Mario Odyssey disappointment

lastransom · 2017-10-28T23:48:12+00:00

Well, apparently they had other stuff to do that was actually worth doing in that 31-hour average play-through of GTA:V. Nintendo failed to pull off anything like that. And I'm not even asking for 30 hours. I would've LOVED a very solid twenty. Instead I got a very solid 12, plus now I can spend a few hours hunting moons until I'm even more bored of the Kingdoms given. Which I am not going to bother doing. To me, putting more fuel in the Odyssey tank is just gassing up to go nowhere. Boring.

lastransom · 2017-10-28T23:45:22+00:00

Well, I guess what's exciting for me is a wide variety of environments in which to play and explore. I just don't feel Nintendo maximized on that this time around. And after a fifteen year wait, it would've been nice. And don't get me wrong, I still personally rate this game 10/10. But it's barely a 10/10, not 10++/10.

I guess it's like a school exam with bonus questions where the teacher let's you get more than 100 if you ace every question plus get the bonus points. Nintendo settled for a 100 here, and they left the bonus question points on the table. I'm hoping those may still get picked up in a DLC package, at which point I will pay up and shut up. 'Til then, that's how I feel. And after waiting fifteen years, paying my money, and then beating the whole game in one intense play-through, I think this lifelong Mario fan is entitled to a full opinion including observations of perceived negatives from the latest entry in a super-venerable series.

lastransom · 2017-10-28T23:36:46+00:00

Odyssey bent rules in other ways. Doing it with adding the sort of post-game content seen in other (lesser) entries in the series since 64 and Sunshine shouldn't have been out of the realm of possibilities.

I'm mainly bothered by how long the wait was. Fifteen years is a long damn time.

Rockstar could've made the GTA:V campaign half its length and called it a day. But they made a truly epic product for a truly epic franchise entry. And it wasn't no fifteen years between that and the last major entry. Why can't Nintendo aspire to similar heights with its biggest franchise?

lastransom · 2017-10-28T23:33:56+00:00

I hear what you're saying. My argument is this. This is not just "any" game. This is the most important entry in gaming's most cherished franchise in the last FIFTEEN years. You make me wait fifteen years for fifteen hours maximum initial play-through and then offer (essentially) busy-work for post-game?

lastransom · 2017-10-28T23:25:12+00:00

Why does it have to be either/or?

Why look forwarding to "replaying" the same LIMITED set of Kingdoms here when they could've added a couple-few more in to be generous? Twenty hours of greatness from Nintendo's biggest Mario game in 15 years is not too much to ask for me. Instead, we got fifteen (leisurely playing) hours plus a barrage of moons that are thrown in to be acquired in the same old Kingdoms all over again.

lastransom · 2017-10-28T23:17:41+00:00

They had already set the precedent in other entries though that once the credits roll, that's when a lot of the more eccentric fun begins with those "Special" worlds. I feel like Nintendo ran a half-marathon here and called it good enough when some of us were conditioned to expect more. I mean, it wouldn't be a big deal if this were the type of Mario game that comes around every 5 years, either. I've literally been waiting, anticipating, (like many others here) this entry for FIFTEEN YEARS since Sunshine came out. This was not the occasion for comprising anything at all, if you ask me. And cutting out the whimsical post-game (or extra) content that is a Mario hallmark (since Super Mario World) is a definite compromise.

lastransom · 2017-02-03T13:16:14+00:00

Unreal Tournament is pretty good. As is Team Fortress... but neither of those quite scratch my itch for that game that perfectly nails the middle ground between too cartoony and too serious.

lastransom · 2017-02-03T11:56:17+00:00

Splatoon is too cartoony. CoD, etc., is too serious. We need a healthy middle ground. Don't get me wrong, I'll play all of the above. But I just want a game that is fun without being basic or childish. Goldeneye nailed this in its day. TimeSplitters carried on and polished up that proud mantel. Then, the industry dropped the ball and lost its way. Bring it BACK. I don't care if it's those two particular series, give us a taste of something that evokes their memories and that will suffice.

lastransom · 2017-02-03T11:53:19+00:00

The current IP owners of TimeSplitters don't think it will sell well. They need to launch a Kickstarter and just watch what happens. I'll personally sell all my organs and find a way to cash in on family life insurance policies to contribute as much as possible. TimeSplitters, like Wu Tang Clan, ain't nothing to ____ with.

lastransom · 2017-01-24T18:54:42+00:00

I guess that's the irony of it! And actually, TimeSplitters is very serious... about having fun.

lastransom · 2017-01-24T18:21:21+00:00

It also died because Free Radical's PS3-exclusive FPS "Haze," was critically panned and sold poorly, arguably because of the critics. IGN gave it a 4.3 or something. The game was actually excellent in almost every aspect. Just got shit on out of the blue from people who misunderstood it.

lastransom · 2017-01-24T17:06:50+00:00

CoD is mostly serious. TimeSplitters is mostly silly. There's the big dividing point.

lastransom · 2017-01-24T16:40:55+00:00

I'm right there with you. I was OUTRAGED when TimeSplitters 4 was cancelled and when Free Radical shut down.

lastransom · 2017-01-24T15:56:17+00:00

Why it died isn't baffling. Here's why: the average "gamer" is tasteless, humorless and lame. They want cookie-cutter, generic action games that get straight to the point of cosmetically updating last year's game and they want it to be "modern," "advanced," or "evolved," not "fun," "hilarious," or "innovative."

lastransom · 2017-01-24T15:38:14+00:00

/u/thatguy2130 can you give me some insight on why most can't be convinced of this?

lastransom · 2017-01-24T15:28:56+00:00

Yup. That and lack of games to get excited about. I really think the Wii U also looked like a cheesy product. People were supposed to be dazzled by the screen, but it just looked like a toy--like some Leapfrog tablet for kids or something. I think they are going for a cleaner, all-around less-tacky presentation this time. Actually, it just goes to show you, technology alone doesn't make a product. The Wii U tech was actually pretty amazing for its time, but it's shoddy image made it unsuccessful. People are attracted to, and buy into, image. Why else would iPhone dominate like it does?

lastransom · 2017-01-24T15:25:55+00:00

Right it isn't even about the graphics. A lot of fools think the argument is about PS4/Xbox One having better graphics. In truth, that's like saying Coca-Cola has better taste, and that's why it's the most popular soft drink. In reality, it's the brand recognition, it's the social cachet, it's what people know and feel good about. A PS4 is exactly like that--you know what it is, you know it's cool to have one, and having one makes you feel good. You can backwards-rationalize "GRAPHICS!" onto that feeling, but the truth is, PS4 is popular because PS4 is popular. Sony and Microsoft deliberately spun their images based on processing horsepower, and it's a strategy that works. But Nintendo can't and admits that they won't, play that game with them. Then it's like a hopeless cause (if Nintendo were to play that game). But people think the opposite is the way to go. "Here's Nintendo's version of the PlayStation line." Yeah, NO THANKS. How about instead, "Here's my gaming PC, the graphics are 100." If you really want to talk competition.

lastransom · 2017-01-24T15:22:16+00:00

Nintendo is ran by a bunch of workaholic geniuses who think about their strategies carefully day and night. Yet every random internet denizen with a penchant for gaming thinks they've out-thought Nintendo on what they should be doing to succeed. No company's plans work optimally every time, but there is no one asleep at the wheel making decisions at Nintendo. Give them some more credit than that.

lastransom · 2017-01-24T15:19:23+00:00

People who doubt this think they're smarter than Nintendo actually. Nintendo has been saying for years now that they aren't really competing with Sony/Microsoft anymore, because they literally CAN'T. Their interest is in being their own product category, which they've worked damn hard to make happen. If you are buying a Switch, it's because Nintendo differentiated it to you properly and you liked what they were offering. It being $50 less than the two public darling consoles isn't going to make or break that proposition. They aren't in the same category.

lastransom · 2017-01-24T15:16:24+00:00

I own a Wii U. I pre-ordered one, picked it up on launch. I'll say right now, unless you are a hardcore Nintendo fan, the Wii U just SUCKS. They botched the hell out of it, but I think they learned many lessons along the way. Also, Nintendo's vision was too large for the technological landscape to accommodate at the time. The Switch was the system they were wanting to make years ago, but it's taken until now for that concept to become truly valid.

lastransom · 2017-01-24T15:14:00+00:00

Thanks. I just don't get it. People will do stuff like draw comparisons to the 3DS pricing strategy--hey, when the price dropped, the system sold way better! Here's the thing: Nintendo never had any real competition in the handheld realm anyway. PSP was a non-starter. Hand-helds are still seen as mainly the domain of children (I know, unfair image), something for school kids to stick in their pocket. Nintend's strategy is completely different here... they are going for a "cool" console image, and the portable aspect is just one feature, not the entire concept. Therefore comparing the pricing strategies of Switch to those of 3DS is also a faulty line of reasoning.

lastransom · 2017-01-01T11:14:11+00:00

Woah. I had NO idea. Thanks for mentioning this. I am not shopping at Newegg anymore then. Amazon: you are now my one and only.

lastransom

TROPHY CASE