Did you like Sega Soccer Slam, a game commonly compared to this one? I didn't.
Did you like NHL Hitz, which was made by Next Level Games? I didn't.
did you expect Super Mario Strikers to be your favourite Gamecube game this year? I didn't.

But it is. It just might be my favourite party game since Smash Bros Melee, a game released pretty much at the Cube's launch. This is a strong statement.


The actual game is just so fun! The items, the tackling, the speed, the electrified walls, Bowser, the super strikes (it takes either a real lapse in defense or a good play involving items to pull this off), just everything combines to make a game that's chaotic and frantic but still favours skill.

The little things really put Strikers over the top.

This is the first Mario Sports game where more than one person (up to 4, actually) can play against the computer in the Cup modes. The Custom Battles mode is just incredible. It's a simple round robin, but the setup is so quick and the rules (3 points for a win, 1 point for a Sudden Death loss, 0 for a loss) work perfectly for a party. Just make some teams (one or two people per team), and choose whether you want to play every other team once, or twice. If you have enough teams, a Custom Battle will go long into the night.

But I don't want to go into review mode here. The bottom line is this game is extremely fun, the reviews for it (especially Gamespot's) have not done the game justice, and you/your friends should rent it and play it together and see how you like it.

Next Level Games... you guys are Gods! to what extent did Nintendo help you make this masterpiece of a game? Thank you for saving the Gamecube's... nay, the industry's holiday season (though Guitar Hero didn't do a bad job doing that either).

Oh right, buy Guitar Hero. Trust me on that.

I see that you're bringing Beatmania to the US. Let me keep this quick and simple:

• Do not screw up the controller
• Do not screw up the songs
• Do not screw up the graphics
  

This is pretty easy for you to do because all you'd have to do it take the latest Japanese game, replace songs you can't get licenses for with in-house songs from older mixes, translate into English, and ship a bunch of your good Beatmania controllers over here. But you'll probably end up putting in more effort than neccessary and destroying the whole game like you did DDR Extreme US. I'm here to say "don't".

Just remember: anyone will step around on a dance pad and have fun. The Beatmania audience will be mostly gamers (and hardcore ones at that), so make the game to reflect that. Don't strip out hard songs. Don't add in US covers that would be boring in Beatmania. Don't make US mixes with half as many songs as the Japan mixes and charge the same amount of money. Don't say "I don't think most Americans will like Memories so we'll just remove it last minute, even though it's free for us to use, but we'll keep the song embedded in the game, tricking the game into thinking that Memories is playable, even though it isn't, making it impossible to master the game".

(Don't screw it up).

E3's coming up soon. I like E3, though I don't know how many surprises are coming up this time around, despite the oncoming consoles. We know lots about the XBox 360 already, Nintendo said they'll be sparse on Revolution details, and the PS3 is just the PS3 in my opinion. Similarily, I can't bring myself to be shocked as Metal Gear Solid 4 and Mario Party 7 are announced. On the flip side, E3 usually delivers something really cool, so I'm still excited

I love Microsoft's mention that Halo 3 will release at the same time as the PS3 in a "perfect" plan to disrupt PS3 sales. What are they thinking? That Halo 3 is up on a hill ready to snipe the PS3 as it comes by? Is one single person less likely to buy a PS3 because Halo 3 is released at the same time, as opposed to, say, a month earlier? I can see MS's profile of the average consumer now: "Ok, I'm off to buy the new PS3 as it launches *goes to store* holy @#$%, Halo 3 has arrived! Well, might as well change my $400 investment on a whim and buy the XBox 360 + Halo 3 bundle instead". Right.

No one is really following this, but Konami has filed a lawsuit against Roxor for making a better dancing game that's cutting into their sales. Ok, that's not the exact reason and "better" is an opinion, but this lawsuit has the power to change the whole landscape of US dancing games. Luckily, it is unlikely that this will interfere with the PS2 release of In The Groove. If you don't know what I'm talking about and don't play DDR, then nothing to see here, please move along.

Finally, let's talk about prices in the next generation: it's been rumoured that future consoles will cost a lot more than past generations, possibly $500 US (!). Are they really chargin this much for the base console? Similarily: $70 to $90 US for games? I sure hope this is some rampant speculation; I'm not buying any console/games with these prices, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. To me, two of the big three using such pricing schemes is a surefire way to get the other one at the top of the consoles wars.

See you next time!

I made this post and decided to post it the ol' journal since, IMO, it's a pretty big discrepency.

Mario Party Advance Review:

"The game's multiplayer features ... aren't organized in a sensible manner. The dozen true
multiplayer games, which require a link cable, are stand-alone options
that aren't included as part of an overarching tournament mode."

The Best and Worst of 2002, Best Party Game on GameCube:

"However, one thing that gives Super Monkey Ball
2 the edge is the pacing of its multiplayer games. While Mario Party 4
requires a bit of a time investment from the group, a satisfying round
of monkey fight can be done in minutes"


I'd also like to point out that Super Monkey Ball 2 has, like Mario Party Advance, a dozen true multiplayer minigames.

So,
Gamespot, what's better, having games seperate or part of a tournament?
And wouldn't a portable game be better suited for small time
investments than a home console game? Apparantly their reviews go a
little further than "colouring facts", more like totally changing their
opinions and reviewing games accordingly.

Sorry Gamespot, my memory is just too damn good when it comes to worthless stuff like game reviews and Simpsons quotes.

I am deeply impressed with this web game. It's called Stick Avalanche 2 and you should play it right now. Some video game producers spend millions on making games with fancy graphics and careful styling toward their "young adult" demographic, and then Danny Miller comes along and delivers what gamers want (and by gamers, I mean at least me).

Ok, it's not a full game, but I'd rather play this than a round of NBA Street, at least when no one else is around to play with. This game is so addictive, and actually has a high score database that works... it's terribly impressive. If it was a bonus game in a bigger game, I'd say "bravo" to the company that made it!

Shouts to Danny for doing this for free (well, plus donations). Big companies could learn a lesson here.

Note: the small "a" was added because Gamespot stops you from writing in all caps in your own personal journal.

Gamespot just had a Q&A with Ken Lobb. Most of it is the general PR stuff you're likely to see in any Q&A ("This new game is going be great", "I think we are doing well".), but there's one passage that struck my eye:

"I think the primary way the industry has changed is that bigger more
and aggressive games that require teams of 30 to 150 have gone from
"Okay that's one in 100 games" (let's say a game like Shenmue several
years ago) to now most games. You basically can't compete in the market
unless you're working with a team that's 50 plus."

This is why, in my humble opinion, Ken Lobb is a moron, or at least his brain was somehow taken over by an alien force for about half a minute, as these words came out of his mouth.

---

All right, so how do you see games? Personally I don't see them as "art", but say you did. How many great works of art we made by 50, 20, or even 2 people? Not many.

Anyway, on to the main arguments for my thesis "Ken Lobb is a moron". Firstly, how about the web games out there that people have spent tons of time playing. I won't get into details, but you've probably enjoyed at least one shareware or flash game in your life, and if you haven't, find my "Flash Games" journal entry. No, they're not big games, but still, for one person who isn't doing it for money, quite a start. And let's not forget mods. Sweet, precious mods that are usually made by small groups and are sometimes more popular than the game itself.

Secondly, how about Ikaruga and Alien Homind? Both have scored over 8.0 here at Gamespot, and both were made primarily by less than half a dozen people. So why does it take 50 people to make a game? Because these big, bloated, corporations believe that more people working on something = a better game. But it's all lies, it results in an awkward disjointed game.

---

Let's look at Halo 2. Assuming they have the source code, couldn't half a dozen people make that? Hear me out; it's a good game, but it took 35 months to make this thing. Let's see how 6 people would do:

Let's say 2 people work on the multiplayer level design. Bungie probably spent millions of dollars making their painstakingly detailed levels, too bad most people would rather play Coagulation. Give 2 level designers 35 months, and they could make lots of actual fun levels, with simple designs (yet different in their own unique way). In this respect, two people could probably do a better job.

Graphics-wise, it wouldn't be the same, but close. We'll put 2 people in charge of graphics. Heck, the original Arcade version Ikaruga only had one (at least according to Game Spy), you'd think you could make some decent graphics with two. As for storyline, I'd say we should dedicate, let's say around zero people for that effort. Honestly, one of the graphics designers could pull out a better storyline than Halo 2's "ending coming soon" stuff. Don't you agree?

Since Halo 2 is quite similar to Halo 1 in gameplay terms, we'll put one person on gameplay programming. I'll be generous and say it'll take take two weeks to make the hijacking feature, and, say, a month for duel wielding (honestly, I don't think it'd take that long with proper knowledge of the source code... I'm being generous). With the other 33 and a half months, the game programmer could surely make the programming for the vehicles and weapons found in Halo 2.... honestly, I can't see that being horrendously difficult.

The last person... uh, sound? 35 months, one song in two months, heck, they aren't even songs, they're remixes. I'll admit, the instruments were pretty good in Halo 2, but they lost to Katamari Damacy (which, I must say, had very good music; good choice, Gamespot). Don't know if Halo 2 had live musicians or anything like that, but I'm sure one could make pretty good digital samples of those intruments. There's some good stuff going on at ocremix.org, and they're not even being paid!

In conclusion, Halo 2 could be made by 6 people. I mean, I hate Ken Lobb.

---

Disclaimer: Ken Lobb is probably not a moron, but I'm passionate about this issue, and it's an ignorant thing for him to say.