Support NeoGAF

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

If you've played other games like Retro's DKC I would certainly love to play them.

Spoiler

Not even close. I actually love them all equally for different reasons but I feel bad that GAF shits on Corruption the most so I always say it's my favorite .

I still think the game is very good.

 

[VanWinkle]

So you're just looking for content to justify the money you

Spoiler

over

spent on your TV, got it.

Do you still play SD games/consoles?

It's hard to even FIND a 720p TV at stores these days. My TV was $420, which is practically nothing for a TV. 1080p is completely the standard, and yes, image quality is an important aspect of games for me. I don't have to have a game rendered in 1080p, but I find a game that is already good in other areas to be an even better experience for me at a higher resolution.

About SD, I will occasionally play a Wii game, though I'm always bothered by the low resolution.

 

[MikeXXIeaf]

Just an observation.

Its mostly european publications that have given DKCTF average scores. Why is that?

Based on GameSpot's review it's due to it being an average game.

 

[dimb]

Just an observation.

Its mostly european publications that have given DKCTF average scores. Why is that?

It takes longer for a check to cross the ocean.

Spoiler

European reviewers are usually more strict with a lot of their reviews.

 

[Vire]

Then why the "if only..." attitude? You're just raining on your own parade because you'd rather being playing another Metroid game.

Where did I say I wanted another Metroid? My whole point of contention is that I wish they were working on another IP instead.

 

[Meier]

To be quite honest, I don't anticipate I'll play it.. I don't really get into 2D platformers these days. I did appreciate the way they've added that extra dimensionality to it though. Graphically, it looks superb. Maybe when the price drops I'll consider picking it up, but I haven't even touched NSMB2 or Luigi and it came with the thing.

The Gamespot review is a little surprising to me. I would say it's click-bait but I'm sure he gave a reasonable explanation for his score so that's probably not entirely true. I don't visit any game sites so all reviews represent click-bait in some form or another to me personally.

 

[Bill Rizer]

Just an observation.

Its mostly european publications that have given DKCTF average scores. Why is that?

Sony is strong in Europe, and has money to spare evidently. They want to bury their old arch enemy.

Spoiler

j/k to be clear

 

[chadboban]

That is the in the same vane as Uncharted. The Last of Us is an evolutionary game. Retro has two teams so they are producing something else. Probably another Metroid game but I hope for a new IP.

Wait what? I didn't know anything about this. Where was this confirmed?

 

[Dr. Black Jack]

It's hard to even FIND a 720p TV at stores these days. My TV was $420, which is practically nothing for a TV. 1080p is completely the standard, and yes, image quality is an important aspect of games for me. I don't have to have a game rendered in 1080p, but I find a game that is already good in other areas to be an even better experience for me at a higher resolution.

About SD, I will occasionally play a Wii game, though I'm always bothered by the low resolution.

So if you went back to, say, N64 on a tube TV, would the low resolution be too much for you to have any fun?

 

[Kriken]

It's hard to even FIND a 720p TV at stores these days. My TV was $420, which is practically nothing for a TV. 1080p is completely the standard, and yes, image quality is an important aspect of games for me. I don't have to have a game rendered in 1080p, but I find a game that is already good in other areas to be an even better experience for me at a higher resolution.

About SD, I will occasionally play a Wii game, though I'm always bothered by the low resolution.

Where are you looking?

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

Wait what? I didn't know anything about this. Where was this confirmed?

No one actually knows if this is true besides Retro and Nintendo.

Keighley asked Vince Joly of Retro and he wouldn't answer but smiled and Miyamoto said that at this stage, he thinks Retro could take on more than one project at a time but there has never been any confirmation that they have two teams.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

No, if anything the "Horn" is a symbolic of the fact that there are some people out there who intentionaly use Mario Kart 8 to bash the Wii U and its Gamepad as a whole, but unfortunately in an incredibly ignorant way. Ignorant in the sense that they won't acknoledge the features that are literaly displayed besides the obvious "HORN" symbol and/or are already confirmed, namely:

- buttons to switch to an overview of the map
- displayed items held by every character, which in itself is pretty important for everyone who tries to master Mario Kart (so that you know what items people in front and behind you are holding, thus allowing you to act/react accordingly)

- not yet confirmed, but very likely I think: probably used to draw your on decals, since MK8 will have car-customization, much like MK7 but with "...a little more choice".

+ the fact that you will be able to use it for OFF TV play, and potential co-op features (which they have yet to reveal, but at least 2 player separate screen gameplay should be a given).

The horn argument is just of the place, because Mario Kart doesn't have to use it for more than stated above. I - and probably all those "horn critics", too - doesn't even know in what other way the second screen or the Wii U Gamepad could be used differently than what it's already used for, especially for a fun racer like Mario Kart. What is missing? What do people want? What else, besides of OFF TV play, displaying important information on the screen, improved cart customization convenience and Co-Op separate screen muliplayer should there be, in order to supstantially add "more" to the overall experience?

EDIT: Same goes for Donkey Kong Country: Tropical Freeze. It's a game that just doesn't need the Wii U Gamepad and I'm happy Nintendo doesn't force it's functionality onto it. This actaully proves that Nintendo will only use it where they see it fit. That, however, doesn't mean the Gamepad and it's cababilies are useless. Plenty of other games will use it in ways that actaully enhance them, just not Tropical Freeze.

The issue is that a lot of people have been wondering whether or not one possible avenue for pricing the console more competitively is to simply ditch the GamePad altogether (or at least offer a SKU that doesn't have it). Now, I've never been entirely convinced that this was the right call, but it always struck me as a feasible option. For instance, if they really want to go all out and get a lower priced model out before Mario Kart, it strikes me as something they need to consider.

However, the response at the investors meeting not only didn't hint that they might go that direction, but that their strategy was in fact to do in the complete opposite direction and stress the capabilities of the GamePad and why it's integral to the system. Now, for unreleased games that are a ways off, it's somewhat difficult for us to completely discount any last minute additions that might be in the games. But when you look at the big guns going forward that we know about, what important functionality do you see being utilized with GamePad functionality that's going to turn the tide on this thing? Because is we're just going to argue that they're "intelligently using it where appropriate and not just shoe-horning in useless garbage" (I'm paraphrasing what I perceive your point to be), then I would counter that that's what they've been doing for 14 months now. Let's focus on this:

Plenty of other games will use it in ways that actaully enhance them, just not Tropical Freeze.

What games? And what specifically do you mean by "actually enhance them"?

 

[TheFLYINGManga_Ka]

No, we pretty clearly dictate what studios choose to work on through sales.

Hence why DKC TF was made... the original sold 6 million copies. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.



I don't think they ever claimed that DKCTF was a bad game, they said it was refined and well made, just something we had seen before. If TLOU 2 was a similar as Donkey Kong Tropical Freeze is to the original, I would wholly expect it to get dinged in the same way.

I would be tremendously disappointed if The Last of Us 2 was just more of the same and didn't greatly expand on the mechanics.

But my point being it doesn't deserve a 6 score does it? It means it's a bad game and on par with other 6 games like Deadpool or something generic like Inversion.

Which is why I hate reviews like that. A more reasonable way to express ones opinion while giving a fair review would be:

"I thought this game was dull and boring, but as a platformer, it's really well made and is better than the first. If you're a fan of platformers and love a challenge, this is for you. If you're looking for something new, than you won't find it here. Other than that, its a well made game that fans would have a blast with."

Score: 8/10 (for game quality, not my bias opinion)

 

[VanWinkle]

So if you went back to, say, N64 on a tube TV, would the low resolution be too much for you to have any fun?

No, because, as I said, resolution is not the biggest factor for me, and gameplay is more important. And since you knew that from my earlier post, you are using straw man argument.

Where are you looking?

I was looking at my local Walmart, where AT LEAST 90% of the TVs there were 1080p.

 

[Mlatador]

Just an observation.

Its mostly european publications that have given DKCTF average scores. Why is that?

In case you missed my post: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=101189429&postcount=506

Also, there just came a spanish review in that gave it a 9/10.

 

[Toxi]

Spoiler

Not even close. I actually love them all equally for different reasons but I feel bad that GAF shits on Corruption the most so I always say it's my favorite .

Spoiler

Gaf unfairly shits on Corruption, but I think it's still the worst of the three. It's still a really good game, but Prime is my favorite and Prime 2 has the best standout moments.

 

[Vire]

But my point being it doesn't deserve a 6 score does it? It means it's a bad game and on par with other 6 games like Deadpool or something generic like Inversion.

Which is why I hate reviews like that. A more reasonable way to express ones opinion while giving a fair review would be:

I think we just have different expectations on what a 6 means. Over the years we have be conditioned that 6 equates to a complete a total failure, when under Gamespot's new scoring system that isn't that case at all.

Go ahead and take a look at look at all the scores they have been handing out for the past 12 months or so:

http://www.gamespot.com/reviews/

You'll see that they aren't afraid to use the complete gambit of scores from 1-10. A six to them means that it slightly above mediocre/average.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

I think we just have different expectations on what a 6 means. Over the years we have be conditioned that 6 equates to a complete a total failure, when under Gamespot's new scoring system that isn't that case at all.

Go ahead and take a look at look at all the scores they have been handing out for the past 12 months or so:

http://www.gamespot.com/reviews/

You'll see that they aren't afraid to use the complete gambit of scores from 1-10. A six to them means that it slightly above mediocre/average.

This, while technically correct, is in actuality complete nonsense.

A 6 means to everyone that the game isn't that good.

No one looks at 6s as the game is better than average.

Not reviewers, nor gamers.

 

[MikeXXIeaf]

But my point being it doesn't deserve a 6 score does it? It means it's a bad game and on par with other 6 games like Deadpool or something generic like Inversion.

Which is why I hate reviews like that. A more reasonable way to express ones opinion while giving a fair review would be:

If I had to equate GameSpot's review to a number I'd say 8 if I'm being nice and 7 if I want to make a point. 6 however makes me wonder if they're just standing out for clicks.

 

[Earendil]

See here.


I don't really even understand this comment. In what part of the post that you quoted did I refer to sales?

My mistake, I got confused between a few different posts/threads/sites. However, until recently, CoD installments were never penalized for being more of the same. And as others have said, look at games like Uncharted. As brilliant as they are, they don't change the formula all that much. Why is DK getting punished for this when other games do not?

 

[Glorified G]

So if you went back to, say, N64 on a tube TV, would the low resolution be too much for you to have any fun?

I always laugh when this is brought up. As if people don't have different expectations on a $300+ console bought in 2012 versus a $199 console in 1996. You may not value your money or have little to no expectations on hardware you purchase but don't try derail or bring strawman arguments when other people do.

Jesus that Gamespot guy is far too old and miserable to be reviewing this game. What an asshat.

I can't believe the stuff some reviewers come up with to justify average scores when this is clearly a high quality game that is improved over DKCR in every aspect... Its like they can't find something really bad about it and that makes them angry or something.

So lets give this game a painfully average score, just because, eh? Whatever, it doesn't have shotguns, right? Derp, i like shotguns in games, this doesn't have one, what?

These posts are the best part of review threads

 

[Gannd]

My mistake, I got confused between a few different posts/threads/sites. However, until recently, CoD installments were never penalized for being more of the same. And as others have said, look at games like Uncharted. As brilliant as they are, they don't change the formula all that much. Why is DK getting punished for this when other games do not?

Cinematic experiences are the current fad amongst the gaming intelligentsia.

 

[Dr. Black Jack]

No, because, as I said, resolution is not the biggest factor for me, and gameplay is more important. And since you knew that from my earlier post, you are using straw man argument.



I was looking at my local Walmart, where AT LEAST 90% of the TVs there were 1080p.

If you're looking for TVs at Wal-Mart then you don't really have a leg to stand on regarding display quality...just sayin'.

 

[Gannd]

If you're looking for TVs at Wal-Mart then you don't really have a leg to stand on regarding display quality...just sayin'.

Why? Walmart sells all major brands and stuff like Vizio has gotten good reviews.

 

[Kid Ying]

I think anyone who gives this game a 6 can't be a fan of platformers. Just like the original, this game is the best of his kind. I'm at the island 4 and the game keeps getting better. Even the water levels are awesome and the game is pure bliss and eyegasm on the visuals.

The reviewer might be in the camp that though retro shoudl've done something else though. I think the Prime series was pretty mediocre and that their first true great game was DKCR, so, i never wanted them doing anything else. If they get stuck doing DK's for all eternity i would be even happier.

 

[Crom]

I think the Eurogamer review put it best:



I don't want another table.

It's another competent well made version of a game I have played a thousand times. It's just not something I'm going to go, for the lack of better word, apeshit over. My point is, that time could have been better spent developing a new original intellectual property. Retro is comprised of some of the best minds in the industry, give them a chance to make something wholly their own.

So you are never going to buy another 1st person shooter. How many of those are made?

DKC was awesome and challenging. This one seems to have raised the bar. How is it more of the same? They made 2 Donkey Kong Country games in the last 18 years and you think that is too much?

So I guess you won't buy a "Last of Us" sequel for 18 years then? You already have a table right.

Anyway the DK on Wii was head and shoulders above any of the SNES ones and added a ton to the series. Nostalgia may blind people but the Wii one blew the SNES ones away in terms of level design. DKCR was a huge step forward in the series, felt fresh, and was very challenging and rewarding. It was not more of the same.

(Still wish Retro made a Metroid on the Wii U 1st though)

 

[VanWinkle]

If you're looking for TVs at Wal-Mart then you don't really have a leg to stand on regarding display quality...just sayin'.

I apprecuate the movig of the goalposts, but nope, not true at all. Vizio TVs are consistently well reviewed and are often said to be by far the best in their price range. For instance, my sub-$500 TV has active LEDs with local dimming, a feature usually only found in high end sets.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

I always hate low score conversations and the speculation behind what sinister motivations are at play in handing out the scoring. No matter which way you slice it, it seems unproductive. If the writer is being sincere and truly believes it's a 6/10 game, then I think we undermine that diverging opinions are actually a good thing. I'm not saying everyone here knocking that will agree with the following sentiment, but I see a lot of chatter about how reviews are too homogeneous and that there's basically an 8 to 10 scale, with everything below an 8 basically existing in some "it's terrible" category. Someone giving an honest 6 to something that isn't terrible isn't automatically a bad thing, as it encourages using more of the scale.

But let's just assume for one second that we know better and that there's no reason to extend such a benefit of the doubt to the author. They're trolling for clicks, and it would be an insult to the intelligence of everyone involved in this conversation to pretend otherwise. We're not that gullible! OK, then I would argue that this meandering conversation serves no other purpose than to shine more of a light on the review, thus helping it accomplish just what it set out to do.

Maybe I'm just crazy, but no matter the medium, if I don't see eye to eye with a particular critic, I just know that I personally can take their criticisms with a grain of salt. There's no need to get worked about about whether it's valid or try to convince others that the score should be ignored. Once I get around to playing DK, if I think it's the cat's pajamas, I might look back on Gamespot's review and conclude that I don't agree with that score. But, that'd be the extent of it. They have their opinion, I'll have mine.

 

[Mlatador]

What games? And what specifically do you mean by "actually enhance them"?

You're right in the sense that we don't know how unannounced projects will use it or whether they will use it in a good way.

But regarding already announced games, I have to quote myself from another thread:

Indie Games like Armikrogg, which are already funded and being developed are gonna use it in cool ways.

Project Cars will use the Gamepad to mimic the complex button layouts of formula 1 cars

The gamepad is being used where it makes sense or offers a plus of functionality/immersion/comfort.

Then there is Watch Dogs Wii U (which we don't know much about). However, no one denies that this is clearly a title that would be a very good fit to prove how the Gamepad can be use to enhance the experience/immersion/comfort of a game, but that is entirely dependant on Ubisoft AND whether Watch Dogs will be able to live up to its own premise that's been shown in the first E3 trailer.

 

[TheSpaceBetween]

Wait what? I didn't know anything about this. Where was this confirmed?

It wasn't. It's pure speculation.

 

[MikeXXIeaf]

I always hate low score conversations and the speculation behind what sinister motivations are at play in handing out the scoring. No matter which way you slice it, it seems unproductive. If the writer is being sincere and truly believes it's a 6/10 game, then I think we undermine that diverging opinions are actually a good thing. I'm not saying everyone here knocking that will agree with the following sentiment, but I see a lot of chatter about how reviews are too homogeneous and that there's basically an 8 to 10 scale, with everything below an 8 basically existing in some "it's terrible" category. Someone giving an honest 6 to something that isn't terrible isn't automatically a bad thing, as it encourages using more of the scale.

I don't think it encourages better use of the scale when a 5 is "mediocre" on GameSpot. 6 means "fair" which I agree with on this review, but being one notch above mediocre? They should rework the labels.

 

[WrenchNinja]

Boy, some are really aiming high to usurp Uncharted and Zelda fans

The game looks terrific and most reviewers do like it

 

[Vire]

So you are never going to buy another 1st person shooter. How many of those are made?

DKC was awesome and challenging. This one seems to have raised the bar. How is it more of the same? They made 2 Donkey Kong Country games in the last 18 years and you think that is too much?

So I guess you won't buy a "Last of Us" sequel for 18 years then? You already have a table right.

Anyway the DK on Wii was head and shoulders above any of the SNES ones and added a ton to the series. Nostalgia may blind people but the Wii one blew the SNES ones away in terms of level design. DKCR was a huge step forward in the series, felt fresh, and was very challenging and rewarding. It was not more of the same.

(Still wish Retro made a Metroid on the Wii U 1st though)

I think this is a pretty narrow way of looking at how sequels can improve or be different than their original fore bearers.

To your point about a sequel to The Last of Us or something like Uncharted... there are a variety of reasons why people come to those games, gameplay being only a small facet of that. In an Uncharted game, a new and exciting story may be enough to differentiate it from it's predecessor. With something like Donkey Kong Country Tropical Freeze, people come to it for usually one reason and one reason only; the gameplay. The problem being, the gameplay didn't change dramatically from the first iteration. If you can't rely on a graphical upgrade, a continuity of story or radical gameplay changes to shake it up and prevent it from feeling stale, then why am I excited for a sequel?

Feel me or no?

 

[Kurtofan]

Was there a radical gameplay change between Crash Bandicoot and CB2?

 

[TheFLYINGManga_Ka]

I always hate low score conversations and the speculation behind what sinister motivations are at play in handing out the scoring. No matter which way you slice it, it seems unproductive. If the writer is being sincere and truly believes it's a 6/10 game, then I think we undermine that diverging opinions are actually a good thing. I'm not saying everyone here knocking that will agree with the following sentiment, but I see a lot of chatter about how reviews are too homogeneous and that there's basically an 8 to 10 scale, with everything below an 8 basically existing in some "it's terrible" category. Someone giving an honest 6 to something that isn't terrible isn't automatically a bad thing, as it encourages using more of the scale.

But let's just assume for one second that we know better and that there's no reason to extend such a benefit of the doubt to the author. They're trolling for clicks, and it would be an insult to the intelligence of everyone involved in this conversation to pretend otherwise. We're not that gullible! OK, then I would argue that this meandering conversation serves no other purpose than to shine more of a light on the review, thus helping it accomplish just what it set out to do.

Maybe I'm just crazy, but no matter the medium, if I don't see eye to eye with a particular critic, I just know that I personally can take their criticisms with a grain of salt. There's no need to get worked about about whether it's valid or try to convince others that the score should be ignored. Once I get around to playing DK, if I think it's the cat's pajamas, I might look back on Gamespot's review and conclude that I don't agree with that score. But, that'd be the extent of it. They have their opinion, I'll have mine.

Well said and I do agree. You're right.

But it's my own personal pet peeve at reviews who don't know the difference between personal bias vs a actual bad game.

That's where I kind of draw the line and whether or not I can take the review seriously.

 

[Ysiadmihi]

To hear that the game isn't much different than DKCR and is still great has me hyped more than ever.

 

[dimb]

Was there a radical gameplay change between Crash Bandicoot and CB2?

There was only a year between Crash Bandicoot and its sequel.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

Was there a radical gameplay change between Crash Bandicoot and CB2?

What about Mario Galaxy 2???

I don't see how that game added more than the first one than Tropical Freeze has to Returns.

That's not an insult at all though, it's called a realistic expectation for a sequel that is in every genre, almost every series that has had multiple iterations.

(when it comes down to it, it's the 2D platformer bias sprinkled with the "it didn't cost ten billion dollars to make", with a touch of...well, I'll leave that to you)

 

[Nabs]

Whew. That Gamespot video review is something else.

 

[TheFLYINGManga_Ka]

I think this is a pretty narrow way of looking at how sequels can improve or be different than their original fore bearers.

To your point about a sequel to The Last of Us or something like Uncharted... there are a variety of reasons why people come to those games, gameplay being only a small facet of that. In an Uncharted game, a new and exciting story may be enough to differentiate it from it's predecessor. With something like Donkey Kong Country Tropical Freeze, people come to it for usually one reason and one reason only; the gameplay. The problem being, the gameplay didn't change dramatically from the first iteration. If you can't rely on a graphical upgrade, a continuity of story or radical gameplay changes to shake it up and prevent it from feeling stale, then why am I excited for a sequel?

Feel me or no?

Don't feel you, to be honest.

Like I mentioned, a platformer, especially a side scroller, is much more difficult to make a sequel to than compared to those games because designing gameplay is more challenging than coming up with a story, IMO.

I don't know what kind of gameplay changes would you seem as doing something different? Murfy levels? Music rhythm levels? Kongo Beat levels? QTE levels? Different art styles like pastel backgrounds or oil paintings? User generated content? Cutesy puppets with dialogue? Stages where you shoot a gun in first person? SHMUP levels?

In other words, it's a 2D platformer. I don't see how you can so something different other than come up with more unique and challenging gameplay with different level designs and backgrounds.

And comparing it to Uncharted or future TLOU sequels is unfair but also contradictory in many ways.

And have you actually played DKC Returns? I'm sure you haven't played Tropical a Freeze yet.

But I did beat and play all Uncharted games (still playing the Vita one) and Last of Us. Just so you know.

 

[Mlatador]

Was there a radical gameplay change between Crash Bandicoot and CB2?

Of course there was not! Sequels don't need "radical" gameplay changes (at least not the sequal to DKC:Returns, because that game stands out in its own unique way among 2D platformers, and something like that we haven't had in decades!). Simple as that. Donkey Kong Country: Returns is - in my opinion, but also the ones of many others, which has almost become a general consensus - the best 2D Platformer of last gen.

The goal for Tropical Freeze was not to reinvend the whole formula, but rather, to at least be on the same high quaitly level of its predesssor or even surpass it. Judging by the reviews TF actually manged to do it (surpassing it), so I couldn't asked for more. Even my wildest dream of David Wise coming back for the soundtrack has been granted.

All I can say is: based Retro!

 

[Ansatz]

What about Mario Galaxy 2???

I don't see how that game added more than the first one than Tropical Freeze has to Returns.

That's not an insult at all though, it's called a realistic expectation for a sequel that is in every genre, almost every series that has had multiple iterations.

(when it comes down to it, it's the 2D platformer bias sprinkled with the "it didn't cost ten billion dollars to make", with a touch of...well, I'll leave that to you)

Galaxy 2 follows the same game design as the original, but around every corner there was a new application of the gameplay mechanics that the first entry established.

Powerups such as Yoshi and its variations, or the spin drill change the rules and level designs to a significant degree.

DKC TF is more like NSMB U from what I've seen so far. Refined and top tier level design that I'd easily put above World, but it's samey. Galaxy 2 does not fall under that category imo. While the ideas are based on the foundation Galaxy introduced, they are fresh to an extent it feels like new gameplay.

Mine Cart, Underwater sections, bonus rooms follow the same formula.

In Galaxy 2, there was nothing like the yellow Yoshi stages in the original.

 

[chadboban]

It wasn't. It's pure speculation.

Oh okay, thanks. I was just wondering why I didn't hear about it.

 

[tassletine]

The horn is emblematic of a Nintendo that pushes ideas without a single compelling gameplay concept to back them up. A horn on a screen could be a silly, fun bonus. But is it worth betting all of Nintendo's relevance in the console space on the GamePad if their best idea is a horn?

NeoGAF is a forum that discusses the video game industry as well as the games. The horn is the epitome of Nintendo's failures to identify trends and contribute in ways that are genuinely driving forward gameplay, such as unequivocally embracing online play. The horn is them forcing a valueless proposition like the GamePad instead of responding to consumer demands.

The horn is more than a horn.

Jesus, what hyperbole. Split screen or networked gameplay IS more fun, everyone knows that, yet almost everyone else has abandoned it. What you call "forward gameplay" is actually less fun, but I get it, you'd rather have homogenization over fun.

And you're forgetting that the vast majority of console innovations originate with Nintendo. They don't jump on bandwagons, they make them, and as a software and hardware developer they are responsible for more quality innovations than anyone else. I'd like to see you try and name one other AAA company that has even released the amount Nintendo did last year, let alone with that variety.

People such as you always mark them down because you just can't see the value in having fun, just the value in complaining because Nintendo aren't like everyone else.

 

[btkadams]

i feel like an alien for not really being blown away by the first game. i even bought the 3ds version JUST to be sure that i didn't just hate the wii controls. that eurogamer quote hits a little too close to home, as it's been my complaint about a lot of recent nintendo releases (although i still managed to love pokemon x and super mario 3d world). i maaay return my copy that ships soon hmm..

i'm all for games like this continuing to exist though and i'm glad people are going to enjoy it. i guess the series might not be for me.

 

[Crom]

I think this is a pretty narrow way of looking at how sequels can improve or be different than their original fore bearers.

To your point about a sequel to The Last of Us or something like Uncharted... there are a variety of reasons why people come to those games, gameplay being only a small facet of that. In an Uncharted game, a new and exciting story may be enough to differentiate it from it's predecessor. With something like Donkey Kong Country Tropical Freeze, people come to it for usually one reason and one reason only; the gameplay. The problem being, the gameplay didn't change dramatically from the first iteration. If you can't rely on a graphical upgrade, a continuity of story or radical gameplay changes to shake it up and prevent it from feeling stale, then why am I excited for a sequel?

Feel me or no?

Play the 1st DKC and play the Wii one. The series has evolved. The Wii one is much more challenging, the levels seem much more alive and have tons of crazy scenarios that no one would have imagined in the SNES days.

You are essentially dismissing DKC because it is a 2d platformer but fail to realize that it is a true hardcore experience (much more so than the handholding in the Uncharted series)

Uncharted had a good story for a videogame and OK gameplay. (this applies to all 3 of them...never played the handheld version)

DKCR has really great gameplay and provides tons of challenge. Beating a tough level in DKCR is much more rewarding than beating Uncharted.

Maybe you are just assuming that DKCR is a carbon copy of DKC on the SNES. It is not. It is a huge improvement and the series has evolved. I honestly don't think that you played the Wii version otherwise you wouldn't claim that it is more of the same.


Gameplay is king in DKCR and it rules with an iron fist.

The story is king in Uncharted and frankly....I'd rather watch a movie. Gameplay is an afterthought.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

Mine Cart, Underwater sections, bonus rooms follow the same formula.

The mine carts alone have different camera perspectives changing the gameplay and presentational value.

 

[freethoughtbubble]

But my point being it doesn't deserve a 6 score does it? It means it's a bad game and on par with other 6 games like Deadpool or something generic like Inversion.

Which is why I hate reviews like that. A more reasonable way to express ones opinion while giving a fair review would be:

"I thought this game was dull and boring, but as a platformer, it's really well made and is better than the first. If you're a fan of platformers and love a challenge, this is for you. If you're looking for something new, than you won't find it here. Other than that, its a well made game that fans would have a blast with."

Score: 8/10 (for game quality, not my bias opinion)

No offense, but I think a review like that would be really disingenuous, and borderline useless. For example, if you didn't like the game, odds are you don't really appreciate or understand what others liked about the original. Thus, it would be presumptuous to say "I think this game sucks, but fans will love it."

I'd rather have a large variety of diverse, subjective (because all opinions are subjective, even the "unbiased" ones), and detailed reactions to a game than reviews that treat games as if they were toasters. ("It's got two slots and toasts bread. 10/10.") Give me your reasons, reviewers, and then I'll make up my own mind, thanks.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

Whew. That Gamespot video review is something else.

He wanted checkpoints during...wait for it...BOSS BATTLES.

 

[DICKS AHOY]

I'm not really getting the reactions in this thread; the game is getting a couple perfect scores, a ton of 9's and 8's and then a few more mild 7's with GS' 6 being an outlier. Doesn't really feel like it's getting shat on at all, outside of maybe Gamespot. Even then, I think it's just because bringing up unfavorably comparisons to Rayman Legends and 3DWorld rubs me the wrong way. Fundamentally they feel like even safer sequels than TF (not to mention the only real gameplay change to Legends, Murfy, GS rated the Wii U version that makes him compulsory lower than the versions that omitted him) and while that's great because I wanted more Rayman and 3DLand-styled Mario (just like I want more DKC), it strikes me as a point he didn't think that far through.

Isn't this more or less how Returns was also received critically?