diablo2

@Nintendofan83 Well said. It IS sad that Nintendo makes a profit from peripherals, their first-party games, the third-party games, and also from their online subscription service. And yet....they refuse to sell the Switch at a loss.

Im sure they could have included at least 64GB (and other small tweaks) at a minimal console loss, and this wouldn't have hurt them at all.

But nope......gotta keep those investors extra happy, right? Screw the consumer.

They should just stop being greedy and release a console with more than 32GB storage. How about that?

Funny how Konami keeps releasing things no one asked for. Meanwhile, so many good franchises are going to waste.

@Mgene15 Isnt it sad? The average title tends to be late (look at Doom Eternal, for example). It's no wonder third parties sell fewer copies on Nintendo consoles. And this is in addition to poorer performance much of the time.

Lots of Wii-era games deserve a comeback, especially since some of them were criminally overlooked.

The screenshot where it says "MONARCH" is straight up PS2 quality. My god, look at those NPCs. The Switch can do better than that.

This article should either be taken down or updated to reflect on the discrepancy. This doesn't add up at all.

I wonder how much they mistreated their employees this time to get this released.

Fun facts about the Banjo Guy, from Destructoid:

"His name was Bertil Valley. He was a volunteer Santa Claus for over 25 years, and he owned his own successful construction company for over 20 years. By all accounts, he seemed like a pretty upstanding citizen. Unfortunately, he passed away back in 2004..."

@nintendoknife It's very similar when it comes to pricing. Whenever Nintendo rips off customers with a $60 port/remake, very few people complain (compared to a third-party counterpart). You still hear people being reasonably vocal, but not nearly as many.

@Nerdfather1 I love the game also. But hopefully they'll do a sequel with more variety in level design.

For example, a lot of the levels (especially early on) are played during night time, and there's a whole lot of buildings and concrete.

It would have been nice to break up that monotony early on, with some levels shown at sunset, giving the level a beautiful "orange" glow.

Little things like this would have been very welcome, so hopefully the devs can read this and improve in the future.

I had nothing against the game until I noticed the insane amount of typos. Makes you wonder what else has been overlooked by the devs...

Feedback to NintendoLife:
Maybe you should just do a "Roundup Friday" type of post which highlights smaller releases, all in one article.

This success only encourages them to keep their idiotic refund policies intact. As far as they're concerned, people will still buy no matter what.

• They'll price the games at $50-60
• Nintendo fans wont buy
• EA will once again jump ship

Absolutely everything has to come out at a later date on Switch. That's really getting old.

Speaking of late releases, i wonder what Doom Eternal sales will be like, considering so many people bought it on other platforms by now. Not everyone has bought it....but many surely have.

Just another out-of-touch decision by Nintendo. Why are we still surprised?

@Expa0 Same here. By the way. Moto Racer 4 is out on Switch. It doesn't feel the same at all, but im happy to see that the name still lives on.

If you care about portability and/or don't own another console, then great. But if you don't care about that, plus you own other systems, there's very little reason to buy so many watered-down games on Switch for (usually) the same price and super late.

@FragRed This is just my opinion of course, but to me, these restrictions stem from outdated thinking and out-of-touch philosophies.

Simply put: No matter how amazing someone makes a Mario knock-off on Dreams, nothing would ever replace the real games made by Nintendo. Same goes for other characters/franchises.

This is similar to YouTube "let's plays" fears that many developers had years ago. Many devs thought people would stop buying their games simply because consumers would be "satisfied" merely by watching a full gameplay video.

In an unrelated note (just to prove a similar point), many companies have embraced a four-day workweek and flexible "work from home" options. While many boomers thought this would destroy work productivity, they have instead seen very positive results so far.

My point is....corporations are often very wrong about the things they fear, instead of seeing them as potential exposure or boosters. Most corporations are simply not forward-thinking enough or do not adapt very well, and it shows.

@SmallraveMike Thanks for your input, Mike. And as a gaming community, please understand many gamers are very vocal (judging prematurely, etc). So please don't take certain comments personally (unless they're actual feedback)

Best of luck with your project!

@JayJ I wouldn't go that far until the game is actually released. Lots of indies have looked like total garbage on the surface, only to show great results in the end.

@jobvd This is why i always look at several reviews, not just from one website.

Since everything is subjective and flawed to some degree, we have to draw our own conclusion based on all reviews collectively.

I love how these guys overpriced everything on purpose, only to reduce the prices to the original (intended) price point.

Hence, now everything appears "discounted" and the devs get some brownie points for "listening to the community."

@WOLF13 Thanks for telling it like it is. Hell, some people commented on Link's Awakening being overpriced, and a bunch of others kept trying to justify the price no matter what. All for defending their little lovely company.

But as soon as a (high quality) third-party port costs even $40-50, everyone loses it.

Ahhh, the beauty of working for money-hungry investors. The people who ask for endless growth within a finite space. Lovely.

Excellent-looking game, but highly generic hero. He looks very "cheap" or mobile-like.

That said, i'll give this a go.

@Spudtendo Weak-willed? Maybe (depending on the person). But there's much more to addiction and compulsive behavior than just being 'stupid.' Especially when many people find a deep, emotional outlet on gambling-like mechanics.

Sooooo many people getting ripped off right about now...

Nice!
Speaking of which, Puyo Puyo Tetris is also fantastic (for those who haven't bought it yet).

Humble feedback on grammar:
"At its core it's still a solid enough game"

@Kulhy And that's okay. People like what they like, whether they're considered bad by the masses or not.
Enjoy it

@able_to_think This is a multi-billion-dollar company that absolutely refuses to lose a single cent, even when the issue is clearly theirs. Nintendo may sell affordable consoles, but they always make damn sure they get your money through other means.

Granted, maybe other companies would also charge to fix XYZ (not just Nintendo), but that isn't necessarily a valid excuse.

@MartyFlan Ahh, i see. This is not too toooo long of a wait, but it's also highly inconvenient for avid gamers. Huge problem for Lite owners, if this issue persists.

Thanks!

@MartyFlan How long does it generally take from the time you send them to the time you get them back? (hopefully less than 3 weeks?)

Assuming the Switch gets it eventually, it'll be yet another late game, just like most popular titles. It's nice to have it regardless, but this "late" trend really needs to stop.

That being said, this game had already been in development before they knew about the Switch (maybe) — but from the sound of it, Borderlands sounds like it's merely a dream at this point (as opposed to actually being well in development by now).

@BarefootBowser For the record, do YOU think it's a tad overpriced, on a personal level?

"and why do they buy it anyway? Simply because they see the value in it at that price."

Not necessarily. They have cultivated that price structure over many years, so eventually people have to accept it whether they like it or not. So even if Nintendo releases a mediocre game (which they HAVE , in the past), people will still buy it due to that long-term pricing structure combined with brand loyalty. Not necessarily due to the game's value.

"You may not agree, but clearly the demand is there at that price point."

There's also the fact that Nintendo games are exclusive, so people can't find them on other platforms (such as Steam) for a lower price. They have no other option.

So....the above are several valid reasons as to why people may be buying them. The answer is not strictly and solely based on value alone.

@electrolite77 Oh i agree, microtransactions are just crappy on a whole new level.

With that being said, it's worth noting that Nintendo is yet another publicly-traded corporation at the end of the day. While they're not necessarily twisting the knife too much, they're still stabbing you nonetheless, lol.

@BarefootBowser Well, tell that to the several reviews I have seen (on this very website) where they actively give their two cents on pricing. Those games just happened to be third-parties, by the way.

So it's all about keeping consistency, and more importantly, not giving Nintendo a pass just because Nintendo.

This is a great game, don't get me wrong. But much like Tropical Freeze, they priced it at $60 just because they know people will buy it anyway.

@BarefootBowser I didnt say that the mere mention should affect the score or anything. It's just worth mentioning their two cents on it, since this is clearly a hot debate among gamers. But again, mentioning it would have no impact on the final score. It's just acknowledgement, is all.

@gamer89 A lot of people praise Nintendo for "not being evil" with microtransactions and whatnot....

But what most people don't realize is that Nintendo is still sucking you dry through other means — mainly by rarely dropping their prices, and by overpricing everything to begin with. People just fail to look at these things because they seem more acceptable than microtransactions.

Brand loyalty is real, and it sucks.

I didnt read the full review, but (if im not mistaken) NintendoLife didn't mention anything about the price.

I feel like Nintendo games almost always get a pass just because it's Nintendo. It's much easier to mention pricing when it's a third-party game.

So if there's nothing about pricing included in the review, I highly suggest you insert something in there. The game should have been $40 to $50 at most.

NintendoLife, can you guys remove the misleading "Review" label and just mark this as an 'Overview' instead? At least for now?

Jesus, Nintendo so white. Need a bit more variety with those actors, Nintendo! (more than the one-second showing of 'other' people).

Now if we could only get Nintendo to comply with the things that actually matter....

It's a great game. Too bad the developers overlooked some rather obvious things — such as the option to enable / disable a mini map on the screen, and there's also no quest log.

Hopefully they will add these quality-of-life features soon.

@John_Deacon They're listening to their investors. FTFY

I always appreciate a good Kirby game, but i wish Nintendo (and second party devs) would surprise us with a dormant franchise or IP. Nothing feels truly surprising anymore, as every year I simply expect the newest same-series title over and over.

And yet, Link's Awakening is $60. I get that the two franchises are completely different, but darn Nintendo.....can you not be so greedy with your games? Maybe $40 to $50?

The real question is, where's the review for Bubsy Paws on Fire?