Round Up: The Pokémon Legends: Arceus Reviews Are In

Yes, but how do the trees look?

@IronMan30 They look literally unplayable, according to some trolls.

I'm pretty surprised by the general reviews. It's put it a bit higher up on my radar. I still really don't like the art style, though.

And people did nothing but trash on the game till now, I'm glad I defended you, my (Kinda) sweet open world pokemon game!

Looks really good but does seem to suffer with a lot of pop textures and assets. This was one things I really hated with BOTW because it was such a beautiful world that it was so detracting. I wish the switch had better ram/GPU or whatever would fix this issue as I find it so distracting. That and muddy textures. Would take those two fixes over 60FPS ANY DAY. i know that makes me the minority.

"Oh, No! Not the Trees! Not the Trees! Ahhhhhhh oh, they're in my eyes!"

@IronMan30 mostly green and rooty

Not my type of game but
The postman comes Friday morning.
My son will act like he’s sick.
It ain’t gonna work.

@IronMan30 Like sitting still Ents.

Game Informer use a weird scale. What do you have to do to get an 8.76 round here?!

It just got bumped up a few branches on my low-poly non-ray traced wishlist game tree.
My wife is going to steal my PS5 for horizon forbidden west which will also compromise my ability to play Elden ring. I’ll need something to do while that happens. I was going to rely on the new Kirby alone but now I’ll likely get this as well!

@meeto_1 The vast majority of games these days have pop in. Even games on PS5 and Xbox SX.

@moodycat
I don’t know, they went pretty hard on BDSP and Pokémon hate has become popular again. If there’s any set of Pokémon reviews I’d expect to be objective, it’s this game. And even so, it has received some criticism as an idea that doesn’t quite live up to its fullest potential and (obviously) some criticism of the graphics. I mean, waiting for user scores is never a bad idea, but this seems somewhat objective.

@Ooccoo_Jr add more water

Despite all the good reviews unfortunately I’m still just not bothered. Gen 7 and 8 just killed my enthusiasm. Maybe I’ll pick it up one day or wait for a review from Arlo or something ha

I’m just grateful the reviews didn’t whine about textures the whole time like some of the commenters on here

@Troll_Decimator those are the worst kind of trees!

Pokémon's weakest aspect is definitely the graphics and framerate but dammit, those didn't stop me from enjoying the previous titles and they're definitely not stopping me from enjoying this game either.

@Archius9
After hearing all the positive reception for this game, my first thought was, “But what does Arlo think?” I might hold off on getting the game because I have to finish Shining Pearl anyway, so seeing his review before I actually play the game would be quite nice.

@StardusterEX Ha ha ha, bloody brilliant! You win today's internet sir!

How long from turning it on, to being able to aimlessly wander around a sprawling world without repetitive tutorial guff?
Have any of the reviews mentioned that yet?

@Snatcher It is only as open world as the original Monster hunter games and MH Rise. Open biomes, not a fully open world, where you take on missions. More open world than any of the others, but still... not truly open world.

@JakedaArbok ha glad I’m not the only one that would rather wait for the Arlo review. I keep reminding myself that Sword had rave reviews too - if NL think that was an 8 then this review means nothing to me either.

@Munchlax Thank you for saying this. There's this weird binary switch with Pokemon criticism that only lets a view of feedback in shades of black and white (or red and blue amirite). It looks like it's going to be fun, but it does literally look like the graphics could be better, as we've seen the Switch push well beyond what's been presented here.

My problem is the challenge, I want it to be a bit hard and require a thoughtful selection of pokemon, attacks and tactic to use in battle to overcome the opposition.

@Unit_DTH I know.

@moodycat

Removing multiplayer should automatically make this a 7/10 or less for fans.

@StarPoint
At first i was sceptical, but i could not resist and watch live gameplay videos. Man seriously, this game looks amazing. (Spoken by someone who doesnt like pokemon)

What i still want to know is the Coop mode in this game. How that works, can you trade with that player etc.

@Troll_Decimator be fair to the trolls. I don’t know if there is playable eggsecutor or Sudowoodo.

Is the game good? To me, yes.

Is the game fun? Looks fun to me.

Is that all that matters? Yep.

Does the ratings and reviews really matter? Not really.

Will the haters and diehard fans ever be pleased by a Pokemon game? Doubtful.

And thus the world goes on..

@Screen
Knocking down the score to a 7/10 purely because the game lacks online multiplayer when it was always marketed as a single-player experience seems kinda silly to me.

@StarPoint funny you should say that… I would like the art style normally for any other video game but I find it really weird to have a Pokémon game set in any time period other than modern. I’m hoping the next mainline game evolves the mechanics introduced in Arceus and returns to a modern setting.

@The-Chosen-one Online trading exists but that is the extent of online multiplayer.

There’s also a feature similar to the Mystery Dungeon games where if you black out, people online can find your satchel where it was dropped in return for some points to spend at a shop in Jubilife Village.

When I was a young gamer lad, i never would have imagined that a tree in a game some day could become such a huge issue 🧐 a generational change of priorities, I suppose.

Good to see some positive reviews, it makes me even more excited for playing it this friday

Y'all can wait for Arlo. I'll wait for Dunkey. Also I'm not going to wait 😏

@moodycat Especially media outlets that offer affiliate links

@Yomogi Pokemon's weakest aspect is not updating the gameplay for 20 years. Can we AT LEAST fight with parties of 3, like literally every other turn based RPG, yet? ffs!!

Promising, but the fans often disagree with the critical consensus.

According to Metacritic, Emerald is one of the worst in the series and X/Y are among the best. I doubt most longtime fans would agree.

Well damn....no wonder this game sold out on Amazon

Man the vibe here is very different than the comments for the normal NL review.

@BloodNinja... If you don't think Legends was an improvement on the gameplay compared to SwSh I don't know what to tell you... Sure it doesn't have a party system. But improvement is improvement even when it doesn't take the form you were hoping for

@Salnax Well, yeah. Reviews generally have to be taken with a grain of salt. I would take X/Y over Emerald any day, though. In fact I didn't even get Emerald because Ruby was such a letdown. Not a fan of the Gen III Hoenn games.

@moodycat Exactly. You can't anger the fans of Nintendo franchises. Everyone jumped down my throat when I said my honest opinion of Metroid Dread; almost made me quit this site, in fact! I'm over it now, but still, what a weird and overly defensive fanbase!

@BloodNinja This game is already a breath of fresh air from the past games. Give it some time. Not everything needs to be changed immediately. I'd love to see a game with different parties, whether it's Pokémon or another trainer fighting by your side in future mainline Pokémon games but for now, enjoy the changes that the game can offer

@Yomogi I mean, I appreciate the positivity, but I laughed really hard when you said "give it some time." The franchise has been around since the Gameboy; I think it's enough time LOL

@BloodNinja I mean at least this time, they made some changes so yeah, maybe give it some time then maybe we can see some more changes in future Pokémon games or would you rather that they go back to the old formula after doing something different with PLA?

@Archius9 I got an early retail copy and I was in the same boat as you beforehand...my friend, I promise you this game is awesome and worth it. Called out of work just to play it more yesterday haha.

@Yomogi lmfao

It's been 26 years of the same thing, with extremely minor changes. They really gotta change things up; it's incredibly old and stale.

@JakedaArbok Arlo is a whiney, overtly negative YouTuber and his content and opinions are overrated. I'd say he's so critical and negative at times that he borders on toxic.

"The new Pikmin HURTS ME" springs to mind.

@Effortless-gamer Man…really? Never felt that about him at all. He’s just honest. I get not being a fan if your opinions don’t align with his but I’ve found he’s always thoughtful and reasonable in his criticisms.

@moodycat Can't argue with that. It is true.

@moodycat OMG I remember when FFXIII came out. The backlash and anger between fans was unreal. Takes me back lol

You're probably onto something there, since the games have been around for a long time they have become very well rooted, leaving more room for toxicity to grow, I guess?

@BloodNinja Pokemon Black and White introduced 3-on-3 battles in 2010.

Every generation of Pokemon games has innovated on the gameplay for better or worse. The changes in the most recent 3 gens (Mega Evolutions, Pokemon Amie and its friendship effects, horde battles, Z moves, removing the gym leader boss fights, Dynamaxing, and a "raid" system to name a few) have all gotten a mixed reception.

That will lead some people to call the series stale. It's not that the gameplay isn't being updated, it's not being updated in the ways people want. But it's absolutely untrue that it's been stagnant for 20 years. A Gen 5 fan trying Gen 1 games would probably find them slow and mechanically shallow.

@BloodNinja I mean if that's how you see it then that's fine. I'm just glad that something was done differently from the mainline games this time.

@swoose I'm not talking about certain events, I'm talking about getting the standard battle system to finally move away from the one v one slog it's been. It was nice that they had 3 on 3 in B&W, but those were set aside as special events and not the main gameplay. I'm saying they need to make something more akin to a traditional JRPG/turn based RPG, where you have a party of 3-4 and you can fight anywhere from singular, strong mobs to groups of 8-12 enemies. The fact they haven't done something like that since 1996 is stunning.

I trust PC Mag. Compared to the BOTW's and the other great open world adventure or JRPG style games, PLA seems to be in the 7-8 range purely off of depth and challenge alone. It tries to appeal to kids and newcomers as much as it does long time Pokemon and video game fans - which means corners are cut and compromises are made. I just think it should be held to the standard of BOTW or Tales of Arise or Persona 5 - not the standard of Pokemon Brilliant Diamond or Sword lol

@swoose I wouldn't really call the examples you mentioned being 'innovative' on the gameplay, mostly due to the fact that the core gameplay loop has always remained the same throughout every pokemon game - catch pokemon, travel the new continent, battle gym leaders and at the same time fight evil organization or gang.
The additions like megas, z moves, dynamaxing etc. are just gimmicks, which isn't inherently at bad thing but Gamefreak feels the need to add unnecessary gimmicks to every mainline game without changing what "works". It doesn't help that pokemon games have been noticeably getting easier with each entry so people are going to be bound to find the series stale.

@iLikeUrAttitude You said it way better than my foggy brain could muster up at this moment LOL

Really good across the board, great to see. I knew this game was gonna be good when the some biggest complaints about the game based off recent trailers and footage was the trees and textures. 😅

There are legit bad games out there that wish such minor issues like that were its biggest flaws.

@Effortless-gamer
I don’t know about that honestly. This is the guy that constructed a 3 hour-review of BOTW and has given Nintendo all the credit in the world when they objectively deserve it. I mean, even, in his words, his “beefier” reviews with games, he still points out the good parts of the game. Take his recent review of Paper Mario: the Origami King for instance. He is a self-professed TTYD fanboy and he absolutely hates the direction the series is going, but he still spent 20 minutes praising the game and even the scathing points come out of a place of genuine disappointment and hope that Nintendo will do better in the next games. He’s also seems to be one of the most legitimate nice YouTube personalities out there, and seems to genuinely care and be grateful for the following he has received.
@Bret
You probably won’t have to wait as long even if you did wait lol.

@Screen

I get where you're coming from, but I was always about the collecting and breeding aspects.

This game offers a more "into the world" feel that I've always wanted from a pokemon game.

The original creator has said in interviews that he wanted a game where kids could run out into nature and experience the joys of collecting from fields and streams like he did as a kid.

Competitive pvp monster battling was the side note, not the goal.

@moodycat Makes a lot of sense, very accurate observations, honestly.

@swoose
I agree with @iLikeUrAttitude. The main game have the same basic gameplay. I stopped buying them because giving pokemon ways of becoming bigger and bigger didn't really seem like growth in the series.

3v3 battles felt like they changed little, as well.

Sure, the competitive aspects have grown slightly more complicated, but the games have felt very samey.

Adding new pokemon and enhancers still makes me feel like I'm playing an old pokemon with a minor change.

Exploration has been mostly the same (sword/shield being the outlier). I haven't wanted to go on a linear path in a pokemon game for years.

If you do that, then the differences in your pokemon and your friend's pokemon is basically down to who is further in the game.

Some of us want changes to something other than minor additions to the battle system, or adding in other competitions (like beauty contests).

In the main games you. . . Choose one of the 3 starter pokemon. Go down a mostly linear path. Get locked into gym competitions in a generally set order. Almost guaranteedly have a counterpart who is a sort of competitor. Stop team somebody from a dastardly plot. Become world champion. Beat the elite 4. Do post game legendaries.

If you take all of the main line games, a high percentage of the above list will be in each of them. That's the same game. For 26-ish years.

I think the art style is going to make this game age pretty well. I remember how many fans hated the art style for Wind Waker when it released, and now a days it's one of the most beloved classic Zelda titles that many fans say aged the best.

@IronMan30 are we talking about the real trees or the professors health? Example: Oak or Elm

@Troll_Decimator
"I can't play these trees!"

@Xellen Not just silly. Disingenuous, dishonest and malicious.

@moodycat Is that really true, though? Looking back at Nintendo's console history, the vast majority of the best looking titles on each console are first party Nintendo. And it makes sense, really, they are developing for their own platform, and the games need to look enticing to buy an entire platform for. They focus all their energy on this one version, and they also try to make games that stand the test of time so they can sell them decades down the road with minor improvements.

@BloodNinja 15 affiliated link pages and preorder guides

@ancientlii Indeed! Strange times we live in.

Gotta say I didn't think GameFreak had it in them but looks like it's at the very least unique to other Pokémon games which has me interested for the first time in a long time. I won't be playing Friday though. Maybe after Elden Ring.

@Sanjithechef Is that fair? Holding a game, aimed at a broad audience, to the standard of a game aimed at a core audience? Should Dark Souls be marked down because it’s not very accessible to kids?

@meeto_1 I agree I’d be more then happy with a solid 30fps and no pop-in fo sho

@Screen it has trades 🤷‍♂️ I’m not in the competitive scene tho so doesn’t bother me

@Dringo good question. I personally think that any game/franchise can balance being accessible and fun, and challenging. Look at Super Mario Odyssey, Smash Bros Ultimate or even something like Animal Crossing. Simple games anyone can play, but so much depth that “hardcore gamers” have a lot to enjoy as well. Pokémon has so much to work with - from stats/abilities/types/etc to its wonderful world of Pokemon characters and locations. When not only graphics leave something to be desired, but the game itself is lacking in anything challenging or deep, we all kind of end up here: Hoping that this is the one that changes things. I love old Pokémon games, Soul Silver is my favourite, but recently they’ve been lacking a little, while mainline Mario and Zelda games have been GOTY contenders and Pokémon games are just fun ways to grind away, because Pokémon

@Kiwi_Unlimited I could make a similar list of things that have drastically changed from entry to entry, and you could call them "minor changes", and we would just argue in circles.

A common complaint in the Pokemon fandom is actually that GameFreak isn't making games enough like the old games, because the difficulty has been so lowered, and popular features like following Pokemon (HGSS) and the reworked exp formula of B&W will show up in one game and be pointlessly abandoned in the next. Even Mega evolutions, which were pretty centralizing in multiplayer battles, were hoped by many to be brought back in Sword and Shield DLC or the Diamond and Pearl remakes, because they added a lot to gameplay.

My biggest worry with Legends Arceus is the battle system will lack complexity for removing layers like held items and abilities, introduced in gens 2 and 3 respectively, that helped differentiate pokemon from each other and opened up many new strategies.

There are some Pokemon games I can play over and over, and others I never want to go back to. That doesn't sound like the same game for 26 years to me. You might as well say 2D Marios have been the same for 40 years because he always runs to the right and jumps on things.

@Pokester99 About?

@larryisaman I am basing my opinion on his content from around 2 years ago, tbf. I unfollowed him on YouTube around then due to being tied of his predictable, negative reviews where nothing was ever good enough.

The video named "the new Pikmin HURTS ME" and a few others after that were what made me sigh, roll my eyes and think "this guys a tool".

His content may well be different now, but for me, that phase he had of "nothing's ever good enough for me and Nintendo should tailor every game exactly to match my expectations otherwise it's not good" put me right off him.

@moodycat I was actually expecting the opposite. With NL and a few of the others, there seems to be no greater pleasure than hyping up a game (to an extreme manner) then cutting it's legs out from under it right before it launches.

If it doesn't look walk, talk or look like a duck, it's probably not a duck, so no it's a spinoff.

Not a big fan of big empty spaces to add "open world" to their taglines. Plus to me, sneaking around and catching 5 of the same thing just isn't Pokemon to me.

Having their sizes vary is about the only thing here to interest me.

@swoose

I can't say that I've revisited any other than blue/red.

In reality, I've played all of them as single player games. So I do consider most of the battle changes as minor.
I imagine, though, that they could mean more to competitive players.

I'm willing to listen, if you're willing to list what you consider the big changes (outside of sword/shield, which I already consider having changed relatively more).

Instead of fighting with you, I'd like your perspective. I won't argue with your response. I'm legitimately curious.

Edit:

Also, I only vaguely remember mega evolutions. At the time it just seemed like "bigger pokemon. " Clearly they're different from dynamaxing, but what were the fine point differences?

@UglyCasanova Except it's not a duck, it's a game. And it's the new direction for GameFreak.... The main Pokémon game studio. Putting two and two together is not hard.

Makes sense with this being pokemons most original idea yet, plus it's still Pokémon. I dont think they're bad games, just bad sequels that rarely evolve the series. They usually have "kids first Pokémon game" in mind and they barely take previous mechanics and QOL changes in mind for sequels

I'm interested to see how reception will be down the line, new ideas are refreshing and fun but also less refined and polished.

Cant wait to play this on PC.

@QueenKittenWrite that’s very good to know, thank you!

@Munchlax you must be fun at parties.

pokemon company should invest more in game development instead of buying good reviews from medias

Personally, having played all Pokémon's since Blue I am very excited for this new style. Reviews are sounding great and the few negatives are not things that normally ruin my gaming (e.g. Graphics- heck I still play blurry ass SNES games for gameplay not prettiness).

My order could arrive today or tomorrow so that is my weekend sorted

Enjoy if you will be playing and have a nice weekend if you are not!

@Sanjithechef They have maintained the formula quite a bit, and leaving innovation to the spin offs’… they seem almost afraid to change things. I wonder if there is a disconnect behind what gamers want and what more pure Pokemon fans want (if that makes sense?).

Even this release has been given a spin-off sounding title and released out of season. It suggests nerves and trying to satisfy a split fan base

@Kiwi_Unlimited OK, well as I see it the first 4 gens all introduced mechanics I'd consider indispensable:
(Sorry to NintendoLife for this wall of text, but this user asked and there's no DMs)

Gen 2: Held items and breeding. Held items are a big source of optionality in Pokemon because they have all sorts of effects, and don't make you spend a turn using them (if they're consumable), or they alter your pokemon in some other way while held. They were introduced with berries which were simple healing, but even some berries have more specific uses like healing a status effect you think you're going to get, or reducing damage of a certain type. So if you're heading into a boss fight you know will hit your best pokemon with a type they're weak to, or give you a certain status condition, you could pick a held item to counteract that. There are even some with negative effects, and ways to swap your item with your opponent to burden them. Competitive teams all use different held items, but I think some are pretty intuitive for single player too. For example, giving Air Balloon to your electric type so they dodge ground attacks, or Rocky Helmet to a more defensive mon so they can do some passive damage.

As for breeding, there are players who play Pokemon games just for the breeding mechanic, trying to make shinies or perfect pokemon. I don't do that myself, but it's fun to see what egg moves a pokemon learns. Those are moves they're not "supposed" to have but can get them if one parent is a certain species.

Also weather effects started in Gen II, the Special stat was split into 2 for attack and defense, 2 new types were added, some type interactions changed, and probably more I'm forgetting. It really overhauled the game.

Gen 3: Abilities and double battles. Abilities help differentiate pokemon from each other and give them different utilities. You might have a formerly weak Pokemon get an entry ability that summons weather or something, and become instantly more useful. There's a parallel to abilities in a lot of other RPGs, like Fire Emblem characters all having personal skills now, or TCGs having cards with static effects. There are some Pokemon that don't even make sense without their abilities, like Shedinja and Slaking. It's extra stupid that Legends Arceus removed abilities but still gave Regigigas the mechanical equivalent of Slow Start, its hindering ability. Just give all Pokemon their abilities!
(cont below, character limit)

Double battles have become the official format of Pokemon's VGC because of how fast and dynamic they are compared to single battles, and how many attacks/strategies are designed with doubles in mind. I like them in single player too, they mix things up and let you see your pokemon complement each other in surprising ways. Or they're good for story beats where you team up with a rival, like with Dawn/Lucas. Ruby/Sapphire had a gym leader double battle with Tate&Liza, I wish there were more like that.

Gen 4: The physical/special split. This was sorely needed because previously, moves used the physical or special stats based purely on what Type they were. A move like Fire Punch should intuitively work on a physical pokemon with strong arms, but nope, it was a special attack before. Pokemon like Flareon or Feraligatr would have high attack stats but not use them well because oops, Fire and Water were special types only. Moves became physical or special on a case-by-case basis in Gen 4, which allowed a lot of Pokemon to finally use attacks of their own type well, which is how the game always felt like it should play.

Gen 5 arguably didn't add a major mechanic besides experimenting with Triple and "rotation" battles. But I consider the EXP overhaul really important to game feel. It rewarded pokemon much more for defeating higher leveled opponents, and much less for defeating lower levels. I think all RPGs should work like this, because it naturally prevents overleveling and keeps your party at similar levels to each other.

Gen 5 is fondly remembered mostly for other reasons. They had a more story-driven approach, where the game didn't end with you battling the Elite 4 and champion, but rather having the antagonist's plot climax at that point and open a different endgame area. They had a full set of 151+ brand new pokemon instead of bringing back old ones; this hasn't been done since. And B2/W2 are the only numbered sequels in the series, which put the whole region forward in time and expanded it with new areas and a new starting point. Anyway some Legends Arceus reviews have called it the best game in the series since Gen 5, which is the most encouraging thing I could hear about it, haha.
(cont)

I didn't like the latest 3 gens as much, but I can speak to them a little. Mega Evos changed the stats of pokemon but also gave them new abilities, some being exclusive and too powerful to be on a pokemon normally. For example Mega Kangaskhan mobilized its baby to make all its attacks hit twice (the 2nd hit at reduced damage). That was as OP as it sounds, even competitively.

Z-Moves similarly pushed how strong single attacks could be, for example Max Evoboost raising all your stats by 2 stages. There was an element of decision making because you might have multiple Mega or Z-Move eligible pokemon on your team, but could only trigger them once per battle, and they coexisted in Gen 7. In single player you might have a Gengar and a Gardevoir and have to decide which Mega is better for a matchup, or when to pop another mon's Z-move. Also the Mega stones and Z-stones took up item slots, so there was an opportunity cost there. The consensus with players is Megas were the more useful of the 2 because they stayed in Mega form the whole battle, whereas a Z-Move could miss or the pokemon that got its buffs could be forced out.

Dynamax could be seen as a middle ground between those, it's like a Mega Evo that only lasts 3 turns, with attacks that have Z-Move effects. All these were really centralizing in competitive play, but I will say Sword/Shield at least featured Dynamax in all the gym battles too. By the time you fight Leon and his Gigantamax Charizard, you've had plenty of exposure to it and will have a strategy of how to respond... even if that's just Dynamaxing the turn after he does. It puts you in the mindset of what you'd do against another player.

Finally, I think the experiments with battle size are interesting. X/Y had 1v5 "horde" battles that got panned because, well, you had to watch 5 pokemon attack, there was generally slow game speed, and maybe some performance issues on 3DS. They felt tedious. Sun/Moon replaced gym battles with "totem" battles where the boss pokemon could summon a helper, making it 1v2. I thought that had a lot of potential, although it felt like the correct play was always to ignore the helper and focus-fire the totem so it wouldn't get off free attacks. And the 4v1 "raids" in Sword/Shield are unique for being a Pokemon co-op mode. I didn't play them much but I have friends who spent the majority of their playtime doing raids. Any of those modes could improve the single player with a few tweaks, even if they're not 4v12 Final Fantasy fights like BloodNinja wants.

I don't know why graphics are such a big deal to people. Games aren't fun because of the graphics, they're fun because of the gameplay. The SNES Allstars remakes of the Mario games for NES aren't any better than the original versions, they're exactly as good as the originals are, no more, no less. Maybe it's just because I grew up in the 80s and 90s, but any game that looks at least as good as a PS2 game is fine by me. It doesn't need to look any better than that. Because the gameplay is what's important.

Trying to claim that graphics affect how fun a game is is like saying a car drives faster if it has a certain colour of paint on it. That is, it doesn't at all affect the speed and manoeuvrability. As long as the graphics are good enough to do what they're supposed to (when they actually do affect gameplay, like for example the modern Tomb Raider games subconsciously tell you which walls are climbable by making them a shade of white/grey) then that's all that's needed. It doesn't have to be 4K 120 FPS all the time or something like that.

I can't believe people are willing to miss out on incredibly fun games, miss out on a really good time for themselves, because they think the graphics aren't good enough. Children all believe that, and that's OK because children are all complete morons. Everyone should eventually grow up and realise that graphics don't matter that much. But the fact that there are fully grown adults who still think like that is baffling to me. Of the Mario 3D Allstars games, all 3 of which I'd never played before, mario 64 was my favourite. Because it just felt so mechanically great to jump around in it. I liked the way the other 2 games looked, but they didn't feel quite as good to play (although they're still brilliant games). I can't imagine someone deliberately missing out on one of the best games ever in 64, just because the graphics aren't as good as other games in the series. They're missing out on a good time.

@swoose

Thank you. I don't agree with all that you've posted, but I can absolutely understand the perspective on a few (and could definitely support the arguments for some), especially for competitive players.

At minimum, it gives me something to reflect on.
I appreciate your response.
: )

@AnorakJimi Mario 64 is the goat!

My only other pokemon game was Pokemon Y, which i never finished. I was disappointed with the lack of 3D & had plenty of RPGs in 3D to get to. But, i will definitely get this eventually. I was already looking at it, but the good reviews make it a sure bet I will buy it. I love turn based RPGs, but the world just never sold me. I didn't grow up with it, so it was harder for me to overlook things that I dislike, as I can with franchises i grew up with (Transformers & GI Joe). Hopefully, the lack of PvP focus will make it a much stronger game for someone like me who loves single player RPGs (especially JRPGs).