>>115873529Dumb pseudo-intellectual reviewers aside, I think middling scores are justified. The game provides exactly what it says on the tin, which is great if you're a nostalgic 25 year old who wants to revisit your childhood whether you played it then or not, but if you WERE 25 when it came out, what value is this game to you?
Stripped of nostalgia and the SpongeBob license, it's a middle-of-the-road 3D platformer which were a dime a dozen at the time, it's buggy and sloppy in many places, it's carried mostly on the strength of its writing and charm.
The 6-7 score range fits perfectly for "accomplishes what it sets out to do, will satisfy its specific audience, has little appeal outside of that audience". I don't know why anyone expected it to review better than the original release.
>>115873922Threads about adaptations of material that originated as /co/ are considered on-topic. And let's be honest, /v/ isn't about videogames, it's about politics and wojak spam.
