ShadJV

@Menardi I mean, the alternative of anything less than 100% catch rate means, if you fail to capture it in the first toss, there goes the legendary for good. Raids only give you one throw and they’ve implied you only get one raid for each legendary. The challenge, then, might be in winning the raid - some of the harder raids more or less required 4 human players with power Pokemon to stand a chance at even winning.

And heck, low catch rate is less of a challenge and more of RNG and soft resets. It’s a lottery... I mean, I suppose winning the lottery is a “challenge”, but not in a way that takes skill. I’d rather actual challenge than RNG + time.

@Mando44646 they gave a total number from the start for both DLC waves. “Over 200“ I think? So I guess if you want the number for this wave, subtract the number of new ones isle of armor (about 100) so it’s about 100 new ones here. That’s still far from the entire Dex.

@Mando44646 it will not, they said initially how many old Pokemon were returning between the two DLCs.

Noooo!!! Layton is one of my favorite series and I’ve always hoped for a return to form for the series... and I still had a shred of hope we’d see a new Fantasy Life title, too... this year has been so crappy, can’t we have some good news for once?

@status-204 tbh, I don’t think it’d make a big difference. I play a lot of online games and the only ones with lag are Nintendo P2P games... and only when paired with certain opponents. My Switch dock is only a couple feet from the wifi anyways. And I’ve tried wired connections with my laptop anyways and there’s no noticeable difference. I have pretty good internet. And I’d rather my limited money go into that pretty good internet than an adapter.

If the Switch had an Ethernet input built in, I’d try it. But I play online games with my PS4 all the time on wifi and don’t get lag.

So yeah. Ultimately, the P2P matches will only be as good as the worst player’s connection. For people with already better wifi, an adapter is a waste of money.

🙃 reading comprehension. If I could read the name correctly at 7, anyone who could read could. Granted, I didn’t get the pun until years later (as a 7 year old I wasn’t really thinking about conquest), but I at least saw the title screen enough times to know the name.

I did always like the pun (well, once I figured it out), because it IS a conquest. The first game was defending DK Isle, but this entry had Diddy coming and driving the kremlings out of their homeland. Kinda harsh but I guess K Rool did kidnap DK...

Or maybe have a port on the Switch dock for LAN so people don’t have to pay extra for an adapter. Not everyone can afford to buy an adapter for every console, Nintendo.

I stopped playing in August. I just was growing bored...

Idk, these rumors have been circling for so long that I’m not sure I buy it. It’s a safe prediction to expect an upgraded model, so of course people who just throw out blind guesses will say that and hope to be right. But Nintendo has only ever done this with handhelds, and the Switch is in the awkward position where it’s also a home console. I think it’s a 50/50 chance at best.

Additionally... March seems too soon, I would’ve thought they’d announce it by now. Especially if they’re announcing games for then already. If we do get one, I don’t think it will be in March.

Honestly, looks like a discount Shovel Knight to me. Looks generic and lacking in character, though maybe that’s quick to judge. The movement also looked less fluid, like the sword didn’t have knock back on enemy collisions.

That being said, I wouldn’t consider Shovel Knight a Metroidvania. More of an action games, the linear individual levels don’t really feel Metroidvania. This looks more like a Metroidvania. I wouldn’t compare them too heavily, might be a disservice to this game.

@RushDawg which is why I said “worthwhile”. None of those games come close to FFVI or SMRPG.

And honestly I don’t really count All Stars since it’s just a port of NES games (which are already available on the NES App and the NES Classic). It was redundant on the SNES App and, if we’re counting NES games, then of course the Switch has way more.

@RushDawg I wouldn’t go that far. All it has worthwhile that the SNES lacks is DKC2. Until it gets FFVI and SMRPG, it still doesn’t stack up.

@pip_muzz personally I think Sunshine is better, and that’s not just based on memories, I’ve replayed it the most times over the years. The problem with 64 is the controls and physics can be janky (really wish this wasn’t a direct port and rather was rebuilt in Galaxy’s engine). The problem with Galaxy is that it’s way more linear (most worlds only have 3 stars at most, and most of the time it’s a straight path to the star you selected). Sunshine is both more open than Galaxy and controls better than 64. So I certainly feel it’s the best, at least from my point of view. The innovation of the FLUDD just cements my opinion, since it’s so different and I like that sort of drastic change in my games.

That being said, yeah, I expect a lot of people to be disappointed in Sunshine, but mainly because, despite gamers often asking for new experiences, they tend to be happier with the status quo. 64 and Galaxy are fairly standard 3D Mario games, which is why they’re so successful. The Mario games that change up the formula the least are often the most financially successful for Nintendo, which seems to me as a reason why they play Mario games so safe. I think a lot of newcomers who expect a more traditional Mario game out of it will be disappointed. The FLUDD controls are a pretty big departure from the standard, simple “run and jump” mechanics of Mario.

Don’t get me wrong, I love 64 and Galaxy too. But I rarely replay them, because I get frustrated with how Mario controls in 64 and I get bored mid game in Galaxy when every stage feels more about “get from point A to point B” than about exploration.

DLC for a limited release seems even more dumb than a limited release. I highly doubt that’s in the cards.

As for it being unlockable... I mean, it’s possible, but as others mentioned it would be baffling to keep that a secret. There are people who are refusing to buy it because they’re upset it isn’t included. Why not advertise it?

I think it doesn’t ultimately mean anything.

@DJ_Cheemstar that’s how it will likely end, correct.

@Ralek85 wow, didn’t realize NL had limits to comment lengths! I agree about not hating 3H but being disappointed in the continual ease of the games. I played 3H for the story, and admittedly it was one of my favorite stories in the series (I loved nearly every character) but... the battles became a chore (which is why my second playthrough has been so slow) because they’re just so boring. My actions don’t seem impactful since I had to do something pretty dumb to lose a unit. The removal of the level cap adds to the unlimited grinding problem as well, because no unit can become useless through poor RNG level ups... which seems like a positive thing when described, but part of the strategy was knowing when to give up on one unit and train another one. Unlimited XP and a level cap of 99 (I think? I haven’t even hit the cap with anyone) means that you can just keep powering through and any unit remains viable enough.

I do get that in many ways, a fairly long story with ways to back yourself into a corner is... bad. Like, it can be disheartening for many players to realize you messed up so badly that you can no longer progress and must start over. But I felt casual mode was a perfect solution while keeping the classic mode challenging in the old ways. Heck... this conversation helped me realize why I don’t like the challenge from the highest difficulties as much as the old challenge, and that’s the whole “stronger enemies” thing. I don’t find it fun for the challenge to be, “have your early paladin babysitter soften enemies so the rest of the party can soak up XP and maybe be useful by mid game”. I prefer the long term challenge, I prefer the situation where it seems like there’s no repercussions right now but I know wasting my strong weapon’s durability will screw me over later, or investing in this unit will be a waste of XP, or even, in the case of Sacred Stones, “Can I afford the weapon durability to complete this bonus battle for a bit more XP?” I want meaningful choices to the entire campaign, not just the “which unit can withstand an attack to bait the enemy over?” That’s what the games need back. It’s so dumb that Byleth’s ancient legendary weapon can just be fixed by the regular Blacksmith for a couple rare resources, I much prefer having to decide when to actually use my legendary weapon because I know it will break after 20 hits.

And also... love that grinding strat you found, that’s the beauty of the old games, everyone finds their ways to exploit their resources but in the end we all had limited resources and had to decide how to use them.

I do hope we have the reemergence of some of the DS gems. People mock Indie games for using the ideas of older AAA games but maybe they wouldn’t have to if we would get those old franchises back in their glory. Wargroove was at least amazing, and so was Hollow Knight. These indie games have their own flavor though, which is great... but I do want those games back. Give me Final Fantasy Tactics. Give me Dawn of Sorrow. Anyways, I digress... I think you see what I’m getting at, as you worded it just as well.

@Ralek85 you hit the nail on the head. The essentially infinite resources has made strategy less meaningful in the series, which is the point I was getting at. The games weren’t always this way - earlier games were brutal enough that you could back yourself into a corner and find the game nearly unwinnable, if you don’t have some long term planning. Fates and Echoes had it worst with the unbreakable weapons, IMO. 3 Houses has a great story, don’t get me wrong... but I’m nearing the end of my second playthrough (I took a long break after the first) and at this point I don’t even attempt to employ strategy in the slightest. I have a huge abundance in weapons and money, my characters are somehow overleveled despite me not doing any extra battles, and death is meaningless with over a dozen “rewinds”... Sacred Stones was probably my favorite game in the series, and sure, that had extra maps for grinding, but like... grinding had to be done CAREFULLY due to other resources. Extra maps only gave a small amount of gold and you could burn through weapons on those maps if you try to go too crazy with grinding. That’s a good balance for me. Now the only way to squeeze out challenge is the highest difficulty in each game and... well, the challenge isn’t even managing resources and planning ahead at that point and it loses most of the fun.

Awakening was such a double edged sword. I mean, the series was pretty niche before then and, at the rate it was going, would’ve likely ended up like Advance Wars - not profitable enough for Nintendo to keep it going. Awakening gave it the much needed popularity... but simultaneously, the fans it drew in were less concerned with strategy and more concerned with the “anime story and characters”, solidifying the future of the series. And maybe, just maybe, there was a chance both could coexist. Casual mode, after all, meant the game could be both accessible for those in it for the story, while classic mode meant the game could be challenging for those in it for the strategy. Sadly, Nintendo saw the bigger audience at that point was the newer fans and decided to focus more on them (and financially it was probably smarter, given how successful 3 Houses was, but man I will always miss the style of the older games).

That being said, I do still miss Advance Wars, just for different reasons. Being able to start each map with a clean slate, building your army with no regard for the next battle... it was its own beast, and also very fun. I don’t know much about Clausewitz, but what I’m understanding is that was more about tactics than strategy, and either way I love both for different reasons. The closest I’ve felt to that AW feel is Wargroove, and while it is incredibly fun, its take on commanders feels so subtle. I really loved how each CO in AW had a passive that affected their whole army and a power that affected the whole field. I still hope someday Nintendo might revive this series. After all, they do sometimes give old IPs another go. I just hope it ends up being more popular... but without giving up its deep tactics.

@fafonio I’m not a fan of comparing the two because they’re just so different. FIre Emblem indeed has strategy, but it’s strategy is more long term than Advance Wars. AW’s strategy is fully within the map you’re playing as resources don’t carry over. It’s knowing what to deploy and how to use it effectively. Meanwhile, FE’s strategy stretches over the entire game. It’s about knowing how to read a unit’s usefulness, investing in its growth and equipment, and focusing on the right units to build a balanced team. Not to mention adapting to bad level ups and learning when to give up on a unit.

The slight differences in genre make it like comparing apples to oranges in that they’re both fruit but very different. AW is more purely a turn based strategy game while FE is a turn based strategy RPG. On the surface they look similar, and the weapon and magic triangles are definitely simpler than AW’s unit interaction, but there’s a lot more stats to take into account.

That being said, Fire Emblem is just as much as victim of itself as Advance Wars is. The past three titles have focused more and more on social aspects to the point that yeah, there’s a waifu focus. Complex strategy has been shoved to the side for the sake of accessibility (the game only has challenge on the highest difficulty now and at that point the strategy is shallow in a different way). All the entries before Awakening have been much more complex and strategic. But the people have spoken and they want waifus over strategy...

@Heavyarms55 I don’t even dislike free to play depending on how it’s handled. But World of Tanks has a steep paywall that you hit sooner or later, and to even have a decent tier tank you’re shelling out $30+. God forbid you don’t do enough research and waste that money on a tank that doesn’t even hold up in the meta.

There’s games like Dragalia Lost that are generous enough to its free to play players that you never really need to pay. You never hit a wall. They constantly give everyone free pulls in the gacha. That I’m fine with - if a company is going free to play and has a wall that you essentially need to pay to get past, they may as well have made it paid... and when there’s one wall, you know you’ll hit more, so you never know how much money you’re expected to shell out. It’s dishonest because it’s a sinkhole of money. When free to play games don’t have a wall, they generally are fairly successful anyways because a majority of these games make their profit from whales (who will pay the money regardless, even just for minor things). If I play a good free to play game and it never forces me to buy anything, I usually end up spending some money on it because I’m enjoying my experience. If I play one that I hit a wall, I generally just quit because it’s just a dishonest model. I don’t know how much they’re expecting me to pay.

@Wilforce do you think massive paywalls are good models for games then?

In all seriousness, I would love a return of Advance Wars... just I wouldn’t trust this company to handle it. The last thing I want to see is AW return with a game that charges real money to unlock stronger units.

Great, can’t wait for them to take one of my childhood favorites and shove it into a free-to-play mode with a steep paywall!

@Heavyarms55 fair. I only have one competitive team so I didn’t think of how the battle box works.

@Heavyarms55 don’t most of the online modes ban using the same item on more than one mon though?

@WickedUnicarnBoi only the first DLC came out so far and it’s like 30 minutes to get through the story - it’s mostly additions to make competitive team building easier and give more options. The second DLC wave looks like it’ll be more story content so it might be better for you to wait for that anyways (the price includes both waves).

@Kalmaro they said you can play 13 dungeons, which I believe is everything through the credits. It just means the Lite version can’t do the new postgame dungeons.

@Kienda that is indeed an option. Do note that the free “lite” version cannot play ALL the content though. From what I’ve read, I believe it says 13 dungeons, which may or may not be everything other than the new postgame dungeons - I counted 14 dungeons in the original but I assume they won’t cut the Lite version off at the second to last dungeon so maybe they’re not counting the final area as a dungeon? They’ve been very vague but I’m pretty sure the Lite version will let you play to the credits and only locks out the new dungeons, which are postgame.

@Kienda I’ve still yet to see anyone see how they’d manage to preserve the secret mission mechanic with couch co-op. I’m in support of them cutting local play if it means keeping all the mechanics intact.

@Kienda the changing friend codes are dumb but as it said, you can follow someone or add someone as a friend and then you don’t need to enter codes again. It seemed pretty clear to me in the tweets. Friend codes only have to be exchanged once... the codes themselves however change every 30 minutes so you cannot write down someone’s code and then enter it into the game an hour later.

Gonna spend hours on this feature alone.

@MeowMeowKins you keep using the term “objective” and I keep saying “subjective”. I don’t know how to be more clear. Whether media is good or bad can never be objective. That’s not how it works. I’m not talking about objectivity, I’m talking about successfulness.

@MeowMeowKins nope, I’m saying there IS no objective opinion on whether games are good or not. Only subjective. I even said it was subjective. Twice. I said the only concrete methods we have to measure success is critical reception and sales, both of which Rare has done fine with in recent years.

@MeowMeowKins what’s your point? Whether a game is good is entirely subjective, and so if Rare is making games that are being received positive by critics and selling well, that’s the best metric we have to measure its quality. Just because you don’t like, say, the current Pokémon games doesn’t define whether they’re good or bad. That’s entirely subjective. Many poor people seem to have enjoyed it than those who haven’t. But that’s a weird comparison to being up, given there’s less controversy over games like Sea of Thieves.

I’ve been waiting for Pirate Bowser Jr, it’s about time he made an appearance somewhere.

Having finished Origami King, I’d rate it higher than Super Paper Mario. Otherwise I agree with this list.

@DoktorTotenKopf I mean, they’ve had several critically acclaimed games under Microsoft but go off.

@MeowMeowKins oh I know, I’m just saying even if they meant they aren’t doing anything good, that’s still wrong. They’re releasing popular games.

@MeowMeowKins but like... they are? They released Sea of Thieves a couple years ago which was very well received, from my understanding.

@DoktorTotenKopf I mean Microsoft has consistently been having Rare make games though, what do you mean by “do nothing with the company as a whole”?

@Yosher fair. I’ve only found two shinies ever naturally, a Spinda (ugh) and a Ludicolo. I don’t think I’d be too upset if they released event shinies of those though, for me the ones I caught would still be special (as much as I HATE Spinda, I’ve transferred it through every generation because it was my first shiny). Besides, it’s also be outweighed for me by having access to other shinies. A self caught shiny always has more value to me anyways, as it’s sentimental. Everyone having it doesn’t make it less valuable to me.

@Doofenshmirtz @Yosher not everyone cares about wasting a bunch of time mindlessly grinding for a palette swap and still appreciate having the ability to use a palette swap. I love when they give out free shinies - I have a lot of productive things I can do rather than shiny hunt, but love to collect the ones that are given out. To me it’s no different than a mythical Pokemon - those take no real effort either, they’re just a cool thing to have. In this case, it’s competitively viable too, unlike some mythicals.

Think all I want at this point is Xeno X. I never did finish it.

@Kalmaro they said you can only play the first 3 dungeons unless one person in the group has the full game. Then you can play the entire game. So, just like if it was local, only one person has to own the game. I have friends just getting the Lite version because they can then play the entire game for free when we play as a group (and, I mean, it’s meant to be played multiplayer anyways).

@Kalmaro @SirKif isn’t there only 13 dungeons in the game though? I only remember about that many, and just checked a guide and only am counting 13.

@Anti-Matter to answer your question “Btw, if the Dream island banned, could they still able to play ACNH normally ?”

If your dream island is deleted, you appear to get a warning unless you’ve already gotten warnings for something. Multiple infractions results in being banned from online play, meaning you can still play the game offline but you can’t do anything online, such as visit dreams, play with other players, or share patterns. If you don’t mind being restricted to offline play, it probably won’t affect you.

@polterpupp I don’t think the update has been out long enough for anyone to verify. But it’s likely you need to at least be at the point where Resident Services is built.

Thought I’d miss it more. But I prefer only hearing about releases that are a month or two away, and between that and how much Switch backlog I have... Yeah, I feel like I have more breathing room. I still always have a game I’m impatiently waiting for in the near future, I don’t need a dozen at any given moment...

@IronMan30 oh yeah, don’t let that be the lesson for the kids. If anything, the lesson is don’t pay for a luxury item until you intend to use it, as it might go down in price by then. You can always find a way to present a lesson as something positive rather than negative.

@dugan I’ve supported games that went free to play, I agree it shouldn’t be a problem. Most things get cheaper over time, and people realize that when they decide not to purchase a game until it gets a price drop. When someone buys a game at full price, they’re deciding that the price is worth having access to the game earlier rather than later, and that’s part of where value comes from. No point being jealous someone got it cheaper or for free because you had it sooner! This is a good idea because it gains them more consumers and more people get to experience it. Win-win! Thank you for being open to this, more people need that attitude rather than getting upset that they paid for something that they got enjoyment out of! (Also, I want to add to my earlier statement that in a situation like the 3DS, the reason prior consumers needed compensation for the big price drop was because there was actually very little value consumers got out of those 6 months due to the rather bare launch window - it still wasn’t something the consumers were owed for the price drop, but it was Nintendo owning up to their mistakes, rather than a simple apology for a price drop. From what I’ve heard from friends and seen from gameplay, Rocket League was absolutely worth the price it was sold at. If anything, I’ll feel a little bad nabbing it for free, but if I am having a good time I can pay the company in microtransactions.

And I’ll keep an eye out for your name, if you see someone by the name of ShadJV (provided it’s not taken) then go a little easy on him, he’ll be a noob.

@NintonicGamer then you supported the developer! I mean they’ll probably give ya something, but I wouldn’t consider it guaranteed. Games that go free to play don’t always reward the early adopters, as your reward is having the game longer. It’s similar to buying a console that eventually gets price drops - they people that bought it for $400 don’t get anything free when it drops to $300, they just had earlier access to it. (3DS being an exception.)