Support NeoGAF

[RawkHawk2010]

Now that I've played DKCR a little bit, I can safely say that it is DKC in name only (this was pretty obvious just from looking at vids). Might as well compare this to Yoshi's Island instead of the old DKC games, they share the same amount of similarities.

Elaborate, please.

 

[dcdobson]

I got this for Christmas, am near the end of World 2 and have had none of the motion control problems mentioned in the last page or two (and probably the last 40).

The illustrations for all of the nunchuk/wiimote motion controls specify up-and-down action. It is not a picture of a guy spazzing out with the controllers in any direction. It is up and down arrows. This is not unclear or counter-intuitive. I got to the part with the cannonballs and crates, and it was a pain in the ass, but only because it was intended to be a pain in the ass. I didn't have any problems pounding or rolling when I wanted to. As soon as Cranky Kong reminded me of the roll-jump maneuver, I've been able to do it easily.

I dunno, people are going to have different experiences but some of the observations here regarding the aesthetics, controls, and level design are 100% opposite of my impressions so far.

Yeah, I haven't had a single problem either (nunchuk and wiimote). Perhaps this being the first game I've played in months makes the controls seem less unintuitive to me than they do to some other people.

 

[beelzebozo]

my awesome girlfriend bought me this for christmas, and we played the hell out of some co-op. the controls are tight and responsive, and--in addition--a complete and absolute joy to use in the levels as they're designed. visually it completely blows me away in a way that few games have in a long time; the background/foreground interaction, the incredible vistas as you hulk through each level. . . like NSMB wii, and like PUNCH-OUT, it seems like an almost effortless, perfect update of a classic style that no doubt is engendered with a ridiculous amount of effort buried beneath layer after layer of style that makes everything seem perfectly natural and obvious.

i am very impressed.

 

[Garcia]

Oh my god ! :lol :lol :lol

I finally shiny golded 1-4 ! ! :lol

I just gave the infinite roll a try and I got the shiny on my first try ! I swear I spent at least 2 and half hours on that level playing just with Donkey Kong and I was never able to get the shiny. Now I just got 48.2 seconds thanks to Diddy.

This will be SO MUCH FUN NOW ! *dances*

 

[Joe Shlabotnik]

Now that I've played DKCR a little bit, I can safely say that it is DKC in name only (this was pretty obvious just from looking at vids). Might as well compare this to Yoshi's Island instead of the old DKC games, they share the same amount of similarities.

I mean, I literally can't fathom this. It has almost identical controls and mechanics, the levels are built from the same philosophy (speed runs) and it has secrets spilling out all over the place. I realize that little tweaks and adjustments can add up to a noticeably different playing experience but I can't begin to comprehend how it could be considered a "sequel in name only". And I played through the original DKC a month ago, before you ask.

 

[flak57]

Elaborate, please.

Movement is based on momentum.

There are other things, like no rolling combos and the Jungle Beat like atmosphere, but the fact that the very basic movements are not similar in any way stands above the rest.

I mean, I literally can't fathom this. It has almost identical controls and mechanics, the levels are built from the same philosophy (speed runs) and it has secrets spilling out all over the place. I realize that little tweaks and adjustments can add up to a noticeably different playing experience but I can't begin to comprehend how it could be considered a "sequel in name only". And I played through the original DKC a month ago, before you ask.

The mechanics are completely different. Not even close.

 

[loosus]

I enjoy the game despite its flaws, but no, it really isn't much like the SNES Donkey Kong Country games at all. The levels feel fundamentally different, the controls are fundamentally different, the flow is different, etc.

 

[_Alkaline_]

I find myself arguing with both people who think DKCR sucks and those who think it is the best in the series.

I think that when DKCR shines it is unmatched, but some issues such as the controls (that are adequate, but not perfect) and some of the strange, yet ultimately not game-breaking, design decisions keep it from being as consistent as DKC2. 2 also had a bit more variety in locals and more animals friends etc. each level had a pretty different mechanic. I dont mind the rocket barrel levels, but there is so many of them and some sections are just a waste.

But hey, rare made their best game with their second effort, im sure retro can do an even more awesome job with a sequel.

The Rare games are considerably darker games, and probably a bit more organic, and it's a significant part of what made the original series memorable (even if Diddy's Kong Quest is the only 'great' game in the series, the other two being merely competent). In fact it's one of the only things that the original really had going for it.

Now this is rather subjective - I'm sure there are people out there who couldn't stand the atmosphere and organic design in Rare's games, just as some will lament the more cartoonish and brighter approach that Retro took. Personally I feel both are perfectly fitting for the franchise and both are achieve their intentions superbly well. Music is another thing DKC2 (and the original) has over Returns, mainly because Returns primarily features Wise's creations. Whilst most of these remixes range from solid (Aquatic Ambience) to great (Life in the Mines), it still remains that they are reused tracks and not original creations. That, and samples from time to time can be underwhelming - it's disappointing that AA, for instance, has considerably superior remixes on OC given that they come from mere fans and Returns comes from one of Nintendo's greatest composers. The few original tracks in the game have their moments, but they don't match up with the Wise efforts. The actual sound design, from mixing tracks to effects, is fantastic.

But let's focus on the key essentials of the platformer - level design, enemy placement and controls. First, controls. Some will point the finger at Returns' admittedly amatuerish implementation of motion controls for rolling, which is indeed a key manouevere so it's disappointing that the game places a mechanic that needs reliable input on a control system that isn't overly reliable. It's very easy upon practice to fine-tune the timing and motion needed to pull of perfect rolls (and roll jumps), but there's no doubt a button would've been the better option. I've noticed some have also complained about high jumps when using Diddy, though personally I haven't had a single issue with this and as a result won't delve into it. Personally I think high jumps work brilliantly in this game and have a real tactile feel to it. The other motion controls in the game are blowing and the ground pound. The former is actually one of the few flaws in the game's level design. The inherent nature of blowing, which requires the player to stop (and whatever changes to the environment are brought from blowing take some time to appear), goes against the flow of a game that often looks like animated ballet. Thankfully these moments are optional and rarely cause death since most blowable objects are placed in areas that feature few enemies or dangerous hazards (and any that are tend to produce puzzle pieces which is an apt reward). The latter, ground pounding, is a superb use of motion controls that is both fun and visceral. Same goes for finishing off bosses. Basically rolling is the only issue here, but it's indeed disappointing Retro didn't provide some kind of alternative given the C button in unused (and the Z or B button could've been used as well whilst grabbing was applied to the other) - on that note, the grabbing mechanic is terrific and feels much more visceral, from climbing to grabbing vines.

As far as level design and enemy placement go, Returns wins. By a length over DKC2, and by lightyears over the original. The original trilogy (especially the first game) featured arbitrary and unnatural enemy placement that belied their organic environments. Returns doesn't entirely rectify this issue but it sure as hell tries to avoid it. Unlike the zingers, spike wheels and whatever fuck enemies that the original trilogy positioned in completely unauthentic places, Retro actually tried to make the enemies, well, make sense. Some will regard this as a small issue in the scheme of things, but it goes a long way to creating a sense of flow and believability (ironic given the nature of the genre) in a platformer. Returns also tends to avoid bullshit placement near hazards and bottomless pits. This was never a huge issue with the original trilogy, nothing like the NES Ninja Gaidens for instance, but it is certainly much better in Returns.

I've always looked at Diddy's Kong Quest as being one of the pinnacles of the 16 bit platformer as far as level design goes - with the help of varied environmental themes and the animal buddies, the variety and creativity still manages to impress. That said, Returns has essentially put nearly all 16-bit platformers, except for YI (and to a lesser extent DKC2), to shame. And it's certainly embarassed most recent 2D platformers, except for the excellent Super Meat Boy and genuinely creative VVVVVV. Even Nintendo's own recent 2D work (namely NSMBW) looks rather pedestrian compared to the abundance of creativity and inspiration in Returns, though one would have to agree that 2D Mario actively tries to avoid being as complex and detailed as Returns in order to retain its aesthetic and accessibility.

No, Returns is essentially on the same level as the Galaxy series as far as level design and variety goes. Each and every stage introduces something new whilst (perhaps unlike the Galaxy games) retaining mechanics from previous stages and throwing them in more complex and difficult scenarios. I'll explore this a bit more thoroughly - basically, Returns takes the Nintendo/Valve approach to game design: Introduce a new concept by placing it in a relatively harmless location so that the player can figure out what to do and familarise themselves with the mechanic. Then, gradually ramp up the complexity and difficulty of this mechanic by expanding on it. This is something that so many other developers somehow get wrong - these are the games where new mechanics spring out of nowhere and you're killed instantly because you weren't sure what to do. Other games will take the Nintendo/Valve approach but introduce it artificially, perhaps through text or tutorials. The right way to do it (and how Returns does it) is introduce it early on in a level, but let the player figure it out for themselves, and have some sort of reward for getting it right. Then, start introducing consequences for getting it wrong. This way the new mechanic is introduced naturally and sensibly without compromising the flow and authenticity of the level's design.

The concepts themselves are relentlessly impressive and creative. Every single level is an experience by itself. The game rarely falls into tedium or repetition because there's always something new around the next corner. The urge to see what's next is what fuels the game and makes it so addictive to play. It's an essential part of any great game but Returns does it so well because it's just full of these special moments. Some games will force you to play hours just to see the next new thing, but Returns is constantly throwing them at you, to the point where it's almost exhausting (in the best possible way, of course). What should also be mentioned it how much detail is put into every square inch of each level. I'm not talking solely about envionmental design here (though it is truly phenomenal and not only a testament to the artistry of Retro but also their effort) but moreso how there is always something interesting on your screen. The game's full of hidden items and collectibles, but unlike many other games, you actually want to collect these. And it's not just for the k-level/art/music rewards (though they are nice) - the real reward is just getting them. It's like the missiles expansions in a Metroid game. You rarely actually need all 250 or 255, but it's the sheer joy in figuring out the puzzles (no matter its complexity) that makes it satisfying. It's the same here. A puzzle piece is just a puzzle piece, but it's the act of figuring out what to do (and actually getting there) that makes it fun. Each level is filled with this mini-moments and they never get old.

I could go on and on about all the various mechanics that make Returns so memorable but I'll leave it there. It's just such a relentless entertaining game. I love DKC2 too, and in some ways it beats Returns for sure, but where it counts most I definitely think Retro trumped Rare. It's just on another level.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

Donkey Kong Country Returns just makes sense.

It makes sense as a modernization of a very good old platforming series.

It feels like Donkey Kong Country to me, just what it'd be like today and they added more new Mario game elements which for me, is a plus.

I have been playing the older series again(3 for the first time actually) and while I thought Donkey Kong Country Returns was more fun, I'd say I like them all around the same(though 1 is a bit too simple and basic compared to the rest but I don't think it has aged as poorly as some say).

By the way, 3 is hated by many????

I'm really enjoying it, some of the levels are really novel and it in many areas has better graphics than the other 2 and the same great level design.

 

[Rafaelcsa]

People who have problems with the controls please read this post below until it sticks to the back of your brain. You have to be in motion already for the roll to work. Once you get that into your head, you'll realize that the motion controls are not broken and that it's just you not playing correctly.

I swear, most complaints about motion controls that I see about good to great games are just hogwash. People just do not want to learn a new control scheme and then blame it on the "waggle".

It's factualy incorrect to state the controls are not responsive because there's no way I would have been able to do all the time attacks with shiny gold medals if I couldn't roll consistently.

The rolling works 100% of the time as long as you understand in which state DK needs to be in for a roll to work. Basicaly you need to be moving forward to be able to roll, you can't roll from a standstill or from a quick change of direction.

 

[Regulus Tera]

The problem with rolling is that it is not instantaneous. The animation only happens after you're done with the shaking. You can get used to that eventually but coming from Galaxy and NSMBW it is very disorienting.

 

[chris0701]

@Alkaline

You really made a persuaive and sound analysis on original trilogy and Returns,maybe one of the greatest post on GAF for a long time.

Thank you.

 

[Yagharek]

This game is kicking my arse. The second jet-barrel level in world 4, with that giant bat chasing you. FUCKING RAAAAAGE!

I think I lost 50 lives on that fucker :lol

The game gets much harder, yes?

 

[Nuclear Muffin]

The Rare games are considerably darker games, and probably a bit more organic, and it's a significant part of what made the original series memorable (even if Diddy's Kong Quest is the only 'great' game in the series, the other two being merely competent). In fact it's one of the only things that the original really had going for it.

Now this is rather subjective - I'm sure there are people out there who couldn't stand the atmosphere and organic design in Rare's games, just as some will lament the more cartoonish and brighter approach that Retro took. Personally I feel both are perfectly fitting for the franchise and both are achieve their intentions superbly well. Music is another thing DKC2 (and the original) has over Returns, mainly because Returns primarily features Wise's creations. Whilst most of these remixes range from solid (Aquatic Ambience) to great (Life in the Mines), it still remains that they are reused tracks and not original creations. That, and samples from time to time can be underwhelming - it's disappointing that AA, for instance, has considerably superior remixes on OC given that they come from mere fans and Returns comes from one of Nintendo's greatest composers. The few original tracks in the game have their moments, but they don't match up with the Wise efforts. The actual sound design, from mixing tracks to effects, is fantastic.

But let's focus on the key essentials of the platformer - level design, enemy placement and controls. First, controls. Some will point the finger at Returns' admittedly amatuerish implementation of motion controls for rolling, which is indeed a key manouevere so it's disappointing that the game places a mechanic that needs reliable input on a control system that isn't overly reliable. It's very easy upon practice to fine-tune the timing and motion needed to pull of perfect rolls (and roll jumps), but there's no doubt a button would've been the better option. I've noticed some have also complained about high jumps when using Diddy, though personally I haven't had a single issue with this and as a result won't delve into it. Personally I think high jumps work brilliantly in this game and have a real tactile feel to it. The other motion controls in the game are blowing and the ground pound. The former is actually one of the few flaws in the game's level design. The nature of blowing, which requires the player to stop (and whatever changes to the environment are brought from blowing take some time to appear). Thankfully these moments are optional and rarely cause death since most blowable objects are placed in areas that feature few enemies or dangerous hazards (and any that are tend to produce puzzle pieces which is an apt reward). The latter, ground pounding, is a superb use of motion controls that is both fun and visceral. Same goes for finishing off bosses. Basically rolling is the only issue here, but it's indeed disappointing Retro didn't provide some kind of alternative given the C button in unused (and the Z or B button could've been used as well whilst grabbing was applied to the other) - on that note, the grabbing mechanics rocks and feels much more visceral, from climbing to grabbing vines.

As far as level design and enemy placement go, Returns wins. By a length over DKC2, and by lightyears over the original. The original trilogy (especially the first game) featured arbitrary and unnatural enemy placement that belied their organic environments. Returns doesn't entirely rectifies this issue but it sure as hell tries to avoid it. Unlike the zingers, spike wheels and whatever fuck enemies that the original trilogy positioned in completely unauthentic places, Retro actually tried to make the enemies, well, make sense. Some will regard this as a small issue in the scheme of things, but it goes a long way to creating a sense of flow in a platformer. Returns also tends to avoid bullshit placement near hazards and bottomless pits. This was never a huge issue with the original trilogy, nothing like the NES Ninja Gaidens for instance, but it is certainly much better in Returns.

I've always looked at Diddy's Kong Quest as being one of the pinnacles of the 16 bit platformer as far as level design goes - with the help of varied environmental themes and the animal buddies, the variety and creativity still manages to impress. That said, Returns has essentially put nearly all 16-bit platformers, except for YI (and to a lesser extent DKC2), to shame. And it's certainly embarassed most recent 2D platformers, except for the excellent Super Meat Boy and genuinely creative VVVVVV. Even Nintendo's own recent 2D work (namely NSMBW) looks rather pedestrian compared to the abundance of creativity and inspiration in Returns, though one would have to agree that 2D Mario actively tries to avoid being as complex and detailed as Returns in order to retain its aesthetic and accessibility.

No, Returns is essentially on the same level as the Galaxy series as far as level design and variety goes. Each and every stage introduces something new whilst (perhaps unlike the Galaxy games) retaining mechanics from previous stages. I'll explore this a bit more thoroughly - basically, Returns takes the Nintendo/Valve approach to game design: Introduce a new concept by placing it in a relatively harmless location so that the player can figure out what to do and familarise themselves with the mechanic. Then, gradually ramp up the complexity and difficulty of this mechanic by expanding on it. This is something that so many other developers somehow get wrong - these are the games where new mechanics spring out of nowhere and you're killed instantly because you weren't sure what to do. Other games will take the Nintendo/Valve approach but introduce it artificially, perhaps through text or tutorials. The right way to do it (and how Returns does it) is introduce it early on in a level, but let the player figure it out for themselves, and have some sort of reward for getting it right. Then, start introducing consequences for getting it wrong. This way the new mechanic is introduced naturally and sensibly without compromising the flow and authenticity of the level's design.

The concepts themselves are relentlessly impressive and creative. Every single level is an experience by itself. The game rarely falls into tedium or repetition because there's always something new around the next corner. The urge to see what's next is what fuels the game and makes it so addictive to play. It's an essential part of any great game but Returns does it so well because it's just full of these special moments. Some games will force you to play hours just to see the next new thing, but Returns is constantly throwing them at you, to the point where it's almost exhausting (in the best possible way, of course). What should also be mentioned it how much detail is put into every square inch of each level. I'm not talking solely about envionmental design here (though it is truly phenomenal and not only a testement to the artistry of Retro but also their effort) but moreso how there is always something interested on your screen. The game's full of hidden items and collectibles, but unlike many other games, you actually want to collect these. And it's not just for the k-level/art/music rewards (though they are nice) - the real reward is just getting them. It's like the missiles expansions in a Metroid game. You rarely actually need all 250 or 255, but it's the sheer joy in figuring out the puzzles (no matter its complexity) that makes it satisfying. It's the same here. A puzzle piece is just a puzzle piece, but it's the act of figuring out what to do (and actually getting there) that makes it fun. Each level is filled with this mini-moments and they never get old.

I could go on and on about all the various mechanics that make Returns so memorable but I'll leave it there. It's just such a relentless entertaining game. I love DKC2 too, and in some ways it beats Returns for sure, but where it counts most I definitely think Retro trumped Rare. It's just on another level.

Bravo! You summarised my feelings to a tee! Your comments about how DKCR follows Miyamoto's philosophy of introducing mechanics safely and then gradually ramping up the challenge also fits perfectly with the Iwata asks where Iwata mentions how the Retro team have the same mindset as Nintendo's NCL staff too.

There's a good reason why I chose DKCR as my GOTY (even ahead of SMG2) and you've nailed it

 

[jarosh]

The Rare games are considerably darker games, and probably a bit more organic, and it's a significant part of what made the original series memorable (even if Diddy's Kong Quest is the only 'great' game in the series, the other two being merely competent). In fact it's one of the only things that the original really had going for it.

Now this is rather subjective - I'm sure there are people out there who couldn't stand the atmosphere and organic design in Rare's games, just as some will lament the more cartoonish and brighter approach that Retro took. Personally I feel both are perfectly fitting for the franchise and both are achieve their intentions superbly well. Music is another thing DKC2 (and the original) has over Returns, mainly because Returns primarily features Wise's creations. Whilst most of these remixes range from solid (Aquatic Ambience) to great (Life in the Mines), it still remains that they are reused tracks and not original creations. That, and samples from time to time can be underwhelming - it's disappointing that AA, for instance, has considerably superior remixes on OC given that they come from mere fans and Returns comes from one of Nintendo's greatest composers. The few original tracks in the game have their moments, but they don't match up with the Wise efforts. The actual sound design, from mixing tracks to effects, is fantastic.

But let's focus on the key essentials of the platformer - level design, enemy placement and controls. First, controls. Some will point the finger at Returns' admittedly amatuerish implementation of motion controls for rolling, which is indeed a key manouevere so it's disappointing that the game places a mechanic that needs reliable input on a control system that isn't overly reliable. It's very easy upon practice to fine-tune the timing and motion needed to pull of perfect rolls (and roll jumps), but there's no doubt a button would've been the better option. I've noticed some have also complained about high jumps when using Diddy, though personally I haven't had a single issue with this and as a result won't delve into it. Personally I think high jumps work brilliantly in this game and have a real tactile feel to it. The other motion controls in the game are blowing and the ground pound. The former is actually one of the few flaws in the game's level design. The nature of blowing, which requires the player to stop (and whatever changes to the environment are brought from blowing take some time to appear). Thankfully these moments are optional and rarely cause death since most blowable objects are placed in areas that feature few enemies or dangerous hazards (and any that are tend to produce puzzle pieces which is an apt reward). The latter, ground pounding, is a superb use of motion controls that is both fun and visceral. Same goes for finishing off bosses. Basically rolling is the only issue here, but it's indeed disappointing Retro didn't provide some kind of alternative given the C button in unused (and the Z or B button could've been used as well whilst grabbing was applied to the other) - on that note, the grabbing mechanics rocks and feels much more visceral, from climbing to grabbing vines.

As far as level design and enemy placement go, Returns wins. By a length over DKC2, and by lightyears over the original. The original trilogy (especially the first game) featured arbitrary and unnatural enemy placement that belied their organic environments. Returns doesn't entirely rectifies this issue but it sure as hell tries to avoid it. Unlike the zingers, spike wheels and whatever fuck enemies that the original trilogy positioned in completely unauthentic places, Retro actually tried to make the enemies, well, make sense. Some will regard this as a small issue in the scheme of things, but it goes a long way to creating a sense of flow in a platformer. Returns also tends to avoid bullshit placement near hazards and bottomless pits. This was never a huge issue with the original trilogy, nothing like the NES Ninja Gaidens for instance, but it is certainly much better in Returns.

I've always looked at Diddy's Kong Quest as being one of the pinnacles of the 16 bit platformer as far as level design goes - with the help of varied environmental themes and the animal buddies, the variety and creativity still manages to impress. That said, Returns has essentially put nearly all 16-bit platformers, except for YI (and to a lesser extent DKC2), to shame. And it's certainly embarassed most recent 2D platformers, except for the excellent Super Meat Boy and genuinely creative VVVVVV. Even Nintendo's own recent 2D work (namely NSMBW) looks rather pedestrian compared to the abundance of creativity and inspiration in Returns, though one would have to agree that 2D Mario actively tries to avoid being as complex and detailed as Returns in order to retain its aesthetic and accessibility.

No, Returns is essentially on the same level as the Galaxy series as far as level design and variety goes. Each and every stage introduces something new whilst (perhaps unlike the Galaxy games) retaining mechanics from previous stages. I'll explore this a bit more thoroughly - basically, Returns takes the Nintendo/Valve approach to game design: Introduce a new concept by placing it in a relatively harmless location so that the player can figure out what to do and familarise themselves with the mechanic. Then, gradually ramp up the complexity and difficulty of this mechanic by expanding on it. This is something that so many other developers somehow get wrong - these are the games where new mechanics spring out of nowhere and you're killed instantly because you weren't sure what to do. Other games will take the Nintendo/Valve approach but introduce it artificially, perhaps through text or tutorials. The right way to do it (and how Returns does it) is introduce it early on in a level, but let the player figure it out for themselves, and have some sort of reward for getting it right. Then, start introducing consequences for getting it wrong. This way the new mechanic is introduced naturally and sensibly without compromising the flow and authenticity of the level's design.

The concepts themselves are relentlessly impressive and creative. Every single level is an experience by itself. The game rarely falls into tedium or repetition because there's always something new around the next corner. The urge to see what's next is what fuels the game and makes it so addictive to play. It's an essential part of any great game but Returns does it so well because it's just full of these special moments. Some games will force you to play hours just to see the next new thing, but Returns is constantly throwing them at you, to the point where it's almost exhausting (in the best possible way, of course). What should also be mentioned it how much detail is put into every square inch of each level. I'm not talking solely about envionmental design here (though it is truly phenomenal and not only a testement to the artistry of Retro but also their effort) but moreso how there is always something interested on your screen. The game's full of hidden items and collectibles, but unlike many other games, you actually want to collect these. And it's not just for the k-level/art/music rewards (though they are nice) - the real reward is just getting them. It's like the missiles expansions in a Metroid game. You rarely actually need all 250 or 255, but it's the sheer joy in figuring out the puzzles (no matter its complexity) that makes it satisfying. It's the same here. A puzzle piece is just a puzzle piece, but it's the act of figuring out what to do (and actually getting there) that makes it fun. Each level is filled with this mini-moments and they never get old.

I could go on and on about all the various mechanics that make Returns so memorable but I'll leave it there. It's just such a relentless entertaining game. I love DKC2 too, and in some ways it beats Returns for sure, but where it counts most I definitely think Retro trumped Rare. It's just on another level.

some of these points and some of the specific aspects you're focusing on sound eerily familiar

 

[_Alkaline_]

some of these points and some of the specific aspects you're focusing on sound eerily familiar

Funnily enough, I was actually replaying the first two games around the same time you did, as a means of reaquanting myself with the universe and gameplay of the series as well as gaining a better idea of their quality, since it had been a fair few years since I last played them.

I remember reading your thread, and though the provocative title initially had me questioning your stance on the games, the actual reasons given in your post were very well written and explored. I still don't think the original game is awful - merely competent, perhaps mediocre with a few moments of greatness - but the same things you noticed is what I had noticed too. You just put them into words far better than I could've.

Certainly some of my points in the post above were borrowed from your analysis, particularly those relating to enemy placement in the original that virtually betrayed the organic nature of the environments. I always found it strange - and moreso my last playthrough than any other - how Rare could create such these natural settings, with such an ethereal atmosphere, and yet make the enemies seem as if they were glued in with little thought as to placement. Some of the enemies (namely little necky and the vultures) made sense, and I liked the manky kongs, but the majority of enemies and obstacles were merely conviniently placed with no rhyme or reason, and merely copied-and-pasted to raise difficulty. "How many zingers are in the way this time? Three? Ok, next time, let's have five." It made the environments seem artificial...almost, if it weren't for the game's stunning audiovisual aspects and atmosphere. The spectacular score and organic artistry (regardless of its age, and to a degree the visuals have indeed aged) really do prevent the original from being an incredibly average game. That, and some novel concepts that remain genuinely creative even today.

I also forgot to mention the shoddy hit detection (also improved in Returns, though from time to time it still has its moments) and zoomed in camera that forces players to take several leaps of faith throughout the game (also improved in Returns).

 

[Shotgun Kiss]

I don't think DKCR is supposed to be a "sequel" to the DKC series; it's a reimagining of DKC1. On that level, I think it succeeds, as there are a lot of things it does differently, it brings back a lot of things (minecart levels, a ton of remixed music, bonus levels, barrel canon segments, emphasis on finding secrets, etc). I wish it had used Kremlings instead of the Tikis, but outside of that (and the waggle controls), there's not much else I'd want changed.

I still prefer the DKC series as a whole, but DKCR is up there with DKC1, and since that's the game it's trying to emulate, I'd call it a success.

I just hope that if we see a DKCR2, Retro start borrowing from DKC2 and DKC3 (DKC2, at least), and we see Kremlings again. I don't want them following in New Super Mario Bros. Wii's footsteps and just retreading the same ground (NSMBW was damn near identical to NSMBDS).

 

[Maffis]

This game is kicking my arse. The second jet-barrel level in world 4, with that giant bat chasing you. FUCKING RAAAAAGE!

I think I lost 50 lives on that fucker :lol

The game gets much harder, yes?

I did the same. Those laser-beams are a fucking pain in the ass.

 

[flak57]

Now this is rather subjective - I'm sure there are people out there who couldn't stand the atmosphere and organic design in Rare's games, just as some will lament the more cartoonish and brighter approach that Retro took. Personally I feel both are perfectly fitting for the franchise and both are achieve their intentions superbly well.

Agreed.

Music is another thing DKC2 (and the original) has over Returns, mainly because Returns primarily features Wise's creations. Whilst most of these remixes range from solid (Aquatic Ambience) to great (Life in the Mines), it still remains that they are reused tracks and not original creations. That, and samples from time to time can be underwhelming - it's disappointing that AA, for instance, has considerably superior remixes on OC given that they come from mere fans and Returns comes from one of Nintendo's greatest composers. The few original tracks in the game have their moments, but they don't match up with the Wise efforts. The actual sound design, from mixing tracks to effects, is fantastic.

This isn't entirely Retro's fault. The tracks weren't meant to be played in this style of DKC, and end up coming off as a little sterile, but they did well with what they had to work with.

As far as level design and enemy placement go, Returns wins. By a length over DKC2, and by lightyears over the original. The original trilogy (especially the first game) featured arbitrary and unnatural enemy placement that belied their organic environments.

I don't like this complaint. This could be said of the likes of SMB3 and SMW, if of course (in the case of DK), you choose to ignore that these enemies are strategically placed to create a specific flow to the level either with timed bounces or rolls or presenting a new challenge to the player, or they could be hinting at a secret.

Returns doesn't entirely rectify this issue but it sure as hell tries to avoid it. Unlike the zingers, spike wheels and whatever fuck enemies that the original trilogy positioned in completely unauthentic places, Retro actually tried to make the enemies, well, make sense. Some will regard this as a small issue in the scheme of things, but it goes a long way to creating a sense of flow and believability (ironic given the nature of the genre) in a platformer.

I find the cohesiveness complaint ridiculous, but to each his own I guess. In DKCR the world around you is often reacting arbitrarily to your presence. You could argue that the more pseudo realistic world of original series makes it's lack of realism in certain aspects more pronounced I suppose. Either way, DKCR does benefit from it being in 3D, allowing for easier manipulation of the environment.

Returns also tends to avoid bullshit placement near hazards and bottomless pits. This was never a huge issue with the original trilogy, nothing like the NES Ninja Gaidens for instance, but it is certainly much better in Returns.

I'm not completely sure what you mean here, but the movement in the original games was much more precise (by design) allowing for easier escape from tight spaces.

Agreed on the gentle introduction of mechanics that you mentioned, spot on by Retro there.

Certainly some of my points in the post above were borrowed from your analysis, particularly those relating to enemy placement in the original that virtually betrayed the organic nature of the environments. I always found it strange - and moreso my last playthrough than any other - how Rare could create such these natural settings, with such an ethereal atmosphere, and yet make the enemies seem as if they were glued in with little thought as to placement. Some of the enemies (namely little necky and the vultures) made sense, and I liked the manky kongs, but the majority of enemies and obstacles were merely conviniently placed with no rhyme or reason, and merely copied-and-pasted to raise difficulty. "How many zingers are in the way this time? Three? Ok, next time, let's have five." It made the environments seem artificial...almost, if it weren't for the game's stunning audiovisual aspects and atmosphere. The spectacular score and organic artistry (regardless of its age, and to a degree the visuals have indeed aged) really do prevent the original from being an incredibly average game. That, and some novel concepts that remain genuinely creative even today.

This part is a little difficult for me to decipher. Are you just talking about the randomness of a bee in a volcano, or the specific enemy placement as well? If the latter, I completely disagree on it being arbitrary. As I mentioned above, most of the enemies are very strategically placed, and I wrote an essay about that shit in the thread made by Jerosh you referred to.

You are correct in that they were copied and pasted onto the game world however, of course that could also be said of 99.9% of all 2D platformer characters. This is where the expertise of the designers in terms of placement comes in, and Rare was excellent at this.

I also forgot to mention the shoddy hit detection (also improved in Returns, though from time to time it still has its moments) and zoomed in camera that forces players to take several leaps of faith throughout the game (also improved in Returns).

I'm intrigued, can you name one example of a leap of faith from the first three games, not including bonus barrels? Keep in mind, you can literally return to the platform you just jumped from at full speed, turning on a dime in mid air. That isn't even factoring in the roll jump.

 

[dimb]

Unlike the zingers, spike wheels and whatever fuck enemies that the original trilogy positioned in completely unauthentic places, Retro actually tried to make the enemies, well, make sense. Some will regard this as a small issue in the scheme of things, but it goes a long way to creating a sense of flow and believability (ironic given the nature of the genre) in a platformer.

Yeah, how about that Crab Pirate Desert Valley.

 

[_Alkaline_]

This isn't entirely Retro's fault. The tracks weren't meant to be played in this style of DKC, and end up coming off as a little sterile, but they did well with what they had to work with.

After reading relatively middling impressions of the soundtrack prior to playing the game, I was pleasantly surprised by its qualities. I have no qualms with the decision to bring back the majority of tunes from the original. My issues is that there's not enough original work, the remixes themselves are perhaps too faithful (some later remixes though, such as Life in the Mines and Fear Factory, do a great job at eleborating on already-fantastic melodies) and some samples are underwhelming in an age where orchestrated music is quite commonplace. I have no issue with MIDI, but even the original trilogy featured instrumentation that attempted to emulate real sounds (Stickerbush Symphony being an incredibly achievement of this) so to have some rather dated samples grace this game was a bit of a disappointing. Like I said though, I was pleasantly surprised. The majority of remixes are great and the original work (Tidal Terror and the Bryyo remix, for instance) is consistently good. I just feel there was potential for something truly great here.

I don't like this complaint. This could be said of the likes of SMB3 and SMW, if of course (in the case of DK), you choose to ignore that these enemies are strategically placed to create a specific flow to the level either with timed bounces or rolls or presenting a new challenge to the player, or they could be hinting at a secret.

I find the cohesiveness complaint ridiculous, but to each his own I guess. In DKCR the world around you is often reacting arbitrarily to your presence. You could argue that the more pseudo realistic world of original series makes it's lack of realism in certain aspects more pronounced I suppose. Either way, DKCR does benefit from it being in 3D, allowing for easier manipulation of the environment.

Certainly the addition of 3D and how far technology has come, which allows for interactive backgrounds and incredibly dyanmic foregrounds, plays a role in making Returns less sterile than the original. Still, I believe my comment is pretty fair.

The original is full of enemies that are simply pasted into the environment to impede the player, with little thought as to why they're there or what they're doing. This is certainly not foreign to the 2D platformer, but it's the way in which it contrasts so harshly against the organic terrain that bothers me. Many enemies also appear out of nowhere as if the ceiling rained them. And then there's other quirks - why are there spiky wheels in a cave? Why are beavers in mines? It's just completely random. Mario can get away with it because of its aesthetic, but DKC went for a much more natural and realistic approach, which makes it all the more obvious and all the more jarring.

Returns has its instances of arbritarily placed enemies (namely the drum enemies), but the majority are introduced cleverly and placed with thought and precision. Most also serve a purpose for being there as opposed to being randomly chucked into an environment for the sake of creating challenge. The game also tends to avoid copy-pasting enemies in order to raise difficulty, which is something that can't be said about the original.

I'm not completely sure what you mean here, but the movement in the original games was much more precise (by design) allowing for easier escape from tight spaces.

I'm referring to enemies being placed near hazards/bottomless pits so that the player is likely to get hit or die in these areas the first time as they couldn't see it coming. It's a common symptom of trial-and-error gameplay and though the original wasn't horrendous with this or anything, it still featured its moments of bullshit. Returns has very few of these moments. It's only a minor quibble, but it's still one nonetheless.

I'm intrigued, can you name one example of a leap of faith from the first three games, not including bonus barrels? Keep in mind, you can literally return to the platform you just jumped from at full speed, turning on a dime in mid air. That isn't even factoring in the roll jump.

One? Let me see...Slipside Ride. There's an instance where the camera is zoomed too far and you're forced to jump onto a platform that you can't see. Logical progression would suggest the platform is there anyway, but it's still a leap of faith nevertheless. The camera was quite an issue with the original.

Yeah, how about that Crab Pirate Desert Valley.

Are you trying to point out something wrong with the crabs? Not quite sure what you're getting at here. I noticed nothing wrong with them.

 

[The Hermit]

Welp, after almost giving up on this thing, I decided to play with the Nunchuck and ,voilà, it becomes an entirely diferent (and awesome) game!

Got all pieces in the first world, I am up to the Clif and loving it!



Retro <3<3<3<3

 

[Kyleripman]

Let's not forget that Returns DOES have floating spiky balls, notably in the Temple levels. I agree that they go the extra mile to make things have a purpose and origin, but it's still a videogame with floating barrels and enemies.

 

[flak57]

Certainly the addition of 3D and how far technology has come, which allows for interactive backgrounds and incredibly dyanmic foregrounds, plays a role in making Returns less sterile than the original. Still, I believe my comment is pretty fair.

3D has allowed for some incredible cinematic experiences in DKCR.

The original is full of enemies that are simply pasted into the environment to impede the player, with little thought as to why they're there or what they're doing. This is certainly not foreign to the 2D platformer, but it's the way in which it contrasts so harshly against the organic terrain that bothers me.

Looking at it from a certain angle, I agreed that this COULD be a legit complaint, as there aren't many 2D platformers that have a similar atmosphere to the original series, so it is in a unique situation there.

Many enemies also appear out of nowhere as if the ceiling rained them. And then there's other quirks - why are there spiky wheels in a cave? Why are beavers in mines? It's just completely random. Mario can get away with it because of its aesthetic, but DKC went for a much more natural and realistic approach, which makes it all the more obvious and all the more jarring.

How far are you going with this issue though? Because DKCR has a goofy lighthearted aesthetic it is exempt from the millions of things that make no natural sense in it, where as it is held against the originals? Let's not forget that in the originals we are dealing with talking primates fighting reptile pirates, floating on hot air balloons in volcanoes while blowing bubble gum and having hair shaped like a banana.

Returns has its instances of arbritarily placed enemies (namely the drum enemies), but the majority are introduced cleverly and placed with thought and precision. Most also serve a purpose for being there as opposed to being randomly chucked into an environment for the sake of creating challenge.

No, most make sense for the environment they are in but are copied and pasted "randomly" throughout the level to facilitate the challenge, just like the previous games.

The game also tends to avoid copy-pasting enemies in order to raise difficulty, which is something that can't be said about the original.

Ridiculous complaint. The enemies are obstacles that facilitate platforming. How they are placed in relation to their behaviors/level structure/player movement is what makes a platformer a platformer. The formations of enemies require different challenges to the player, often utilizing a unique gimmick for that level and of course, to progressively increase difficulty.

I'm referring to enemies being placed near hazards/bottomless pits so that the player is likely to get hit or die in these areas the first time as they couldn't see it coming. It's a common symptom of trial-and-error gameplay and though the original wasn't horrendous with this or anything, it still featured its moments of bullshit. Returns has very few of these moments. It's only a minor quibble, but it's still one nonetheless.

Again though, DKC movement had little weight to it, and the player was able to turn on a dime, so the obstacles reflected that. There was definitely a great deal of trial and error, just like there is a great deal in nearly all platformers, including DKCR.

One? Let me see...Slipside Ride. There's an instance where the camera is zoomed too far and you're forced to jump onto a platform that you can't see. Logical progression would suggest the platform is there anyway, but it's still a leap of faith nevertheless. The camera was quite an issue with the original.

There were no leaps of faith in Slipslide Ride.

 

[GC|Simon]

When I first saw DKC Returns at E3 I thought: "Cool, a new DK game. But Retro is developing a 2D paltformer? Wasted potential... I want a shooter or something like that." Since a few days I'm playing DKC Returns and I'm glad that Retro did this one. The result is insane and unbelieveable good in every aspect. (Nearly) everything about this game is perfect. This is clearly one of the best games I have played on Wii. No, not only on Wii. Ever. It is on the same quality level like Super Mario Galaxy (2). It is one of those games you only get every few years.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Incredible game. World 4 is my favorite world so far.

 

[KuwabaraTheMan]

I'm only a little ways into this game (at the end of World 2), but I'm very impressed with the variety in the levels so far. It isn't as good as the original trilogy, but it is still an extremely enjoyable and well made game, and one of the best platformers of the past 14 years.

I wish there was a bit more of the originals in there (the lack of animal buddies, for example), but it's a great return for the series, and I hope that Retro builds on this in the future.

 

[The Hermit]

I don't think DKCR is supposed to be a "sequel" to the DKC series; it's a reimagining of DKC1. On that level, I think it succeeds, as there are a lot of things it does differently, it brings back a lot of things (minecart levels, a ton of remixed music, bonus levels, barrel canon segments, emphasis on finding secrets, etc). I wish it had used Kremlings instead of the Tikis, but outside of that (and the waggle controls), there's not much else I'd want changed.

I still prefer the DKC series as a whole, but DKCR is up there with DKC1, and since that's the game it's trying to emulate, I'd call it a success.

I just hope that if we see a DKCR2, Retro start borrowing from DKC2 and DKC3 (DKC2, at least), and we see Kremlings again. I don't want them following in New Super Mario Bros. Wii's footsteps and just retreading the same ground (NSMBW was damn near identical to NSMBDS).

Despite the graphical similarities, both are completly diferent games, being NSMW miles better than the DS version.

 

[MadOdorMachine]

People who have problems with the controls please read this post below until it sticks to the back of your brain. You have to be in motion already for the roll to work. Once you get that into your head, you'll realize that the motion controls are not broken and that it's just you not playing correctly.

I swear, most complaints about motion controls that I see about good to great games are just hogwash. People just do not want to learn a new control scheme and then blame it on the "waggle".

I'm calling bullshit on this right now. You have three different moves (Ground pounding, blowing and rolling) all mapped to the same motion. Does the current control set-up work? Yes. Could it be better? It could be worlds better. There's nothing about motion controls that make the game good, in fact, the only motion control that makes sense is the ground pound because you're actually mimicking the move. The game would be just as fun with traditional controls and there's no reason they couldn't have had both aside from stubbornness.

I played the first four levels yesterday (1-1 thru 1-4) and got 100% and gold speed run medals on all of them. Today my wrist is in pain from all the shaking I've been doing. I forgot about this from playing SMG, but all that waggling has caused my wrist to constantly pop. I'm curious if any Wii players have developed carpal tunnel syndrome from all the waggling.

Edit - Looks like Nintendo has a warning about it on their own site:

http://www.nintendo.com/consumer/wiisafety.jsp

WARNING - Repetitive Motion Injuries and Eyestrain
Playing video games can make your muscles, joints, skin or eyes hurt. Follow these instructions to avoid problems such as tendinitis, carpal tunnel syndrome, skin irritation or eyestrain:

 

[Lathentar]

Shake with your forearms not your wrists.

 

[Garcia]

Shake with your forearms not your wrists.

That's the way I do it. Feels good, never did I find it bothering.

 

[Foliorum Viridum]

Just started this tonight with my girlfriend and I'm really liking it so far. We're on to world 2 now and we're starting to die a lot. :lol Some of it is silly mistakes due to tiredness, but I feel like the game is only going to get harder and harder. There's clearly a fuckload of stuff to collect too, which is nice. I'm hoping my missus doesn't start to find it too hard because when we were going for 100% on NSMBWii she didn't to the star world with me due to the difficulty.

And other than the fact it's nice to co-op games with her, it's partly because I can't imagine this game is all that great solo. The co-op has a nice dynamic because of the different abilities. She has a clear advantage when it comes to platforming because of the hover ability, which is really cool.

Really digging the art style, too. Looks very nice. The sunset level especially.

 

[flintstryker]

Just started this tonight with my girlfriend and I'm really liking it so far. We're on to world 2 now and we're starting to die a lot. :lol Some of it is silly mistakes due to tiredness, but I feel like the game is only going to get harder and harder. There's clearly a fuckload of stuff to collect too, which is nice. I'm hoping my missus doesn't start to find it too hard because when we were going for 100% on NSMBWii she didn't to the star world with me due to the difficulty.

And other than the fact it's nice to co-op games with her, it's partly because I can't imagine this game is all that great solo. The co-op has a nice dynamic because of the different abilities. She has a clear advantage when it comes to platforming because of the hover ability, which is really cool.

Really digging the art style, too. Looks very nice. The sunset level especially.

Nonsense, this is fantastic solo, actually can't imagine playing some of the later levels in co-op

 

[Soloist]

Nonsense, this is fantastic solo, actually can't imagine playing some of the later levels in co-op

Omg the level in world 7

Spoiler

the one with the red and blue buttons

made me want to shoot myself when I was playing with my friend.

 

[Plinko]

Got it for Christmas and am amazed at how good this game gets as you keep playing. I love Retro and hope they make a trilogy out of this.

Also, no major problems here with the motion-controls, but would like the option for button-presses in the next one.

 

[reggieandTFE]

My future mother-in-law bought me Epic Mickey instead of this. Kinda bummed.

 

[cooljeanius]

My future mother-in-law bought me Epic Mickey instead of this. Kinda bummed.

That's the other game my Dad said he and my Mom were considering getting me instead. I would have been fine with either. Neither were my most wanted retail Wii games though (those would be Wii Fit Plus, Monster Hunter Tri, and Elebits).

 

[Fantastical]

Got this for Christmas. Played it yesterday and today. O_O It's really good. Like... really good. Retro is amazing.

My family and some of my friends were watching me play and they kept saying commenting on how crazy the game and its design was. I think this game is a lot better than NSMBWii, personally.

I'm definitely enjoying this more than DKC and DKC2 (which I loved). Can't wait to play this with a friend (although... I see it being harder).

 

[Rafaelcsa]

I'm calling bullshit on this right now. You have three different moves (Ground pounding, blowing and rolling) all mapped to the same motion. Does the current control set-up work? Yes. Could it be better? It could be worlds better. There's nothing about motion controls that make the game good, in fact, the only motion control that makes sense is the ground pound because you're actually mimicking the move. The game would be just as fun with traditional controls and there's no reason they couldn't have had both aside from stubbornness.

I played the first four levels yesterday (1-1 thru 1-4) and got 100% and gold speed run medals on all of them. Today my wrist is in pain from all the shaking I've been doing. I forgot about this from playing SMG, but all that waggling has caused my wrist to constantly pop. I'm curious if any Wii players have developed carpal tunnel syndrome from all the waggling.

Edit - Looks like Nintendo has a warning about it on their own site:

http://www.nintendo.com/consumer/wiisafety.jsp

I didn't say that the set up couldn't be better nor did I say that Nintendo couldn't have left in the option of no motion controls at least for the roll and the blowing (I'd never trade ground-pounding's glorious wiimote bashing for a measly button). My point was that the motion controls, the way they are in the game now, are not broken at all. I saw many people saying that they don't work properly, that DK doesn't roll when they want him to. All I said was to learn how the controls actually work before complaining about them. You said it yourself, the controls work. Rolling is not broken at all. People just need to understand that DK needs to have some momentum before attempting to roll, that's all there is to it. I myself admit to dying many times in the game because I kept forgetting this rule, but I didn't blame the game for the deaths. I knew I was fucking up.

Are you playing with the nunchuck? I'm playing with the wiimote alone (by far best way to play 2d games) and I feel no pain at all due to motion controls. Using both of your forearms for shaking is much better than using one wrist to do it.

Then again, I must be an exception because I rarely have problems with motion controls in Wii games (not that I go out of my way to play games with widely-known badly implemented controls, mind you -- I don't waste my time with obvious bullshit controls like, say, Mortal Kombat Armageddon on Wii). Out of the top of my head, the only game which I wasn't able to control at all on the Wii was Let's Tap. Never had huge problems with any other game. And the Wii is my most played console ever.

 

[Tricky I Shadow]

All these overwhelmingly positive opinions are great to see!

 

[EmCeeGramr]

HOLY SHIT THIS GAME IS AWESOME

I'm at the beginning of World 4, and it's not only beautiful (the almost non-existence of repetition in backgrounds and level designs is unbelievable), but challenging as hell. The controls work extremely well once you get the hang of them, and level designs are insanely clever.

The only minor nitpicks I would have is that compared to the Rare trilogy, bonus stages are far less varied so far (all taking place in extremely similar looking rooms and involving getting every pickup before time runs out) and there's a sad dearth of animal friends outside of Rambi in two or so stages.

 

[Haunted]

Your minor nitpicks are spot on and will continue to stay valid over the rest of the game. Basically no Rambi and you've already seen all the bonus rooms if you're at World 4.

Similarly, your praise of level design and cleverness will also stay valid throughout.

 

[Yagharek]

Fianlly beat the world 4 boss. Fucking hell these bosses are challenging :lol

World 5-1 music is beautiful <3

 

[mokeyjoe]

Despite the graphical similarities, both are completly diferent games, being NSMW miles better than the DS version.

Personally I much preferred the DS version. MP was good too.

 

[agrajag]

I agree with flak57, the ape physics in DKCR is completely different to the originals.

 

[Zek]

The mandatory motion controls were just such a horrendously bad decision and it really brings the game down a lot. At least the ground pound and the blowing are not usually necessary but having to shake the damn controller every time you want to roll is infuriating, especially when you need precise timing and it doesn't do it right. I have died countless times due entirely to this.

 

[legend166]

The only time I roll is when I'm doing a special jump or something to get a letter or puzzle piece. I've never been in a situation where I've had to roll straight away. I always set it up and never fail.

 

[LaneDS]

I also agree that the physics are almost entirely different than the old games, but even with that in mind I still think the game absolutely feels (in other ways) like a new entry in DKC. I received it for Christmas and have co-op'd my way to the sixth area and really enjoyed everything about the game. Initially the roll felt really terrible, but after some time with the game I appreciate the extra element of skill required to use it correctly (assuming that one's Wiimote is willing to behave). Would I prefer it was mapped to a button? Yeah, definitely. But so long as it works, I dig it.

The level design is outstanding, the amount of secrets is great (although they could benefit from a larger variety to the bonus banana areas), I mostly enjoy the music although the originals are better, and the graphics (or art design) look amazing.

Oh, and co-op has been totally fun. I really like how it's designed, even though it makes for a harder experience generally (on occasion co-op seems to afford advantages, like on the banana bonus stages or the boss of the forest area). The difficulty is, in my opinion, perfect as it has stayed relatively challenging from the second world onward but rarely gets into frustrating levels. Getting gold medals on the time trials is another story, as that seems ridiculous and is not something I see myself going for later on.

All in all, I love the game and would recommend it to anyone who enjoys 2D platformers, regardless of whether they liked or didn't like the old DKC titles.

 

[ivysaur12]

I take back what I said. This game is amazing.

 

[flak57]

I also agree that the physics are almost entirely different than the old games, but even with that in mind I still think the game absolutely feels (in other ways) like a new entry in DKC. I received it for Christmas and have co-op'd my way to the sixth area and really enjoyed everything about the game. Initially the roll felt really terrible, but after some time with the game I appreciate the extra element of skill required to use it correctly (assuming that one's Wiimote is willing to behave). Would I prefer it was mapped to a button? Yeah, definitely. But so long as it works, I dig it.

The level design is outstanding, the amount of secrets is great (although they could benefit from a larger variety to the bonus banana areas), I mostly enjoy the music although the originals are better, and the graphics (or art design) look amazing.

Oh, and co-op has been totally fun. I really like how it's designed, even though it makes for a harder experience generally (on occasion co-op seems to afford advantages, like on the banana bonus stages or the boss of the forest area). The difficulty is, in my opinion, perfect as it has stayed relatively challenging from the second world onward but rarely gets into frustrating levels. Getting gold medals on the time trials is another story, as that seems ridiculous and is not something I see myself going for later on.

All in all, I love the game and would recommend it to anyone who enjoys 2D platformers, regardless of whether they liked or didn't like the old DKC titles.

Even though completely different, rolling in both is like crack.