Not at all, what they said was:

unless you like the idea of starting entire battles over again upward of seven times until you can complete them without losing precious allies.

which is of course referring to the true Fire Emblem tradition of restarting when you lose someone, not implying that its a game over if anyone dies.

All claims that the reviewer had barely played the game are entirely made up. They seem to have played through the whole thing (which I believe is Gamespot policy) and from actually reading the review definitely made it to the late game. I dont agree with parts of the review but its fair overall, and I do sympathise with the reviewer. It must be very frustrating to play through a 50 hour game and write a review under crunch only to have a load of people who havent read your review or in many cases played the game yet accuse you of not doing your job.

The review is totally fine. Some fans are just toxic.