Skip to content

Nintendo Wii: Kirby’s Return To Dreamland Is One Of IGN’s Most Disappointing Games Of 2011

IGN has posted what it deems to be the five most disappointing games of 2011. Surprisingly Kirby’s Returns to Dreamland features on this list despite gaining overall praise from critics and receiving an average review score of 82 on Metacritic. Do you think Kirby’s Return To Dreamland was one of the biggest gaming disappointments of 2011?

134 thoughts on “Nintendo Wii: Kirby’s Return To Dreamland Is One Of IGN’s Most Disappointing Games Of 2011”

    1. IGN Nintendo used to be cool when Craig and Matt were the editors. Since they left, IGN’s gone downhill. I trusted Matt and Craig, they were always trustworthy and honest and accurate.

      1. true. so true

        I have kirbys return to dreamland and its VERY fun it deservers at least a 90
        it goes back to kirbys original gameplay while adding new things
        i had lots of fun playing mini games like scope shot
        its also tons of fun if you play with a friend
        the gears you find throughout the stage help make the stage a little harder (when you try to get them, they are like a star coin in SM3DL)
        overall it deserve a 92/100

        there’s my review

        IGN’s review:
        (in the conclusion)
        +its pretty fun
        -not COD
        -not COD
        -not COD

        1. That’s really more the comment section. Seriously, I feel the comments section on IGN fits their stereotype better than the site itself.

      2. Yeah, IGN used to be amazing. The only thing I praise them for is rating Skyward Sword 10/10, because that game definitely deserves it.

    2. i just bought the game skyward sword limited edition and is garbage
      the wii remote looks like crap the orchestra soundtrack sucks full of mistakes and the game is just ok, the controls are not responsive at times but the game is just more of the same….

      1. i just bought myself and i’m garbage
        i look like crap i sucks i’m full of mistakes and i’m is just ok, i’m not responsive at times but i’m just more of the same….

      2. i just read a comment by noname, the limited November 25th edition, and is garbage. Their font looks like crap the avatar sucks full of grammar mistakes and is just an alright read, they have a tendency to not respond but they just post more of the same every topic….

      3. i just bought noname limited edition and is garbage he looks like crap he sucks full of mistakes and he is just ok, he are not responsive at times but he is just more of the same….


  1. I’m guessing they love when Kirby strays out of the usual formula like in Mass Attack or Epic Yarn?

    Either way, it’s their opinion. Doesn’t matter, don’t care.

    1. Personally, I liked Epic Yarn (mainly because of it’s amazing presentation) but I’m glad Kirby got back to it’s roots in terms of inhaling enemies and adding super abilities. I kinda wish the game put Kirby in a different galaxy altogether though, similar to how Mario moved from the Mushroom Kingdom to Outer Space. This game deserves at least an 8/10 though.

  2. they said that they wanted a more classic kirby, thats what they get and then they complain, they need to make up their minds.

  3. Well in IGN it scored a 7.5 and it’s cataloged as “good” but the overall apeal of the game is dissapointing according to IGN. I’ve played the game myself and it’s fun cause it reminds me of past Kirby games but the game itself is just “good” or “playable” it is not that great and it’s not bad, maybe IGN exagerated saying that’s a complete dissapointment for the games in 2011 but at the same time they are contradicting their opinions.

    1. They said it’s good and that the only reason it’s dissapointing is because Nintendo games are usually better. In other words they expected something fantastic but instead got something good, which is disssappinting for them.

  4. I like how it said, they thought it”was going to take it back to kirby’s roots”… and then they were like…. “it was nothing new, same old kirby”… Idiots… what do they think taking something back to its roots means!!!!!!!

    1. That’s what makes me upset about gamers. They always dissappointed if a game doesn’t retain what makes it a great game to begin with, but if it’s not new in every aspect they freak out and say they are playing the same old thing. It’s a game… It shouldn’t be too different from the original should it. When’s tha last time Basketball add a Bazooka to it core gameplay, or how about Monopoly, They might add an electronic Banker and change the names of the properties but it’s still the same game.

  5. Me and my roommates started plaything that game like crazy when it came out, it’s a pretty fun co-op experience. Not a disappointment in the least.

  6. 82 isn’t good for a console exclusive franchise.

    Regardless. It’s not that Kirby is THAT bad. it’s just all the other games were THAT good.

  7. So they were expecting more, why is that wrong?

    I’m quite surprised at how people are interpreting this. Is it wrong that they have high standards for Nintendo?

    Though it is dumb how they gave MW3 a perfect score, compared to every other game released.

      1. Perhaps I’m getting it mixed up with the other MW3 perfect scores. Regardless, they can’t give MW3 a 9, then Kirby a 7 for the exact same reasons.

  8. No, it wasn’t a disappointment at all. By no stretch of the imagination is it the best game ever made, or even the best Kirby game ever made. But to call it one of the top five disappointments of 2011 is unfair. I thought Mass Attack was more disappointing than Return to Dream Land.

    To call Return to Dream Land a disappointment because “it doesn’t attempt to do anything we haven’t seen before” is unfair. Lots of games do that, and they’re not on this list. Heck, any shooting game out there just does the same thing over and over and over. The graphics may change, but the concept remains the same for every single one: shoot people. Yet I don’t see MW3 or any of THOSE getting grilled. Besides, the statement isn’t even entirely true. There’s Super Abilities in this game, and it’s the second biggest co-op Kirby game out there (after Amazing Mirror). Perhaps it’s not the best game, but it’s certainly not worthy of the title of “disappointment.” If you want an example of a game that’s a disappointment based on pre-released hype, take a look at Skyward Sword. But that’s a whole other can of worms.

  9. Sickr sure this is flame war topic, and a vita rumor, and everybody wants to here will lose it, but it is directly what the wiiU is in a sense… Look at the reaction of the sony players on neogaf(some of the same guys who said “the idea of playing on a tiny screen is stupid.”) I know this is a hot topic, but its worth a look. (don’t know if you’ve seen this. So sorry if you have.) And ign sucks anyway @ign kirby worst game thing.

      1. Lol the screen is huge! Its 100% pure nintendo hate, one idea like screen controller play can be shot down just because its from a certain company, but if another company does the same thing as the first and just because its NOT the other company they love the idea all of the sudden. Even the vita plays at the same resolution and lags its ass off or plays at 1/2 the fps. Sony fans will automatically love it and hate the obviously better wiiU’s tablet. Even if its the same concept! Idk how fanboy logic works. Heres the Eurogamer link:

  10. I’d rather not go into how disappointing and biased IGN is with their reviews…

    and now it’s on the Top 5 most disappointing games of the year list?

    like really IGN…? was it really THAT bad to them? wow….

    from now on….when making video games….be sure to not be traditional… it might knock down your review scores… -.-

    1. They never said it was bad. They said it was disappointing, as in “not as good as we were hoping” or “not as excellent as previous Kirby games, or Nintendo games in general”

      If anyone’s biased, it’s you; you’re letting your emotions cloud your reading comprehension.

  11. They were excited about it being a return to the regular Kirby style, then go mad because it ‘added nothing’? YOUR LOGIC IS TERRIBLE.

      1. good point there. they might as well have just put DLC for MW2 for the next part of the story mode (as if anyone cares about that) and the survival mode that’s in MW3

  12. Wow, you guys have selective hearing. IGN gave Skyward Sword a 10, “We love IGN! They’re the best!”

    IGN is disappointed by Kirby’s Return to Dreamland “We hate IGN! They’re idiots!”

    1. And this is wrong why….? You can’t like everything someone does. I don’t like Ign all that much anymore for their overall lack of any legitimate gaming journalism.

    2. When IGN gave Zelda a 10/10, i was amazed, i mean they don’t usually give games like Zelda THAT score.
      But when i heard about Kirby, it’s just made me realize 2 questions:
      1. Who reviewed the Zelda game was the same one who did the list or reviewed Kirby?
      2. What if IGN are Zelda and CoD fanboys? i mean, they give a lot of scores in Zelda and CoD games, so it’s a possibility.

  13. I am so sick of these false comments. I, personally, can NOT wait for Kirby’s Adventure wii to hit our shores in December 2011

  14. Just saying…
    IGN Skyward Sword 10/10 Response: FINALLY IGN JESUS BALLS!!!!!
    I thought Kirby RtD was great too but i’m not going to be an idiot about it.

    1. I guess we all should blindly accept everything IGN goes and give them unwarranted praise even when their reviews are poor and unfair. Let’s practice our sheep calls; “baaaahh!”

      1. ^Like. You’ve so many points in what you say. Yet they only tells their FPS fanboyish opinion on games. No one should take it to seriously XD

  15. EVERYBODY CALM YOURSELVES!!!! IGN is a trusty review site imo, so if they say it is disappointing, then it must have been in some way dissapointing, either that or they were wrong, but I don’t support the whole, IGNorance thing, they are a great review site that makes some great reviews, and whenever they say something bad about Nintendo, everybody gets on their case. Nobody said anything bad about IGN when they gave Zelda perfect scores, so stop liking them only when they give you the scores you want! Besides, it’s not like they are as bad as GameSpot, you know, those 7.5 guys.

    1. Your defense of them is “they’re a great review site because they have great reviews”?

      While I will agree that the response to IGN is biased, it’s hard to deny that they, themselves, have some clear biases as well.

    2. Don’t let one good zelda review justify the line of bullshit Ign CONSTANTLY puts out! Im not even talking about just reviews either, their aryicles are bias piles of shit 89% of the time designed to start flame wars or get “hits”. Idk how the fuck they’re still around. I get my reviews and information from gameinformer, neogaf, here, gametrailers and destructoid.

      1. Gameinformer is worse than IGN in my opinion in terms of reviews. They gave Sonic Colors a low 7/10 when it clearly deserved a 9/10, a score it received by IGN and Nintendo Power. They also grade on a .25,.75 scale, which I feel is unnecessary because it just seems like they don’t want to give some games that .5 or perfect 10 for nit-picky reasons, so they just subtract .25 points.

      2. I’ll actually not place the blame on their Nintendo section. Listening to Nintendo Voice Chat, they seem to be genuine fans who love seeing what Nintendo will put out next. Rich is a harsh reviewer compared to the others on the site, though, so some might misinterpret him as a “hater” without reading his review.

        I will admit there is bias in certain corners like GameScoop and Girlfight, and there’s tons of new journalists they hire who do terrible reviews, but I’m not going to call the whole site a waste of bandwidth because of them. Even the most “IGNorant” articles tend to come from Australia. Try reading who is the author next time, and they’ll come up often enough on the worst articles.

        If your problem with articles is “They should only do news and reviews,” however, I do find articles other than those entertaining. It should also be noted that they are an enertainment site with a majority focus on games, not a 100% games site. They have the right to talk about movies if they want.

  16. Lesson learned here, ladies and gentlemen.

    If a new game in a series isn’t 100% original and groundbreaking in everything it does, it will be considered incredibly disappointing, no matter how many actual gamers thoroughly enjoyed it

  17. I find the basis for MRtDL’s inclusion on this list. The basis of the article is coming in with one expectation and coming out with those unsatsfied. With KRtDL, the preview and review were done by two different people, Audrey Drake and Rich George, who clearly wanted 2 different things out of one game.

    The author of the article clearly forced this in so they would have a list of 5.

  18. Jesus, the people on this site have no reading comprehension.

    They were expecting more; they never said the game was bad. They rated it as “good”, but were disappointed because it was not “great”.


    1. Jesus, the people on this site have no reviewer comprehension.

      They were expecting Kirby at its roots; they never said they’d give a good review for what they asked for. They rated it as “good”, but were disappointed because it was not “exactly as they dreamed”.


        1. Rich wasn’t looking for a roots game. Audrey was.

          It’s actually why I find fault with the fact this was even included in an article about unmet expectations.

  19. Kirby returns is one of the best of the year! I have been waiting for this since kirby 64. In any case I was a bit more dissapointed with zelda ss, is good but not a 10, more like a 9. Ocarina still king.

  20. I saw their article yesterday. IGN are IGNorant. Returns to Dreamland is an enchanting classic with some fresh features.

    But here’s my theory: they only gave it that number because they either had no friends to play multiplayer with, or they were stuck on a level, kept dying on that level and they rage-quit… OR they’re just Kirby-hatin’ trolls.

  21. The game is good; it’s not the best, but it’s good. People complain that a game doesn’t change much. Nintendo releases Kirby’s Epic Yarn and apparently it’s not good because it’s not the usual Kirby. Kirby’s Return to Dream Land is released, then it gets bashed for not being different like Epic Yarn and for being the “same old” Kirby. Then they go and call Uncharted 3 “innovative.” I have nothing against UC3, but critics don’t know exactly what it is they want.

  22. even though i love Nintendo and everything about it i kinda agree because, i mean think about it king dedede and meta knight are helping you and its all kiddy. remember back then when you could break the shit out of a planet, destroy a the heart of a gigantic robotic whishing machine, or whe you could cut the shit out of your enemies, or when meta knight would try the impossible just to fucking kill you and cut you, and finally when you did the impossible just try to kill Marx and when you finnaly did he would fucking scream, does any body remember that scream it fucking gave me nightmares. I’m not going to say it suck it just a bit oa a dissapointment not to see that again. insted i see meta knight and king dedede help you in your quest their bad guys not good. but you know what its fun i would give it a 85 out of 100 and i would much rather play this game than uncharted 1,2,3 or god of war. if its nintendo its alway better.

  23. i kind of have to agree, it lacks especially in de multyplayer minigames, and even thou it is kirby and it i extremeley pure Fun but i do miss the hamster, Owl and Fish, is a game that only with multiplayer can really be enjoy and to have only 2 minigames kind a of suck. Also I miss the Duel Minigame, The Break Planet Minigame, Hell the jumping Game from Kirby Crystal Shards and to be honest that was way harder than this kirby and well Crystal shards wasn’t exactly hard, Regarding the look Is kirby and the kiddy look is just awesome it fits perfectly, what I’m a little dissapointed is in the challenge is way. But Overall Is good The Final Boss is Really cool. But I wouldn’t say that i’m completely satisfied, especially with games like Donkey Kong(This one is Hard). I am a Nintendo Fan but because of that i do expect more from them i would give it a 80/100(Mostly because of the lack of Multiplayer Minigames on a kirby that is focused on the Multiplayer Experience).

  24. ArghMyNameIsUnknownButWhoCaresIdont

    It’s ironic how people loved IGN when they gave SS a 10/10, but everyone hates them by giving Kirby a low score. Real ironic.

  25. Well, I can’t really agree with them. They said they wanted a Kirby game that was similar to the Kirby we all know and love.. but then they were disappointed because it didn’t separate itself from the status quo. Contradiction? Certainly. Modern Warfare 3 also failed to make an appearance on the list, but I guess that’s because we all knew it was going to be terrible anyway so there was no room for disappointment.

    1. It would be a contradiction if the preview and review were written by the same person. Audrey wrote the preview, and Rich wrote the review. Audrey wanted a return to traditional Kirby mechanics, Rich didn’t.

      I feel like this one was shoehorned in to make a list of 5, because it certainly doesn’t fit in with the “unmet expectations” idea of the article.

    1. uh-huh…so since this game did not meet your expectations, would you mind telling us what you would change to make this a kirby game that isn’t disappointing for you?

      1. Sure!
        – graphics that aren’t GameCube-era shite
        – more inventive level design
        – co-op that isn’t handled so poorly (life pool, screen follows 1P, et al)
        – a better difficulty curve
        – more content like the DS Kirby games have

        1. More content, more content?! Hah, you made a funny. Forgetting about an Extra Mode, a couple of arenas, and some minigames? This game had good level design. Life pool? It’s KIRBY. Get over it. Fantastic game.

          1. Level design was at least consistent but it felt like everything was set up too well. Idk how to phrase it, but everything felt handed to me. I know it’s Kirby and it’s not designed to be even remotely difficult, but for what it is I just didn’t feel that big a sense of accomplishment when I beat a level.

            And yeah, it’s Kirby. If my little sister dies 100 times I don’t want to have to restart the process. The life pool doesn’t make much sense in this context.

  26. played the game, was good, wasnt the best kirby game but still hold up (kirby superstar was my favorite). sure IGN shouldve gaved it a 8 or something, but you guys cant be so close minded and think all nintendo games are perfect. i personally felt like there was nothing new, yea the kirby formula is great, but the only diffrence i saw was 3d graphics and other minor things.

  27. ok, so nintendo is held with higher standards so if it doesnt revolutionize gameplay its score suffers?, but CoD, Halo, Uncharted, Batman, Assasins Creed, ect. ect. ect. are held at lower standards so new maps AND story with the same formula deserves +9?? wow!! just wow, preferance is one thing.. this just makes then look like little dick bullies… wow.

  28. The game was amazing, but the story was disappointing. There wasn’t that classic Meta Knight battle where he gave Kirby a sword, and the design for the characters were, well, a lot better in Super Star Ultra and Squeak Squad. Also, having Dedede and Meta Knight as the “good guys” really bothered me. It doesn’t feel like a true Kirby game if you don’t fight those two.

    1. In a lot of Nintendo games, the majority of the replay value comes from being a completionist and getting all of the things (in this game, Energy Spheres) hidden in each level. I remember playing Squeak Squad and I had to play each level two or three times to truly get every single Treasure Chest, and same for Epic Yarn. For Return to Dreamland, I usually only had to play a level once to get all of the Energy Spheres and twice very few times.

  29. I wasn’t really anticipating this game from day one, it just sort of came out and I got it. So far, it is really easy, but it’s pretty enjoyable with two/three other people. My brother and I were playing it, and then we decided to jump over to DKC Returns, where our arses were handed to us on a silver platter. lol
    but yeah, it wasn’t any huge disappointment for me, but I would’ve liked it more if they tried having some new ideas and more clever/scenic level designs like kirby 64.

  30. Great game? Yes.
    Dissapointing? A little bit.

    IGN can have opinions, guys. It was a great game, true, but enough Kirby games are too similar. I think it’s a great game if you’ve only played the DS lineup or Epic Yarn or none, but if you’ve played beyond that, it seems too similar. I’d give it 8.5/10.

    If you want good, unbiased reviews that praise Nintendo when they’re good and correct them when they’re bad, GameInformer is the most unbiased source ever.

  31. What can i say, i can’t agree more. The game is just too easy and slow and even playing in multiplayer mode ain’t fun. IIRC Epic Yarn was better than this one which I assumed would only be a warm up for the Return to Dreamland which was the only game besides Skyward sword that I counted down the days til its release in 2011. However to my disappointment it has/had zero appeal on me.

    Nintendo please release 2D action sidescrollers as engaging and fun as Donkey Kong Country Returns. That was the best game last year imo >> galaxy 2.

  32. Pingback: Look What I Got!!!! « Lucy in the Sky

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: