Wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!

[motosada]

Seriously; world-ending!

Plus, since it's a Crystal Chronicles game, I don't think the battles are random. They're either seen encounters (where you see an enemy on the screen, and interacting with them starts the battle) or real-time (where the enemies are on-screen and you can beat them up as you see fit, with no transitions/old-school RPG nonsense).

I think.

[Slime]

I haven't pre-ordered a Wii game in awhile. I think I might for Resident Evil: Darkside Chronicles for the t-shirt.

[orochigeese]

Oct 7, 2009 0:06:40 GMT -5 motosada said:

Seriously; world-ending!

Plus, since it's a Crystal Chronicles game, I don't think the battles are random. They're either seen encounters (where you see an enemy on the screen, and interacting with them starts the battle) or real-time (where the enemies are on-screen and you can beat them up as you see fit, with no transitions/old-school RPG nonsense).I think.

Yeah, that would work. Honestly I used to laugh at FF: Mystic Quest for having those silly little gifs of the enemies on the map screen but I can actually appreciate that more now. Granted some of them were unavoidable but at least I was able to plan when I fought them and not get so shocked that I lost my bearings before the battle, making it impossible to remember where I was after the battle.

At this point what I'd love is a FF style story/character development with a fighting game interface for the actual combat, and with the enemies all seen walking an open map.

[motosada]

They tried that.

It was called The Bouncer.

It was terrible.

[orochigeese]

LOL I kinda remember that, it was one of the PS2 launch titles. But I can't remember the actual gameplay.

Seriously - imagine a LEGIT fighting game engine with an adventure/RPG story.

The problem with 1p fighting games is that there isn't really any motivator to finish the game (at least not after you beat the ending). You play 1p cause you want to play the game itself BUT you don't have anyone else around at the moment. 1p is a necessary substitution for vs. play 90% of the time. But if you had a legit story mode, that could change. You'd be playing the game and having fun with the actual engine but also building to something bigger. And who knows, maybe the story could somehow reflect the way you do battle. (Don't turn evil, Ryu, fight the urge to kill!). It's more useful then just fighting Seth ;D

[motosada]

See, that's why they have unlockable characters and shit in fighting games; to compel you to play the 1P.

[orochigeese]

That's pretty ridiculous though if you really delve into that idea.

It's like saying we're gonna reward you for playing something we couldn't think of how to do better to make you really want to play it in the first place. The game mode should be its OWN reward. Unlockables should just be for extra stuff that is non-essential. Like going through 1p mode with a funny hat

Now if we use SF4 as an example, it's still really fun to play the game itself so playing the cpu isn't BAD. I still enjoy it. But it's also still a total placeholder for playing other people once you beat the game for the first time with each person to see the story. (after that there's no longer any real incentive to play 1p as opposed to playing other people if you have other people there to play unless you don't have online capability). But imagine if the 1p mode actually gave you a dynamic story experience along with the fighting fun. That would be money right there and they wouldn't feel the need to artificially extend replay value by withholding key parts of the game like actual characters.

Make a game right and you don't need unlockables, is all I'm saying.

Look at Tetris/Chess and it's replay value

[Slime]

I'm surprise that no one is talking about the New Super Mario Bros. Wii? Is the Wii craze dead?

I'll be getting Resident Evil: Darkside Chronicles next week. Hopefully they don't screw me and run out of the pre-order t-shirts.

[orochigeese]

I have mixed feelings on the game and prob won't get it at launch. I don't buy Nintendo's reasons why there isn't online multiplayer and think they were more concerned with appealing to casuals with their "Help me" mode then they were in trying to make it the best game they could. They said they didn't have room in the disc for multiplayer but "help me" mode was put in? Seriously ridiculous priorities here for this specific game.

The game is really meant for multiplayer - it should have allowed online multiplayer. Like Smash and Mario Kart. This isn't like Galaxy, the ma in selling point here is "Finally play Mario at the same time as other people" and not everyone have friends that live near them. But Nintendo downplayed that fact, in some interviews even marginalizing that audience and acting like it didn't exist or wasn't important. So that irritated me and I don't feel like giving them money for this game, at least not full price.

Further, the single player experience in this game looks similar to new Super Mario which felt "empty" in ways. I'll likely get it next year but I really don't want to pay full money and buy early to support what I see as a lack of effort and marginalizing focus on this game.

I also think Mario Galaxy 2 will lack a lot of the fun and soul the first one has and will end up being Galaxy 1.5. Nintendo has really been pissing me off the last few months and appear to be doing the bare minimum to keep their longtime audience interested which was not their approach in 2007-8.

[motosada]

I dunno, man. Reviews have been pretty positive, and a few have even said that it's best played in single-player and that multiplayer just adds chaos to the proceedings.

The way they're talking about Galaxy 2 seems to be saying that they're making it for "veterans"; for people that demolished Galaxy and are wanting a helluva challenge. Maybe they should take that same mindset into the new Legend of Zelda, too, cuz the most challenging thing the last few Zelda games has been forcing myself to get all the pieces of heart (not that I don't still enjoy the games, I just wanna get kicked around a bit by 'em).

[edit:] Kotaku's review is quite glowing.

[orochigeese]

I have no problem with a more challenging Galaxy game, I just don't want them to call it Galaxy 2. At this early point in time based on the footage we have (scarce) and interviews we've heard (a bit more) it seems like an expansion pack with Yoshi and a few new stages. I think they're gonna flat out ignore the story of the first and not add much for the second. Miyamoto wasn't happy that they actually went ahead and did something different with the story and that bugs me cause the story was easily my favorite part of the game cause it actually took a risk and really handled it quite nicely. So to hear Galaxy 2 will have barely any story and barely anything new is telling me it shouldn't be called Galaxy 2 or offered for full price.

As for New SMB, it really bugs me that the n selling point in terms of their own advertising has been multiplayer and yet online isn't available. And the way they've brushed off and marginalized criticism made me think of Kutaragi at his finest. As for the single player experience, it looks empty to me compared to SMW and SM3. It reminds me of New SMB on DS which just felt like it was going through the motions and nostalgia without adding very many new things that left an impression. The game just wasn't memorable aside from that GIANT Mario upgrade which was funny but also kind of a gimmick. New SMB for the Wii looks a bit more fleshed out but still, it's like its simulating the Mario experience rather then really creating it. I do think some of those stages look very cool in design but I hope they aren't just empty and devoid of enemies as many looked. Unfortunately in recent years "twitch gameplay" has been minimized in favor of exploration/searching for items, even in side scrollers. (That's why Mega Man 9 was such a colossal challenge for many people at first...before we gained our abilities back). And a lot of stages in New SMB looked like it had more of a focus of Mario getting coins then avoiding enemies and traps to do so.

Keep in mind - I LOVE side scrolling Mario games but the DS version put me off as did the whole lack of multiplayer for this. It's definitely likely I'm not giving this new game enough credit but I also think its likely that the reviews are just being bloated up as they have been for the last year or so for every big game.

But hey - 2 stories about New SMB means Kotaku is only 98% MW 2 coverage

[motosada]

I understand why you're taking a wait-and-see on this one, but I hope you're not just screwing yourself out of a fun game. Just like everyone else on the planet, you're upset by the lack of online multiplayer and a bit of uninventiveness on the part of Nintendo, and it does seem like a lot they've done with the overall game design is "play it safe" - all four characters play and control identically, they went with two new Toad characters instead of tossing Peach into the mix and having things be all Super Mario Bros. 2 where there were reasons to pick other characters, they decided not to let you play it online, they have recordings of people playing the game but don't let you make your own recordings to rewatch or share with friends - but it's Nintendo and all they seem to know is "play it safe". They get their accessibility, but it's at the cost of innovation and being up to speed with the rest of the goddamned industry.

But does that make it a bad game? No.

[orochigeese]

This is a simplified version of my thought process really:

1) This game reminds me too much of NSMB on DS and I wasn't a huge fan of that game.

2) Still, that game was worth around $25-30 and wasn't bad.

3) This game is probably better then that one but I'm pissed at Nintendo's attitude to the point I won't support this game on early release and at full price. Voting with my dollar, I suppose, is the positive way of spinning "bitterness" ;D So I expect to buy this eventually, just not right away.

[motosada]

But you're forgetting one thing; it's a Mario game from Nintendo. It won't be dropping in price after launch. Hell, Galaxy and Kart and Smash Bros still fetch $50 after a couple years.

[MRW1215]

I liked NSMB on DS, but I just don't know that I'd pay the full $50 for a sidescrolling Mario game, in this day and age. The lack of online doesn't bother me, much, as I'd probably play single-player only, anyway, but I just don't see it as something I'd pay full price for. If it were another DS title, I'd snap it up in a second. Just can't buy it as a console game. :/