User Profile



Male, United States

Wed 22nd May 2013

Recent Comments



DeltaPeng commented on Eiji Aonuma on the Idea of Giving Link a Voice:

Per xenoblade chronicles, methinks the avatar seems a little inpersonal because of the typically (too?) casual gestures made during cutscenes, and in comparison to other characters who are voice acted. The contrast is shown in that your character tends to be very animated (talking and otherwise) in battle, but in cutscenes he/she stands there and acts like a quiet/shy mime. May've helped if they displayed more enthusiastic emotions based on dialogue choices (or a standard subsets of phrases to be said per VA, like Shulk's "I'm really feeling it!", to breathe life into the personality). I guess it's a bit tough since the expectation is to have the player imprint their personality, as opposed to a pre-designed/thought-out character like Shulk, who could then have a voice acted lines and react to the world and other characters in a more personal way (based on predetermined personality, goals, etc). This style (character imprint, character customization and dialogue choices to form personality) seems more western RPG'ish, personally I prefer a deeper story and set characters/personalities of typical JRPG's.

I think there's a charm to having characters that don't speak, when done right. Examples done well are Mario and Luigi (they speak gibberish) and Link (battle grunts), and Inklings (gibberish, personality shown some in game at Squid Sister concerts, idle plaza animations, fashion-focus, expanded to generalization of having mischievous personalities on fan vids [some good stuff, btw]). I think these characters tend to embody a certain kind of personality on their own based on their general actions / mindset. It'd be different/weird to have a Link say with a voice or with character dialogue choices. Instead, we tend to see them with a certain heroic personality and presume / expect them to make the right or typically more just action. That may simplify the storylines, but I think it works well with their type of games, which tend to be more about action, adventure, and commitment/dedication (to overcome difficulty, save the world / princess / toad / etc). I feel like if they wanted to choose a deeper storyline or explore other aspects of story, it'd be typically better suited to introduce a new character to do so (like Midna and the more serious storyline/action of Twilight Princess, from which we can see Link react in new ways to the new problems presented).



DeltaPeng commented on Review: Discovery (Wii U eShop):

My initial impressions (have not tried Minecraft but seen a few vids. Just played some Stone Shire prior).

++ ~148 items all available in unlimited quantity from the start (no grinding to collect!)
++ easily place (L) and remove (R) blocks and from a distance

  • graphically looks great
  • good price point $8
  • nice feature - can duplicate worlds you create
  • easily move around with flight mode
  • easily change lighting (+ - buttons)

As mentioned, some negatives, but I didn't care about the exclusion of most of them.
-can't use pro controller for single player (presumably used for co-op mode)
-as mentioned, no off tv to gamepad screen play
~- no gamepad inventory management, though item selection is not too hard
-no survival mode so potentially less play time.

Goal appears to be a focus on creativity and not grinding or interruptions from monsters, and it seems to have done really well in that.

My initial play impression is 8.2 / 10, particularly if you care more about creating worlds over the other features. May have less gameplay time due to lack of grinding and monsters to survive, but for the price point it's a fairly high value for the money. For me, as I'm getting older I particularly dislike wasting time grinding. This game appears to be the perfect type of block sandbox for me (everything being unlocked, unlimited quantity, ability to move and place blocks freely).



DeltaPeng commented on Developers Dig into Sales Failure of Toto Temp...:

I echo a few other comments here:
-the price could be a bit lower (personally for my gaming group, probably $4-5. I'd probably enjoy it, not sure if my friends would as much so idk how much mileage it would get).
-the inclusion of 'Deluxe' in name makes it sound / gives the impression that it's a cheaper title

Aside from that, I'll say I like multiplayer games and wish there were more, online may be nice though I don't think I'd play it much more even if it had it, unless the gameplay was very good quality/replayability. I bought some other indie local mp games but my friends and I didn't care much for them, so they only got a few rounds of use, and they're not something I think I'd regularly play. They didn't quite compare to similar games (i.e. bomberman) which are simple to learn, but difficult to master, fun/challenging, good 'gotcha' moments.

I checked out a couple Youtube videos for this game, and it was hard to understand just by watching it (saw the bomb exploding mode). I think a good multiplayer game (like sports) is ideally fairly easy / clearly understood by those observing it, so they can cheer and get excited and become interested in playing it. The color indicator is helpful when a swap occurs for the person obtaining the goat/bomb, but it's confusing for the person who gets tackled and a bit visually distracting. Maybe a better option could be a slow motion tackle (similar to Starwhal?). A more exaggerated animation for getting hit by a bomb may also be helpful visually (and also feel more satisfying when a hit occurs. Maybe add a sound effect? Not sure if there was one.). I found it also kind of weird that only the leader's score is displayed in game. While that might've been added for suspense, I think it's more interesting (and perhaps even more suspenseful) to watch if all 4 player's scores had been continuously shown. Content feels a bit sparse, there are other stages and I see some random things / powerups, not sure their significance (doesn't seem readily apparent from video watching).

-Ideas/recommendations to make game interesting:

Note, I haven't played the game so some of this may or may not be actually implemented to some degree in the game.
-per bomb exploding mode, may help if the bomb showed more visually when it was about to explode. It seems more based on the sound effects, but if the sound were turned low/off, it seems it'd be harder to track/tell when it was about to explode
-The dashing mechanic seems to be the main draw, does the dash go the full distance (until running into something)? While that mechanic is interesting, a cooldown on dash and limited distance could potentially be more varied/interesting (which would allow for inclusion of powerups to extend those or get the full-length dash, or a 'double' dash to allow player to change direction). Maybe rare one time use items to snatch goat/bomb from afar, like a grappling hook. Or throwing a temporary block (to limit movement). Goat holder can collect a temporary shield/trampoline item to push back players? Seems like dashing to snatch item leaves that player immediately in danger more often than not (presuming all players are going after one).



DeltaPeng commented on Editorial: Let's Make 2016 a Year of Nintendo ...:

My 2016 highlights I'm keeping an eye on are:
-3DS new ace attorney game! (think it will release this year)
-3DS Final Fantasy Explorers
-WiiU Fire Emblem crossover
~WiiU Star Fox
~NX news
-new SSB4 characters (WiiU)

I'm interested to play existing games I own as well, Discovery (WiiU), Hatsune Miku Project Mirai (3DS), Xenoblade Chronicles X (WiiU). This'll probably keep me busy, if not I have other games in my collection I've yet to play through/try



DeltaPeng commented on ​'Brain Training' Games Aren't All They're C...:

Emphasis in brackets: [ ]
"While the games are no doubt entertaining and require different thought processes than your average video game, they [do not actually improve] mental performance."

A nitpick, but as it may help for future article creation, I'd say a more correct statement would be "it has [not been scientifically proven] to improve mental performance" as opposed to stating that it (100%) does not improve mental performance.

The fradulent advertising was more based on a claim that brain games [will] prevent specific things (memory loss, dementia, and Alzheimer's disease) from occurring, which is a more serious claim than doing this may/will help improve brain function / mental performance. For all we know, brain games could prevent said mental deterioration or improve mental performance, but the fradulent part was claiming that it does, when the proof is inconclusive / uncertain / not proven currently scientifically one way or another in an adequate measure / form.

Per my experience, I've played a little Brain Age, Brain Age Academy, Brain Challenge, and while it may not scientifically be proven to make me smarter, practicing thinking logically and with a time limit doesn't hurt. Prior to getting my first job, part of the interview process involved completing logic questions on a test in a time limit. I think I did very well on it (I got the job). For a time I spent some time playing said Brain games prior to going to bed, which sometimes helped me sleep because it made me mentally tired (similar to working out physically, but for the brain). May be a good thing to try again / test out someday.

The headline of this article (as someone else mentioned) is a bit confusing, as the mention of Brain Training and a picture of the Brain Age game makes it seem like Nintendo was the one who had the false advertising (particularly for those skimming the site and not reading articles in their entirety).



DeltaPeng commented on Review: Discovery (Wii U eShop):

6/10 makes the game sound like a bad game (though the general way I see games scaled/rated is 7 as average/decent). For what is on offer (creative mode, more world space than minecraft, beautiful graphics) and a good price point (~1/4 of minecraft price?), I'd have thought it should at least be 7/10 or inbetween 7-8, like 7.5 if that were possible (good quality of game per cost). The game looks great so I'll probably pick it up, my initial impression is that it seems a lot better than all the other minecraft clones.

Granted, I haven't played many such games and survival mode has little appeal to me currently. Of this genre this game seems most appealing, played Terraria on PC and the survival aspect (endless hordes, high spawn rate) was annoying and too often interrupted the creative process.



DeltaPeng commented on Analysts Weigh in on Nintendo's Successes and ...:

While a stronger digital presence would give more reason to buy amiibo, would you really want / be able to afford that? I do think that since amiibo has been a run away hit, more game functionality (to unlock things like costumes) would be helpful to the consumers. But I don't want to see Nintendo go the route of "let's make a smash bros game where every character is locked behind a $13 amiibo". I prefer to buy a game and have the core functionality free.

Additionally, Nintendo has been getting better at producing amiibo, and the scalper situations/prices have finally been going down. A consideration for making amiibo more popular digitally, is that if it happens, Nintendo will essentially recreate the supply shortage/scalper situation by bringing up the demand on all amiibo. Nintendo has done a great job at producing many kinds of amiibo, I presume over 40-50+ different kinds within a year. While they can restock the more popular figures from time to time, I doubt they can restock all of them to the satisfaction of the customer if they were all to suddenly become high in demand (additionally, stores would have a hard time managing and shelving that many items in addition to other toys-to-life competitors).

If Nintendo were to make an amiibo-centric game, I think the best and perhaps only feasible solution would probably be to:
first release amiibo cards for all existing figures to unlock the digital functionality. These would enable Nintendo to produce and make available all digital content, and give a lower price to those who only care about digital. Would probably only work for any read-only amiibo options, as I presume that amiibo cards cannot store the same level of data as regular amiibo.

So far, Mario Maker is the best example of amiibo unlockables imo, incorporating the use of several amiibo, but not making it mandatory (there is a way, albeit [too] slow, to unlock every costume without amiibo). Not a big problem though cause even if you don't own the amiibo, you can still enjoy the use of the costume from others who make/edit stages with that amiibo costume. Presuming a casual amiibo collector, this implementation also works well. If your all-time favorite character say is Greninja and you have the amiibo, you can use your Greninja amiibo to have him make a cameo appearance in the game. If this was done for other games, it'd be an ideal/optimal implementation for kids / fans of said character. It should be noted that trying to incorporate 40-50+ ~extra characters in every game is not an easy task, though, so do take development efforts into consideration (prior to just assuming Nintendo can/should do it all).



DeltaPeng commented on The Animal Crossing amiibo Range is Bigger Tha...:

I did make mention in my post, that your main point is that Nintendo is not limiting stock, to which i agreed in the first discussion about this and now. If that's the point, you can say it as such.

But it's not right to use 'x number of amiibo manufactured per day' and claim it as a fact to try and prove your point, when it is not a fact, and likely your estimated number is a fair amount lower than that.

Amiibo first released; 11/21/14

10.5M amiibo shipped, article mentioning it at beginning of may 2015

To simplify calculations, roughly 6.5 months, estimating 30days/month

10.5M / (6.5 mo * 30 days) ~= 53.8K amiibo per day

But this is assuming that the initial stock of amiibo was just 'ready' on the day of release. More likely it took several months of manufacturing. Assuming a speedy production time of 3 months, that puts the total at around 36.8k a day, but it could be lower than that.

70k/54k = 1.296 = claim is roughly 30% more than actual
70k/37k = 1.892 = claim is roughly 89% more than actual

I have no issue with your claims that nintendo is producing a lot of amiibo and trying to satisfy demand, but use either more accurate estimates and call them estimates, or don't claim numbers as "fact" because in honesty those can't be proven accurately at this time, without knowing insider information into how long it actually takes to produce amiibo, how long prep time was, and whether Nintendo is actively creating amiibo (could be delays in manufacturing contracts, etc).



DeltaPeng commented on The Animal Crossing amiibo Range is Bigger Tha...:

@JaxonH @Reusinck. Jaxon, dude, we talked in another forum already that it's not a 'fact' that Nintendo is producing x amount of amiibo, and there's no sure way to know unless Nintendo tells us directly since we don't know how long it actually takes to create x amount of amiibo. Additionally. The numbers you estimated assumed that all amiibos appeared at the beginning release day (and that was closer to 50k a day), which is unlikely bc it probably took several months of manufacturing prior to the release day to create the initial amiibo stock (i.e. Less than 50k a day were being produced). That all said, you can point to restocks and reggie's words to say, 'no purposeful shortage and more amiibo are coming', but it's not truthful to claim the numbers you are claiming without solid evidence



DeltaPeng commented on The Animal Crossing amiibo Range is Bigger Tha...:

As much as I like amiibo, the ac character selection leaves something to be desired. I'm surprised is isabelle doesn't hv her standard green outfit, and that some more popular characters haven't been chosen (more villagers, shampoodle)



DeltaPeng commented on Talking Point: It's the Community That'll Put ...:

it does look like they're doing a lot of cool stuff with the editor (and new things/dynamics) not seen in the standard games, which can make levels very interesting.

The Nintendo fan base tends to be creative so that shouldn't be an issue, they gotta make sure they nail the sharing levels aspect well, so that the amazing creations can be shared/downloaded easily. I haven't followed the news, but I recommend level sharing and the ability for the user/player to group different levels into their own worlds. Also, if you can play 4players (5 with pad?), that would rock.



DeltaPeng commented on Reggie Fils-Aime Tackles Metroid Prime: Federa...:

I'm not a huge fan of Metroid prime, but I can see why fans are upset. Federation Force just looks ok to me, the characters look pretty blocky/generic, and it feels like they just slapped the Metroid Prime logo on the game to try and build hype or give the game more credibility/sales. I guess the genre itself is related to the Metroid Prime Hunters sub series more than Metroid Prime, but it's not particularly what fans clamoring for another Metroid Prime were wanting, methinks. I could be wrong of course, but that's my initial impressions.

For the cancellation request, some were wanting that (not bc they just don't want the game, as a game is better than none) but bc they wish the resources to dev the game went elsewhere (like creating a standard MP game)



DeltaPeng commented on Take More Risks With Your eShop Purchases, Ple...:

Unfortunately, I have tried buying a variety of different eshop titles in these past two years (and indie games on Steam), and a majority of them I didn't like (even some highly praised ones like shovel knight). It doesn't help if the game in question is pricey.

I am finding more what my particular tastes are, and those tend to be platformers / puzzles, more cartoony /creative and generally family friendly games. I am a huge fan of gameplay mechanics, something Nintendo does particularly well, if that isn't there I tend not to enjoy the game. That's what Nintendo does best, and I imagine that's what a lot of fans of Nintendo enjoy about them, so it's to be expected that that is the preference.

If other games want to step in, they need to get closer to the gameplay quality that Nintendo has (imo) or adjust their prices accordingly



DeltaPeng commented on Feature: The Biggest Wii U Retail Games of 201...:

Xenoblade chronicles by a fair measure, though the more Mario Maker footage they show the more I want to buy it.

Starfox looks ok imo, the graphics don't look like much (and I tend not to care about graphics). Fatal frame may be interesting to see more of or maybe rent.



DeltaPeng commented on Tablets Stole The Wii U's Thunder, Laments Shi...:

A nitpick, but while I appreciate that they are attempting to make the system affordable, I think the better focus would be to make software (that is, the games) more affordable for the masses, which would make the system more attractive. Nintendo puts out the best games (imo), and it's true that they have been doing more sales and eshop price points are cheaper, but for the games I want to play (mostly first party games) the price point tends to still be pretty high, and this is making gaming as a hobby less viable for me



DeltaPeng commented on Poll: We Need to Talk About amiibo - Where Do ...:

@I_Am_Kappa Well, I can't really speak to the issue officially as I am not part of Nintendo, you can recommend that idea (to sell amiibo unlocked content as DLC apart from amiibo) to them, but they are not 'required' to do anything (sorry, I tend to be pretty literal).

They have made mention of amiibo cards (which I assume may be only read-only) which are cheaper, which may be the solution you are looking for (no figure and hence cheaper and mainly focuses on the digital content). We'll have to see on details, whenever they come out.

As to whether they 'should' make amiibo content available as paid DLC, I can see multiple sides to it. They'd make some more sales that way (on digital content only), but would it outweigh the money they could make if they continued to sell only amiibo figures (and amiibo cards)? There is a 'charm' that comes with having content unlocked by the figures, maybe primarily for kids, similar to the 'magic' of having a skylanders/DI figurine bring up that character in-game, which may be lost if the content was available outside the figures.

In my eyes, the digital unlock via amiibo is already pretty light compared to Disney Infinity and Skylanders. I don't know if Nintendo would bother having a DLC unlock only option to get extra costumes from MK8 [unless the similar thing to DLC (outside of amiibo), the Smash bros mii fighters costumes, sold like crazy]. The exception would be Splatoon amiibo unlocks since they unlock heftier content, but the question comes back to, would Nintendo get more profit via selling the digital content alone (as opposed to with figures)? The other (personal) solution, would be to have a friend (with Splatoon amiibo) come and do the unlocks for you, in which case you'd only need one set of Splatoon amiibo per group of amiibo-collecting / Splatoon-owning friends.

If you do not approve (of the amount of content in Splatoon without amiibo), you could wait and not purchase the game until it is in the price range that you feel the content is worth, 'speaking with your wallet' to affect their sales numbers, as Nintendo is a business and will aim to make/maximize a profit in whatever they do (and for their shareholders). Or, you could adamantly not buy splatoon amiibo (if you are primarily looking for DLC unlock) and either wait for the price to reduce, wait for an option for it to be unlocked via some DLC payment option (if it happens), or befriend or use a friend's splatoon amiibo to unlock the content in your game (or in other games, like MK8). If you know an avid amiibo collector, it should not be hard for them to unlock a fair number of the content/costumes (assuming they do not keep the amiibo boxed up, but you get the gist).



DeltaPeng commented on Poll: We Need to Talk About amiibo - Where Do ...:

I think you mean 5.5 months, if we start from mid-November.

Point being is that they didn't decide to produce and ship amiibo overnight, so the actual start time for amiibo was pre-Nov 2014. Again, most likely months in advance. So, claiming Nintendo is making 70k amiibo units a day is speculation/estimation (though potentially inaccurate since we don't know true production start date), and not a fact/provable without inside information or a statement from Nintendo that's along the lines of 'this is how long amiibo have been in production, here are how many units we made during this time, the rate we produced amiibo have been consistent, and we are continuing to create the amiibo at this same rate today".

But perhaps that's a nitpick.

Your point being, which I agree with, is that Nintendo is working to produce more amiibo, as seen from restocks and the general high number of amiibo created so far.

And I'm about signing off, I have Splatoon to play and maybe a comic to draw.

For a less stressful amiibo experience, I recommend not trying to 'buy/get them all', and mainly focusing on the ones you really want to get. With hope, the rare amiibo people really want will be / become stocked well.

Good luck on your amiibo hunts everyone, but don't stress yourselves out too much over it.



DeltaPeng commented on Poll: We Need to Talk About amiibo - Where Do ...:

@JaxonH Alright, a nitpick, but first if you break down the math it's closer to 50k a day, 10.5M divided by 7 months, divided by ~30 days a month.

I can agree that they have produced a lot of amiibo total so far, 10.5M of any product is a good amount. So yes, Nintendo is creating a good supply, though demand is still high.

But whether the stock issue will be improved soon (such that rare amiibos are no longer rare) and whether Nintendo is still actively producing amiibo at this moment, is more unknown. Whether they are "actually /currently creating 50k amiibo units a day", is not a fact, it's still speculation, because it assumes (per my math above and your ~70k number) that it only took from the amiibo starting day (Nov 2014) till now to create all 10.5M amiibo units.

Most likely Nintendo did not start production of amiibo the moment or day before they began selling amiibo, more likely the amiibo production line started months in advance (prior to its release on Nov 2014).

That said, how long the process takes to create x amount of amiibo, such that amiibo will become plentiful and not rare, we don't know unless someone from Nintendo reveals that info. It's also dependent on if Nintendo wishes to make the rarer amiibo more plentiful (characters that they didn't anticipate would get much attention or use in games as amiibo), as opposed to just printing new ones or more versions of popular characters. It is unlikely that all the lesser characters will become as plentiful as the more common ones, unless Nintendo sees a large demand for them. A bad stock decision would be, as you pointed out, to have too many of a character people don't want taking up shelf/storage/retail space, and costing them money in that way.

Since amiibo have become popular, though, they should be able to take more risks in releasing more of the rare ones, as have been seen by the small restocks of late. Could use more risk-taking for the rarer characters though, which is what I think a lot of the fans are wanting (i.e. more Rosalina, robin, lucina, etc). Lesser characters, like King Dedede, people want him mainly for collections, but I'd say he has less general appeal as opposed to characters like Rosalina and Jigglypuff (whom buyers may buy even if not familiar with the character/series, because they look cool [imo]).



DeltaPeng commented on Poll: We Need to Talk About amiibo - Where Do ...:

@MadAdam81 "If there was double the stock, there'd be less sales and not more - the idea that stock is short has driven sales."

Not necessarily, depends on how many people are buying them out of rarity as opposed to actually wanting the figure. A lot of people want to complete their collection, in which case having more stock would result in more sales. The initial rarity has driven hype and gotten more people interested in them, though



DeltaPeng commented on Poll: We Need to Talk About amiibo - Where Do ...:

@JaxonH While they have been putting out restocks, most of them seem pretty small. I don't think they are producing millions of figures of month, per the stock situation it seems more like in the 1k/10k's, assuming they are reprinting each month (someone earlier mentioned possibility that Nintendo needed to renew/update manufacturing contract after initial amiibo production estimates were off)



DeltaPeng commented on Poll: We Need to Talk About amiibo - Where Do ...:

@Technosphile Region locking on toys is different than games by far, as it is related to unlocking content (oftentimes, neutral, such as costumes) as opposed to rating the content itself compared to a culture's values. I don't think there's any hypocrisy there at all.

I'd say S.H. Figuarts is a different case. Amiibo are better compared to with skylanders and disney infinity (similar sized, detailed, and priced figures). S.H. Figuarts tend to be in the $25-50 range, which means that less people would intend to buy them to start (the cheaper something is, the greater demand for it), and hence it'd be easier to resupply



DeltaPeng commented on Poll: We Need to Talk About amiibo - Where Do ...:

On the other side of the fence, people would argue that there is not enough content (unlocked via amiibo) to justify the amiibo price, so it's a tricky thing.

Note that a large part of the price is for the figure itself. I mainly collect them for the figures which I think has better value than the digital (currently).

Ideally all content would be free and unlocked, but a good question is how the amiibo content is created. If extra time/money is spent specifically to create unlockable content (for amiibo), then it makes more sense and is less like 'locking content away to charge more', but rather having DLC/extra_content paid for by amiibo sales.

Other option, can always befriend an amiibo-collecting Nintendo fan to unlock stuff for you ;p



DeltaPeng commented on Poll: We Need to Talk About amiibo - Where Do ...:

With limited stock, the distribution of these amiibo could have been better. Either, one of each kind of amiibo per person (and a total of x number of amiibo per person per visit, as opposed to everyone being able to get 1 of each kind and Robin/Lucina being sold to the first ~4-6 people opening day).

Or, Nintendo/retailers needs to exclusively sell these online, to ensure each household does not get more than 1 of a kind, preventing scalpers from claiming a ton.

An example is I recently heard one person was somehow able to preorder 3 Lucina from a store when that window was open. That's.... sigh.

@mjc0961 I'd say the idea of a contract and moving to other ones is more likely than not (presumed best way to be profitable for a manufacturing plant is to be producing all the time, and hence to schedule everything in advance). Sure, Nintendo's been putting out stock regularly since opening, but who's to say the original contract didn't account for all these? Their plans from the start was to create an amiibo per smash bros character. So, the original contract could have been to produce x number of mario by this month, x number of marth's by this month, etc. They may not have the flexibility to go back and ask them to produce 2x-4x the original requested/arranged number of amiibo. That said, Nintendo could've had more foresight into which characters were going to be popular (fire emblem, less mario [there are already figures of him around and about, one can only buy so many variations of a character], rosalina [she's the Elsa of Nintendo! Of course she's going to be popular, c'mon mans!]).

That said, if we were going for individual character popularity (and in-game use via amiibo dlc), it makes sense certain characters like Pit, Meta Knight, King Dedede, etc were in low supply. Since the amiibo craze took off and some people want 1 of each to complete a collection, and due to scalpers, the supply was not adequate to meet everyone's wants. They are slowly improving (quite a few more greninja and jigglypuff produced, at least compared to Robin/Lucina/other_rares). Hopefully to continue to get better.



DeltaPeng commented on Review: Mega Man Battle Network 4 Red Sun & Bl...:

Personally, while I am a huge fan of Megaman Battle Network in terms of gameplay and style, and I consider it to contain one of the best action-rpg battle systems, I think by this point in time the game was feeling too familiar/repetitive. Too many iterations of a good thing without changing up the formula feels stale. The best of this line of series imo are 1-3 and MM Starforce 1-3.

There are some cool Styles (or, Souls as they call them in this game) as you get Styles based on Navis, so a number of different cool abilities. [My favorite was Roll Soul, her charge shot can destroy other player's battlechips (excellent in 2p versus)! However, this version on WiiU is incapable of versus mode. so that won't help much here.]

The battle system, per previous entries, is still top notch, and better than most RPG's. I forget when, but at some point in the series Countering was added (attacking an enemy with a battlechip right before they attack stuns them). That is a great addition to the series, if 4 is the first, then kudos goes to them for adding that, as it adds a level of depth to the timing of attacks and forces the player to watch enemy movements closer.

The major gripe I have against this game, and what kills it as a game, is that it is not one 'lengthy' adventure, it is a smaller adventure that they want you to complete 3 (or maybe 4) times in order to unlock everything. Sure, each playthrough is slightly different, you fight mettaur2 (the little helmet guy with the pickaxe) during the second playthrough instead of mettaur1, but per previous entries you encounter these guys much sooner on the standard adventure, rather than having to wait to battle and collect their battlechips.

If you are not a fan of grinding in general, you probably won't like this game, as being required to read through the same text and traversing the same areas that many times is frustrating.

Because of this, my personal rating for this game is probably 6.8 - 7.2 range, especially if you've played the original 3. For me, the series after 3 just felt like more of the same. Note though, that while Starforce series is similar to MMBN, the different perspective in the battle changes things up quite a bit. They also create a whole new 'universe' of characters, which helped liven things up.



DeltaPeng commented on Hands On: Checking Out Splatoon's Freshly Unlo...:

The ranked battles are interesting for the Capture the Center mode, but the ranking point system needs to be adjusted to be made more accessible so that wins accrue more ranking points and losses don't kill your rank (and can be a lower point difference as you rank up).

As is, the point difference between a win and a loss is too strict, even at the lowest rank (a loss is worth 50% a win [win is +20, loss is -10), at rank C it's 67% (win +15pt, loss -10pt), at rank C+ it's 83% [win+12, loss -10]. This adds to the frustration when individual merit (in a loss) isn't rewarded, and you feel like the loss occurred either due to the 'randomness' of team selection, team weapon loadout, or stage (Urchin Underpass seemed hard to recapture after it had been claimed). I think a lot of people of widely varying skills will get stuck in the C rank ranges because the ranking point difference from win to loss is not very high.

Methinks this could use adjustment, or that one should ignore their personal Rank to help avoid frustration. While 0 Level up points are rewarded for a Knockout, you do get quite a bit more Level Up points when you win, so the balance for those points should work itself out eventually.

Tips: for Ranked battles, if you get a team you aren't working well with, can exit to Lobby and return, that should shuffle who you match up against. Also, inking area is still pretty important in Ranked Matches, as it increases your team's mobility/stealth and decreases your opponent's. The primary goal is to capture the center, but afterwards it is handy to ink the surrounding pathways leading to the center to prevent your opponents from getting near there. I haven't experimented with a lot of weapons in Ranked, but the best time to experiment is probably when your rank is low.



DeltaPeng commented on Review: Splatoon (Wii U):

@shani I agree on the 'quality over quantity' is more often Nintendo's policy. On the other hand, I want Splatoon to be a raging success, and I think the best way they could do that would be to do lower the price (or make it free to play @gcunit [assuming they don't go crazy on costs and charge for every gear piece], but it's probably too late to change it from a retail release) to get more people committed to the game, and create Prototype stage releases (simple structures, only to be detailed/colored fully if players like it) to add more online content and stage variety. The community may even like the game more for it, giving the players a chance to be a part of how Splatoon develops as a game.

@shani Actually, I am complaining about the price-performance ratio a bit ;p For a game like this, it's better for the game to be cheaper and get more players rather than be more expensive and have less purchases, considering Online matchmaking benefits_from/requires more players. But per value, since it looks like I'll be an early adopter, I'm hoping the additional modes/stages will be enough to make up for it over time.

Anyway, I've said my bits. We'll see more how it actually feels as a game and its value once it's released, then once it releases the free stages/modes. I will say that not many games have caught my eye as being of remarkable quality in a long while, but Splatoon looks to be at that level. The only other game I consider a must buy for me at this time is Xenoblade Chronicles X.



DeltaPeng commented on Review: Splatoon (Wii U):

@shani I played all the demos and played games pretty much the entirety of the time (with exception of the 4th demo because of the server issues, and I did not know there was an additional playable hour after to make up for it), and the 2 stages were beginning to feel stale, though I wouldn'tve minded playing more.

I do make mention that it makes the most sense for them to have released the game now (during summer time) as opposed to later.

The mechanics are the most important part of a game (in my opinion), and Splatoon does well in that and has a good theme/aesthetic, which is why I mentioned that Splatoon is a must buy for me (at some point in time, prob day 1 primarily bc TRU has amiibo sale with preorder).

I've created simple computer games in the past, and from my point of view, though, I don't see why more stages (even dirt simple stages, like my example) aren't available to give more variety to gameplay/strategy and more replay value. Some ultra competitive people may only like to play a single map, but in general, stage variety can't hurt to extend the (replay) value of a game (and if a particular map or test map is terrible, people will just not select it and Nintendo should be able to note that and remove it accordingly). It feels like the development focus was on Single Player mode as opposed to Online, but Online is where I feel the core mechanics of the game really shine and are put to use, and seems to be what the game was originally intended for. Hopefully this will change with time, it should with the release of new stages/modes

@Zapkido The lack of local multiplayer online is likely due to the mechanics of the game. If you just had a 1v1 or 2v2 turf war, the team that has any inking splatted by enemy ink is at a pretty severe disadvantage for the time that that inking is out of play. Being able to only Super Jump to 1 target also doesn't help (it'd be pretty obvious to your opponents if you tried to backup your teammate via Super Jump, which may just end up in you getting splatted again). The minimum for turf war is probably 3v3, but at that point you can't reasonably split up the screen locally into that many mini-screens. Additionally, trying to process that many players' positions would probably not be easy for a single WiiU system. Hence, the primary play is online, but single player is good for practicing the gameplay and gear/weapon collection. The expectation/focus for this game should be Online play, methinks.



DeltaPeng commented on Review: Splatoon (Wii U):

@Zapkido No, you can't do the 'standard' multiplayer offline/locally as those are for 8 players (team battle of 4v4).

They do have a 2 player local, target practice kind of game that can be played, but the core multiplayer will be online.



DeltaPeng commented on Review: Splatoon (Wii U):

@shani Free maps/modes are not bad, but the issue I have is that the game should primarily be online play, and based on that I -feel- the game should have been more developed in terms of online content (namely, more maps). The single player does look quite good in terms of polish and design, but it's really like training for online play (so says my competitive gamer-self ).

It makes the game feel rushed, and my main concern is that people will get bored of the few maps offered too quickly and leave. Also questions on whether it is worth the value to pay full price, though pretty much everything else about the game looks great and polished. The game is a must buy for me because of its fun and polish, but the question for the consumer is at what price and when. I argued in earlier Splatoon forum topics that it should be cheaper to start, to garner support and ensure that online matches would be easy to make (as this game requires 8 players, as opposed to Smash which can initiate games with as little as 2 players).

Nintendo Everything has a good video review and opinions on the pacing of the content/map_change, if you want to check that out (around 10min mark).

For Nintendo, the other alternative though could be to have waited until August to release a fuller version of the game, but then, that would mean the summer game time for all students was pretty much lost, so it does seem better to release now rather than later.

Yes, more stages and modes are on the way and they do look like they'll add good replay value, but per stages, I don't see why there couldn't have been more variety regardless (more development focus, or ...). They could create Prototype stages and even label them as such (and, based on popularity, decide whether to polish and release it officially). Yeah, they won't have the depth and Nintendo polish of the stages they have now, but creating say a simple square/rectangle room that is ~large and completely open would give variety and change up gameplay (this would become more of a battle stage, with sneak attacks harder but more rewarding to pull off).

@Reznor52 The duration of Online Support for this game would probably depend on how popular the game is. If everyone kept playing it for years on end, Nintendo may keep it going, though they'd probably need to introduce paid DLC to get income to keep the servers running for the game. Presumably this game will not be backwards compatible on NX (depends on features), so that could affect it's online support, but so far Smash Bros U is popular online, and I've never really had trouble finding matches (and it's been out for a good while). Since they are both on the WiiU, if Smash keeps it's online support for a lengthy time, I can see Splatoon remaining as well.



DeltaPeng commented on Ronimo Games Explains Pricing for Swords & Sol...:

@Cathousemaster I don't know about releasing a game at 'as high a price as possible', doing that could just 'burn' your loyal fans or parents (who pay that price, if they later determine it is not worth the value). Could then bring bad reviews/publicity concerning the game.

I'd say for a studio, you want to find a good price point per value for your game. True, pricing too cheap could make people think your game is cheap and/or ignore it. Most of the time, though, if a game is a really good value, people can find out / will know with just a little bit of research online.

I'd say there is a market for mid-range games (who doesn't want a good game for a good price?), but most often it's a question of quality/value per price, and whether your game appeals to people (be it theme, interesting gameplay, etc). Certain games, like Mario/Nintendo games, are fairly high quality, and they have high appeal (all ages, good difficulty curve, creative stage design, etc), hence people are willing to buy them at higher prices (it's not just nostalgia, and it's not just brand recognition). Particularly, they often do game mechanics and controls very well.

On the flip side, the higher the price, the more competition (with other products/hobbies) and less willing people are to 'risk' buying your game (as most long time gamers have been disappointed with paying a price for a game they felt was much higher priced than its value). If you are an avid steam or mobile gamer, you may be hesitant to pay higher prices when you already have a lot to play or can tend to buy/try games at a much lower price (though, I argue console gaming offers a much deeper gaming experience than mobile, typically so it's worth the price difference from few $ apps).

But note, a lower price on a game doesn't mean a the total value you would/could've gotten from game sales is less. If the game is at a good price, you could even make more sales, and hence a higher overall $ amount from the game (principle of supply and demand, the cheaper something is, the more people will want or be able to buy it [higher demand]). With the way the market is, some people will impulse buy if it's a good price. If it takes too long for the price to go down, some may watch it, others will just leave it and look for good deals among the latest games.



DeltaPeng commented on ​Feature: The Poor Career Choice of Super Sm...:

Interesting article, I didn't know some gamers could make so much from professional gaming. Quite enlightening.

I'd say another big factor that Nintendo doesn't financially support Smash tournaments is that Smash is not like a PC game, being on console (and without excessive DLC) means that Nintendo tends to only make a one time sale/money from the game. Sure, they gain some money from popularity/advertising from the tourney as it peaks other players' interest to buy the game. But for Melee (where the gamecube, controllers, and game) is no longer readily produced, any financial backing is Nintendo giving away free money (minus, again, some advertising promotion).

On a game like League of Legends, you will have some people pay large amounts of money to unlock characters or new skins, oftentimes (for the ones who do pay) more than the cost of a single Smash bros game. With that and future DLC, there is always money to be made, so the producers can and have more reason to financially support/promote PC game tournies.

I prefer that Smash is basically unlocked from the start (though, it's also nice that they have been expanding the game via new characters [minus the DLC cost is not something I'm used to, feels high per character], custom stage/character transfer, etc).

Per sports players salaries in general (esport or otherwise), I tend to think they get overpaid. I can't figure out why someone would ever need, say, over $100k a year, when you should easily be able to make do with less. Sure, that excess money (from entertainment streaming, tickets) should not necessarily just go to the Sports League/Association instead, but in the ideal world it'd be nice to see that money go/be_donated to world problems instead (i.e. limited income for a single person, and excess should go to supporting the community, rather than a single person / few people). It's not that entertainment is bad (in moderation), but really, I think we tend to exalt / overemphasize the importance of it, when bigger issues are present and could be improved/changed were the wealth collected from these things distributed differently.



DeltaPeng commented on Combat Core Is What You'd Get If Super Smash B...:

It's smash-like in that it's a 4 player fighting game, but the gameplay itself will be quite different being in a 3D arena (gameplay-wise seems much more like a digimon arena game, or like a 4 player Tekken / virtua fighter). Would be tough to balance the gameplay as movement is harder and thus needs to be somewhat slower in a 3D environment, but the pacing looks pretty good. To be accessible (and probably bc of the 3D world), the controls would benefit if they were more simplistic (like Smash). The HP per fighter is a good way to go, and seems to again play / be balanced well (attacks do enough damage to make it a faster paced game [than a 4 player brawler like that TMNT one, and not dependent on mainly finishing moves [like PS all star brawl]). Is that custom fighter creation at the end? That would help a lot (in terms of replayability and character design, though making that balanced if moves are customizable would be hard).

The oculus rift support...I don't own one, but I don't see how it could be done well without giving people a headache (when a character is attacked, are they flipped (back-flip recover)? Displaying that imagery through the eyes of the fighter would be a roller coaster of an experience (and you wouldn't be able to 'see' your fighters attack movements ranges, making it in general much harder to play [I'm thinking, melee attacks in a FPS are hard enough, but trying to do that when combos and ranges are important, doesn't sound likely]).

For a one man project the gameplay looks like it is shaping up great and that it has a lot of potential. The art and character design could be better / more distinct. But, the visual-custom characters looked good and would change that up.



DeltaPeng commented on Satoru Iwata Highlights The Planned Connectivi...:

That's interesting, he mentions:
"What we are aiming to establish is not a simple extension of the existing loyalty program but a loyalty program with, say, the entertainment elements where the members feel that they have received certain rewards as a result of not only their purchases but also the history of their gameplay and how each consumer has interacted with others."

Makes it sound like you could be rewarded for helping/assisting other gamers, which is an interesting idea and could help foster a good community



DeltaPeng commented on Parent Trap: Splatoon Is The Perfect Family Fi...:

The issue with 4 gamepad support, aside from owning and selling separate gamepads, is most likely a technical issue. Trying to have the WiiU system render 4-5 separate images/views of the world and still run well, would be difficult. Maybe linking multiple wiiU systems, but that would be impractical (assuming 2 players per wiiU, would need 3-4).

Even if you could, though, the gameplay's style seems best with 4v4. A 3v3 may work, but I think 2v2 is too small a team. Splatting a player would give the other team a pretty big advantage, and one could only squid jump to one position (minus the beacon item). More players allows higher possibility to be suprised by an enemy, and to have to more cautiously approach things. Not to say it still couldn't be fun, but gameplay-wise the experience seems best with larger teams.

I think the 'family fun' aspect comes from being accessible / appropriate for all ages, and being enjoyable by everyone (even if not playing, as it can be fun to watch / backseat play, as someone mentioned earlier)



DeltaPeng commented on Nintendo Unable To Promise When It Can Remedy ...:

While demand can be difficult to predict (and hence, how much to supply), one potential solution is for Nintendo to setup their own online shop for amiibo. This will limit the amount a household can get (and hence, limit scalping). If they set up pre-ordering, they can know a good estimate of the minimum amount to create (as anyone who really wants it, will preorder), then some other base amount per store or based on a character's projected popularity.

The supply may still be a process that takes time, but then at least those who really want a specific amiibo will be guaranteed one.



DeltaPeng commented on Poll: Did The Splatoon Global Testfire Hit Its...:

I hear ya, among Friends, having the option of VC would be nice. I know some consider it to be a dealbreaker, so I'm providing some thoughts/discussion/considerations against that. But like you said, the gamepad map and quick rounds, and fairly straightforward gameplay allow the game to be played well in spite of no VC.

True, though it is important to understand that Nintendo does often want to cater to All Age audience (and that many choose and support Nintendo for their Family Friendliness), which makes sense from a business and practical standpoint (the casual gamers far outnumber the competitive and super competitive/hard_core gamers). All types of gamers are needed, though, for Nintendo to keep up business/profit and continue making good console game entertainment, particularly with heavy competition from mobile and computer games against the traditional/dedicated gaming market. That said, their primary audience being family friendly, from a design perspective it makes a lot of sense not to allow VC, at least on random matches, for the purposes and history of online competitive game VC containing a lot of crude/angry/hateful speech.

I feel like Nintendo in general has been slow to implement Online functionality in their games, so it's also possible that it's not just a design decision, but also Development-wise, they are still familiarizing themselves in how to handle Online games well (an example is Smash Brawl online vs Smash 4 online, with the latter running much smoother). Yes MK8 and SSB4 has voicechat, but it's not during the game, it's in the waiting room (and, among Friends). Perhaps it's harder to implement in game (potential for more lag)? Perhaps a similar example is their adaptation to HD games being slow, primarily bc they weren't used to the development efforts/costs needed for HD gaming. If that's the case, they will hopefully improve as time goes on, as it does seem like their Online experiences are already gradually improving.

Per Smash, I do think Stock is better over Time matches (from competitive since), but For Glory 1v1 is a Stock round (which is quite nice). I enjoy playing Smash on For Glory, Team (and 2 per WiiU, when possible) quite a bit, but I agree that if more options were available and I could make it a Stock round (and maybe add Team Atk On), that would add a lot of replayability and value to the game (take notes, Nintendo! ).

They are getting better at allowing customization options Online, Mario Kart 8 has online rooms with some adjustable rules (and I think items?). And if you play with Friends in Smash, you can then use Custom fighters, stages, and set rules how you want. The overall Online experience is Smash is amazing, not perfect, but considering their past with little to few games with Online, it's a big step in the right direction. Hopefully, other developers and Nintendo will continue to follow suit, and it will gradually keep taking steps in that way



DeltaPeng commented on Poll: Did The Splatoon Global Testfire Hit Its...:

@Yorumi True, but a competitive player can also lose every match and still have a good time and fun (I had fun with occasional losses throughout the demo, even when I got stomped and some other players contributed like 100-0 points to the match, in part also because I am taking a more casual approach to the game), taking each game as an opportunity to improve their own game/strategy. It may not feel good to lose, but that's normal.

Personally, I don't mind losing as long as I feel it's fair. What tends to annoy me is when people win via a spammy or cheap tactic (thinking, some players in Smash bros).

I do agree that some players have fun by being competitive, I am one of them, but in terms of local play (in Smash Bros.) I find I'm the best player of my group by a fair deal. It actually has a downside as people don't like to play me as often as I would like to play, and I get less enjoyment as I feel I am not challenged. I can find people online who can stomp me, which is nice from the competitive sense, but I lose something in not being able to play it as often with friends locally. The solution? When playing locally, I use custom characters/movesets or characters I am less familiar with when I battle my friends, to even things out, and in return I still get better at the game (but in different ways/ different characters, even if I lose bc of it). That's just a personal example of how I can still have fun with it with others who play more casually, by being 'less' competitive, in ways. Just a rabbit trail of something to consider.

But anyway, I do understand the thrill of being in heavy competitive play though. For those people who do like that, can always play on the mode which allows you to invite Friends (I edited my last post with this info, if you want to check it out). That will likely become the more competitive mode (similar to playing Smash on For Glory, Teams, 2 players per wiiU).

The main point I wish to make is, there isn't [absolutely no good reason] to [not include voicechat], and that competitive players should be able to still have fun even without it (it shouldn't in my mind be a deal breaker or prevent you from being able to have fun or try the game out, because even with inexperienced players, or maybe especially with them on your team, you can take it as a challenge to improve your game or try new strategies. You may not Win the game, but it could still be a win in your own book if you challenge yourself and do well, in spite of not technically Winning.)



DeltaPeng commented on Poll: Did The Splatoon Global Testfire Hit Its...:

The game overall seems fun, and has good 'quick competitive battle' games like Smash Bros.

The main draw and replayability for this game is the online multiplayer. Inability to really play great local co-op hinders some of the value/replayability of the game, as it becomes more a solo game experience as opposed to Smash Bros, which can be excellent single or multiplayer experience (online and local).

That said though, I feel like the game 'feels' a bit sparse in terms of content/value versus price. They will have a single player campaign, which is nice, but the core gameplay mechanics' focus (of painting an area in your color and which differentiates this shooter from others) is really on the online component of the game [and hence the online content is especially important]. I played all 3 demos, had fun, and would've liked to play more, but the two stages on offer began to get repetitive. Granted, it's a demo and I played the same maps for ~3hrs, so that's not bad, and I know they'll have customizable equipment, more stages and game modes later (and that they're working on more stages).

Since the main draw is online multiplayer, and since matches are 4v4 (8 players as opposed to Smash brothers which can work 1v1, 1v1v1, or 4 players), I have some concern that online games will be later hard to matchup (worked well on the free demo bc it was worldwide and limited to certain time spots). It really depends on the number of people who will own the game, and how regularly they play it. People will be more drawn to the game and to play longer if there is a lot of content available (maps and game modes, and hence my desire for many more of them; and customizable/collectible equipment should help), and more people will get the game and play it the cheaper that it is sold. That said, there are similar online computer games (MOBA) that are similar head-to-head competitive play, and some online FPS, which are free-to-play (and make money through other means, advertisements and DLC via expansions, costumes, or in-game items) and hence they have a lot of players on it. That said, I think $60 is a little too high for the content offered (and in consideration that one may want to buy the amiibo [+$13-35] to also get content), which may prevent online matches from being easy to start (the core gameplay content in the long run). I am grateful and prefer that content / equipment be unlockable as opposed to DLC, but the cost is high compared to similar games online, and this 'barrier to entry' may prevent the core online experience from getting the exposure and play time that is should have (as it is a solid game). The map content also feels sparse at the moment, hopefully to change when the full game is released and with the upcoming (free?) DLC stages. I think the ideal price to draw people in would be closer to $40-50 for the core game.

In summary:
-(potential problem) Splatoon requires a fairly large number of players per online game (always 8, as opposed to Smash bros which standarly uses 2-4), so may be hard to regularly find matches. Game is expensive (yes it's on par for console games [which are already arguably expensive compared to computer games], but it will not gather the same kind of attention and number of players to it as similar online battle games which are free-to-play. The higher the cost difference, the larger the barrier to entry), which may prevent more people from buying and playing the game. (potential solution) Reduce game price to $40-50 range. Should bring more players online also.
-(potential problem) Game longetivity/replayability would benefit from more maps and map diversity. It's a solid game, but need diversity to keep players coming back for more. (potential solution) create more maps that offer different situations in battle, even if they are not '100% balanced' or have a lot of depth.

Ideas / recommendations:
I know they want to design good levels that are very high quality, but since the gameplay mechanics are all there and solid, I would like to see more stages even if not all of them are 'as good or balanced' say as they could be (preferring some more quantity for replayability and diversity's sake over strictly high quality stages). An example would be having a large, flat room that is square or rectangular. It's simple, and some may argue that it's not as good due to lack of depth, but at the same time the gameplay for such a stage would be quite different and interesting. It would be a lot easier to tell where an opponent is going (if looking at a map), and one can't really hide except in the ink (though each team should roughly control their half of the stage, which is a lot or space where one could be, if hiding). The focus would be either on battling, or being far enough away to try and paint more area (because there is less hiding in a flat land). Most players' attention would be focused toward the other half of the field, which leads to intense action and good sneak attacks. Anyway, I think a map like that would be fun.

My opinions. The gameplay itself is fun and pretty solid. I share my thoughts in hopes that Nintendo makes something really great from this game, as it looks like it's off to a good start.



DeltaPeng commented on Poll: Did The Splatoon Global Testfire Hit Its...:

@Dr_Corndog - the primary reason not to have voicechat would be to keep the game fun for players even if they are not competitive-minded. I hear from some players who game FPS with voicechat, that voicechat with random people tends to rarely be used for strategy, and more often you'll hear some of the most racist/rancid/putdown kinds of comments instead. From a parent's perspective, it would not be pleasant to have say, your kid playing the game and some random adult or even kid cussing him out for not "painting the area or playing the game 'properly' " or not "following a popular/meta strategy". From that POV, it makes more sense not to freely have voicechat, especially considering that Nintendo likes to keep the games enjoyable for all audiences (a plus in my book).

Granted, it would be nice if you could send a beacon onto the map (by touching a specific point) to alert all of your teammates to be 'be cautious of or go to' a certain area. Either way (having ability to voicechat or not), it's all different ways of playing a game and strategizing. A good player should be able to do well regardless of the amount of communication available. If there's not a lot and you get inexperienced teammates, then that's just an extra challenge for you to overcome as the 'veteran' of the team. Maybe instead of forging your own path (and anticipating your teammates to do the same), you can make the round a personal 'challenge round' and try to instead play the support/backup role, making the goal to keep a less experienced teammate alive (via charger/sniping or sneak/back attacks, or even a dodgy decoy ).

Also, Nintendo announced in the Direct that they plan on having a mode where you can invite Friends from your wiiU list to duke it out. In that case, you could always Skype with them if you really want to play some rounds with the VC aspect of it.

Important thing is to not take it too too seriously, and have fun / try to make it fun for everyone.