How could reviewers have been so wrong about Steel Diver?

Steel Diver could very well be in the running for most underrated game of the year, maybe even the decade. Check out this thread at NeoGAF that contrasts reviewer consensus with the opinions of actual gamers:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=426245

Reviewers say that the game can be completed in a couple of hours; gamers say that it can take upwards of 20-hours. Reviewers say that the game is too short and easy; gamers say that expert mode (unlocked after beating all 7 missions with all 3 subs and which adds new hazards and enemies to the levels) effectively doubles the amount of content and makes the game considerably challenging. Reviewers say that the game is slow and dull; gamers say that it's fun and immersive.

It's like the reviewers played a different game than the rest of us.

I played it quite a bit before I fell in love with pilotwings. Its a fun game but it has serious errors

...it has serious errorsLaytonsCat

One of those love it or hate it games then..Litchie

Perhaps, but I find it curious that gamers love it while reviewers hate it.

[QUOTE="Litchie"]One of those love it or hate it games then..dzimm

Perhaps, but I find it curious that gamers love it while reviewers hate it.

There's always a few games like that, Dynasty Warriors springs to mind. I haven't played Steel Diver personally but I did expect it to get better reviews than it did after a lot of the initial hands-on and previews were positive.

Playing through the same game three times to get a harder difficulty doesn't really count as content.

I played Mirror's Edge for more than 50h, that doesn't mean that reviewers are wrong when they said the game is 7-10h long.

[QUOTE="Litchie"]One of those love it or hate it games then..dzimm

Perhaps, but I find it curious that gamers love it while reviewers hate it.

The reason why some gamers love it is because it was the game they got with the system and are doing anything they can to justify that decision.

They think it's way overpriced so it impacts the score alot. Many reviewers also don't have any experience with handheld gaming.

Craig Harris is a handheld gaming veteran and been following Nintendo professionally for 15 years so I trust him more, to say the least.

http://www.thisiscraig.com/

Basically he thinks it's alright, but overpriced.

They think it's way overpriced so it impacts the score alot. Many reviewers also don't have any experience with handheld gaming.

Craig Harris is a handheld gaming veteran and been following Nintendo professionally for 15 years so I trust him more, to say the least.

http://www.thisiscraig.com/

Basically he thinks it's alright, but overpriced.

SuperFlakeman

Where did you get the idea that most reviewers aren't used to handheld games?

[QUOTE="SuperFlakeman"]

They think it's way overpriced so it impacts the score alot. Many reviewers also don't have any experience with handheld gaming.

Craig Harris is a handheld gaming veteran and been following Nintendo professionally for 15 years so I trust him more, to say the least.

http://www.thisiscraig.com/

Basically he thinks it's alright, but overpriced.

JLF1

Where did you get the idea that most reviewers aren't used to handheld games?

From reading the reviews? Since when did content affect their scores anyway? Look at Uncharted 2.

From reading the reviews? Since when did content affect their scores anyway? Look at Uncharted 2.

SuperFlakeman

It always had.

Uncharted 2 has a really good multiplayer and is much longer than Steel Diver or Pilot Wings.

No offense but the only reason I think you have that impression of reviewers is that they didn't give these Nintendo games better scores. There are IPhone and IPad games for less than $10 that have much more content than these $40 3DS games.

Look at SSF4 and Shadow Wars. Both have gotten great reviews because they actually have content and multiplayer and takes advantage of the 3DS in good ways.

Look at SSF4 and Shadow Wars. Both have gotten great reviews because they actually have content and multiplayer and takes advantage of the 3DS in good ways.

JLF1

[QUOTE="JLF1"]

Look at SSF4 and Shadow Wars. Both have gotten great reviews because they actually have content and multiplayer and takes advantage of the 3DS in good ways.

LordAndrew

I didn't say it was perfect.

It has a lot of content though and at least have multiplayer.

It always had.

Uncharted 2 has a really good multiplayer and is much longer than Steel Diver or Pilot Wings.

No offense but the only reason I think you have that impression of reviewers is that they didn't give these Nintendo games better scores. There are IPhone and IPad games for less than $10 that have much more content than these $40 3DS games.

Look at SSF4 and Shadow Wars. Both have gotten great reviews because they actually have content and multiplayer and takes advantage of the 3DS in good ways.

JLF1

Was not refering to scores. The funny thing is that you're doing the same thing by comparing the ammount of content in UC2 directly with PWR and SD. It's like comparing UC2 with a fighting game such as SSF4. Makes 0 sense because UC2 is a campaign while PWR is meant to be that type of game you play over and over like Smash bros. or SSF4.

I don't own any iOS device so I wouldn't know.

I can understand why I come off as a fanboy, it's because I'm only here to defend. I never praise, criticise or attack other games / devs / whatever. I don't believe in thumbing down or going into threads where I don't belong. Love your stuff and stop hate things you dislike.

Playing through the same game three times to get a harder difficulty doesn't really count as content.

I played Mirror's Edge for more than 50h, that doesn't mean that reviewers are wrong when they said the game is 7-10h long.

JLF1

Justin did a pretty good job with his review of Pilotwings because he at least described what's in the game and how you can get more out of it if you enjoy going for a perfect score. I'm a completionist, so I knew I would love going back for the perfect score on every level and collecting everything in Free Flight Mode. And in the 9:15 I've spent on the game, I've completed Free Flight Mode and have 11 more missions to get a perfect score on. Now that I'm on the harder levels, I'm guessing I'll get at least another two or three hours out of it over the course of another week or two.

The problem with reviewers (and it's not necessarily their fault) is that they play games under totally different conditions than we do. They have an extremely short time limit in which they have marathon play sessions. Especially for portable games, this doesn't even come close to how most of us will play these games. Sometimes I'll put a game down for a few weeks or months after I've "finished" it, then come back to it and play through the rest of the content to experience 100% of what the game has to offer. Reviewers don't have that luxury, though they really do need to better predict how their readers' experiences might differ from theirs and give us the info we need to decide whether we'll enjoy what the game offers.

[QUOTE="JLF1"]

Playing through the same game three times to get a harder difficulty doesn't really count as content.

I played Mirror's Edge for more than 50h, that doesn't mean that reviewers are wrong when they said the game is 7-10h long.

JordanElek

Justin did a pretty good job with his review of Pilotwings because he at least described what's in the game and how you can get more out of it if you enjoy going for a perfect score. I'm a completionist, so I knew I would love going back for the perfect score on every level and collecting everything in Free Flight Mode. And in the 9:15 I've spent on the game, I've completed Free Flight Mode and have 11 more missions to get a perfect score on. Now that I'm on the harder levels, I'm guessing I'll get at least another two or three hours out of it over the course of another week or two.

The problem with reviewers (and it's not necessarily their fault) is that they play games under totally different conditions than we do. They have an extremely short time limit in which they have marathon play sessions. Especially for portable games, this doesn't even come close to how most of us will play these games. Sometimes I'll put a game down for a few weeks or months after I've "finished" it, then come back to it and play through the rest of the content to experience 100% of what the game has to offer. Reviewers don't have that luxury, though they really do need to better predict how their readers' experiences might differ from theirs and give us the info we need to decide whether we'll enjoy what the game offers.

Exactly my point. They use a different perspective than what I consider the "proper" one, it's not always easy to review a certain game. How do you score a game such as Picross 3D? UC2 is not meant to be played over and over for star ratings, PWR is a game made for that in mind, it's different.

Star coins in NSMB are cleverly implemented and gives you an incentive to explore the secrets of a level. Collecting treasures in UC2 is only there as a filler, sometimes it's cool when they hide stuff outside of camera angles under stairs or so but most of the time it's there just for the sake of achievements.

There is a difference between things that seemingly are the same.

There are IPhone and IPad games for less than $10 that have much more content than these $40 3DS games.JLF1

Iwata's point in that GDC speech was that those ridiculously low prices are serving to devalue games in general. If everyone starts to see price tags higher than $5 for fully fleshed out games as a complete ripoff, then that's going to totally change how developers/publishers approach handheld games. We'll start to see games that can feasibly be sold at those cheaper prices, and the quality and amount of content will reflect that. Pilotwings (in its current form) couldn't have made a profit if it been sold at $10, regardless of how much more content is in a $1 iOS game. People are willing to buy it for $40, and that will most likely at least cover the cost of development and production.

It kind of does, though. They should at least mention the possibility of replayability (which they usually do), especially when replayability doesn't just mean that you can play the game multiple times if you think it's fun. Some games offer real incentives to play the same content more than once, like Steel Diver with the stuff already mentioned, or Pilotwings with the star rating system, or Mirror's Edge with time trials and skill combos, or any game that grades you on your performance.

Justin did a pretty good job with his review of Pilotwings because he at least described what's in the game and how you can get more out of it if you enjoy going for a perfect score. I'm a completionist, so I knew I would love going back for the perfect score on every level and collecting everything in Free Flight Mode. And in the 9:15 I've spent on the game, I've completed Free Flight Mode and have 11 more missions to get a perfect score on. Now that I'm on the harder levels, I'm guessing I'll get at least another two or three hours out of it over the course of another week or two.

The problem with reviewers (and it's not necessarily their fault) is that they play games under totally different conditions than we do. They have an extremely short time limit in which they have marathon play sessions. Especially for portable games, this doesn't even come close to how most of us will play these games. Sometimes I'll put a game down for a few weeks or months after I've "finished" it, then come back to it and play through the rest of the content to experience 100% of what the game has to offer. Reviewers don't have that luxury, though they really do need to better predict how their readers' experiences might differ from theirs and give us the info we need to decide whether we'll enjoy what the game offers.

JordanElek

Using that logic every game basically have infinite gameplay. Yes, you can count new difficulties as more content but that is not what most people are talking about when they talk content.

Personally though, I think Nintendo are shooting themselves in the foot by releasing Pilotwings and Steel Diver in the shape they are now after bashing the IPad and it's games.

Using that logic every game basically have infinite gameplay. Yes, you can count new difficulties as more content but that is not what most people are talking about when they talk content.

Personally though, I think Nintendo are shooting themselves in the foot by releasing Pilotwings and Steel Diver in the shape they are now after bashing the IPad and it's games.

JLF1

Nintendo's comments about iOS games where coming from a business standpoint, not games themselves. They think that Apple's model is going to hurt the developers in the long run.

He's talking about people actually loosing their jobs, because of how the iOS games work.

How can you not have understood this? He is trying to protect developers, not bash the competition.

Playing through the same game three times to get a harder difficulty doesn't really count as content.JLF1

Why not? And it's not just playing through the game three times but playing it with subs that all have their own unique characteristics that offer a different experience on each of those three play throughs. And then there's expert mode which effectively ups the mission count from 7 to 14, so in terms of straight content, there is several hours of gameplay out of the box, and that's before even touching time trials (both unique time trial levels and trying to beat staff ghosts in the missions) and the Steel Commander strategy game.

So really, reviewers that criticised the game for "lacking content" were making a subjective rather than factual evaluation. Case in point:

• Fact - The game has 7 mission levels
• Opinion - The game is light on content

I'm not even convinced that most reviewers played the game all the way through. I may be mistaken, but I don't think Gamespot's video review showed anything past level 5 which is accessible right from the start.

And never mind the amount of content, the game is just a pure joy to play.

Using that logic every game basically have infinite gameplay. Yes, you can count new difficulties as more content but that is not what most people are talking about when they talk content.JLF1

These games still have a point at which you've experienced everything the game has to offer (100% completion), but it's well beyond the bare minimum of content to say you've "finished" the game.

All I'm really saying is that reviewers should point that out, even if they don't play through all of the extra content themselves or even if they wouldn't personally enjoy it, because many people will care about that extra stuff.

Personally though, I think Nintendo are shooting themselves in the foot by releasing Pilotwings and Steel Diver in the shape they are now after bashing the IPad and it's games.JLF1

See my previous post about that.

The problem with reviewers (and it's not necessarily their fault) is that they play games under totally different conditions than we do. They have an extremely short time limit in which they have marathon play sessions. Especially for portable games, this doesn't even come close to how most of us will play these games. Sometimes I'll put a game down for a few weeks or months after I've "finished" it, then come back to it and play through the rest of the content to experience 100% of what the game has to offer. Reviewers don't have that luxury, though they really do need to better predict how their readers' experiences might differ from theirs and give us the info we need to decide whether we'll enjoy what the game offers.JordanElek

That's an excellent point. And it's worth noting that in the case of the 3DS, reviewers only had the review units for a week before the reviews were published, meaning that they probably only spent a day or two with the games at most. Not really the fairest conditions under which to review a game.

[QUOTE="dzimm"]

[QUOTE="Litchie"]One of those love it or hate it games then..JLF1

Perhaps, but I find it curious that gamers love it while reviewers hate it.

The reason why some gamers love it is because it was the game they got with the system and are doing anything they can to justify that decision.

:roll:

i knew it was going to be good ever since i saw it... thats why i bought it.

Why not? And it's not just playing through the game three times but playing it with subs that all have their own unique characteristics that offer a different experience on each of those three play throughs. And then there's expert mode which effectively ups the mission count from 7 to 14, so in terms of straight content, there is several hours of gameplay out of the box, and that's before even touching time trials (both unique time trial levels and trying to beat staff ghosts in the missions) and the Steel Commander strategy game.

So really, reviewers that criticised the game for "lacking content" were making a subjective rather than factual evaluation. Case in point:

• Fact - The game has 7 mission levels
• Opinion - The game is light on content

I'm not even convinced that most reviewers played the game all the way through. I may be mistaken, but I don't think Gamespot's video review showed anything past level 5 which is accessible right from the start.

And never mind the amount of content, the game is just a pure joy to play.

dzimm

The FACT that this game is low on content can't be argued.

JLF1

So what do you say about any fighting game? Just a few new characters, some new backgrounds, not really any content.

Really, the point of these types of games is that you are meant to be playing them over and over. They're not supposed to be a typical campaign.

It depends on how well the gameplay mechanics are in these games -- it's solid in PWR therefore, despite lacking content in the traditional sense, it's still a solid game.

Tetris says hi aswell.

Edit: You'd expect more from a 3DS game than Steel Diver is though, but it's not the disaster some people claim it is.

What constitutes "Playing the game all the way through" for you?JLF1

In the case of a reviewer preparing for a review, I think at the very least they should play the game enough to at least have a reasonable idea of everything it offers. The fact that no professional reviewer even mentioned expert mode speaks volumes.

The FACT that this game is low on content can't be argued.JLF1

That's not a fact, that's a subjective evaluation.

[QUOTE="JLF1"]

The FACT that this game is low on content can't be argued.

SuperFlakeman

So what do you say about any fighting game? Just a few new characters, some new backgrounds, not really any content.

Really, the point of these types of games is that you are meant to be playing them over and over. They're not supposed to be a typical campaign.

It depends on how well the gameplay mechanics are in these games -- it's solid in PWR therefore, despite lacking content in the traditional sense, it's still a solid game.

Tetris says hi aswell.

Edit: You'd expect more from a 3DS game than Steel Diver is though, but it's not the disaster some people claim it is.

What you are trying to do is simply justifying the price that you paid for it. It's one to argue that you have played it for 30h, it's a whole other thing to recommend it to people and claim that the game a lot of content.

That's not a fact, that's a subjective evaluation.

dzimm

A subjective evaluation that you have claimed is wrong. Ironic isn't it.

[QUOTE="dzimm"]

That's not a fact, that's a subjective evaluation.

JLF1

A subjective evaluation that you have claimed is wrong. Ironic isn't it.

It's not so much wrong as it is a meaningless criticism. It's as though reviewers saw that only 7 missions were available, and the knee jerk reaction was to declare it lacking in content without bothering to explore how much gameplay is really available in those 7 levels. Basically, I don't subscribe to the notion that there is a direct correlation between gameplay content and the amount of unique art assets you see during the course of a game.

[QUOTE="JLF1"]

[QUOTE="dzimm"]

That's not a fact, that's a subjective evaluation.

dzimm

A subjective evaluation that you have claimed is wrong. Ironic isn't it.

It's not so much wrong as it is a meaningless criticism. It's as though reviewers saw that only 7 missions were available, and the knee jerk reaction was to declare it lacking in content without bothering to explore how much gameplay is really available in those 7 levels. Basically, I don't subscribe to the notion that there is a direct correlation between gameplay content and the amount of unique art assets you see during the course of a game.

Most reviews I've read have been good IMO.

Besides, we all know that Nintendo effed up with their launch games. It's rare but the third party games are simply better.

Besides, we all know that Nintendo effed up with their launch games.JLF1

You really struggle with this whole concept of fact versus opinion, don't you?

Content. It always comes down to content. Pilot Wings is a great game, but it's ridiculously short: only one island. I think Pilot Wings and Steel Driver should have come on the device or been packaged together for $40 then they'd be worth the money.

This is why I really don't like gen console-wise. There was no content. Usually a half-assed 8-10 hour campaign and thats it. No replayability, no unlocks, no nothing.

One of those love it or hate it games then..Litchie

Steel Diver could very well be in the running for most underrated game of the year, maybe even the decade. Check out this thread at NeoGAF that contrasts reviewer consensus with the opinions of actual gamers:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=426245

Reviewers say that the game can be completed in a couple of hours; gamers say that it can take upwards of 20-hours. Reviewers say that the game is too short and easy; gamers say that expert mode (unlocked after beating all 7 missions with all 3 subs and which adds new hazards and enemies to the levels) effectively doubles the amount of content and makes the game considerably challenging. Reviewers say that the game is slow and dull; gamers say that it's fun and immersive.

It's like the reviewers played a different game than the rest of us.

[QUOTE="JLF1"]Playing through the same game three times to get a harder difficulty doesn't really count as content.dzimm

Why not? And it's not just playing through the game three times but playing it with subs that all have their own unique characteristics that offer a different experience on each of those three play throughs. And then there's expert mode which effectively ups the mission count from 7 to 14, so in terms of straight content, there is several hours of gameplay out of the box, and that's before even touching time trials (both unique time trial levels and trying to beat staff ghosts in the missions) and the Steel Commander strategy game.

So really, reviewers that criticised the game for "lacking content" were making a subjective rather than factual evaluation. Case in point:

• Fact - The game has 7 mission levels
• Opinion - The game is light on content

I'm not even convinced that most reviewers played the game all the way through. I may be mistaken, but I don't think Gamespot's video review showed anything past level 5 which is accessible right from the start.

And never mind the amount of content, the game is just a pure joy to play.

It just doesnt...not in a review type of situation anyway. Hey I am all for replayabilty but if you apply what you are saying to other games it means GoW3 is 40 hours long (to unlock chaos mode etc) and Uncharted 2 is 30-40 hours long. It just doesnt make sense...If we like to go back and reply the missinos over again, thats great for people like us but there are people who just like to play through the game once and any game should be long enough and to justify the price tag to do so. Its no secret that games like Pilotwings (one of my favs) and Steel diver are lacking content...if you cant see this then I dont know what else to say. You're protecting this game like your the spokesman for nintendo.

[QUOTE="dzimm"]

[QUOTE="JLF1"]

A subjective evaluation that you have claimed is wrong. Ironic isn't it.

JLF1

It's not so much wrong as it is a meaningless criticism. It's as though reviewers saw that only 7 missions were available, and the knee jerk reaction was to declare it lacking in content without bothering to explore how much gameplay is really available in those 7 levels. Basically, I don't subscribe to the notion that there is a direct correlation between gameplay content and the amount of unique art assets you see during the course of a game.

Most reviews I've read have been good IMO.

Besides, we all know that Nintendo effed up with their launch games. It's rare but the third party games are simply better.

I've ben enjoying the game myself and the more I play it the more I'm certain many reviewers simply didn't play the game at all. They saw what was in the menus, maybe went through a level or two and then when they wrote their "reviews" didn't even fully describe what they saw. Siginifcant elemnts are left out of even the positive reviews of the games.

Will everyone like the game? No. However I have issues when reviewers purposefully mislead people with their positions when it comes to these reviews. This isn't the first time several have done this. They did this with Wii reviews as well. With some even lying about aspects of games just because they didn't like motion controls or weren't intelligent enough to undersand how you use the remote. Using aspects as negatives meanwhile in reviews for games on other system actually ignoring those same aspects.

[QUOTE="dzimm"]

Steel Diver could very well be in the running for most underrated game of the year, maybe even the decade. Check out this thread at NeoGAF that contrasts reviewer consensus with the opinions of actual gamers:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=426245

Reviewers say that the game can be completed in a couple of hours; gamers say that it can take upwards of 20-hours. Reviewers say that the game is too short and easy; gamers say that expert mode(unlocked after beating all 7 missions with all 3 subs and which adds new hazards and enemies to the levels) effectively doubles the amount of content and makes the game considerably challenging. Reviewers say that the game is slow and dull; gamers say that it's fun and immersive.

It's like the reviewers played a different game than the rest of us.

Rod90

i think its obvious he likes it...as do I.

Hey I am all for replayabilty but if you apply what you are saying to other games it means GoW3 is 40 hours long (to unlock chaos mode etc) and Uncharted 2 is 30-40 hours long.SRTtoZ

Is this really a valid comparison? Does "chaos mode" effectively reinvent each level to offer a new experience, or do the enemies just become hit-point bricks?

If we like to go back and reply the missinos over again, thats great for people like us but there are people who just like to play through the game once and any game should be long enough and to justify the price tag to do so.SRTtoZ

I suppose it depends on what you mean by "play through once". In the case of Steel Diver, a single play through means beating all 14 levels (7 regular, 7 expert) with all three subs -- and for added value there's time trial levels and the strategy game -- but I realize that kind of thing doesn't necessarily appeal to everybody. However, it's clearly unfair to claim that it lacks content. I think a fair review would say, "There is a lot of content here for people willing to invest the time necessary to see it all, but if you're a 'once-and-done' kind of player then you're probably not going to get a lot of value for your money." That's an objective analysis that doesn't sell the game short and gives people a good idea of what to expect.

Content. It always comes down to content. Pilot Wings is a great game, but it's ridiculously short: only one island.SirFatalChaos

So Pilotwings has 42 missions, three vehicles, and one big, highly detailed environment, and I won't include any of the factors that affect replayability. How much more content would it take for you to consider it worthy of $40? Would online leaderboards make you think any differently about the game?

But it's Wuhu Island, which is filled to the brim with character. I didn't really care about the setting at first, but now that I've spent a lot of time with it, I love that you really get to know this place inside and out by the time you're deep into the game. That does a lot more for me than if there were, say, a different random location for each cIass or something.

So Pilotwings has 42 missions, three vehicles, and one big, highly detailed environment, and I won't include any of the factors that affect replayability. How much more content would it take for you to consider it worthy of $40? Would online leaderboards make you think any differently about the game?

JordanElek

I love Pilotwings myself, but that's the problem. I love it so much, I wanted more. I wanted more vehicles. I wanted more missions, I wanted another island. I wanted more variety. I just felt that I got a lot more for my money out of Pilotwings 64 than I did with Pilotwings Resort. The premium price of the game seems like it went towards the 3D than anything else. JustPlainLucas

So I looked up how much content was in that game. From what I can tell, there are 27 total regular missions, four different islands, three different vehicles, three bonus "vehicles" with three levels each, and six different characters with different attributes.

Resort has 42 total regular missions, three vehicles (each with one mission in a suped up version of the vehicle), one larger environment, one character with no real attributes, and a free flight mode with different collectibles for each vehicle (over 200 total).

There is more variety in PW64, but there's less playable content.

I only rented PW64 when the N64 first came out, so I don't remember it all that well.

So I looked up how much content was in that game. From what I can tell, there are 27 total regular missions, four different islands, three different vehicles, three bonus "vehicles" with three levels each, and six different characters with different attributes.

Resort has 42 total regular missions, three vehicles (each with one mission in a suped up version of the vehicle), one larger environment, one character with no real attributes, and a free flight mode with different collectibles for each vehicle (over 200 total).

There is more variety in PW64, but there's less playable content.

JordanElek

I guess that's why I felt I got more for my money, because I wasn't doing the same thing over and over again.JustPlainLucas

Plus, PW64 had human cannonballs! :DJustPlainLucas

i can't talk about the length, but playing 30 minutes of it was unbearable. Neat concept, poorly fleshed out and just plain not fun, at least not immediately

3DS games are getting bad reviews for a few reasons. they are not being looked at for their beautiful visuals, moreso their use (or lack thereof) of 3d tech, and also many reviews were rushed as they did not have copies of most games but for a few days before the review.

PilotWings should have easily gotten a 9.0 IMHO. although it could use more levels and more online capabilities. that is another reason 3ds games are getting knocked. the apparent lack of nintendo being ready in the online-realm for the launch

btw i was hoping they would release pilotwings64 for VC alongside the 3ds release but no such luck. LAME. just like the lack of DK64 (so what if you need to pay off Rare, Ninty has the minty) when New DK Country was released.