>>12121290
True. It's more that Earthbound just has its diehard cult following. It's not a misunderstood flop though, as some people insist, because it actually sold pretty decently.
Jap sales were over 500000, which is pretty good, while it sold about 140000 in the U.S, which would still be decent, but that's including the cost of that full guide included, a lack of confidence which probably hurt the profit margins.
Nintendo probably figured they'd at best get comparable results in Europe (where at least the guide would need translations in different languages now too), which is probably why they felt it wasn't worth it.
Flop? No, but biggest and most remembered SNES hit? Not at all.
>>12119093
Also true. I like Earthbound and I think it's a sincerely good game that deserves praise, but not the amount of praise you see some people heap on it.
It's a slightly improved Dragon Quest game, mechanically, which is acceptable, but it could probably have been a bit better, mainly in the game design. It gets by a whole lot on its setting, style, charm, humor, and story, and I really love that, but this only really makes me tolerate the gameplay, and there are rough parts which are outright frustrating.
I would also criticize the game's story for its pacing. It's kind of on a slow boil up through Threed, but then it's like the devs realize they're driving under the speed limit and quickly change gears, and the story and progression starts happening a lot faster, it never slows down again.
That in itself doesn't have to be awful, but it leaves less room to savor all the later parts after Fourside, you don't have time, hurry to the next section. It also makes the weird and quirky a bit less special, to me at least.
Overrated? Yes, but bad? No, it's clear to see that there's a lot that's easy to love.
In that sense, Earthbound is comparable for me to Stardust Crusaders, people certainly love it, even me, but there's a lot about it which also isn't as good as it should be.
