First, apologies; I realize that some of the stuff below has been explored before; I've been following the threads on Meteos here at the GAF since the JP retail launch. Unfortunately, the lack of search makes it prohibitively difficult to find one of the previous threads to add my observations and questions to, so I made a new thread.
So, after nearly 3 hours of 'a transmission error has occurred' (unbelievable...), I finally managed to snag the Meteos demo from the wireless download point in the Nintendo booth. After having spent two or three hours with the demo and a good 15 mins with the full version of the game on the game floor, I have two questions:
1) Where does all this Meteos hate come from? My impression of the game very positive! It's fun, and I've been constantly discovering new strategies throughout my play time (one of my primary evaluation points for a great puzzle game). I'm not getting the impression that I'm suddenly going to realize it's shallow and there are no new tactics for me to try. The game also manages to be pretty easy to pick up and play. It's not overly confusing or frustrating, even when you first fire it up. I've stayed continually entertained with a simple 5 min time attack demo for over two hours - and the full game I played on the floor had so many other modes and things to do, I can't imagine that I'm going to become bored too quickly. I haven't even tried multi yet. What is it about this game that so many people dislike? Which leads me to...
2) Why do people insist on comparing Meteos to Lumines? Granted, they share a developer and publisher, but it's like comparing SF and VF. Yes, they are both fighting games, but the differences are far more pronounced than the surface genre similarities. It reminds me of when people were comparing SM64 and NiGHTS just because they were the flagship action titles of their respective consoles in the same launch season.
Overall, I didn't have particularly high expectations from Meteos, even after being amazed by Q's other game. I'm wondering if it's the overall hype and the fight for handheld market share that's causing a fun, original game to garner criticism.
So, after nearly 3 hours of 'a transmission error has occurred' (unbelievable...), I finally managed to snag the Meteos demo from the wireless download point in the Nintendo booth. After having spent two or three hours with the demo and a good 15 mins with the full version of the game on the game floor, I have two questions:
1) Where does all this Meteos hate come from? My impression of the game very positive! It's fun, and I've been constantly discovering new strategies throughout my play time (one of my primary evaluation points for a great puzzle game). I'm not getting the impression that I'm suddenly going to realize it's shallow and there are no new tactics for me to try. The game also manages to be pretty easy to pick up and play. It's not overly confusing or frustrating, even when you first fire it up. I've stayed continually entertained with a simple 5 min time attack demo for over two hours - and the full game I played on the floor had so many other modes and things to do, I can't imagine that I'm going to become bored too quickly. I haven't even tried multi yet. What is it about this game that so many people dislike? Which leads me to...
2) Why do people insist on comparing Meteos to Lumines? Granted, they share a developer and publisher, but it's like comparing SF and VF. Yes, they are both fighting games, but the differences are far more pronounced than the surface genre similarities. It reminds me of when people were comparing SM64 and NiGHTS just because they were the flagship action titles of their respective consoles in the same launch season.
Overall, I didn't have particularly high expectations from Meteos, even after being amazed by Q's other game. I'm wondering if it's the overall hype and the fight for handheld market share that's causing a fun, original game to garner criticism.
