Support NeoGAF

[LightOfTruth]

Well I have to admit that I do find this a bit surprising. I was down on the game at first but the more previews they showed the more optimistic I became.

 

[Ridley327]

If he had given a score, you could be sure that B2YK would be the first to point out that the guy did not finish the game and is thus not qualified to review it.

I really don't see why someone shouldn't be called on that, regardless of whatever investment they have in this game or any other.

This game has been in the hands of outlets for weeks now. If Gies wasn't enjoying himself during that time to the point of being unwilling to finish it at least once through, the proper thing to have done was ask for the review to be reassigned to someone else. Gies has already had a lot of issues with being taken seriously over various review gaffes in the past, so to come up on the day the embargo raises only to say that he didn't want to do his job is not what one would call helping his case.

 

[Anarky]

Is it too much to hope they release another version of this game on NX without the gyro controls that's tweaked accordingly?

 

[Pyrokai]

It's just so disappointing to see that something I've always deeply loved (games that I can start up and beat opening to credits in one session, under 2 hours or so, but requiring finesse and mastery to do well) is now considered a bad thing. For years I've had to put up with games ballooning in length and scope, which I've never really been a fan of outside of RPGs (which I play on and off with other games in between). Now, finally, a game of the style I really like comes out, with a 2-3 hour campaign that requires you to come back to it again and again until you feel like you've totally mastered it 50 or 70 or 100 times through, and people are saying that's "archaic" or somehow a waste of money.

I'd much rather have a high skill ceiling 2 hour game I can sit down and go from opening to credits in one session and hone my skills at it for months, learn all the tricks, and achieve maximum possible scores at than a 20 hour game that I play once and never touch again, but no one makes games like that anymore. Now Nintendo has. I am so excited to finally get my hands on this on Friday.

me too : ( we are the 1%

 

[Jawbreaker]

It's just so disappointing to see that something I've always deeply loved (games that I can start up and beat opening to credits in one session, under 2 hours or so, but requiring finesse and mastery to do well) is now considered a bad thing. For years I've had to put up with games ballooning in length and scope, which I've never really been a fan of outside of RPGs (which I play on and off with other games in between). Now, finally, a game of the style I really like comes out, with a 2-3 hour campaign that requires you to come back to it again and again until you feel like you've totally mastered it 50 or 70 or 100 times through, and people are saying that's "archaic" or somehow a waste of money.

I'd much rather have a high skill ceiling 2 hour game I can sit down and go from opening to credits in one session and hone my skills at it for months, learn all the tricks, and achieve maximum possible scores at than a 20 hour game that I play once and never touch again, but no one makes games like that anymore. Now Nintendo has. I am so excited to finally get my hands on this on Friday.

Well, the problem is that it's competing against a lot of fantastic titles that are both better and offer more content at lower price points. It's one thing if all you game on is a Wii U, but for consumers with plenty of options, that's $60 that could go towards two great games. I could buy Stardew Valley and Ratchet & Clank for a little less right now. Of course there may be people who prefer Star Fox, but I'm speaking generally.

 

[TreIII]

Agreed, I was excited when Nintendo announced that they were making a new Star Fox game but it lost wind when I found out that it was the third reboot.

It just feels like that instead of letting the series progress Nintendo just keeps hitting the reboot button because they think that the fans wants more of the same.

I am still getting the game and I am excited for it but I do not want to see Star Fox get rebooted for the fourth time.

To be fair, though: after especially Command, I could understand Miyamoto and other parties involved just deciding to kill it and start over.

My only hope is that now that they have a foundation, they'll just let Platinum take over the series going forward and we'll truly see what StarFox will be like when PlatinumGames is allowed to just go full P* mode OTT.

 

[Watch Da Birdie]

None of the reviews comment on Slippy

I just want to know about Slippy

Just how Slippy is he this time?

Hope they didn't skimp on the Slippy

*concludes post with random Slippy noises*

Me and my dad bonded when I was little over making fun of Slippy, he's the best part of Star Fox for that reason alone.

 

[Boy Wander]

So it's wrong, but right, but wrong because of a specific definition of "completing" a game, which isn't what the reviewer said.

Okay, what if a player just wants to beat the game, like complete the story as the reviewer said?

But why the fuck would someone think. OK, game with branching paths, shortish levels, multiple routes.....fuck it . I'll just play one route. Then I'll bitch about it even though I knew the type of game it was. People moan games don't have replayability. Along comes a game in a series where progression is BASED on replaying levels, and reviewers say "nah, game is too short". 😵😵😵

 

[Hilarion]

Well, the problem is that it's competing against a lot of fantastic titles that are both better and offer more content at lower price points. It's one thing if all you game on is a Wii U, but for consumers with plenty of options, that's $60 that could go towards two great games. I could buy Stardew Valley and Ratchet & Clank for a little less right now. Of course there may be people who prefer Star Fox, but I'm speaking generally.

In general, though, across platforms, there's no respect for very short games with high replay value. It's one of the reasons I brought up The Binding of Isaac earlier in the thread. If I'm looking for new games that I can pick up, press on, and see the ending credits by the time I turn the system off, there's really not a lot of options.

 

[KamiCrit]

I'm excited for Star Fox Guard. Play, create, and share tower defense levels with a Nintendo twist looks awesome. Very excited to see what levels the online community will come up with.

 

[DeVeAn]

Nintendo made me believe this game had optional motion controls. Sounds like they are not and I'm pissed about it.

 

[Anarky]

"forced reliance on the Gamepad's screen and motion controls"

Yup, no buy for me. "innovative" motion controls and Miyamoto's "great" gimmick ideas can fuck off. He used to be my hero and now I hate him with a passion. Everything he touches, turns to shit.

I'd just like to take the time to appreciate the absurdity of this.

 

[Randomizer]

The game sounds great to me, based on the reviews that didn't dismiss the game immediately based on the motion controls at least. The graphics are the biggest and most glaring fault but if the gameplay is great I won't care.

The replayibilty sounds like exactly what I want in a Star Fox game, different branches and medals and all that awesome stuff. The slow puzzle levels aren't sounding too hot but they never looked fun to begin with. Bosses as ever are looking fantastic; Nintendo and Platinum always deliver on that front and I am expecting some holy shit moments.

Too bad I am still playing Dark Souls 3 or I would pick it up at launch to help with the likely abysmal sales. I really hope Nintendo don't base the future of the series on the sales of Zero as it was obviously going to fail on an already failing console.

 

[freethoughtbubble]

Is it too much to hope they release another version of this game on NX without mandatory gyro controls that's tweaked accordingly?

Fixed. And the answer, unfortunately, is probably yes.

 

[Jawbreaker]

In general, though, across platforms, there's no respect for very short games with high replay value. It's one of the reasons I brought up The Binding of Isaac earlier in the thread. If I'm looking for new games that I can pick up, press on, and see the ending credits by the time I turn the system off, there's really not a lot of options.

I also appreciate games like The Binding of Isaac, but that was much cheaper and reviewed quite well. If a game is legitimately great and the price point is reasonable, I don't think they'll get docked by reviewers. The argument can be made that the price shouldn't matter if the game is fantastic, but of course, it doesn't exist in a vacuum. There's a lot of competition vying for time and money that isn't unlimited. The market has changed considerably, for better or worse.

 

[Edag88]

Just played the first level. They keep it simple for you and you stumble a little with the new controls at first but I nailed them a couple times during that mission and it felt GOOD.

I'm moving onto the next level now and I can only see the motion controls getting better from here.

Gyro controls are Splatoon quality. They're good. Style is cool. Tries to go for a cooler attitude with the music and stuff, but its not cringey at all. The first level starts out mirroring the first level of 64 but then drifts off from there into original stuff.

So far I love it.

 

[Shiggy]

I really don't see why someone shouldn't be called on that, regardless of whatever investment they have in this game or any other.

This game has been in the hands of outlets for weeks now. If Gies wasn't enjoying himself during that time to the point of being unwilling to finish it at least once through, the proper thing to have done was ask for the review to be reassigned to someone else. Gies has already had a lot of issues with being taken seriously over various review gaffes in the past, so to come up on the day the embargo raises only to say that he didn't want to do his job is not what one would call helping his case.

Wouldn't that rather create a biased opinion? Only those who enjoy a game enough to finish are allowed to voice their opinion, if they cannot bother going through the game the review has to be reassigned as long as someone likes it? Wonder what that would look like for a really bad game that nobody likes.

If you read the Polygon text, it makes his opinion pretty clear and that's the point of a review too, right? So just because he's not calling it a review and it lacks a score, I don't see why they should reassign the game to another reviewer. Rather seems to be that some are dissatisfied that this game hasn't received generally positive reviews.

 

[Rodin]

I'd just like to take the time to appreciate the absurdity of this.

The sentence after the one you bolded is equally absurd. It's like Pikmin 3 (the last game he supervised before SF0) never happened lol.

The game sounds great to me, based on the reviews that didn't dismiss the game immediately based on the motion controls at least. The graphics are the biggest and most glaring fault but if the gameplay is great I won't care.

The replayibilty sounds like exactly what I want in a Star Fox game, different branches and medals and all that awesome stuff. The slow puzzle levels aren't sounding too hot but they never looked fun to begin with. Bosses as ever are looking fantastic; Nintendo and Platinum always deliver on that front and I am expecting some holy shit moments.

Too bad I am still playing Dark Souls 3 or I would pick it up at launch to help with the likely abysmal sales. I really hope Nintendo don't base the future of the series on the sales of Zero as it was obviously going to fail on an already failing console.

Well let's hope sales won't be that bad

but yes, Nintendo needs to keep the series going on the NX, it's one of those games that they can sell on both the home and the handheld. Also a good quality anime would help a lot in increasing brand recognition, which would help with sales of future chapters.

for some people people the control has really clicked and the game is very much fun as a result. In this cases the average score ain't telling you much, you should try the game and see for yourself. Obviously if you liked previous iterations of the franchise it already has something going for it.

Pretty much.

 

[marcbret87]

The reviews are going more or less as I expected. Lots of bashing for the controls and graphics, but for some people people the control has really clicked and the game is very much fun as a result. In this cases the average score ain't telling you much, you should try the game and see for yourself. Obviously if you liked previous iterations of the franchise it already has something going for it.

Personally, I am quite looking forward to playing it. I am bit tired of 50+ hours games that have tonnes of side quests, would like a more focused experience for a change. Also, the co-op option in case I don't quite catch the controls is always there, my wife will appreciate.

 

[pulsemyne]

Nah, Giant Bomb review is legit. I might have come down a little softer, like a 3, but the point remains: playing Star Fox Zero made me seriously question if Star Fox was ever fun or if I was just too young to know what I liked. Ryckert's last paragraph is directly in line with how I thought about the game after completing it several times. Gies is being melodramatic, but his individual points aren't far from my experience.

I honestly had to go back and play the SNES versions and 64 to fully understood how I felt.

And yet for me it's been really good. Horses for courses.

 

[JobenNC]

It's just so disappointing to see that something I've always deeply loved (games that I can start up and beat opening to credits in one session, under 2 hours or so, but requiring finesse and mastery to do well) is now considered a bad thing. For years I've had to put up with games ballooning in length and scope, which I've never really been a fan of outside of RPGs (which I play on and off with other games in between). Now, finally, a game of the style I really like comes out, with a 2-3 hour campaign that requires you to come back to it again and again until you feel like you've totally mastered it 50 or 70 or 100 times through, and people are saying that's "archaic" or somehow a waste of money.

I'd much rather have a high skill ceiling 2 hour game I can sit down and go from opening to credits in one session and hone my skills at it for months, learn all the tricks, and achieve maximum possible scores at than a 20 hour game that I play once and never touch again, but no one makes games like that anymore. Now Nintendo has. I am so excited to finally get my hands on this on Friday.

I feel you. Obviously it still could be bad, but I haven't heard a ton from like-minded people yet.

 

[Neoleo2143]

You are runnjng on the assumption that many of these reviews are out to be unbiased. Gies has a fanbase and people who read his thoughts know how their own align to his views. Simply saying he didnt finish it is enough to tell his fanbase what they can expect. Its no different than anyone elses preferred editor.

Then Polyon could have gotten out a second opinion. The game was in their hands for a Month, far more time than the vast majority of games out there.

 

[fhqwhgads]

Given some of the reactions I see the "7/10 Worst game ever" stigma is still alive and well. It's like how a game can have strong sales and still be considered a disappointment, a game can have a respectable score and still be considered a bad game.

 

[Tom Nook Sawyer]

Wouldn't that rather create a biased opinion? Only those who enjoy a game enough to finish are allowed to voice their opinion

He's merely asking Polygon to post a review of the game, which they haven't at all, by someone who played it for more than an hour

 

[Schnozberry]

Nah, Giant Bomb review is legit. I might have come down a little softer, like a 3, but the point remains: playing Star Fox Zero made me seriously question if Star Fox was ever fun or if I was just too young to know what I liked. Ryckert's last paragraph is directly in line with how I thought about the game after completing it several times. Gies is being melodramatic, but his individual points aren't far from my experience.

I honestly had to go back and play the SNES versions and 64 to fully understood how I felt.

I think the way the GB review was framed grated on me. It seemed to fundamentally misunderstand the game. Star Fox was always about replay and chasing high scores and seeing who can get through the stage taking the least amount of damage. At least to me, that is. Maybe I have different expectations from Star Fox than everybody else, but this game seems to satisfy all the check boxes for me. The story elements always seemed secondary to me to me and when I played the demo of SF0 at Pax Prime the controls clicked with me immediately. Maybe it's because of all the hours I put into Splatoon, I'm not sure.

It seemed like Ryckert was expecting a AAA set piece space action game set in the Star Fox Universe instead of a Star Fox game, with all the development priority changes that requires. That's what made the 2002 comment seem to jarring to me personally. The statement implies the premise that 2016 games are better than 2002 games because the industry as a whole has lifted it's quality standards, but in making that statement he's asking me to disbelieve my own experiences.

 

[Ocarina_117]

I would love for this game to sell well enough to give Nintendo confidence in allowing Platinum full reign over a future Star Fox titles. I believe it was mentioned in Emily's reports that Nintendo are in discussion with external developers in handling their IPs.

 

[Neoleo2143]

Given some of the reactions I see the "7/10 Worst game ever" stigma is still alive and well. It's like how a game can have strong sales and still be considered a disappointment, a game can have a respectable score and still be considered a bad game.

People have agendas, opinions, biases... its a matter of fact. Scores carry little context on their own so a 7 could be alright or terrible depending on who you ask.

Time will tell if Star Fox Zero is looked upon Fondly, I think once detractors die down and the more detailed critiques and people enjoy it pop up, the narrative will change. Or it could not happen and the game wallows in the gaze of mediocrity. History is a funny beast, a single moment is never fully defining of it.

 

[JobenNC]

Nah, Giant Bomb review is legit. I might have come down a little softer, like a 3, but the point remains: playing Star Fox Zero made me seriously question if Star Fox was ever fun or if I was just too young to know what I liked. Ryckert's last paragraph is directly in line with how I thought about the game after completing it several times. Gies is being melodramatic, but his individual points aren't far from my experience.

I honestly had to go back and play the SNES versions and 64 to fully understood how I felt.

I apologize if you've already covered it in previous posts, but what was your conclusion? Were the other games better, or do you just feel like it's a formula you won't get anymore out of?

 

[Anarky]

I would love for this game to sell well enough to give Nintendo confidence in allowing Platinum full reign over a future Star Fox titles. I believe it was mentioned in Emily's reports that Nintendo are in discussion with external developers in handling their IPs.

Yeah I think a Star Fox with full reign by Platinum could be pretty bitchin and could probably be better than Zero.

 

[TheSlySoul]

Specifically, I want to know what people who love starfox 64 think of this game.

I play star fox 64 regularly even after all these years and it ranks as one of my all time favorite games. I can beat each playthrough it about an hour.

I will post my opinion in the OP because I love SF64 to death. Background is did not like Adventure, Assualt had good and bad things, hated Command.

Edit: Overall I felt Skyward Sword was meh, but it was not controls. It was Fi + boring OW. Great dungeons though!

 

[Refreshment.01]

People have agendas, opinions, biases... its a matter of fact. Scores carry little context on their own so a 7 could be alright or terrible depending on who you ask.

Time will tell if Star Fox Zero is looked upon Fondly, I think once detractors die down and the more detailed critiques and people enjoy it pop up, the narrative will change. Or it could not happen and the game wallows in the gaze of mediocrity. History is a funny beast, a single moment is never fully defining of it.

Sadly this never happens with games that have "motion" controls as part of the experience.

Just look at this boards, some people that abored a Wii game 10 years ago, still detest it with burning pation. Even when some of their arguments have been objectively shutdown, they' ll just wait for another thread and present the exact same reservations, basically initiating the cycle from Zero. XD

Most people that abor the game without even playing it will still feel the same years from now. Their minds were made up in the middle of 2015.

 

[Ridley327]

Wouldn't that rather create a biased opinion? Only those who enjoy a game enough to finish are allowed to voice their opinion, if they cannot bother going through the game the review has to be reassigned as long as someone likes it? Wonder what that would look like for a really bad game that nobody likes.

If you read the Polygon text, it makes his opinion pretty clear and that's the point of a review too, right? So just because he's not calling it a review and it lacks a score, I don't see why they should reassign the game to another reviewer. Rather seems to be that some are dissatisfied that this game hasn't received generally positive reviews.

Why would you assume that the next guy would have given it a better score? That's not the issue at all here. Gies had at least two weeks to play through this game for an assignment, and all he has to show for it is a paragraph about how he couldn't even do that. He is not doing his job, and as such, deserves ridicule for the lack of professionalism on his part, whether it's for not finishing his assignment or for not having the decency to pass it off to someone else who could, regardless of what their ultimate feelings towards the game would have been.

Gies could have played through it in its entirety and have had the same opinion that he's expressing now, and not get any flack from anyone other than the people emotionally invested in the scores for the game. He would also deserve this criticism that is being levied against him now if he tried this on another game. There are people that have expressed the same feelings he has for this particular game and still did their damn job in the end. It is really not that much to ask for.

 

[Tom Nook Sawyer]

Why would you assume that the next guy would have given it a better score? That's not the issue at all here. Gies had at least two weeks to play through this game for an assignment, and all he has to show for it is a paragraph about how he couldn't even do that. He is not doing his job, and as such, deserves ridicule for the lack of professionalism on his part, whether it's for not finishing his assignment or for not having the decency to pass it off to someone else who could, regardless of what their ultimate feelings towards the game would have been.

Gies could have played through it in its entirety and have had the same opinion that he's expressing now, and not get any flack from anyone other than the people emotionally invested in the scores for the game. He would also deserve this criticism that is being levied against him now if he tried this on another game. There are people that have expressed the same feelings he has for the game and still did their damn job.

Nailed it

 

[Astral Dog]

so the reception is very mixed, no surprise after all the game never looked particularly impressive, but still a lot of fun...

Some of the bashing about low quality is a bit overreacted, its not the reboot SF deserves, but at least something to play while waiting for the new system news, (i sure hope that NX is going to beat expectations, its like fanboys are too invested in saying Nintendo does not make good Wii U games on purpose, cant wait for the first mediocre NX game

 

[orthodoxy1095]

It would be interesting if Nintendo blacklisted Polygon from receiving future review copies.
I mean it's one thing for receiving either negative or lukewarm reviews, but to not even bother doing the review at all is something else.

The alternative would be Gies slapping a 2-3 on that article and call it a review.

Which do you think Nintendo would prefer?

 

[Astral Dog]

should have been $40 though

 

[BY2K]

If he had given a score, you could be sure that B2YK would be the first to point out that the guy did not finish the game and is thus not qualified to review it.

Well that's a quick as hell way to point fingers.

Nice job misspelling my 4 characters username, btw.

 

[Ridley327]

The alternative would be Gies slapping a 2-3 on that article and call it a review.

Which do you think Nintendo would prefer?

To be honest, Nintendo really hasn't shown any inclination of being terribly fussed by negative reviews in the past. I'm sure they don't mind Gies being unable to bring the average down a little bit more if he did score his review, but they haven't struck me as the kind of company that values less-than-glowing reception with anything more than a shrug and an "onto the next one" attitude.

I mean, they were certainly used to them last fall!

 

[wild wild rice]

Best Buy order is shipped. Gonna tell the UPS guy to do a barrel roll when he arrives and see if he knows what's up.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

What does it mean to finish this game anyways? It's a game that seems, like many PG titles, to lend itself to replaying.

The "offload the review" idea is nice, but would also likely require shuffling the staff's schedule around. It wouldn't exactly be surprising if the other authors already have assignments they need to tend to before they take on Gies' assignment.

To be honest, Nintendo really hasn't shown any inclination of being terribly fussed by negative reviews in the past. I'm sure they don't mind Gies being unable to bring the average down a little bit more if he did score his review, but they haven't struck me as the kind of company that values less-than-glowing reception with anything more than a shrug and an "onto the next one" attitude.

I mean, they were certainly used to them last fall!

I only posited the idea because Polygon threw out a review for Codename STEAM last year where the author hadn't finished the game either.

Which again is why I'm actually a bit surprised that Gies didn't score Star Fox. I guess that's either his personal standard or it speaks to just how much he hated the game.

 

[Ridley327]

What does it mean to finish this game anyways? It's a game that seems, like many PG titles, to lend itself to replaying.

The "offload the review" idea is nice, but would also require shuffling the staff's schedule around. It wouldn't exactly be surprising if the other authors already have assignments they need to tend to before they take on Gies' assignment.

I think the reasonable suggestion here would be for Gies to say, "Hey, I struggled with this game to the point where I don't have a review ready in time for the embargo, so allow me a little bit more time with it for something more substantial in the near future. Or if I'm still struggling to the point of debilitation, I will work with the staff here at Polygon to find a replacement reviewer when they're available to give a proper write-up of the game that I would confess to not being able to do myself." Apologize for the delay, and get to work one way or the other.

A little egg on your face is better than taking a whole pie.

 

[me0wish]

My most hyped Q1/Q2 release, hopefully worth the wait!

 

[KingBroly]

What does it mean to finish this game anyways? It's a game that seems, like many PG titles, to lend itself to replaying.

The "offload the review" idea is nice, but would also likely require shuffling the staff's schedule around. It wouldn't exactly be surprising if the other authors already have assignments they need to tend to before they take on Gies' assignment.

I only posited the idea because Polygon threw out a review for Codename STEAM last year where the author hadn't finished the game either.

Which again is why I'm actually a bit surprised that Gies didn't score Star Fox. I guess that's either his personal standard or it speaks to just how much he hated the game.

codename STEAM is a much longer game and it's kinda the norm for RPG's not to be finished in time for reviews.

But...this is a 2-3 hour game. The idea that he couldn't complete a 2-3 hour game for a review in 2 weeks shows his disservice to the game and his job.

 

[Tom Nook Sawyer]

codename STEAM is a much longer game and it's kinda the norm for RPG's not to be finished in time for reviews.

But...this is a 2-3 hour game. The idea that he couldn't complete a 2-3 hour game for a review in 2 weeks shows his disservice to the game and his job.

My most accounts, it was closer to a month even

 

[braves01]

The non-review comes off as more of a tantrum than anything. He says he played half the game, which is like 1-2 hours going by what people are saying, and probably more time drafting editing and uploading his rant. I mean, you're really not going to just play that last hour? He admits at the end of the tantrum that he didn't make a good-faith effort to review it. Come on now. Silly and unprofessional even for the gaming industry.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

The non-review comes off as more of a tantrum than anything. He says he played half the game, which is like 1-2 hours going by what people are saying, and probably more time drafting editing and uploading his rant.

Actually, that's my bigger problem with the way he wrote it. It's very Gies-ish.

He could have wrote a very sensible post about what exactly he didn't like, what point he got to where he felt it was time to quit and why he/others don't have time to finish the review.

But instead it does seem very tantrum-ish.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

At what point can someone say they don't like the game and/or the controls a not be arraigned for it? How long do you have to play and how good will you have to be in order to say that?

Only asking so that I can know when it's okay to post impressions after playing it

 

[Tom Nook Sawyer]

At what point can someone say they don't like the game and/or the controls a not be arraigned for it? How long do you have to play and how good will you have to be in order to say that?

Unless you're posting as the only representation on behalf of the of the biggest gaming websites, I'd say you're good whenever

 

[Ridley327]

At what point can someone say they don't like the game and/or the controls a not be arraigned for it? How long do you have to play and how good will you have to be in order to say that?

Only asking so that I can know when it's okay to post impressions after playing it

Gies isn't being taken to task for not liking a game. Gies is being taken task for failing his professional duty as a video game reviewer.

As I mentioned, there are certainly plenty of reviewers that didn't like the game, and they still performed their job at the end of the day.

 

[Agent Unknown]

It's just so disappointing to see that something I've always deeply loved (games that I can start up and beat opening to credits in one session, under 2 hours or so, but requiring finesse and mastery to do well) is now considered a bad thing. For years I've had to put up with games ballooning in length and scope, which I've never really been a fan of outside of RPGs (which I play on and off with other games in between). Now, finally, a game of the style I really like comes out, with a 2-3 hour campaign that requires you to come back to it again and again until you feel like you've totally mastered it 50 or 70 or 100 times through, and people are saying that's "archaic" or somehow a waste of money.

I'd much rather have a high skill ceiling 2 hour game I can sit down and go from opening to credits in one session and hone my skills at it for months, learn all the tricks, and achieve maximum possible scores at than a 20 hour game that I play once and never touch again, but no one makes games like that anymore. Now Nintendo has. I am so excited to finally get my hands on this on Friday.

Best post of the thread, absolutely nailed it. I'm still a bit skeptical of the controls but the reviews which mainly slam it for having a short main campaign typical of the series even though it's packed with skill based branching paths and extras are just incredibly stupid, almost like the writers are deliberately catering to the throwaway generation. Who on earth buys a game like this and thinks "Gee, I sure hope I like this $50-60 game so much that I'll only have the desire to play 40-50% of it and will never want to unlock any of the additional stages and other content!"

Edit: Yeah, that Gies "review" is an embarrassment, wow. Welcome to an age where a game reviewer can openly revel in their laziness and still get paid.