It received better than average reviews, sucked is obviously a personal perspective.
So did Other M, yet Metroid fans hated that game.
So did non-Metroid fans. Some Metroid fans liked it, some non-Metroid fans liked it. What relevance does being a fan of a series have?
Well, there's the fact that ignoring their issues could result in those fans not buying your product. Also, a point I forgot to make is that just because critics liked something doesn't mean everyone does. Then there is fixing those issues, which could result in fans not buying your product. Whatever you do, you're not going to please everyone. I also wasn't speaking just about critics, but general reception as a whole.
Reception was also rather negative. It started off great because, hey! It's a new Paper Mario! What's not to like? But then people started playing through the game, and they started noticing problems, and the novelty started to wear off. So you're saying a lot of people people gave the game a positive rating without having played it. Can you prove this. You're confusing anticipation with reception
You're also assuming that all Paper Mario fans disliked Sticker Star, which I doubt is the case. By "we" you mean all those who agree with you.
When did I say that all Paper Mario fans hated Sticker Star? Of course there's going to be at least one person out there who liked it. I as talking about the majority of Paper Mario fans, which, in case you haven't noticed, is a bit pi$$ed. You are putting words into my mouth.
"We (as in Paper Mario fans)." You use we as a collective, and now you're saying that you speak for most, when really you only speak for yourself
Again, I never said that every Paper Mario fan disliked it. You know exactly what I meant. Stop trying to put words in my mouth to help your argument. And I'm pretty sure I was speaking for most, because I think it's pretty safe to say that the majority of people didn't really like Sticker Star that much, given the reaction to Color Splash, and the fact that pretty much every discussion involving Paper Mario has the majority of people saying that Sticker Star was the worst. Plus, considering that a while ago Gamestop had enough used copies to sell for just 10 bucks a pop, it doesn't set a very good image as to how people felt towards the game. I'm not putting words in your mouth, this is something you've typed: "And I'm pretty sure I was speaking for most." You're literally saying you're speaking for a large group of people, when really you are only speaking for a dissatisfied, whiny, minority. Are Chairperson for the "I hate Sticker Star" organisation?
I highly doubt we're in the minority. I mean, the amount of hate for this game and Sticker is a bit larger than those who support the two. Now if you could provide a link to that statistic that would be great. I mean, it can't possibly be that the reason the hate for the game seems so large is because, a handful of people are really vocal about it. Could it?
It is different, they're using a different combat system,
How is the combat system different? The only difference is paint, which does nothing but add ANOTHER limited resource that you have to micro-manage.
See, different.
But other than that one detail (which actually makes things worse by adding yet another limited resource, might I add), it's pretty much the same thing.
Other than the ways it is different, it is the same. I see...
But it still has the same issues as before with resource-based attacks.
Resource based attacks, like limited Ammo, weapon wear and tear, stuff like that?
Yeah, but they don't really matter. Yes, you can upgrade the amount of paint you can carry, but there's an abundance of paint scattered throughout the levels for you to get, and the amount of paint needed for cards doesn't seem to be alot. It's sort of like how the abundance of coins in Sticker Star made earning them in battle pointless. Why would I try to upgrade my paint, when the amount I'm already given is fine? Plus, it doesn't change the fact that you're wasting paint in battles that you could be using elsewhere. Really, you could just avoid the battles altogether and save the paint for when you really need it, and collect the crap-ton of paint in the overworld when you start to run low, without needing to upgrade your amount.
Evidently it does matter, as you said Paint is a limited resource, the more you carry, the better.
But, again, there is paint scattered everywhere, so running out shouldn't really be a problem.
Unless you're halfway through a battle.
But why would I battle if it'll just get rid of paint that I could use elsewhere when I really need it? See, this is the same problem that Sticker Star had with the Stickers: if it's just gonna get rid of resources that you could use elsewhere, why even bother? And before you bring up increasing your paint meter, again, there is paint scattered everywhere, so running out shouldn't be a problem. Why should I upgrade it when the amount I have is already enough?
I doubt you are going to be able to avoid every single battle, nor are you going to be able to go through each battle using your paint perfectly. Increasing your paint meter might be necessary to overcome some obstacles.
and from what I understand "more of a story than Sticker Star."
Considering that they were hesitant to call it a "proper story", I will honestly be surprised if the story goes beyond "Bowser did it." Besides, even if there IS a story, why should I care? I mean, the characters are pretty much just lifeless Toads with zero personality, with the only exception being some different-colored Toads that talk differently, so why should I care about what happens to them? If the developers didn't care enough to make them actual characters, why should I care?
There it is, the intent to dislike it at all costs. "So what if it has a story, all the characters look the same. So what if all the characters are different, it doesn't have a party system. So what if it has a party system, it won't wipe my backside." Using the same model for non-essential NPCs is not a new thing, it has been going on for a long time
You just missed the whole point of my argument. If the characters are pretty much lifeless, lack any sort of personality, aren't the least bit memorable or engaging, or are pretty much interchangeable, I'm not going to give a crap about them. And yes, lots of games do reuse models for npcs, but nearly every single characters, with maybe one or two exceptions? Also, "So what if it has a party system?" WHAT PARTY SYSTEM!? The enemy cards? Are those supposed to be our "partners" in this game? Because they don't really count. You can only use them once, you can't decide what they do, you can't use them in the overworld, they don't have personality, they can't level up, and you can't even use them during boss battles. They are pretty much glorified meat shields.
Well my party comment is pretty much me saying why you'll never be satisfied, because you're intent on disliking the game. I completely forgot about the assist cards, isn't that new to this series as well? As for your NPC complaint, you are still describing every single non-relevant NPC in every single RPG. They just sit there, reciting the same line over and over. You're not supposed to care about every single character in the world. We've seen very little in the way of interactions between Mario game game progressing NPCs.
But it's not just npcs, it's every. Single. Character. The only exceptions I can think of are Mario, Peach, Huey, and the enemies. Hell, even reused-models for npcs in other games have more variety than this! I wasn't aware that you had seen every. Single. Character. the game had to offer. It seems to me like the Toads that aren't coloured red are the ones with something important to do. Although I guess it is unreasonable of me to assume that the main population of the Mushroom Kingdom are the Toads.
Just because they've made one game previously that has perceived similarities to this game, doesn't make it the same.
There are so many similarities with this one, that we have gone beyond the point of it posibly not being the same. Hell, just look at this:
The events in the footage from the direct when this game was first revealed lines up almost PERFECTLY with Sticker Star's trailer. I know it's bad to judge a book by it's cover, but c'mon!
Similarities does not equal the same. There are a lot of similarities between Call of Duty 1 & 2, but they're not the same. (To use one example). You can find similarities between anything if you're intent on looking hard enough.
There's having similarities, and then there's looking nearly identical.
Glad you agree, now when they decide to do a literal Sticker Star HD, I'll agree that they are pretty much identical.
OH MY GOD. No, please don't worship me, I am not a god (unless you are Gozer, in which case, yes I am a god).Are you seriously still at this!? Guess I am For God's sake, it uses the same battle system except the parts that are different , it only uses Toads for characters except where it doesn't, the closest thing you have to a partner is based around the game's gimmicks, wasn't aware that a partner was a necessity you need a specific thing to make a boss beatable as with every boss ever, it is absolutely littered with Sticker Star elements! Mario elements too!We are well beyond the point that it might not just be Sticker Star 2!A step in any direction is technically a step towards your destination
Metroid Prime HUnters was on the DS, weaker graphical power, but it still had a more realistic non-chibi art style
It also didn't have to render things in 3D, as well as process other players goofing about, the AI, other non-background objects (boxes, ammo, keys etc.)
What do you mean? Most of Metroid Prime Hunters was rendered in 3D, and in multiplayer players could goof off in the same way.
Yes but the 3DS has to process more things than just the players and the environment, which was my point.
It received better than average reviews, sucked is obviously a personal perspective.
So did Other M, yet Metroid fans hated that game.
So did non-Metroid fans. Some Metroid fans liked it, some non-Metroid fans liked it. What relevance does being a fan of a series have?
Well, there's the fact that ignoring their issues could result in those fans not buying your product. Also, a point I forgot to make is that just because critics liked something doesn't mean everyone does. Then there is fixing those issues, which could result in fans not buying your product. Whatever you do, you're not going to please everyone. I also wasn't speaking just about critics, but general reception as a whole.
Reception was also rather negative. It started off great because, hey! It's a new Paper Mario! What's not to like? But then people started playing through the game, and they started noticing problems, and the novelty started to wear off. So you're saying a lot of people people gave the game a positive rating without having played it. Can you prove this. You're confusing anticipation with reception[/strong]
Okay, let me try restating my point. Reception started off great. The critics most likely didn't outright say that the game sucks because it's not "Terrible" persay. I mean, it's not filled with glitches, and it functions, so it's not terrible. However, critics don't necessarily represent the majority of people. As for fan reception, that was pretty much negative. It started off nice, but that could simply be a result of them just being too happy to have a new Paper Mario to notice any problems with the game. When the magic faded, however, they started to notice that something was wrong, took a second look at it, and...yeah.
You're also assuming that all Paper Mario fans disliked Sticker Star, which I doubt is the case. By "we" you mean all those who agree with you.
When did I say that all Paper Mario fans hated Sticker Star? Of course there's going to be at least one person out there who liked it. I as talking about the majority of Paper Mario fans, which, in case you haven't noticed, is a bit pi$$ed. You are putting words into my mouth.
"We (as in Paper Mario fans)." You use we as a collective, and now you're saying that you speak for most, when really you only speak for yourself
Again, I never said that every Paper Mario fan disliked it. You know exactly what I meant. Stop trying to put words in my mouth to help your argument. And I'm pretty sure I was speaking for most, because I think it's pretty safe to say that the majority of people didn't really like Sticker Star that much, given the reaction to Color Splash, and the fact that pretty much every discussion involving Paper Mario has the majority of people saying that Sticker Star was the worst. Plus, considering that a while ago Gamestop had enough used copies to sell for just 10 bucks a pop, it doesn't set a very good image as to how people felt towards the game. I'm not putting words in your mouth, this is something you've typed: "And I'm pretty sure I was speaking for most." You're literally saying you're speaking for a large group of people, when really you are only speaking for a dissatisfied, whiny, minority. Are Chairperson for the "I hate Sticker Star" organisation?
I highly doubt we're in the minority. I mean, the amount of hate for this game and Sticker is a bit larger than those who support the two. Now if you could provide a link to that statistic that would be great. I mean, it can't possibly be that the reason the hate for the game seems so large is because, a handful of people are really vocal about it. Could it?
Depends. Could you provide a leak to your statistics? I mean, it can't possibly be that those haters are in the majority, and the supporters are simply in the minority. Could it?
It is different, they're using a different combat system,
How is the combat system different? The only difference is paint, which does nothing but add ANOTHER limited resource that you have to micro-manage.
See, different.
But other than that one detail (which actually makes things worse by adding yet another limited resource, might I add), it's pretty much the same thing.
Other than the ways it is different, it is the same. I see...
But it still has the same issues as before with resource-based attacks.
Resource based attacks, like limited Ammo, weapon wear and tear, stuff like that?
Yeah, but they don't really matter. Yes, you can upgrade the amount of paint you can carry, but there's an abundance of paint scattered throughout the levels for you to get, and the amount of paint needed for cards doesn't seem to be alot. It's sort of like how the abundance of coins in Sticker Star made earning them in battle pointless. Why would I try to upgrade my paint, when the amount I'm already given is fine? Plus, it doesn't change the fact that you're wasting paint in battles that you could be using elsewhere. Really, you could just avoid the battles altogether and save the paint for when you really need it, and collect the crap-ton of paint in the overworld when you start to run low, without needing to upgrade your amount.
Evidently it does matter, as you said Paint is a limited resource, the more you carry, the better.
But, again, there is paint scattered everywhere, so running out shouldn't really be a problem.
Unless you're halfway through a battle.
But why would I battle if it'll just get rid of paint that I could use elsewhere when I really need it? See, this is the same problem that Sticker Star had with the Stickers: if it's just gonna get rid of resources that you could use elsewhere, why even bother? And before you bring up increasing your paint meter, again, there is paint scattered everywhere, so running out shouldn't be a problem. Why should I upgrade it when the amount I have is already enough?
I doubt you are going to be able to avoid every single battle, nor are you going to be able to go through each battle using your paint perfectly. Increasing your paint meter might be necessary to overcome some obstacles.
MAYBE you'd have to do it, like, once? Again, the abundance of paint makes levelling up pretty pointless. Plus, even assuming that you get to a battle that you can't avoid, with the abundance of paint, you should have enough. And with the abundance, you should be able to recover from it pretty dang well.
and from what I understand "more of a story than Sticker Star."
Considering that they were hesitant to call it a "proper story", I will honestly be surprised if the story goes beyond "Bowser did it." Besides, even if there IS a story, why should I care? I mean, the characters are pretty much just lifeless Toads with zero personality, with the only exception being some different-colored Toads that talk differently, so why should I care about what happens to them? If the developers didn't care enough to make them actual characters, why should I care?
There it is, the intent to dislike it at all costs. "So what if it has a story, all the characters look the same. So what if all the characters are different, it doesn't have a party system. So what if it has a party system, it won't wipe my backside." Using the same model for non-essential NPCs is not a new thing, it has been going on for a long time
You just missed the whole point of my argument. If the characters are pretty much lifeless, lack any sort of personality, aren't the least bit memorable or engaging, or are pretty much interchangeable, I'm not going to give a crap about them. And yes, lots of games do reuse models for npcs, but nearly every single characters, with maybe one or two exceptions? Also, "So what if it has a party system?" WHAT PARTY SYSTEM!? The enemy cards? Are those supposed to be our "partners" in this game? Because they don't really count. You can only use them once, you can't decide what they do, you can't use them in the overworld, they don't have personality, they can't level up, and you can't even use them during boss battles. They are pretty much glorified meat shields.
Well my party comment is pretty much me saying why you'll never be satisfied, because you're intent on disliking the game. I completely forgot about the assist cards, isn't that new to this series as well? As for your NPC complaint, you are still describing every single non-relevant NPC in every single RPG. They just sit there, reciting the same line over and over. You're not supposed to care about every single character in the world. We've seen very little in the way of interactions between Mario game game progressing NPCs.
But it's not just npcs, it's every. Single. Character. The only exceptions I can think of are Mario, Peach, Huey, and the enemies. Hell, even reused-models for npcs in other games have more variety than this! I wasn't aware that you had seen every. Single. Character. the game had to offer. It seems to me like the Toads that aren't coloured red are the ones with something important to do. Although I guess it is unreasonable of me to assume that the main population of the Mushroom Kingdom are the Toads.
[/quote]
If there was an npc that wasn't a Toad, we would've seen it by now. And if it's anything like Sticker Star, yeah, those slightly-different colored Toads won't really add much.
it only uses Toads for characters except where it doesn't
Oh, yeah! The paint bucket is a REALLY good one! Some of the best character design I've ever seen, right there! [quote=shaneoh]the closest thing you have to a partner is based around the game's gimmicks, wasn't aware that a partner was a necessity/quote] That wasn't the point, the point was I was listing the elements this game shares with Sticker Star.
you need a specific thing to make a boss beatable as with every boss ever
I'm gonna guess that you're referring to things like a boss's weakness. Tell, me do those weaknesses force you to go on a goosechase looking for what you need to attack it? And before you bring up bosses needing you to find a specific weapon to beat it, in those cases, it's the game actually WANTING you to go back to a different area. With this, though? It doesn't want you to do that. It expects you to just know what you need.
Okay, let me try restating my point. Reception started off great. The critics most likely didn't outright say that the game sucks because it's not "Terrible" persay. I mean, it's not filled with glitches, and it functions, so it's not terrible. However, critics don't necessarily represent the majority of people. As for fan reception, that was pretty much negative. It started off nice, but that could simply be a result of them just being too happy to have a new Paper Mario to notice any problems with the game. When the magic faded, however, they started to notice that something was wrong, took a second look at it, and...yeah.
Or they could be happy with the game because they enjoyed it. This concept may seem foreign, but I assure you it happens
Depends. Could you provide a leak to your statistics? I mean, it can't possibly be that those haters are in the majority, and the supporters are simply in the minority. Could it?
MAYBE you'd have to do it, like, once? Again, the abundance of paint makes levelling up pretty pointless. Plus, even assuming that you get to a battle that you can't avoid, with the abundance of paint, you should have enough. And with the abundance, you should be able to recover from it pretty dang well.
Or maybe you have to do it more than once. Who knows? Maybe there will be consecutive boss fights where you can't replenish paint. You are assuming that paint is going to be readily available everywhere you go.
If there was an npc that wasn't a Toad, we would've seen it by now. And if it's anything like Sticker Star, yeah, those slightly-different colored Toads won't really add much.
the closest thing you have to a partner is based around the game's gimmicks, wasn't aware that a partner was a necessity That wasn't the point, the point was I was listing the elements this game shares with Sticker Star.
There are many games that do not give you a partner, in that respect they are all similar to sticker star...
I'm gonna guess that you're referring to things like a boss's weakness. Tell, me do those weaknesses force you to go on a goosechase looking for what you need to attack it? And before you bring up bosses needing you to find a specific weapon to beat it, in those cases, it's the game actually WANTING you to go back to a different area. With this, though? It doesn't want you to do that. It expects you to just know what you need.
There are more than one puzzle boss out there that don't tell you what you need to do to beat it.
Okay, let me try restating my point. Reception started off great. The critics most likely didn't outright say that the game sucks because it's not "Terrible" persay. I mean, it's not filled with glitches, and it functions, so it's not terrible. However, critics don't necessarily represent the majority of people. As for fan reception, that was pretty much negative. It started off nice, but that could simply be a result of them just being too happy to have a new Paper Mario to notice any problems with the game. When the magic faded, however, they started to notice that something was wrong, took a second look at it, and...yeah.
Or they could be happy with the game because they enjoyed it. This concept may seem foreign, but I assure you it happens
Then how do you explain the amount of hate that quickly arised after getting an initial positive reception? Look, I'm not saying it's impossible to have liked it at launch, but if we're trying to explain the initial positive reception quickly turning into absolute hatred, that's pretty much the only explanation I've got.
Depends. Could you provide a leak to your statistics? I mean, it can't possibly be that those haters are in the majority, and the supporters are simply in the minority. Could it?
Positive outweighs negative. It's more than anecdotal evidence being masqueraded as a general consensus.
Actually, when combining the average and negative user reviews, the negative actually outweighs the positive. Hell, even on it's own, the negative user reviews outweigh the positive. And if you combine all the reviews, both critic and user, the positive is outweighed by people who thought it was average or bad.
MAYBE you'd have to do it, like, once? Again, the abundance of paint makes levelling up pretty pointless. Plus, even assuming that you get to a battle that you can't avoid, with the abundance of paint, you should have enough. And with the abundance, you should be able to recover from it pretty dang well.
Or maybe you have to do it more than once. Who knows? Maybe there will be consecutive boss fights where you can't replenish paint. You are assuming that paint is going to be readily available everywhere you go.
If that happens, I will give you a cookie. But chances are, most of the time, it’s really not going to be a necessity. I mean, really, the only time I can see that happening is some Boss Rush in the end.
If there was an npc that wasn't a Toad, we would've seen it by now. And if it's anything like Sticker Star, yeah, those slightly-different colored Toads won't really add much.
Right, we've seen, what, 1% of the game?
We’ve seen two trailers, and an entire treehouse broadcast. If there was a character that wasn’t a Toad, we would’ve seen AT LEAST one.
Oh, yeah! The paint bucket is a REALLY good one! Some of the best character design I've ever seen, right there!
Assuming that's the only new character...
We ‘ve had two trailers and an entire Treehouse Broadcast. We would’ve seen one at this point. Even just something simple like a new enemy species would’ve worked. And given that they seem to still be following Miyamoto’s concept of “only using already-existing Mario characters”, I’m guessing that there’s not going to be anyone else. In case you decide to bring up “Well, then why is Huey here?”, Kersti was in Sticker Star. I’m not sure how they slipped through the cracks. I’m guessing that it’s for the purpose of having some sort of guide.
the closest thing you have to a partner is based around the game's gimmicks, wasn't aware that a partner was a necessity That wasn't the point, the point was I was listing the elements this game shares with Sticker Star.
There are many games that do not give you a partner, in that respect they are all similar to sticker star...
[/quote]
THAT WASN’T THE POINT I WAS MAKING! The point I was making was that it was based around the game’s gimmick, kind of like Sticker Star!
I'm gonna guess that you're referring to things like a boss's weakness. Tell, me do those weaknesses force you to go on a goosechase looking for what you need to attack it? And before you bring up bosses needing you to find a specific weapon to beat it, in those cases, it's the game actually WANTING you to go back to a different area. With this, though? It doesn't want you to do that. It expects you to just know what you need.
There are more than one puzzle boss out there that don't tell you what you need to do to beat it.
Yes, and that makes the resulting tedious back-tracking okay.
]
Resource based attacks, like limited Ammo, weapon wear and tear, stuff like that?
Yeah, not the same thing. In those cases, they might be depletable, but you can use them more than once. In this case, though? Nope. One use, and that’s it.
Heaven forbid Nintendo try to do something different with their games. But they also better not rehash their games either. Well I'll be going into Colour Splash with an open mind.
The flaw is, Paper Mario never stayed in one spot long enough for anyone to start complaining about rehashing. If they stayed with the original mechanics for five entries, then yes, that's understandable. But does anyone complain about a series getting stale after the second entry?
There's also the case where the best received 'innovative' Nintendo games still keep the core mechanics of what made said series. Mario Galaxy still takes a lot of elements from Mario 64, Every 3D Zelda takes a lot from Ocarina of Time, and Metriod Prime felt like a natural progression into 3D.
The 'innovative' Nintendo titles that gets the most hate are the ones that completely reinvent the wheel before the series was even refined enough to be called a rehash. Here we have Star Fox Adventures, Yoshi's Story, and of course Sticker Star. Regardless of the game's quality, they tend to get a lot of backlash. No one wants their favorite franchise turned into an experiment.
Yet when Nintendo get's a new idea and creates a new IP with it, like Pikmin, Animal Crossing, and Splatoon, it get's good reception. Mostly because it's not replacing a system that's still be refined, while these new core mechanics get refined as well.
The process of trying to be innovative every title is the mindset that killed Sonic. Look! Sonic has a Sword now! Nevermind, now he's a werehog! Forget that, he absorbs aliens to get super powers! How about time traveling? Combining Parkour with Mario Galaxy? Now let's make a mediocre beat 'em up part platformer!
As a result, every game may as well be treated as the first in a franchise. An idea with potential. Yet what is potential if you ditch an idea for a new one? Paper Mario is heading in the same direction, as the series in general might lead to an identity crisis as well.
@Seacliff Well, actually, with Color Splash the number of Sticker Star-like games will now be the same as the number of Paper Mario games like the first one. I agree that experimenting should never be at the expense of great ideas, and after more than 10 years probably something new could be devised even when retaining much of the core structure of the first two Paper Mario games. Unfortunately, here we are also seeing a whole new development team and a game like the first two would risk being less creative because of that (it is very difficult to imitate the work of others and be as creative as the others you are imitating, and I think the NSMB series is a bit suffering because of that), so I can see why they tried almost from scratch using rules so strict we don't understand. I would like to know how much of the original development team is still there at Intelligent System. If it is there, I wouldn't mind a new Paper Mario game from them. But I don't see it happening, as it would put the new team in an awkward situation if it is bypassed or it could lead to various internal conflicts if it isn't, much in the same way as I'm not seeing a new Super Mario game directed by Koizumi or Tezuka (and I really would like them!).
@Mister_Wu From what I heard, everyone except the programmers were replaced for Sticker Star, which I find believable.
For the record, I would be less worried about them focusing on the Sticker Star system then trying to think of something completely new again. It would be nice if they could meet halfway with the older fans though, however unlikely that would be.
@Mister_Wu From what I heard, everyone except the programmers were replaced for Sticker Star, which I find believable.
For the record, I would be less worried about them focusing on the Sticker Star system then trying to think of something completely new again. It would be nice if they could meet halfway with the older fans though, however unlikely that would be.
As I said before, I suspect that in the Iwata Asks of Sticker Star they said that Sticker Star was going to be the standard for this exact reason - new development team who is actually more well versed in doing this kind of Paper Mario games. So, I expect to see a few games that will try to refine this formula, with possibly other experimentations - I still suspect that Super Paper Mario was actually a scrapped game in which Paper Mario elements were introduced later, as there are clearly two distinct art styles that don't blend together at all, and the settings in that game almost all follow the new art style introduced in Super Paper Mario and used only in that game - not to talk about many paper abilities that were removed, including Plane, Boat and Tube.
Then how do you explain the amount of hate that quickly arised after getting an initial positive reception? Look, I'm not saying it's impossible to have liked it at launch, but if we're trying to explain the initial positive reception quickly turning into absolute hatred, that's pretty much the only explanation I've got.
Actually, when combining the average and negative user reviews, the negative actually outweighs the positive. Hell, even on it's own, the negative user reviews outweigh the positive. And if you combine all the reviews, both critic and user, the positive is outweighed by people who thought it was average or bad.
How do you figure all that? 150 positive reviews to 114 negative and 81 mixed. Just so you know 150 is a larger number than 114. Also a mixed review doesn't equate to a bad review so I don't see how you can justify adding them to the negative, whatever skewed logic you are using could easily be applied to make those mixed reviews count as positive reviews.
If that happens, I will give you a cookie. But chances are, most of the time, it’s really not going to be a necessity. I mean, really, the only time I can see that happening is some Boss Rush in the end.
We ‘ve had two trailers and an entire Treehouse Broadcast. We would’ve seen one at this point. Even just something simple like a new enemy species would’ve worked. And given that they seem to still be following Miyamoto’s concept of “only using already-existing Mario characters”, I’m guessing that there’s not going to be anyone else. In case you decide to bring up “Well, then why is Huey here?”, Kersti was in Sticker Star. I’m not sure how they slipped through the cracks. I’m guessing that it’s for the purpose of having some sort of guide.
Then by that logic, there will be no NPC's in Breath of the Wild
THAT WASN’T THE POINT I WAS MAKING! The point I was making was that it was based around the game’s gimmick, kind of like Sticker Star!
FLUDD, the baby Luma, Sticker Star wasn't the first Mario game to have a partner based around the gimmick of the game. Won't be the last. Mario is doomed forever...
Okay, you weren’t even trying to counteract my point. How does that change the fact that this game has Sticker Star written all over it?
Gameplay is different to the previous game, same old mooks, the level of story is changed, different character progression. Colour Splash or Dark Forces 2? As I said, anything is like Sticker Star if you want to look.
Yeah, not the same thing. In those cases, they might be depletable, but you can use them more than once. In this case, though? Nope. One use, and that’s it.
Like a grenade, one shot spells? How about one use items that give you buffs?
The 'innovative' Nintendo titles that gets the most hate are the ones that completely reinvent the wheel before the series was even refined enough to be called a rehash. Here we have Star Fox Adventures, Yoshi's Story, and of course Sticker Star. Regardless of the game's quality, they tend to get a lot of backlash. No one wants their favorite franchise turned into an experiment.
I disagree, look at SM64 and OoT. They diverged wildly from their previous games.
The process of trying to be innovative every title is the mindset that killed Sonic. Look! Sonic has a Sword now! Nevermind, now he's a werehog! Forget that, he absorbs aliens to get super powers! How about time traveling? Combining Parkour with Mario Galaxy? Now let's make a mediocre beat 'em up part platformer!
Every new Sonic title is trying to reinvent Sonic, which is the problem. The Mario series has several offshoots of which Paper Mario is just one, most stay similar to the core idea, but there is room for them to experiment with some of the smaller series.
Then how do you explain the amount of hate that quickly arised after getting an initial positive reception? Look, I'm not saying it's impossible to have liked it at launch, but if we're trying to explain the initial positive reception quickly turning into absolute hatred, that's pretty much the only explanation I've got.
Extremely whiny, I mean vocal, minority.
Okay. Y'know what? let's just stop this one, and wait to see how the game sells. Then we'll see.
Actually, when combining the average and negative user reviews, the negative actually outweighs the positive. Hell, even on it's own, the negative user reviews outweigh the positive. And if you combine all the reviews, both critic and user, the positive is outweighed by people who thought it was average or bad.
How do you figure all that? 150 positive reviews to 114 negative and 81 mixed. Just so you know 150 is a larger number than 114. Also a mixed review doesn't equate to a bad review so I don't see how you can justify adding them to the negative, whatever skewed logic you are using could easily be applied to make those mixed reviews count as positive reviews.
Okay, you got me there. However, mixed can range from 5-6, which is not terrible, but not all that great, either.
If that happens, I will give you a cookie. But chances are, most of the time, it’s really not going to be a necessity. I mean, really, the only time I can see that happening is some Boss Rush in the end.
We ‘ve had two trailers and an entire Treehouse Broadcast. We would’ve seen one at this point. Even just something simple like a new enemy species would’ve worked. And given that they seem to still be following Miyamoto’s concept of “only using already-existing Mario characters”, I’m guessing that there’s not going to be anyone else. In case you decide to bring up “Well, then why is Huey here?”, Kersti was in Sticker Star. I’m not sure how they slipped through the cracks. I’m guessing that it’s for the purpose of having some sort of guide.
Then by that logic, there will be no NPC's in Breath of the Wild
First of all, that comparison doesn't work because it's beenc confirmed that there'll be towns in the game. Second, you are REALLY grasping at the straws here. I mean, for God's sake, if there was anyone else, we would've seen him/her by no. For God's sake, EVERY character is a Toad. There has not been a single new character, except for Huey. And given that this is following those guidelines Miyamoto placed, there most likely won't be any. And when this game is released and everyone's a Toad, just remember: I told you so. Seriously, just look at this: http://images.nintendolife.com/news/2016/07/nintendo_producer...
Look at all the Toads! What makes this even worse is that this island is supposed to take place AWAY from the Mushroom Kingdom, so we should be seeing some natives, not Toads! You are pretty much in denial at this point!
THAT WASN’T THE POINT I WAS MAKING! The point I was making was that it was based around the game’s gimmick, kind of like Sticker Star!
FLUDD, the baby Luma, Sticker Star wasn't the first Mario game to have a partner based around the gimmick of the game. Won't be the last. Mario is doomed forever...
You're missing the point...AGAIN! Okay, let me try this again: Huey is basically this game's Kersti. He's based around the game's gimmick like Kersti, he's only there to give you hints like Kersti, and even his backstory is similar to Kersti. http://nintendowire.com/blog/2016/06/16/nintendo-releases-new...
"Huey lives under the “prism” of Prism Island in a slumber, and is somewhat of a guardian to the island. The developer explained that if the color were to ever fade from the island, Huey would spring into action and save the island. Huey will accompany you on your journey and will provide you with hints along the way."
Seriously, just make slight corrections, and...
"Kersti lives under in the “center” of Sticker Comet in a slumber, and is somewhat of a guardian to the Comet. The developer explained that if the Comet were to ever break, Kersti would spring into action and collect the Royal Stickers. Kersti will accompany you on your journey and will provide you with hints along the way."
See? It's Kersti.
Okay, you weren’t even trying to counteract my point. How does that change the fact that this game has Sticker Star written all over it?
Gameplay is different to the previous game, same old mooks, the level of story is changed, different character progression. Colour Splash or Dark Forces 2? As I said, anything is like Sticker Star if you want to look.
But it has the warning signs all over it! I'm sorry, but if you're actually thinking that it's not just Sticker Star, despite the mountain of evidence, you're pretty in denial at this point, and when it ends up being Sticker Star again and you get dissapointed, you're going to have nobody to blame but yourself!
Yeah, not the same thing. In those cases, they might be depletable, but you can use them more than once. In this case, though? Nope. One use, and that’s it.
Like a grenade, one shot spells? How about one use items that give you buffs?
Again, not the same thing, because those are just things that can help you, and NOT you're only form of attack. In those cases, you have other ways of defending yourself. Here, though? Yeah, you're stuck with the cards.
But does anyone complain about a series getting stale after the second entry?
People were complaining about the NSM series being stale when NSMB2 came about. That was the third game.
Let's see here...
Time between NSMBW and NSMB2: 3 years.
Time between Thousand Year Door and now: 12 years.
Yeah, I think people would be more okay with another Thousand Year Door than another NSMB. Also, there's a difference here: See, Thousand Year Door may have had the same gameplay as the first game, but it had many differences, like the locations, and the characters, and the curses, a new way to upgrade your partner, Pit of 100 Trials, lots of things. So if the supposed sequel had the same gameplay but still continued to include new ideas, then it'd be fine. NSMB2, though? Yeah, they pretty much just copy-and-pasted NSMBW onto the 3DS and threw in coins.
The 'innovative' Nintendo titles that gets the most hate are the ones that completely reinvent the wheel before the series was even refined enough to be called a rehash. Here we have Star Fox Adventures, Yoshi's Story, and of course Sticker Star. Regardless of the game's quality, they tend to get a lot of backlash. No one wants their favorite franchise turned into an experiment.
I disagree, look at SM64 and OoT. They diverged wildly from their previous games.
Yes...by going into 3D. However, they still, at there core, contained the very essence of what gave their series's their identities, as opposed to Sticker Star, which simply threw all that out the window.
The process of trying to be innovative every title is the mindset that killed Sonic. Look! Sonic has a Sword now! Nevermind, now he's a werehog! Forget that, he absorbs aliens to get super powers! How about time traveling? Combining Parkour with Mario Galaxy? Now let's make a mediocre beat 'em up part platformer!
Every new Sonic title is trying to reinvent Sonic, which is the problem. The Mario series has several offshoots of which Paper Mario is just one, most stay similar to the core idea, but there is room for them to experiment with some of the smaller series.
But they're completely reinventing the wheel with every Paper Mario, which is the mindset that nearly killed Sonic (I say nearly, because he's still around).
Now, look. I'm getting tired of this. Is there some sort of middle ground that we can both agree on? Help me out here.
First of all, that comparison doesn't work because it's beenc confirmed that there'll be towns in the game. Second, you are REALLY grasping at the straws here. I mean, for God's sake, if there was anyone else, we would've seen him/her by no. For God's sake, EVERY character is a Toad. There has not been a single new character, except for Huey. And given that this is following those guidelines Miyamoto placed, there most likely won't be any. And when this game is released and everyone's a Toad, just remember: I told you so. Seriously, just look at this: http://images.nintendolife.com/news/2016/07/nintendo_producer...
Look at all the Toads! What makes this even worse is that this island is supposed to take place AWAY from the Mushroom Kingdom, so we should be seeing some natives, not Toads! You are pretty much in denial at this point!
I also see a Shy Guy, wonder if he's getting a pair of sunglasses. Just because Toads are natives of the Mushroom Kingdom, doesn't mean they can't be natives of other places either. But I'm not in denial, I just know not to make assumptions about a game when I haven't seen it in its entirety.
You're missing the point...AGAIN! Okay, let me try this again: Huey is basically this game's Kersti. He's based around the game's gimmick like Kersti, he's only there to give you hints like Kersti, and even his backstory is similar to Kersti. http://nintendowire.com/blog/2016/06/16/nintendo-releases-new...
"Huey lives under the “prism” of Prism Island in a slumber, and is somewhat of a guardian to the island. The developer explained that if the color were to ever fade from the island, Huey would spring into action and save the island. Huey will accompany you on your journey and will provide you with hints along the way."
Seriously, just make slight corrections, and...
"Kersti lives under in the “center” of Sticker Comet in a slumber, and is somewhat of a guardian to the Comet. The developer explained that if the Comet were to ever break, Kersti would spring into action and collect the Royal Stickers. Kersti will accompany you on your journey and will provide you with hints along the way."
See? It's Kersti.
It's not an unusual theme:
Link lives in Hyrule in a slumber (to his true role as Hero), and is somewhat of an unaware guardian to the Hyrule. The developer explained that if Hyrule were to ever be threatened, Link would spring into action and collect the Triforce/Master Sword (to vanquish the threat).
The same description could be given to Fi or Midna
But it has the warning signs all over it! I'm sorry, but if you're actually thinking that it's not just Sticker Star, despite the mountain of evidence, you're pretty in denial at this point, and when it ends up being Sticker Star again and you get dissapointed, you're going to have nobody to blame but yourself!
Since when were we calling molehills mountains? You're assuming I didn't enjoy Sticker Star, so who do I blame if I enjoy the game?
Again, not the same thing, because those are just things that can help you, and NOT you're only form of attack. In those cases, you have other ways of defending yourself. Here, though? Yeah, you're stuck with the cards.
Much as you'd be stuck with guns. In both instances they are exhaustible resources used to damage enemies.
Let's see here...
Time between NSMBW and NSMB2: 3 years.
Time between Thousand Year Door and now: 12 years.
Yeah, I think people would be more okay with another Thousand Year Door than another NSMB. Also, there's a difference here: See, Thousand Year Door may have had the same gameplay as the first game, but it had many differences, like the locations, and the characters, and the curses, a new way to upgrade your partner, Pit of 100 Trials, lots of things. So if the supposed sequel had the same gameplay but still continued to include new ideas, then it'd be fine. NSMB2, though? Yeah, they pretty much just copy-and-pasted NSMBW onto the 3DS and threw in coins.
I see you've left out Super Paper Mario, so yeah, that brings the time difference between Paper Mario games down to 5 years. Not a huge time gap
Yes...by going into 3D. However, they still, at there core, contained the very essence of what gave their series's their identities, as opposed to Sticker Star, which simply threw all that out the window.
I disagree, the Mario 2D games were about getting to a clearly defined, static, goal, in a mostly forward moving manner. Enemies and environmental hazards were in equal abundance. Super Mario 64 did away with all that. Levels were more puzzle and exploration based, environmental hazards were more prevalent than Goombas, Koopas and Boos. OoT is more in line with its predecessors but it still placed a greater emphasis on platforming and narrative.
But they're completely reinventing the wheel with every Paper Mario, which is the mindset that nearly killed Sonic (I say nearly, because he's still around).
Pshhh, Super Paper Mario was leagues better than Sticker Star in every way conceivable I wish that stayed the series norm. Though ideally turn based battling that mattered would have been the path they followed.
@shaneoh Okay. I'm just gonna stop with the constant quotes, and try one more time to explain to you why people are so damn upset in a calm manner. Okay? Okay. The reason people liked the first three games (mainly the first two, but Super still has it's fans. Me being one of them.) is because of the characters and the stories. It had this diverse cast of unique and colorful characters, with their own personalities and characteristics and back-stories, and they'd leave an impression on you. You wouldn't forget about them. And the stories? Good Lord, the stories. They weren't the type of stuff you'd be able to get away with in the main Mario games. They were actually very dark, with some very serious moments. But the important thing is that they were good stories. Hell, even Super, which didn't have the gameplay of the first two, got this right. These elements are so important to Paper Mario, that in Japan, the first game was titled "Mario Story". They're pretty much what makes Paper Mario...Paper Mario. In Sticker Star, however, all of that went away.
The story was dumbed down to “Bowser did it”. Now, you could make the argument that the first game did it. However, it was a bit more tongue-in-cheek, like “Oh boy! This again, am I right?”, and more along the lines of a story-book. Here, it’s basically just New Super Mario Bros. In addition to that, all those likeable characters were replace with nothing but generic Toads, with the only exceptions being Toads with a different color scheme that talk differently, and Wiggler, who is pretty much the only developed character in the entire game (well, he at least has more development than the countless Toads)…and Kersti, who is just flat out annoying and is practically useless. In addition to that, the bosses are basically just regular enemies made bigger, without even so much as a simple design change, and then there’s Bowser and Luigi, who are arguably two of the best characters in the entire series. Bowser doesn’t even talk, and Luigi only appears in the background. So, as you may imagine, the fanbase wasn’t exactly all that happy. Even more reason for this were early screenshots that made it look it was going to be a return to Thousand Year Door’s gameplay, when the end result was nothing like that at all. Even when you take away the fact that it’s Paper Mario, it’s still got problems.
Let’s start with the battle system: your only form of attack are stickers that you can only use once (And no, it’s not the same as guns having limited ammo as you suggested, because you can get more than one shot.). In addition to that, battles don’t give you EXP, only coins…which you can find scattered everywhere. Because of this, there’s no reason to battle since you won’t get anything out of it, and ultimately does more harm than good because it’s wasting Stickers that you could be saving for the time that you need it. In addition to that, there’s how damn cryptic the game is. There’s being a bit hard to figure out, and then there’s the designers being downright cynical. If you want to get through the game without using a guide, well, good luck, because you’re gonna friggin’ need it! The game barely even tries to give you a hint on what to do, and when you figure out what sticker you might need, chances are you won’t have it, and will need to go on a wild goose chase trying to find. Case in point: the bosses. They require a certain sticker in order to beat. Now, other RPGs might give you a slight hint before-hand as to what it’s weakness. Not this one. You figure out what you need until the boss happens, and even then, if you don’t have the right thing sticker, you have to out of the battle, go look for the thing, find it, take it to Decalburg, get it turned into a sticker, then come aaaaaaall the way back to the boss, and THEN use it. And this will happen frequently, both in battle, and in certain areas on the field. And it is not fun. Like, at all. It’s rather annoying.
Now, fast forward to now, and we see Color Splash, which basically looks exactly the same as what we got last time. The over-abundance of Toads, Huey’s essentially this game’s Kersti (albeit, he seems to be a bit more chill), bosses need a specific thing card to be beatable, it’s like they didn’t even try to fix this. And with any attempts they DO make to fix it, you can’t help but feel like they just didn’t even care. So, they made it so that you can upgrade your paint capacity? Well, there’s an abundance of paint that you can collect to refill it in the overworld, and considering how little paint even the Thing Cards consume, it seems like you can get along just fine with the amount you’re initially given. Add in the fact that battles will make you lose paint that could be better spent elsewhere, and they somehow made battles even MORE redundant. If they REALLY wanted to fix things, they would’ve just given you the ability to jump and use the hammer as much as you like, reserved the cards as special attacks, and let you level up other things like your health. See? That adds purpose to the battles, and keeps them from being counter-constructive by giving you the opportunity to not waste your resources. Meanwhile, they apparently listened to people having issues with needing the right sticker, and have decided to make Huey give hints. 1. Isn’t that what Kersti did (or at least was SUPPOSED to do)? 2. Unless it makes the right card you need suddenly appear, you’re still gonna have to go back and find it. If they REALLY wanted to fix things, they would’ve just done a massive overhaul on the cards altogether. See? They’re fixing things…but not really, and you can’t help but feel like Nintendo/Intelligent Systems don’t even want to put in the effort to fix people’s concerns out of arrogance and feeling like they’re way is the best way, and everyone else is wrong.
Finally, there’s Risa Tabata’s comments in interviews, and OH BOY! This actually made things WORSE. For starters, there’s the fact that she stated people liked the characters, humor, and puzzles of Paper Mario…yet they’re only focusing on the humor and puzzles, while completely ignoring the characters (plus I haven’t really heard many people say that they were absolutely enthralled with the puzzles). Then there’s saying that there is a story…but not exactly a proper one (Oh, boy. Bowser did it. WOO.). And THEN there’s the infamous “If you want an RPG, go play Mario & Luigi”. First of all, Mario & Luigi, while a good series, isn’t a proper replacement for Paper Mario. The two are VERY different from eachother. Paper Mario is dark and serious, whereas M & L, while pretty serious at times, is generally more lighthearted. Paper Mario’s combat is more slow-paced, whereas M & L is more fast-paced and “action”. Paper Mario has partner, whereas Mario & Luigi has…Mario & Luigi. Badges give you new abilities in Paper Mario, but replenish your health/BP in M & L. Second, you have no right to say that when Nintendo is fine with having several platformers, various mini-game collections, and a crap-ton of Mario sports games. Finally, that is basically saying to Paper Mario fans “You want an RPG? Screw you! Go play something else!” So, as you can see, there are some reasons for fans to be a bit upset. Even more so, when you consider that the developers want this series to become the new standard, meaning that we may never get a Paper Mario game like the first three ever again. So the reason we’re mad is because they got rid of everything people enjoyed about Paper Mario to begin with, apparently haven’t listened to any fan complaints, and it’s most likely to stay this way.
If you want a better understanding, I’d recommend you go look up Arlo’s two videos on the subject:
And don't just ignore them this time because of the video thumbnail! I can assure he does this in a very calm manner, and makes some very good points!
And y’know what? Also look at these to get a good idea of fans would’ve preferred.
@NintendoFan64 I recommend stopping using Arlo's latest video. I think he does a bad analysis of what makes the Mario & Luigi and Paper Mario series different. In my opinion they are different and definitely cannot replace each other, but the points he makes are not convincing.
Mario & Luigi: Partners in Time, despite its funny and crazy moments, has a way darker story than the first Paper Mario.
Also, in the first two Mario & Luigi games badges have different effects besides those cited. As an example, there are those that increase the chance of receiving rare items, those that lower the coins lost when fleeing from a battle, those that increase attack power when you have a lot of mushrooms. And even in Partners in Time bosses couldn't just be beaten by spamming attacks and avoiding all enemies' attacks. Remember Commander Shroob? And even Sunnycide and Swiggler required smart actions in order for the battle not to last an insane amount of time. Superstar Saga even has weakness and resistance to fire or thunder. actually, some enemies are healed by those moves.
And of course, there are spiny enemies you can't jump on and flying enemies you cannot attack with the hammer, just like in Paper Mario.
The only point that stands is that of the partners, that are effectively a thing unique to the Paper Mario series.
I think Tabata's reply was terrible, because people are asking for a Paper Mario game like the first two, not a game pertaining to a different series, but this doesn't justify a biased analysis of the Mario & Luigi series just to reinforce some points against Sticker Star and Color Splash.
And I'd rather have Morton Koopa Jr. than that egg boss. If anything, Superstar Saga gave me both the Koopalings and original characters.
@Mister_Wu Alright, some good points there, but there is something that I disagree with. Partners in Time was seriously dark, but aside from that, M & L is generally more light-hearted, with maybe one or two other exceptions. Also, it definitely has some stiff competition with Super Paper Mario. Still, I'll give you the other stuff, and we at least can agree with Tabata's response being absolute bull.
Forums
Topic: Paper Mario: Color Splash - OT
Posts 561 to 580 of 954
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.