TromboneGamer

@EffortlessMuppet So you just want to complain about videos you haven't even watched then? They don't JUST point out that the switch version of a game is worse than another version. A lot of the time they might say something like "as you might expect the switch version performs at a lower res/frame rate", but then they ALSO explain specifically what was done to achieve those frame rates and resolutions. A lot of the time they praise developers for making smart decisions or pulling off "impossible" programming feats. They're not trying to be negative about switch games. It's like you said, switch games are worse than other versions, most people know that. DF's job is tell to you why that is. Whether that's for you or not doesn't matter.

@TheCrabMan You can blindly enjoy your games if you want, but you can't invalidate the work and expertise that goes into making these analysis just because it's "tedious". The information is presented in an objective manner, but that doesn't mean they're out to take away your fun. Hopefully you're better at handling criticism targeted towards yourself rather than a video game.

@OldVolkano I don't think anyone's ignoring the positive reception. I do think people are weirdly overlooking the glaring flaws in performance. Maybe my standards are just super high these days, but the game looks downright ugly a lot of the time and doesn't perform very well either, and it takes me out of the experience more often than I'd like.

@EffortlessMuppet Why are you so scared of people criticizing a video game? "You're reviewing the software as it is not as you wish it was?" Bro/Sister, they literally reviewed the game as it is and how do you do that without comparing it to your own expectations? You're judging their thorough analysis of the game based on your own version of what's "reasonable" criticism. And like sixrings pointed out they didn't say they hate the game or the switch and they didn't even imply that. I think the game is fun but a lot of the time the game looks like a blurry mess and the frame rate tanks which feels pretty bad when the gameplay is supposed to be super smooth. There's a lot to like, but it's clear that it could be a LOT better. Just because it's a switch game doesn't mean you can't be annoyed or disappointed by those things.

Was this the indie smash-like that was on indiegogo or something a long time ago?

If anything tournaments with items on are going to teach players how un-fun items are in a competitive environment.

2 years of delay just to result in mediocrity. Feel bad that the dev couldn't meet expectation, but at the same time there's simply too much competition to just get a passing grade especially at its price point.

I don't mean to be rude, but perhaps you weren't particularly "good" at the games? Not that you have to be good to enjoy a game but when it comes to fighting games that certainly helps. Perhaps you didn't explore the rule variations in multiplayer with your friends much? If you wanted a more zany experience that might have done the trick. Anyways at the end of the day smash is a game and if you're not hooked then that's fine.

Makes me wish the game actually was 60fps.

I get that Dragon's Dogma is also an action game, but at the end of the day it's not DMC. I don't get it.

This game is awesome. If you have even a passing interest in shooters buy this game!

If this is true just note that the game will NOT look as good as it did, BUT will probably run a lot more smoothly.

How about giving it some actual value instead of locking away multiplayer and cloud saves?

Hopefully they've done something with the translation seeing as how it was so bad I couldn't be bothered finishing the game. The game is quite challenging though which had a bit to do with it as well.

Mango's a very genuine person. I don't agree with his lifestyle for the most part, but that's one thing I give him credit for so I'll believe his "excuse".

Let's take online play away from users so they can pay for our nearly meaningless subscription so that eventually maybe the fluff we add to it will be worth something to somebody.

I don't think they're doing anything related to Fast Racing. Maybe we're getting a sequel to another one of their games. I wouldn't be surprised if it's something entirely new tho.

He didn't say that he didn't have fun with Mario but it obviously didn't keep him playing.

@FoxyGlen Proper discourse is a rare find no matter where you look on the internet these days. I unfortunately phrase some of my thoughts in a negative manner as well. At the end of the day I just hope people can provide discussion with value.

@FoxyGlen I do think that some commenters are unreasonably angry, but there are also commenters like me who want to encourage critical thinking and alternate viewpoints..

@FoxyGlen Up until maybe a year or so ago you could build a very competent PC at the $300-500 mark. GPUs are more expensive due to cryptomining which hurts the prospect of building for a lot of people though I'm pretty sure bargain hunting can still get you good parts at a reasonable price. Of course Enthusiast level components are premium priced. Point being the the cost of Gaming PCs is sometimes a valid point, but in recent times not as much so.

@Spudworthy I'm not singling Nintendo out. I've blasted Xbox for it from the very start and Playstation when they decided it was okay. I have a gaming PC and enjoy playing my games with all their features at no extra cost. I also had a PS4 and Switch, but gave them up because I had other priorities. I plan to pick them up again sometime soon though. It is good to look at things in a positive light, but I feel like many people who support services like this don't look at things critically enough.

@construx The problem is they don't need any other reason to lock online play behind their subscription BECAUSE people will pay for it anyway. Most people don't want to linger on the feeling that they're getting ripped off so they'll find any justification to be apathetic to things that technically don't hurt them in the short term and maybe in the long run. I personally find it very dangerous that people are so willing to bend to anti-consumer trends like this just because "it could be worse".

If we didn't grumble then companies would step on consumers and no one would bat an eye. It is important to support businesses when they provide quality products and services. But when anti-consumer agendas are being fulfilled (online paywalls and cloud saves) for services that not everyone wants (discounts and "free" games) it would be a disservice to not speak out. Minor grievances can turn into bigger problems and no one wants that.

Disgusting

@NewAdvent That's not even a relevant statement given that MMOs are the only PC games that require a subscription. Also people miss the point that locking multiplayer for all games behind a subscription is just a bad thing for gamers in general. You could be paying 1 cent and it would still be awful. This is a matter of principal. It's not something you should have to pay extra for in most cases.

I love the Switch Pro controller, but I can't see myself using it to play smash. Would be nice to have this smash edition version just for the looks tho.

I agree with the quality part but software rarely, if ever, justifies a multiplayer paywall.

When you're country is run by what is essentially a dictator things like this tend to happen.

@Heavyarms55 I think the typical $60 price tag for their games more than covers the cost of their servers. I'm not sure to what extent they could lack motivation and certainly more money can help provide that, but there's no guarantee a paid service would make things better. Even if they are a business the products they make need to justify their price tag. Online paywalls at this point in time are simply not justified other than the fact that people will buy into them due to marketing and sometimes the extras that come with their subscription.

@Heavyarms55 Basically any time a company like Nintendo asks you to pay to play online it's a scam. It's true that it does cost some amount of money to maintain servers, but as far as I know not nearly enough to justify an additional paywall. There are many people who are either indifferent or are under the illusion that paying for a subscription service will make things better. Things might get better, but it's not like Nintendo or any other console producer lacked the resources to "make things better" before subscription walls.

"Exciting news" you say? It's unfortunate that there are people who feel that way.

Pretty sure we'll finally see Fire Emblem. It seems that Bayo 3 and Metroid most likely started production sometime last year so highly doubtful we'll see anything. Metroid might be mentioned at some point but likely no real information, maybe some concept talk. We'll see a lot of Smash, maybe a new mode, a new character or two, new stages of course. We definitely won't see everything though like Bill said. That Star Fox thing will almost certainly be revealed. There's some potential to finally see Pikmin 4. Maybe if we're lucky there'll be a surprise, and I hope we get one, but who knows.

Ah, yes, because we all know a port would really bring the hype for arguably the biggest games show of the year. I don't see any reason to bank on a port at this point. It's definitely a new entry we just don't know how much different it will be from Smash 4.

I don't understand Ark Sys's spoiler paranoia at all.

How about we just stop giving online paywalls a chance?

@dumedum For example: I'd really like to buy Splatoon 2 and invest my time in it, but since I'm one of those who are unfortunately in the minority of people who are adamant against these services I have basically no reason to get the game. It's one of few online focused experiences (on the switch) I'm interested in. The fact that I have to pay an additional fee to access those online features is a huge bummer and the problem only compounds itself when more and more games that have genuinely compelling online experiences become locked behind a subscription as well.

Nothing can forgive a paywall for online pay. Hell you get cloud saves for free with steam as well. While the price is a heck of a lot better than the competing services you're still being ripped off. I really hope someday people will get on board with the idea that you don't have to support practices like this.

@ThatNyteDaez @Prizm @dunnyone Please do not spread the notion that paying for a service will make it "more stable" or "better".

@illmatic20xx As per usual I second this. Do not support this game at launch at least. The developers lost touch with long time fans by pushing relentless amounts of DLC and had to rework a lootbox system that still locks the best weapon upgrades in the game as dice roll paid content. Unlocking guns and most upgrades is simple and pretty fast, but grinding for skins and masks takes way too long. Do not recommend.

You should stop suggesting that Red Dead Redemption could be ported. The coding for the game was a mess so they abandoned the idea of porting it to other systems a long time ago.

@Ralizah I didn't say that the fighting was all I cared about either. Calling the game and others like it "Diet Smash" does them a disservice as well. What makes this game in particular so interesting is that it has the chance to introduce people to some great indie games- even ones that I haven't played. Hopefully it IS a good game which would make ignoring it even more of a shame.

@Ralizah @Anti-Matter @Agramonte Thanks for being close-minded. If you genuinely just want to save money and/or your interest in smash-like games/fighters only extends to- well, smash- then I get it. But there are a lot of people who really like the fighting aspect of smash bros. I understand that the collectathon/completion part of smash in particular is important, especially for more casual players, but I admittedly am not as into that aspect anymore. I respect that element of smash, but I don't think this game deserves to be outright dismissed. Though, I don't know anything about the single player element of the game and am concerned about that as well. Whether it be a robust training mode, "arcade" mode, or the unlockables/progression system. TLDR: A smash-like game doesn't have to be Smash Bros. to be a good game.

Unless you get a kick out of grinding to the nth degree just to gamble for items when the odds are completely against you i don't recommend this game. Not to mention the switch version will most likely not look particularly great or perform well.

Do people really wanna play DOOM on the go badly enough to play it at 30fps? Look, I want hardcore 3rd party shooters as much as the next guy, but this is about as barebones of a port you can get. Of course, I understand the fact the game plays at all is a testament to the talent of the programmers, but still. No motion controls? What about HD rumble? Overall the experience is going to be lackluster even compared to the other console versions.

lack of rumble is disappointing, but I might consider getting one for Puyo Puyo Tetris.

A lot of people have been having fun with the Switch version so I thought there wasn't anything wrong with it, but after watching the video I am greatly questioning how people develop a tolerance for such poor performance. Even when I was ignorant to the difference between frame rates I don't think this is something I wouldn't notice.

Can I just say how awful it is that you need to buy an amiibo to play a game on a harder difficulty?

Red Steel 3.

I'm not particularly impressed. I'll wait for reviews I guess.