 Hey everyone, Nathaniel Ruffal-Jance here from Nintendo Prime, and I think we need to have a conversation today because Kirby and the Forgotten Land just came out and I could talk about my initial thoughts on it, my impressions, and who knows, maybe a video like that would actually perform very, very well. I don't do those kind of videos that often and we'll probably have a deeper conversation on Kirby next week in our podcast. In fact, you could probably sort of view our upcoming podcast next week or maybe even the week after, but probably next week as a pseudo impression slash review of the game. And one thing that happens every time a major release comes out that people see I'm playing or enjoying, whether it's on live stream or they see me say something like I did last night on Twitter after our stream came to an end, I put out on Twitter that this is the best Kirby game ever. What happens is people want me to review a game. Actually look at reviews in this light of overhypeness or not hyped enough. And sometimes we even get upset if a game has a Metacritic score that doesn't match what we think it should or a Metacritic score that's too high. There are people that think Elden Ring as an example is completely overhyped and not actually as good as the reviews say it is. And I get asked often why I don't review games more often or at all in some cases. And I do review games once in a blue moon. I think the last one was Yoshi's Crafted World. I really barely ever review games. And when I do it's usually because I'm dabbling with the new type of content as if reviews are some sort of new type of content and need me to review or I have something unique I think to say that no one else is going to say which is often not going to be the case. But reviews do have a place. Hype levels do have a place. But I think what we are asking for from reviews is one, not actually what you want. We'll get into the term unbiased, the whole unbiased review and any review that tells you it's unbiased but isn't just a list of facts about the game is not actually an unbiased review. And that what you truly want are reviews that match what you want out of video games. And that is very important because you're not going to get that from a medic critic rating. You're not going to get that from say, I don't know, open critic. You're not going to get that from saying I hate all reviews from IGN. I hate all reviews from Easy Allies. I hate all reviews from this outlet or that outlet or Kotaku or this person which that's a bit more accurate. Now before I get into this conversation I am going to ask you to subscribe to the channel. We are on our road to 80,000 subscribers. I would love to get there at some point before summer but who knows. And by the way, we're also giving away an Xbox Series X of PlayStation 5 and a Nintendo Switch OLED this month. All you have to do is head to that gleam.io link down in the description or a pinned comment. The only base requirement is that you are subscribed because it's a subscriber giveaway but that's not actually how you enter. It's just I'm only giving this away to someone who is subscribed to the channel. Now, that being said, this conversation began with a person who, a person in the comment section after my Kirby stream who asked me, you know, hey, would you recommend this? Set aside your Nintendo bias because you're a Nintendo YouTuber and tell me, would you recommend this to me? I didn't really enjoy the demo and this was in regards to the Kirby. And this made me think something I've always realized about game reviews is people look at them for multiple reasons. One, some people look at it as they want justification for something they enjoy. So for me as an example, Breath of the Wild from the Legend of Zelda series is my favorite game of all time. So seeing that it has a Metacritic rating of a 96, a 97, whatever it is right now and is one of the highest rated games of all time to me feels almost like vindication for my personal opinion of the game, right? So I view it as it's the greatest game of all time and it being rated at what it is at a 97, you know, overall across multiple outlets and people, it feels like a justification for my opinion. Although I don't need a justification for my opinion. The justification for my opinion and my experience is my opinion and my experience, right? It's about what I think not about what anybody else thinks. So I could say Breath of the Wild is my favorite game of all time and it has nothing to do with you. It has nothing to do with a reviewer. I don't need those review scores to justify my opinion on something, but a lot of people do look towards these Metacritic ratings or these open critic ratings or individual review outlets that they value as a justification for themselves or maybe it's more of a vindication. It's more of a, hey, I'm correct. So I think this way because all these other people agree with me. Now that's fine. That's more of a, I want to pump my ego or one way or another, I want to pump my ego up by, hey, all these outlets agree with me that this game is great or I want to pump my ego up saying, you know what, a game is bad. Like say you're somebody who says Bolland Wonderland is one of the worst games ever. And then you go look at the review scores and you see, okay, yeah, maybe they're higher than some of the actual worst games ever like Super Mad 64, ET, et cetera. But they're actually significantly lower than most games that have released, which again, feels like a justification for your opinion or a vindication or whatever you want to call that. So that's one way that people look at reviews. Another way, the reason that reviews really exist in general is people looking to find out if they should buy a game. Now, look, a lot of us know already ahead of time if we're going to buy a game or not, right? Like I already can tell you, I'm going to buy Splatoon 3. I'm going to buy Breath of the Wild 2. I'm going to buy a lot of games because I already know that I will enjoy them based on my prior experience with that franchise, that game developer, et cetera. So I can already tell you a good majority of the games I'm probably going to end up purchasing this year. But there are some games that I'm not sure about, right? There are some games that maybe I need extra context for. As just a general example, I would need more context for something like, I don't know, Shredder's Revenge? Now look, I'm actually really looking forward to Shredder's Revenge. I think it looks great. But also, we are so far removed from when the Ninja Turtle games were made in this way, made in this arcade style gameplay that I grew up with that we're getting in the Kawabunga collection where it's taking all those old school turtles games and packing them together, that while Shredder's Revenge might look the part, I'm not completely sold that it's going to deliver on the promise that the older games brought up. Because we haven't seen a game made like that in so long in the Ninja Turtles franchise that I have some trepidation on just saying, I'm going to buy this day one and be satisfied with it. No, I'm going to have to lean on reviews to give me the information I want. But here's the thing, you might go, well, Nate, just check the Metacritic Grading. Just check the Open Critic Grading. If it ends up in the 80 plus range, it's probably what you were looking for. And that might be true. And if you are someone that looks at those Metacritic Gradings or looks at those Open Critic Gradings and anything rated above a certain number, you play the game and then tend to agree or enjoy it, that could be a useful tool for you. But the way we need to look at reviews isn't about the outlet. It isn't about the Metacritic Grading. Here's how you need to get your game suggestions from review. You need to find a reviewer who actually reviews games almost identically to what you would. Gives games the score that you would give it. Gives games the score for the reasons that you would. For the reasons you dislike a game and for the reasons you like a game. You need to find a reviewer who plays games and enjoys games and dislikes games for the exact same reasons that you do. That means you need to find the reviewer, not the review outlet. So it shouldn't matter if it's IGN, it shouldn't matter if it's Game Informer, I got the latest Game Informer magazine over there. It shouldn't matter if it's myself, it shouldn't matter if it's Player Essence or Spawn Wave or Arlo or whoever. What matters is the individual. So as an example, if you really agree with the way that Arlo ranks games, the way he rates games and the reasoning he gives behind his like and dislike of games, chances are his recommendation or recommendation to buy or not buy is going to be something that's of value to you as an individual. But of course, as I said, a lot of the views of these reviews, a lot of the Metacritic debates and all that are based around us wanting to vindicate something that we either wanna buy or don't wanna buy or think positively or negatively of. We're looking for that positive association to our own feelings rather than maybe looking at reviews for recommending something that we actually need more information on. And this is where I get into the whole of what I want an unbiased review. I can't tell you how many times people will come and be saying, hey Nate, I don't ask you for recommendations on Nintendo Switch games because you're a Nintendo YouTuber and that makes you biased. And this is a funny thing because everyone's biased. You've never in your life read an unbiased review. You could have the unbiased review in the title of a YouTube video. You can have the unbiased review in the title X, Y, and Z. But here's the thing. Unbiased reviews do not compare anything you have played to any other game. They don't have the nuanced context. As an example, is Kirby an easy game? Is it an easy franchise? To say it is is to give an opinion and that opinion is built upon experiencing other video games. It could actually be the hardest game you've ever played but the context is based on your experience playing games. So there is no way to make a statement on how good or bad something is, how easy or hard something is, without that context. So here's what I will say. An unbiased review would literally just be a list of facts about the game. Here's how many collectibles there are. Here's how many different achievements there are in each section. Here's how many branching paths there are. Here's how many hidden paths there are. Here's how many boss fights there are. And in the case of like Kirby and the Forgotten Line, here's how many new abilities, the number of abilities that you could suck up and the name of those abilities that you could use. Does it have co-op? In this case, yes, it does have co-op. Second character is stuck with the same abilities. The main character gets more. Are there extra, quote unquote, challenge levels? Well, you couldn't call it a challenge level but you can say that it's part of the path in that game, an alternative path because again, they don't call it challenge levels. So calling them challenge levels, again, would be based on prior gaming experience. So unbiased reviews are not really reviews at all because to be unbiased is to not have an opinion and thus not compare what you are doing to anything else. So you could say, well, in a vacuum, Kirby is easy. No, because in a vacuum, you don't know what an easy video game is. You don't know what a hard video game is and what's easy for you and hard for you is different than what's easy for somebody else. As an example, I've had people tell me when they play chess, that chess is a very complicated game for them and I can tell you right now, to me chess is significantly easier than Kirby and the Forgotten Line but that's for me because chess is a strategy game, involves a lot of logic and thinking many moves ahead. Kirby on the other hand requires some nuance and how you have to notice certain things in the level and if you miss it, you end up missing on everything whereas in chess, I can already predetermine what I'm gonna do with my moves based on my actions and the actions of the opponent. By the way, this doesn't mean that I'm suddenly the best chess player in the world. It just means my enjoyment of chess and how easy I find it to be in comparison is, hey, I think it's just an easier game to play than maybe to master that's a whole different level. So look, game reviews have a purpose but the way that we use them and the way that we put demands on people for them needs to change. Your hype level for a game should only be based on your experiences and then if a reviewer you trust that fits with how you play games, a reviewer that you have done research on and that's the hard part. To find that reviewer that you trust that plays games for the way that you do, does dislikes games for the same dislikes, likes and dislikes the same genres you do for the same reasons that you do requires research. You're gonna have to look up that author and find all the reviews they've done and review his reviews to find out or his or her reviews I should say to find out if those reviews line up with your taste and if they don't, then you need to move on to a different one and it could take you a long time. This is why there's no such thing as too many people reviewing a game because everybody's so nuanced in how they enjoy things or how they dislike things that there's never such thing as one reviewer to rule them all. That's just not how it works. Now again, this is because if you're using reviews not to vindicate the opinions you already have but or justify your opinions, however, you're looking at the review to actually help you make a decision on whether or not you should buy a game. That's how you need to do it. You need to find a reviewer that fits with you. You need to find somebody who is you reviewing games. That's what you're trying to find. Now, this idea that because I'm a Nintendo YouTuber my opinions on Nintendo games are invalid. I find this to be rather fascinating because most positive reviews that exist in the world of video games are coming from people who wanted to play the game. So when you see Elden Ring getting 97s, 96s, 10 out of 10s out there or even like a seven out of seven but we'll focus on like the eights, nines, 10s, right? You see those positive reviews almost every single one of them mentions something like this is like Dark Souls but in an open world setting. I have seen that repeated in enough of these reviews to get the general gist that most of these super high review score games are from people who have prior experience with FromSoft games. This matters because it means regardless of the review these people would have already bought this game. So that tells you what? You are getting reviews from people who already enjoy these kinds of games. By the way, nothing wrong with that. And if you get a negative review when you read those negative reviews it's often from somebody who doesn't even like these kinds of games in the first place. Now that doesn't mean there isn't criticism that there isn't good critique but good critique again is subjective based on your particular way you like and enjoy video games. Maybe you want your handheld, maybe you don't. Maybe you want it to be super obvious or maybe you want it to be stupidly obscure you can't tell what it is and you magically find it because you clipped through a wall. Maybe that's what you enjoy. There's no right or wrong answer. So that's where we have to be careful when we say oh I'm gonna dismiss this person because they're an Xbox person or a PlayStation, I can't trust a PlayStation fan to review a PlayStation game. You absolutely can if you are also a PlayStation fan that happens to enjoy the same sort of games. That's an invalid way to look at it. When you claim you want this unbiased review that's not really what you want. What you want is somebody who is you reviewing the game to tell you if you should buy it or not. Because hey, games are expensive. $60 a pop, $70 on next-gen. I don't know, some of them are even more deluxe editions. You know, all this, they go up to hundreds of dollars collector's editions, you know, special editions. There's all this stuff that gets more expensive on systems that for a lot of you is very expensive. I might look at it as buying a Nintendo Switch Lite for $200 isn't a big deal to me but to you that literally might be all the free money you have for the year. You got to save up for a year to buy a Switch Lite and in that case, you'll probably interested in reviews of free to play games. Then you got to find someone who enjoys the same types of free to play games as you so you don't have to spend extra money for a while. See, there's no right or wrong reviewer. There's no right or wrong way to review. There's no right or wrong way to digest those reviews. But how we put the pressure on certain reviews, review outlets, or even like Metacritic to be this be all end all that's this game is overhyped, is it? Is it really overhyped? Because if you think Elvin Ring is an example is overhyped what you're saying is, hey, I played the game. I don't think it's as good as the reviews say. That's a fair critique of the reviews. But within the context of if you were reviewing the game you would not have given it that score. That doesn't change what the score would be for other people. That doesn't change that. Hype responsibly is not something I say on my channel repeatedly, repeatedly ad nauseam. I wear merchandise I created that literally no one's bought but me that says Hype responsibly for a reason. You are responsible for your hype level. So if you say this game is overhyped who's it overhyped for? You? Did you get your expectations too high? And then you need to review why? Review yourself, do a self reflection. Why did you get overhyped? Oh, because it had 97 on Metacritic. Why are you basing your excitement level then on an aggregate score that you don't agree with? Why didn't you not base your excitement level on your prior experiences with games from that company and or a reviewer that actually enjoys in critiques games in the same ways that you would? You got yourself overhyped. They didn't. Those reviewers legitimately enjoyed the games to a point that they gave it the scores that they did. It's not their fault. They didn't overhype the game. You allowed yourself to be overhyped. And I think we need to start taking more responsibility for that and stop attacking review outlets, stop attacking individual reviewers. And it's a focus on ourselves and why we consume reviews and what the purpose of a review is to us. Now, for those of you out there that just want reviews to be a vindication for you, that's valid. There's nothing wrong with that. If you think Kirby in the Forgotten Land like I do is the best Kirby game ever made, but you wanna be upset that it's not the highest reviewed Kirby game ever, sure. Go ahead and be upset. I don't see too many Kirby fans saying that, but go ahead and be upset if you want. Maybe you think it should be a nine out of 10 and you're really mad that reviewers don't get it. I've seen people going out there making all these videos and articles about how all these reviewers complaining about Kirby being too easy or whatever, just don't get it. It's okay that Kirby's too easy and it is okay that Kirby's too easy. It's also okay that like Dark Souls is hard. Both are okay. Neither are factually negatives in that of themselves. They're just opinions. The bottom line is some people want their games to be that way. Some people want their games to be a completely different way. There is no right or wrong. It's just opinions. And to have an opinion is to be biased because opinions are based on experiences. Unbiased viewpoints. People bring up, oh yeah, the unbiased Yarnes is MVP of the NBA. Unbiased, look at the stats. Look at the numbers. Nicola Jokic is the unbiased MVP. But what is your criteria to determine MVP? Is that criteria creates a bias. Why is that criteria? The reason that you vote MVP. Why is the narrative a reason you vote MVP? Same thing with video games. It's the same thing. Every thought we have that is subjective opinion based and you might think it's not subjective but if it's based on any prior experience in your life, it is by definition subjective. If you wanna come in and say the platforming in Kirby is drab and boring. That's a fair assessment. That is a fair opinion. But the only reason you could say that is because you are comparing it to experiences you have had elsewhere. Thus making you biased to the experiences you've had previously. So when I hear Nate, I can't listen to your opinion on this because you're a biased Nintendo YouTuber. Here's what I will say to that. You shouldn't listen to my opinion then. Not because I'm a biased Nintendo YouTuber but because you automatically presume you are not going to agree with what I'm about to say and you're bringing up the context that my experience is playing prior Nintendo games. Because that's really what you're saying. You're saying because you're a Nintendo YouTuber, you obviously are gonna be super biased towards liking Nintendo games. And here's what I can say. Chances are because I am a Nintendo YouTuber, I do enjoy Nintendo games. Lo and behold, somebody talks passionately about things that they enjoy. That's not a bad thing. So it doesn't mean you shouldn't listen to any video game reviewer from any YouTube channel or any video game outlet because they passionately enjoy video games. Can't listen to them. They're obviously biased to enjoy games. That's how silly that argument sounds to me. Man, I can't, you know, if I wanna review for a Zelda game, man, I can't listen to anyone who enjoys Zelda games. I have to listen to someone who doesn't enjoy Zelda games. That's a fair thing to do if you happen to be someone who has never played a Zelda game and that's the perspective you're looking for. I'm just saying, let's review reviews. Let's review ourselves and why we care about reviews. Why do you read reviews? Why do you check out Metacritic? Are you looking for a vindication of the feelings you already have? Or are you looking for recommendations on purchasing? And then are you actually doing what you should be doing to get proper recommendations? I can't tell you how many people have told me, man, I bought this game because it reviewed well and I didn't like it. That's not why you should have bought the game. You should have bought the game because the reviewer that plays games and enjoys games for the same reasons you do really enjoyed the game. That would be, man, it sucks that, you know, Nintendo Prime here is telling me how much he enjoys Breath of the Wild and all the reasons he does and those are the exact reasons I enjoy video games but then I bought the game and I didn't enjoy it. That sucks that I didn't agree with him. It's really hard to trust his reviews moving forward because I just, you know, for myself because, hey, you know what? I thought it was a thing and it wasn't. Or, hey, I bought a game because Nintendo Prime, you know, says the greatest game of all time. I played it, I don't agree because it doesn't have X, Y and Z without you having any context for why I said Breath of the Wild is the greatest game of all time. If you had known the reasoning behind why I thought Breath of the Wild is the greatest game of all time, you might have realized, damn, that's not what I play games for. That's not what I want from a Zelda game. That's not, whoa, well, that's not right. You would have realized in talking to me and hearing my opinions on it that, yeah, okay, he might think it's the greatest game of all time but that's not why I ain't play games so I'm not gonna buy it. We need to be more cognizant of how we research what we're going to spend money on because that's to be perfectly clear. If you're someone looking to buy a game and you don't know if it's gonna be for you or not or you're considering getting to a new IP or a new system that you don't have any experience with, right, the purpose of the reviews to you, the purpose, the sole purpose is to give you information on whether or not you're going to be happy with what you're about to spend money on. You are doing research and I'm asking you to do research on the research. Don't just look up PlayStation 5 reviews if you're looking to get a PlayStation 5 and just click on the first couple of articles and go, yep, cool. No, click on the author's name and see if the reasoning behind multiple things they are reviewing match up with the things that you like or find reviews of things you know you like and things you know you dislike and see if that person has reviewed them and then see if the reasonings for liking or disliking match yours. Yes, you need to research your research because we're not gonna sit here and give you a breakdown of our entire history of video games and what we enjoy and don't enjoy in every review because that would take up a majority of the review before we even talk about the game. That would also make every review video I ever do in the future 17 hours long. And I don't think that's fair. I don't think people wanna waste that much time. So, research your research. Review the reviews you trust. And let me know what you think of this down in the comments below. I am Nathan and Robert Deist from The Center of Prime. Thanks so much for joining me for this weekend conversation and I'll catch you in the next video.