@phili878: well true..but isnt graphics subjective tho ? one could find BOTW amazing visually...I agree with your general sentiment but...when it comes to performance its more about...you know...numbers, specs...on sheet stats...30 fps vs 60 fps...screen judder, timing, input lag, refresh rate...the "digital foundry" stuff...whereas with graphics/resolution/art style....that is subjective...some people find Borderlands beautiful others want a more immersive realistic (Red Dead Redemption 2) look..others love the cartoony look of WoW or some random indie game (2D platformer) personally I love Binding of Isaac...cartoony but expressive like a classic arcade game...yet I can love the art style of Hollow Knight...and then turn right around and play Flight Simulator on Xbox Series X on a LG OLED 4k TV...and appreciate all of them for different reasons.
I hate to be the cheesy "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" but isnt that really the case here ? Thats why some people still love the visuals of Silent Hill 2 despite looking like...well a PS/PS2 era game lol...proper shadow & lighting can take a game a long way. And some games (ahem: TLOZ: ALTTP) which is now 30 years old (1991-2021) still holds up quite well...whereas Mario 3D while as innovative and groundbreaking as it was in 1996...now looks ..well as dated as you'd expect.
@Tekarukite: its relatively solid...few dips...of course as you'd expect it runs 30 FPS...1080p/30fps docked...and undocked(handheld or tabletop) 30 fps as well (but 720p resolution I think) but from what I've seen (on digital foundrys performance analysis) outside of cut-scenes (which are lower then 30fps as they are with alot of games) the ingame performance (outside of heavy city areas/village areas teaming with life) runs pretty good...I mean hey they made MHGenerations Ultimate run quite well on New 3DS XL (which isnt even half the performance in terms of specs of the Switch) Switch is no powerhouse but...it seems to be enough to get a "relatively" locked 30 FPS in most areas. I find it serviceable maybe a few areas could use some improvement but they already have a patch planned and knowing Capcom (and the popularity of the MH series) they wont let this game fall by the waysides. I would recommend it (both in terms of graphics and performance) to any newcomer or veteran MH fan alike.
@RSM-HQ: Well as a MH veteran (From MHFU on PSP) to MHTri(3 on Wii U) to 3DS to MHGU on Switch to Rise. I have to say I always hear the argument of classic MH (PSP, PS2, 3DS) titles (the more difficult less forgiving titles) vs the streamlined "normie" of World (despite worlds impeccable art design, cohesiveness, end game/meta content) ....all that said...I think Rise does a great job of bridging the gap..yes (as the reviewer says above) it lacks end game content...and a paper thin story ...but I dont play MH games for story...I have Horizon Zero Dawn or RDR2 or Skyrims political narrative or Days Gone for stuff like that. I play MH for the main reason most people play (difficulty, or rather challenge...exploration, the obvious combat and customization w gear/items, the incessant and important aspect of grinding) ...like most of us these are probably premier reasons...maybe add in the multiplayer/community aspect and you have the 5 tenants of what makes MH work...and now its as big as its ever been in EU and NA regions as it is in JA.
Best MH ever ? I wouldnt even begin to rank them....but I would say its in the top of that list (with 10 major entries, spinoffs, remasters as we call "ultimate" editions) over 15 titles I can think of...and I would most certainly put it among the top 3 or 5. But you said it yourself...with DLC...content updates...Events...(which will undoubtedly come) I think the end game issue may get cleaned up in due time...its sorta like most games...(bad games come out..and can get updated and years later look entirely different...case in point No Mans Sky) or "good" games..that get even better...of course some games just stay crap regardless...but I'm hopeful for MHR future...and the fact it looks as good as it does on Switch and runs relatively solid (despite not being 60 FPS) is still quite a testament to the games designers.
@just1mohr: yes really a 9. And it deserves it..every reviewer is giving it a 9. The gameplay looks like a 6 or 7...uh...ok dont see where you get that from. Gameplay is solid, tight, enjoyable and w tons of content. If the graphical style isnt your taste fine thats taste anyway. But serious sam doesnt look like anything special..graphics on an indie game i dont consider inferior. They are just different. Its meat vs vegetables..cant really compare a hand drawn isometric ARPGs 2D style game to a AAA 3D title. I prefer alot more indie titles..usually they are just better games. Sure both AAA an indie have trash just seems to me AAA has alot more trash. These games arent expensive or demanding and I know what I like (esp roguelites/like) which have amazing replayability. Just the dollar for hour content alone makes this title (and titles like binding of isaac and rogue legacy and spelunky 2 worth the price of admission) $20, $25, $30 is a fair price for most of.these kinds of games...an i dont really like playing indies on pc or standard console..dont like these arcade plug n play type indie games on devices that are in a fixed location switch is perfect for indie games..they arent very demanding so they usually run quite well, and dont cost much nor have a large install size.. and some indies actually look better on smaller (condensed) screen. No joke.
Im enjoying hades tho..if you can get it on switch or windows.pc/steam i highly suggest it...then again it just might not be for you.
@deviltaz35: False, it was first used in the late 80s, as a testing ground for games (with emphasis on story) then in the 90s - computer Personal computer age - came about, the games did quite well in the CRPG arena...mid 90s, to late 90s, saw a resurgance. how did it become a thing b/c the graphics are good. Many pixel art games look good, oh boo hoo its overused, you do realize you are not required to buy any specific game right ? sprite based, pixel-art, 3D/antriscope graphics, any of those. It was not used "back then" just b/c PC's were too shit to produce decent graphics, LOL who gave you a half-assed history lesson of gaming ?
It was first utilized on home consoles and the arcade era (far back before the revolution of the home Personal Computer) and it was successful, then it was BUILT upon (new game engines, new graphics styles including Retro HD (by the late 90s./early 2000s) Sprite-based 16 & 32bit era (which basically replaced pixel-art for quite a few years). Then it had a resurgance...as it should. It became a thing b/c people like the way it looks (back then, and now) especially when combined with Filtering (filters) and shaders...the clean out the edges (pixel art always looks better on smaller screens, condensed, the colors pop more, and visually more enticing) of course not everyone is going to like it. LOL but what you consider to be "good graphics" many people find drab, boring, ugly, over-used (just like all the modern 3D, grey-scale/open world 3rd person perspective action/adventure games...all of which use the same ragdoll physics, copy each other, and is highly oversaturated, its the same idea in the Pixel-art arena. Every now and then you will see a game stand out (OR better yet) a game utilize a variety of graphics styles (a mix if you will) of Sprite based, Spine (a high resolution version of Sprites / pre-rendered back-rounds) and sometimes GIFMation (similar to Anime style) or "cel shaded"
...Cel Shaded / GIFMation, Pixel Art, HD Retro, 3D, 2.5D, 2D, Spine, Sprite-based, Pre-rendered = these were all styles over the course of the last 30-35-40 years.
Many of them have been updated, and I've seen some pretty good looking Pixel-art games...look quite nice, I know LOTS of people (even modern day gamers who like modern day graphics & physics) go back to Pixel Art, for no other reason other then they like the way it looks (and b/c the games aren't very demanding) performance wise, they run quite well (as to be expected).
"Somehow now its art"
Once again, shows your lack of knowledge.
This isn't opinion, its fact - Pixel "Art" like Sprite, and Spine, and GIFMation and Cel-shaded styles = were ALL considerd art, many years ago. Pixel art was art in 1992, (as it was in 1984) as it was in 2005, and now in 2019. It has always been considered art...and Personal Computers (like Compaq Presarios and Dell XPS desktops of the late 1990s / early 2000s - could run games both in 2D and 3D, sprite and pre-rendered back-rounds as well as GIFMation - and they could play / run (execute) Pixel art games...and guess what ? Those games were popular then too (like Icewind Dale and Planescape Torment, that had pre-rendered back-rounds mixed with SPINE and Pixel Art graphical styles (many games combine graphical elements) like the indie hit - Hyper Light Drifter - Spine and Pixel Art combined, - its sad when the Indie industry (even with its restrictions and saturation) still manages to craft better quality games with minimalistic graphical styles.
If you dont like it - thats fine - that doesn't make you stupid (or bad) or anything. But brush up on your history...because these games existed long before the idea that the personal computer (mechanically under-the-hood) was too shitty to produce "good quality graphics" and who says what is GOOD quality ? you ? me ? we don't speak for the entire industry.
Spine can create games like Hollow Knight, and Pixel Art can create a game like Hyper Light Drifter or Planescape: Torment , among many others...many classic JRPGS.
and if thats all too much (TLDR)
then heres the short / easy answer
people like it, I like it - many people like it (literally lots of people, young and old, male and female) if you dont...fine, its over-used...lol there is worse things to be over-using (ahem 3D graphics in major AAA sports games, same graphics, same mechanics year after year) but thats ok ? but pixel art isnt b.c you dont like its retro style and look ? I see more artistic expression out of those pictures ^ above t hen I do out of...Ghost Recon Wildlands...I can respect God of War, and advances in tech and graphics...but comes a point where its JUST about gawking at images...look how sexy RDR2 looks (but not everyone likes that game, or likes REALISM) I didnt start playing games (or continue playing them years later) for realism, and ADVANCED Physics....if I want realism, I'll go outside, and work on my Chevy Malibu...lol
If I play a video game...its the same idea ...as if Iplay Zelda: Links Awakening or Zelda: BOTW ....graphically they are nice...but not ground-breaking right ? but people still like them
or take for instance ORI AND THE BLIND FOREST (you do realize SPINE and GIFmation = created that games graphics) as smooth and feely-feels that game has....its basically condensed images ...nothing new, - but looks great doesn it ? some people DONT LIKE that style (or Hollow Knights visual aesthetic) ...just like when I play Axiom Verge...a very basic pixel-art metroidvania, I think there is ROOM for all these games....Shovel Knight = very basic, pixel art, still amazing, (maybe everyone wont agree, and thats fine) but...in the end what do you care ? lol if its a thing, and remains a thing...thats all. Nobody is forcing you to like these games, or comment on them, or play them...just avoid them. I will play (some of them), and I will avoid some others its a mixed bag
@ballashotcaller: I dont know...I'm hearing basically nothing but good things and while its completely fine to be concerned alittle about a few FPS drops . From what I saw at the Handheld Gamers Lounge (just a few months ago) - and how the game improved upon every trailer (everytime it was shown public) from 2017 to 2019. Basically all the reviews (independant and mainstream) are saying the same thing. It runs quite well basically in 98, 99% of the game (the overworld, the dungeons, boss fights, etc) theres only a few areas in which you even SEE / feel even the remotest of frame-rate hiccups. Nothing remotely game breaking. TO me its quite extreme to say a few frame-rate drops are not justified...even if it IS a small game ...theres still alot going on, and its density is quite packed...alot to do for such a small package. I still want quality control, and a SOLID game...and I think based on all I've seen / heard so far it delivers almost always on that. LOL Considering whats out there, this game will run vastly better (as it should). The game was tweaked, and improved upon in every way, and this wasnt just a HD remaster...it was a complete overhaul..and they've done the right job, give it to another developer...lord knows it would prob be worse lol.
But even still - I'm fairly sure some random Quality of Life patch/update will release fixing any few nagging remaining issues, I'm not going to defend it - but I will say even if they dont fix it...I SERIOUSLY doubt it will interfere with my overall experience, if a game that you end uplaying for 20-30 hours - 98% - 99% of it (in all areas) runs at a targeted LOCK...and theres a few dips...I can forgive it, its worth noting - but I can forgive it. Not just b/c its Zelda, ANY game AAA or Indie that runs that well across the board....I put over 1,340 hours into The Binding of Isaac on Nintendo Switch...an indie game that runs targe ted at 60fps (to be expected, its an indie, not the most demanding of games)...but theres a few FPS hiccups (mainly b/c of end-game...when you attempt to break the game - the amount of chests spawning, and stuff going on - on the screen..can cause an overload (even on the PC version this can happen) so...I can only be SO harsh about a game. For instance, a big AAA 3D open world ARPG...that has nothing but bugs, issues, slow to the response of fixing those issues....day 1 patches that fix little....games like Fallout 3 (despite the overwhelming positivity) its a Bethesda game (and back when they still had respect within the industry) there was still the oh-so-obvious jokes about their games being so buggy....people still enjoyed those agmes...but you take the DLC for Fallout 3...FULL of issues, and major FPS slowdown (bog down)...so much so...it AFFECTED my game play almost making Point Lookout UNPLAYABLE
NOW THAT Is unjustified....
The Legend of Zelda having a game that remakes/overhauls an already excellent 26 year old adventure, completely updates it for a modern era, does it WELL, and has enough content packed into the package, to make most players excited, and releases as a single stand-alone price, with a high level of polish (relatively high) and ready OUT of the box to play, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30+ hours not to mention (even if the Dungeons don't feel that impactful, the Dungeon Maker system may add some length to that play-time/replay value) all that said wrapped in a nice new graphical package...and all the while 98-99% of it runs QUITE well - with little to no issue, just a few slight hiccups. Even if thats not justified...at the very least, its tolerated and people can still enjoy...but if this game was literally UNPLAYABLE (10 FPS, massive spike, slow-down, damn-near crashing game)...THEN I'd be on the forums screaming about how "this is NOT Justifiable by Nintendo fans standards in any which way"
lol I don't think we are quite there, I have read 6 reviews, 2 in-game critiques (like Joseph Anderson who has some of the best / most NON biased- even footed reviews of new[er] releases) he doesn't get star struck...or get / do paid reviews...I can count on his reviews to be better then MOST pro reviewers (like Kotaku, Polygon, Gamespot, EGM, Gamespy, Giant Bomb, Jim Sterling, Arlo, Game Informer, GamePro, Rock, Paper, Shotgun, Nintendo Life, GameXplain) They are all praising the game, saying the POSITIVES vastly outweigh the negatives, and thats a big thing for me. I'm not saying anyone here is right or wrong...just that...I think a few hiccups = molehills being made out to be mountains. I see the 2 big issues (in the comments) see to be revolving around "the hiccups in frame-rate in certain areas, regardless how small or minor they may be" AND "the price tag being $60 for basically a 26-year-old-remake" ....$39.99 - could of been easier to swallow...but oh well. I can wait (No need to day 1 it)...Holidays....gift cards, end up paying half price for it. "
@snugglebear: Yea everyone is different - thats fair, but I'm the one who is excited (cause the original was so great) and the best levels besides arent the "top levels" its the levels your friends will send you, plus the massive amount of content this game has thats SINGLE player in nature (like 4-games-in-1 package for $60) even JUST the single player / non creation content = would be 40-60 hours - and then online ? a few hundred hours of co-op, friends, uploading, and playing the (1.6 billion levels) that will get created, many of which will be masochistic, some challenging, some stupid, some fun - its a mixed bag, I like the idea of "infinite replay value"
I like my single player ARPGS and action/adventure games that are offline and hand-crafted and all about the story...but I can only handle spending $60 on games that give me (barely 1 hour per dollar entertainment) I know thats a weird way of looking at things...but a game like this...I could (very well 18 months from now) be hitting the 600 hours mark...and still having fun, texting friends on my phone "did you SEE that level?...holy shit..whats your rank.." (that cult like appeal that these kind of games get) ...thats sorta my thing. Plus creating levels = (even in basic layman's) is ...so damn easy, its so easy to throw together something stupid or fun...in a matter of minutes, and theres a sense of progression (to unlocking things)...which I like. Just based off the sheer amount of content - its worth the price of admission (for most of us). Even now as I speak, 14 different reviewers/sites & Youtube vloggers have already had extensive hands-on-time, and they basically all say the same thing, A) its great B) it has a crap ton of content C) the future also looks quite good for expansion (and there is no microtransactions, no buggy day 1 launch, no skin packs of Helix coins, seasons pass, none of that) just a solid $60 game with loads of content, and a future that will guarantee continued support. I honestly never saw myself (before I played the original) enjoying it...I was like "meh...I'm not really into design, and creation, doesn't seem fun, not my kind of tea" ...then I tried it, and realized how (almost) effortless it became, I gave it a few hours to sink in..and began realizing this COULD become very addictive in nature (LOL) literally....and so if this game is anything like the original (but much more), and thats what I'm hearing (overall positive reception, and 89% metacritic so far) ....well that means...alot more hours are going to be gone...I can see it now, all the memes and jokes on Facebook (chinese boy found dead after spending 187 hours on SMM2 - a binge which he didnt survive) LOL -But again, everyone is different. Not everyone is going to see the appeal, personally Super Smash Bros (and most fighting games) are not my cup of tea, so I skipped that one...but this one I won't be skipping, but as with any form of entertainment...I'm sure there are games you are looking forward to. Atleast I hope so
@PrpleTrtleBuBum: Well to be fair - Nintendo has more franchises then the other "big two" combined..you do realize that...so they really don't need to make new games or CREATE new franchises.
With what ?
1) Xenoblade (series)
2) Super Mario (series)
3) Luigi (stand-alone-series in itself)
4) Mario Party / Mario Kart / Maker (off-shoots, of the mainline/base line games)
5) Donkey Kong (series)
6) The Legend of Zelda (series)
7) Pikmin (series)
8) Pokemon (series)
9) Animal Crossing (series)
10) Etrian Odyssey (series)
11) Fire Emblem (series)
12) Kirby (series)
13) Metroid (series)
14) Star Fox (series)
15) F-Zero (series)
16) Smash Bros
17) Bayonetta
(and a handful of others like Mother, Golden Sun, Kid Icarus, among others)
and then all the indies being supported (some multi-plats/ports, SOME exclusive....like Celeste...and timed exclusives like Hollow Knight, that end up on other platforms as well) ....and original games that aren't really franchises (yet) but new & exclusive to Nintendo (such as Octopath Traveler)...not to mention other upcoming exclusives like Astral Chain and BDDP (2-3 more that most ppl aren't even talking about)...Nintendo has been ROLLING in exclusives both AAA & Indie...wtf are you people talking about (and no I'm not a fanboy or sucking on anyones tit...I own them all...console/pc/handheld....Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft/Sega/Atari/Apple/Samsung/LG/Vizio/TCL/Hisense/Amazon/Google - christ I have hardware & software from a LITANY of major hardware manufacturers (VR devices, phones, tablets, chromebooks, consoles, handhelds, hybrids, Desktops/all-in-ones, laptops, TV's, sound-bars, you name it) But if were just talking gaming developers (both software and hardware) its fair to say Nintendo wins in the department of "# of exclusive franchises" ...why ? Nintendo has had a longer history in gaming...more franchises, more years...it just makes sense....that isn't fanboy sentimentality...just fact.
I don't think Nintendo or (their in-house dev team, or any team's signed up to produce/publish for them are having a problem developing new content, or utilizing one of the 15-16 existing franchises) from Game Freak to Team Cherry to Ubisoft (and rayman games) Nintendo has enough under its belt (Hell there could be atleast 2 more Zelda titles for Switch in its life-span, obviously Links Awakening & BOTW 2...and that will be exciting...and all the indies that will continue to stream in...and get ported over -another Metroid, another Kirby, and another Donkey Kong will come to the system in due time (as will the upcoming Animal Crossing) Smash brothers (which has already released, will continue to get momentum, with packs released, and updates) SMM2 (the game at hand here) will continue to get play & support for years to come.
Even playstation with all the exclusives (about 23 games in the past 6 1/2 years since the PS4's release in 2013) - even they don't have that amount of "exclusive franchises" nor does Microsoft.
Nintendo IF anyone, doesn't need to create new IP's
lol
If anything you guys might want to throw that advice/criticism over to Microsoft
@zmanbarzel: lol 8 is still pretty damn good, considering all the 5s & 6s we see...and so many ppl are focused on a single number/numeric value....other sites are giving it glowing reviews, and gamespot seems to like it...i dont see the issue here (either way)
OMG an 8 - it deserves ATLEAST an 10/10 and 11/10 - How dare them !?!?!?!
lol 8/10 is more then ok...a solid game, and prob as with time (things will change, new additions, etc) we know that much.
That then leads me to the question of....maybe game review sites shouldn't review a game (esp a game like this) and many modern games right away, day 1 ...maybe they should wait...cause we all know in todays industry, good games can become better over time, patches/DLC/fixes/expansions/quality of life updates...often decent games become better (over time), and bad games, become somewhat forgiveable/more playable (as time progresses) so....makes me wonder why sites (Polygon, Gamespot, Giant Bomb, Game Informer, Games Radar, IGN, Kotaku, and youtube reviewer[s]/vloggers like Nintendo Life, GameXplain etc) why they cant review a game (early on) sort of"early impressions" and then go back and review the game at 6 months / 1 - year, etc...and talk about the changes, and positives and negatives (solely unbiased).....it COULD be done lol (a review now) and a (review later) retrospective reviews would be nice...like after so much time has passed, you could say alot more about the game...
ps I know alot of expansions get reviews as well...so that counts I guess...but a game like Super Smash Bros Ultimate, and Super Mario Maker 2, could be reviewed early on (upon release) to give the general viewers/audience a feel of the game...and whether its worth buying for them or not...and then go back and within a year or (more) give or take....review it again, with all the updates, content packs, fixes, etc...and talk about how its changed...and what are the improvements...and how much its worth it NOW vs upon release...the value of the product day 1, vs the value of a product down the road...could be a good thing. It's been done before, but very rarely by major/mainstream gaming institutions/sites.
Itzsfo0's comments