Got a Nintendo Switch for Christmas. Any good games?

[SteelArchangel]

I’m a huge, huge fan of Super Mario 3 on NES. Hmmm.

Which would be better, Odyssey, Super Mario U, or Zelda?

 

[SteelArchangel]

Mega Man 11 is great, but it is hard AF.

It give you four options at the beginning to choose a difficulty level: newcomer, casual, hard, and superhero. I went on casual because that was suggested for someone who was at least remotely familiar with Megaman, but it was so, so, so difficult, I had to lower it to newcomer and I still haven’t beaten the game, but I am close.

It’s super fun, and if you’re a MegaMan fan, pick it up. I need to get Legacy though.

 

[ZMystiCat]

Which would be better, Odyssey, Super Mario U, or Zelda?

Of those three, I would personally say Odyssey.

If you haven’t played the New Super Mario Bros. games, then that might be fun, but the games on the whole tend towards being very well-designed but sort of forgettable. Actually, I’d say that describes most of the modern Mario games - well-designed and fun but mostly forgettable.

Odyssey is the one major exception to that and is easily the best and most memorable Mario game since the first Galaxy game. It definitely plays the nostalgia hard, but unlike a lot of other recent Mario games, doesn’t do so by going through the motions of past games. It just has little ways it calls back to old games, and it has enough new and surprising things that even seasoned Mario veterans would be surprised by it. I haven’t had that feeling in a Mario game since Galaxy.

Breath of the Wild is…well, I’m a bit odd in that I’m not a huge fan. The world is beautiful, and I remember having fun with a lot of the game. However, outside of a couple unique shrines, I found the game overall to be forgettable. They virtually removed the dungeons from past Zelda games and replaced with dozens of shrines, which are well-designed but all blend together. The Divine Beasts are a little more interesting, and the missions to actually get on them are some of the best moments in the game, but again, they all sort of blend together. It does offer the most hours of all three games by far, but I think Odyssey packs the most into its runtime.

Granted, I am going a bit against popular opinion on Breath of the Wild. Overall, all three games are good. I just think Odyssey is the only one that really stands out as a memorable experience.

Mega Man 11 is great, but it is hard AF.

I like how Mega Man is hard, even if a lot of the games have at least one section that really makes me consider bothering with beating it over just messing around. It’s interesting to see a boss that seems overwhelming become completely manageable.

 

[SteelArchangel]

This was a common complaint in the local Gamestop.

I traded in a copy of Gears of War for Xbox. An employee and some customer standing there asked me why. I told them I had beaten the missions pretty quickly and wasn’t a fan of the multiplayer system they changed.

This customer sort of starts to obsess over this to me about how games are too easy and “people like me” just turn their nose down on them. I told them that I enjoy a difficult game. I told them to go play a Mega Man 2 or Metroid without any cheat codes or save points and see how long you can go. That’s how it used to be back in the day.

I’m torn between Odyssey and Mario U. I love the nostalgia. Just how open world is Odyssey? Are we talking Fallout-level open worldness?

 

[Joe_5859]

How about the new Super Mario Bros Deluxe?

As ZMystiCat said, this hearkens back to the old 2-D side-scrolling platformers. With the map, it really reminds me of Super Mario World the most.

This edition also includes Super Luigi U, which was a DLC extra for the original Wii U version of the game. It’s basically a speed run version of the regular game with modified level designs and only 100 seconds on the clock.

I’d agree that the New Super Mario games in general are a bit forgettable. I mean, there are stages and images from Super Mario 1, 2, 3, and Super Mario World that are burned in my brain. But I’d have a hard time trying to conjure an image from the New Super Mario Bros Wii or this one. Not that they are bad games.

I still picked up this one because I never actually bought it for the Wii U. There are some places you can find it on sale right now, too.

 

[Joe_5859]

. Just how open world is Odyssey? Are we talking Fallout-level open worldness?

It’s not that much of an open world. The worlds are generally bigger than those in the Galaxy games, but there are also fewer of them. As Z said, there is a story, so you do follow that along in a more linear fashion. But there are also a lot more opportunities to stop and smell the metaphorical roses. That’s why I compare it more to Mario 64 or Mario Sunshine. But the worlds aren’t so large that you get lost in them or anything.

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

I’m seriously gonna plug Dark Souls Remastered here. Beating some of the bosses in that game is an incredibly rewarding experience, and since the online playerbase is so small, you’re probably not going to be screwed over by jerks. Seriously, if you’re down for a massive learning curve that hides in an amazing game, get DSR.

 

[ZMystiCat]

That’s how it used to be back in the day.

I have mixed feelings about games getting easier. A lot of older games were developed with an arcade-game mentality, including difficulty that was often less about engagement and more about milking quarters. Some arcade games even allowed controlling how frequently a player could even be given the chance to win. I’ve also always expected some of the challenge, such as things that are impossible to know to progress, was an attempt to sell player’s guides. Getting away from that is great.

On the other hand, engaging challenge is something that too many games lack. Dark Souls is the only major series keeping it up, but outside of that, many games lack challenge or do it half-heartedly, like having bullet-sponge enemies.

Are we talking Fallout-level open worldness?

No, it is more Banjo Kazooie openness, at least when the level opens up. There are many levels, and they’re all pretty open but perhaps with clear paths to major points of interest. I’d compare it to Mario 64, which is also similar, but it does things that Banjo Kazooie did better, like not pulling you out of the level when collecting a moon. There is no hub world like N64 platformers, but that wouldn’t have worked with the journey nature of the story.

 

[giuseppe96]

Me too. I’m looking forward to seeing it in HD at last.

 

[SteelArchangel]

I liked Gear of War, but maybe 5 hours total into the story and the game was over. What’s left was multiplayer and it was ok.

My other issue is DLC. They tried hitting me up a Gamestop with $129 on some super edition game and it didn’t even include all the maps! Whenever I’m offered this I always tell them, “I used to remember when $59 bought the WHOLE game”. I know it’s not their fault, but I am glad that EA got in trouble over the Star Wars games last year. I picked that one up and day one…some player as Darth Maul with double lightsabers totally annihilated me about ten seconds into the game. How is it fair if you can just buy a good character.

Still, I enjoy Nintendo because they’re not nearly as bad about that stuff as some of them are.

 

[Joe_5859]

Still, I enjoy Nintendo because they’re not nearly as bad about that stuff as some of them are.

Indeed. Like with Mario Kart 8 on the Wii U, they released the game which had as many tracks as previous Mario Kart games. Then they released an additional 16 tracks (and several additional racers and vehicles) for $12. That’s something I can live with as it felt truly extra. When it seems like developers are holding back on something in order to charge you for it later, that doesn’t sit well.

 

[ZMystiCat]

My other issue is DLC.

I’m not against the concept of DLC. We used to have expansion passes, and DLC seems like a natural progression of that. It’s delivering content through the Internet, and it’s a bit smaller to account for networking speeds. The problem came with how companies abused it. Bethesda had that embarrassing horse armor DLC. IW and Activision charged $5 extra for DLC in MW2 compared to CoD4, and that was after considering how broken the game was when the DLC released. Capcom would sometimes have the content on disk and release DLC that only unlocked it. Sure, there’s been some great DLC in the past, and I actually added the Smash Bros. DLC to my order, but companies really got greedy and gave it a bad name.

The same happened with microtransactions. In some cases, I’m more than happy to spend a little money on a cool outfit or perhaps a new character. The problem is that most microtransactions have insane price tags (Fallout 76 being the most recent example of it), and games started getting developed around the idea of pushing microtransactions. That meant boring grinds, something game designers were starting to move away from, in order to encourage buying what would be a pain to get through gameplay. Now I have bought some small microtransactions in games I really like, but those games were inherently fun. They weren’t trying to push me into buying. They just offered something I wanted.

But then came loot boxes. Those are just inexcusable, and I’m glad some countries are cracking down on them legally.

 

[SteelArchangel]

Wow that’s incredible. To me, MarioKart is pretty complete as it is. But having more like that for that amount would be ok with me. Any higher and I’d have to nix that.

 

[SteelArchangel]

DLC to me is ok, if it provides extras for a game. But to even utilize parts of a game? I used to enjoy Madden, but now you can’t even play online anymore. You have to purchase a Season Field Pass to play against others.

If I’m committed to the game, then I don’t mind paying $10 for some more maps, or skins and weapons. They really push it with special characters. A bit back there was the WWE video game and I was going to pick it up. For an extra $50 I could have the Hulk Hogan edition with a bandana, photo, a figurine and I can use Hogan in the game. It’s like, “This is a wrestling game but I have to pay extra to use Hulk Hogan?”

 

[Joe_5859]

Mario Kart 8 Deluxe for the Switch includes all the original tracks from Mario Kart 8 for Wii U, plus all the DLC, plus more battle stages and options. So it really is probably the most for your money for any Mario Kart game so far.

They only reason I didn’t get it is because I have Mario Kart 8 for the Wii U and I feel weird paying for the same game twice. Unless it’s Zelda. If they slap an “HD” after the title, I buy it again.

 

[SteelArchangel]

I didn’t have a Wii U. I did have the Wii with MarioKart on there. I of course utilized the Virtual Console, which I’m disappointed the Switch doesn’t have. I could play MarioKart64 literally all day long.

Yeah, I hate it when they claim it’s a new game and barely change anything on it.

 

[Joe_5859]

I of course utilized the Virtual Console, which I’m disappointed the Switch doesn’t have.

It seems that—for now at least—Nintendo is relying on the “Nintendo Switch Online” subscription as the means to deliver older games on the Switch. Right now, for $20 a year, you have access to a growing library of old NES games (probably around 30 or so right now). They add 2 or 3 each month.

Honestly, that wouldn’t be so bad if they also had SNES and N64 games as well. I have a sinking feeling that, when they introduce SNES and N64 games, they will introduce a tiered pricing scheme to the online service requiring that you pay more if you want games from those other systems. But I’m holding out hope that I’m wrong.

Yeah, I hate it when they claim it’s a new game and barely change anything on it.

They are doing a lot more ports on the Switch from the Wii U than they ever did with previous consoles. Part of the reason is that the Switch is not backwards compatible. The other part is that the Wii U sold so poorly that many people never got to play those great games.

So for Mario Kart 8 (for example), the Switch version has already far outsold the Wii U version. So it’s hard to blame Nintendo for re-releasing these games when there clearly is a market for them.

 

[SteelArchangel]

Ports are cool and I’m ok with them.

The Online service needs way more games. 90% of them are the same ones that are on the NES Classic Edition. Their catalogue is huge, don’t they own SEGA games as well? I’d like to see at least Super Mario World very soon. The issue with SNES, unless you own an original one and can find the games, then you can’t really play it again.

I enjoy 8-bit games, but only the good ones. Pro Wrestling and Soccer 8-bit are Atari-level bad.

 

[Joe_5859]

The relationship between Nintendo and Sega is certainly better than it was during the “Console Wars”, and they have collaborated on some things in recent years, but Sega is still it’s own entity.

On one level, I understand why they roll things out slowly. If they gave everything all at once, and then stopped completely, people would be complaining about that, too. But it is sort of frustrating that they finally have a good, sizable library of old games available, and then they release a new console and effectively start back at square one again. It was the same with the Wii U. It took years before the Virtual Console catalogue was back up to the size it was on the Wii.

I have a feeling part of it has to do with courting 3rd party indie developers. If Nintendo had released their entire back catalogue of games on a Switch Virtual Console at launch, many people would have bought all those games and ignored the newer indie games. As it is, without the Virtual Console, people pay more attention to those indie releases.

 

[SteelArchangel]

I get the slow roll from a business point of view. But even on Virtual Console, they didn’t post everything they had for sale, and that was discouraging.