The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the KingdomReviews are inand they’re what you’d expect: high praise for a game that seems to take a lot of what made its predecessor great and make it bigger. However, if you take a look at the list of review notes on Metacriticthere is only one outlier: a 6/10.
Week in Games: Return to Hyrule
Monday 3:53 p.m.
It is by Gfinity’s Josh Brown, and at the time of publication this is the only poor/yellow rated review for the game on the entire site, a fact you can only confirm after scrolling through what looks like a sea of no end of 100 and 95. There are of course no negative reviews. The excerpt chosen by Metacritic to reflect Brown’s criticism reads:
If you haven’t set foot in the open world of Hyrule yet, Tears of the Kingdom is the best way to experience it, with just enough new terrain to keep things interesting. But if you haven’t followed the 2017 version, the story alone might not be worth the second attempt.
Was it 2006—when GameSpot’s Jeff Gerstmann had the nerve give Twilight Princess a mere 8.8/10— this could be a scandal. Luckily most of us have grown a lot since then, as critics and also as human beings, but that hasn’t stopped there from being a degree of consternation on the part of Zelda the fans, who…I don’t know, take a single reviewer’s criticism as a personal affront? Are angry that a single 6/10 has overturned the game’s astronomical Metacritic overall score lower by a number or two?
The more psychotic among these fans can never be saved, but I’ve also seen softer questions about the review, even on other websites, so I felt like I was absolutely clear here :c ‘is good. And one A 6/10 review for a game that everyone gives 90-100 is a good thing!
Wait, don’t all review grades suck?
I think so! And we, as an outlet, with some of our peers like Polygon—think that too. Trying to bend text to a score can often do both a disservice, and lowering the “quality” of a single-digit game almost feels like Don Quixote. Many people still love them and rely on them, so it suits them.
Brown’s review is everything a graded review should be: it’s personal, it clearly states what he’s saying and why he’s giving.g the score and helps anyone who might share those views understand what the game is about. But it’s as good due to the fact that it stands alone as it does.
I can’t believe it needs to be said, but it clearly is: no game is objectively perfect, everyone has different tastes and abilities, and every game meets those needs differently. The idea that a game can be unanimously “good” or “bad” is crap from 1995, and we’re better than that. And if you’re not, then you should try to be.
It’s bad for video games if a major release is unanimously acclaimed, because it does a disservice to the wider public of video game players. Not everyone likes Zeldanot everyone likes everything Zeldaand it is important to talk about it and listen to the experiences of others when they do.
We can – and will – do so over the coming weeks and months and given the success of breath of the wild probably years coming, through discussions and opinion pieces and whatever, but for a lot of people, reviews – and rated reviews in particular – are often the ultimate benchmark for a game. is perfect, no collection of reviews should be either.
