Polygon, Sim City, A Review, and the Implosion of the Internet

Everyone is fully aware of the embarrassing launch that Sim City has recently undergone. And while some talk is about EA and their ineptitude of having servers ready, the future of always-online games, and the overall frustration gamers normally vent; Polygon decided to open a new can of worms with Sim City and wrote a review. The review itself wasn't the problem, it was what they did after the review was written that caused a backlash.

The above score of 9.5 was the written review of Sim City before it's initial release. As you can see, it was a very highly regarded game and almost reached a perfect score. This was on 3/4/13, the day before release. Less than 24 hours later, it received an updated score:

Still a pretty good score, but why the change? As everyone is well aware, Sim City has...to put it lightly....botched their release day. The game is nearly unplayable to most gamers. A game being unplayable is a pretty big problem, and I would say warrants a worse score than an 8. That is if you decide that server problems like this should influence the score. Which it did...to an even greater extent:

This is the most recent score that Sim City has on Polygon. A 4. Within two days, a near perfect game is ranked as a game you should ignore. And the biggest reason is the server issues. Which leads me to the main point of this blog.



Perhaps it's because I'm not in the business, but I have no problem with a game getting a slight ding against it due to online issues. If a game has online problems, people who read the review need to be made aware of it since they will be throwing money at the game to play it. But perhaps online instability shouldn't be a large ding against the game on a review. Thanks to where we are in gaming, patches and fixes can come on a daily basis. What is broke today, may be fixed tomorrow. But how does a reviewer attack that exactly? Clearly server problems weren't evident before the game release which would warrant the score of 9.5. There are three ways I think this should be approached, both without touching the final review score:

1. Review Game but Update with Notes - This would be for reviews that come out before launch day. Which is the case for most big time games. Usually online problems are not persistent for review (and early leaked) copies of the game. It either works or it doesn't. Score the game based on what it deserves at that time. However, if the game releases and is unable to work online, you don't update the score. You update the REVIEW, and you do it at the top where everyone sees it immediately. Don't hide it in the original review and don't create a different section at the bottom. Let the readers be aware that there is an update to the review that doesn't go into the final factor of the score, but should go into the final factor of your purchasing decision.

2. Hold the Review Until Launch - Blasphemy. Sites need these reviews for unreleased games mainly for hits which brings in the money. This is definitely the worse of the two, but it can be considered. The problem is the competition with other gaming sites and who releases the reviews first. People care less about the accuracy of their reviews and more about how many views their review receives. This could be true, or it could be that they do care about their reviews but the higher ups don't. This would lead into discussion about embargoes, and that's not something I'm going to touch. Especially since I'm not too familiar with them.

3. Review Online Mode Later - While this wouldn't work with Sim City due to it always being online, some games have a functional single player mode and a broken multiplayer. In cases like this, the single player can be reviewed but leave a discretion to the reader that the multiplayer can't be reviewed yet because it's broken. Anyone who played Brink on the PS3 on launch day remember that you couldn't play online due to the Sony hack. In this case, review the single player and let the readers know that the multiplayer will be reviewed at a later date. Same can be said for any multiplayer that doesn't work immediately.

Polygon however decided to take their own route on it, and just change the score with a reason as to why. But I have a slight problem with it. For their score of 8, they listed that being unable to play the game was a big reason. Understandable, but if that was a huge concern, you would think an unplayable game would receive an unplayable score. Fast forward one more day and you receive more problems that stem from the same issue of server overload. So they lower the score again. But while you can actually get into the game, there are other issues such as the speed of which you can play it (no more "Cheetah" speed), crashing issues and no leaderboards. That caused the game to receive a 4. Maybe I'm a crazy person, but I would much rather play a game with some issues than not play a game because of issues. But scoring a game less because it actually works and still has problems as opposed to not working in general is completely ludicrous, and the reviewer should rethink the approach.

Many seem concerned with Polygon's approach to changing games. But it shouldn't be that big of a shock as it is mentioned in their review guidelines:

Taken from Polygon:

Polygon's reviews and database have been built based on the idea of updates, or "bumps," as I've called them. If a game changes in a substantive way, we can add an update to our reviews that informs you how and why, and we can modify our scores accordingly. This will appear on the reviews in question as a timeline of that game's evolution and our corresponding recommendation (or lack thereof). The original review score will never vanish or go away, but our readers will be able to better understand where our opinions as a site reside over time for games we review.

We do not guarantee that we'll be able to do this with every game, and whether we do so or not is solely at Polygon's discretion. We will act in what we consider the best interest of our audience, while being as fair as possible to the developers and publishers who pour time and money into the games you play. If a game sees substantive improvements that make for a better experience, we want to reflect that. If a game is less worthy of your limited time, we also want to reflect that.

 Whether you agree or disagree, they have it on their site as to their approach on reviews. But one should question exactly what it would take for them to update their scores. Games have problems with launches. It's common. Everyone is well aware of similar issues Diablo 3 had upon it's launch, but it received a perfect score. What is weird though...it's online is STILL messed up....It hasn't been updated, it never received a docked score, and was one of the biggest releases last year. This idea of pick and choose what reviews will be updated is not something a professional site should use, even if I agree that a game worthy of your time should receive this attention. Clearly, it doesn't. It only matters based on what will create hits at that time. Even the creator of Minecraft made comments on it because he constantly makes updates that improves the game. Oh, and in case you haven't heard, Minecraft is a pretty popular game. Not just on PC, but 360, Android, and IOS.

Polygon has made some bad decisions in this review, and to make it worse, they don't even follow their own rules. Here is what it says about a 1:

A game that doesn't properly function, which is what Sim City was. Instead of giving it an 8, it should have received a 1. Bottom line based on the review guidelines that the site itself set up. If they don't follow their own guidelines for scores, what makes Polygon a site worth trusting with reviews? Back that up with their pick-and-choose approach to what games will get updated scores, and I wonder why anyone would go to Polygon for their reviews.

Despite this being a Polygon centered blog questioning their review not only for Sim City but review scores in general, I think it sets up a precedence for the possibility of future online-only games. But it's not only online-only games that are affected. Every Call of Duty or Halo release seems to cause problems on Xbox the first day or two due to sheer number of people online at any time, and I don't think there's been a single MMO that hasn't released without a hitch. It's not singled out to Sim City. But Polygon needs to think about their review process a little bit more before this happens again, because the Sim City review has painted them in a negative light. Especially if they don't treat this game equally to other games with similar problems on launch day.

Square Enix: How The Mighty Have Fallen

It's hard to believe that at one point in time, Square Enix used to be one of the biggest names in video games. It still is, but not in the same way. Whereas they used to be an acclaimed developer known for their amazing RPG's, they no longer warrant the attention they once deserved. But why?

Well, let's go back a ways first. You see, people don't have super fond memories of Square Enix, it's usually Square. Square is the company that came up with a little game series called Final Fantasy. Other gems include Parasite Eve, Kingdom Hearts, Legend of Mana, Vagrant Story, Xenogears, and Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars. Perhaps you have heard of a few of them? In 2003, Square was merged with publisher Enix best known for Valkyrie Profile, Star Ocean, and the other juggernaut RPG franchise, Dragon Warrior/Dragon Quest. Square Enix now appeared to be an RPG developer that nobody else could touch.

Too bad for Square Enix, they decided to no longer touch RPG's for the most part either. While Square was a developer, Square Enix became more of a publisher with some instances of developing games. Front Mission 4, Romancing SaGa, Kingdom Hearts 2, and Final Fantasy XII were some games that came within 3 years of the acquisition that were developed by Square Enix. Then, the turn for the worse started to become evident.

While they were never opposed to releasing handheld games, it soon became a more reoccurring aspect to their releases. From the merger in 2003 to the end of 2005, they developed 15 games and only one was a handheld game with co-developer Jupiter. This release was Kingdom Hearts: Chain of Memories on the DS. In a similar time frame between 2006-2008, they released 19 console and handheld games. Only 7 of them were console releases. Not to say handheld games will be terrible, but considering some of these games are Pingu's Wonderful Carnival, Snoopy DS: Let's Go Meet Snoopy and His Friends, and Mario Hoops; they don't quite command the attention a new game in a successful franchise would warrant. And of the new Final Fantasy games released, it was 4 years between XII and XIII that were littered with Crystal Chronicles, spin offs such as Dirge of Cerberus: Final Fantasy VII, and in recent years have re-released many of the older games.

Then perhaps one of the worst moves they ever made was to tease a remake of Final Fantasy VII, one of the most beloved RPG's of all time. After the movie Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children was released, the idea of a sequel or remake started making waves. They then touched on the Final Fantasy VII universe again with Dirge of Cerberus, but the worse offender came at E3 2005. There, they tried to show what kind of power the PS3 was capable of. And to do so, they remade the beginning sequence of Final Fantasy VII with HD graphics. They let loose the hounds of hell with this tease, and they haven't heard the end of it since.

The Last Remnant was their "biggest" RPG release between XII and XIII, and it was released to weak reviews. Although it was received positively in Japan, many complaints about it's graphics and battle system led to many reviews in the west being disappointing. While the PC version played better than the 360 version, it wasn't enough to keep the game on the tongue of RPG players who wanted more from RPG's in the newest iteration of consoles. Especially when Square Enix teased other games...

Knowing that Final Fantasy was the cash cow most companies didn't have, they began work on several games. These games were announced at E3 in 2006. On the horizon loomed Final Fantasy XIII, Final Fantasy Versus XIII, and Final Fantasy Agito XIII (later renamed Final Fantasy Type-0). Final Fantasy XIII was not well-received thanks to the 8-hour tutorial filled with corridors and handholding. Final Fantasy Type-0 released in Japan but is nowhere to be seen outside Japan. Final Fantasy Versus XIII is still in limbo. Later came Final Fantasy XIII-2 that made improvements, but still didn't woo the audience. That doesn't matter though as Lightning Returns: Final Fantasy XIII is set to release next year.

Then, rumors started about an HD collection of Final Fantasy X and X-2. While X-2 hasn't been announced to my knowledge, HD Final Fantasy X did get recognition in 2011 that it was coming to PS3 and Vita due to it's 10 year anniversary. A few months later, development on the HD re-release started and then news fell by the wayside. Until last month. February 2013, Square Enix showed some HD models of Tidus, Yuna, Bahamut, and Yojimbo. And while Square Enix may be proud of where they are on the HD re-release, it has fans scratching their heads wondering why all they can show after a year of development are some HD models of a game that was released back in 2001.

And let's just ignore the disaster that was Final Fantasy XIV...

At the recent Sony press conference for the Playstation 4 reveal, Square Enix committed another act which left people confused. They showed a tech demo, which looked like a Final Fantasy game, to everyone in attendance. But what was weird though, was that they released the EXACT same tech demo the year before at E3 when they revealed their new Luminous Engine. Instead of showing more footage of Lightning Returns: Final Fantasy XIII or even something involving Thief 4 which was announced today, they decided to make themselves a laughing stock at the PS4 announcement conference by showing something everyone has already seen. Didn't attach a working title to it, didn't give anything else other than "Please look forward to E3!" And all I have to ask myself is...why?

It's baffling to try and construct some sort of explanation to figure out exactly what Square Enix has been doing in recent years. They have done little with some of the bigger franchises they have available to them, and some of the biggest franchises they have are plummeting to their demise or surviving due to re-releases. Perhaps with the next generation of consoles they can dig themselves out of whatever hole they have created and reinforce to gamers that Square Enix is a developer you can get behind. That Square Enix is a developer who understands the fans and release games they like. And that Square Enix is no longer the joke many see them as and become the powerhouse they should be. But until the stupid decisions are abolished, nothing will be changing.

What the Next-Gen Consoles Need to Succeed

It seems the past few years we have expected the consoles to release at any time. Well, it seems that time has come. With more and more rumors coming to light and Sony having an announcement on 2/20/13 discussing the future of Playstation, the console war looks to spark up again between the next generation systems.

However, there won't be such a discrepancy between the systems as there once was. According to rumors, Sony has ditched the cell processors that were problematic for developers and are going to be on the same level with Microsoft in terms of development. They both may have the potential to collapse the used game market (unlikely, but still being talked about), both will try to have a focus on being a media box instead of solely being a game system, and integrating motion control into the system (or controller) this time is a possibility.

So what do the systems need to really differentiate themselves between the competitors? Wii U has hardware that isn't on the same level, and they are clearly going with their game pad, 1st party exclusives, and social aspect of the Wii U to be what captivates gamers. Despite those big three things, the sales for the Wii U has seemingly been disappointing in the eyes of most people, but shouldn't be counted out considering it hasn't been out for very long. It takes a while for a system to really get steam and have the potential unlocked, and that may just be the case for the Wii U. But for Microsoft and Sony to succeed next generation, they have more to prove.



1. Price

Sony knows better than anyone how much the price of a system can influence sales. The PS3 suffered heavily due to it's intimidating price point, and a more recent example can be the Vita. Not to say that each system isn't worth that amount, but for a consumer, it's not easy to fork out the amount that the PS3 and Vita asked for considering the competitor system/handheld prices.

Fortunately for Sony, they are making a system that will have cheaper specs and Blu-ray is no longer the price cow it used to be. But the magic number of $399 floats around as being the absolute most someone might spend on a new system. $450 with a game or an extra controller, but $399 for a basic system what people seem to clamor for as the most a system will cost. Hopefully this isn't completely outrageous, but I'm not a developer and I have no idea what it takes to make a profitable and affordable system. Which at first, probably won't be.



2. Exclusive Games

I think it's hard to say that exclusive games don't matter. Part of the reason Nintendo is successful is because of the love of their franchises. Originally that wasn't the case as many developers outside of 1st party could succeed on older systems such as the SNES, but recently Nintendo hasn't been as loving to outside devs. They seem to be trying to change that with the Wii U, but it doesn't change the fact that their Mario, Zelda, Smash Bros., Mario Kart, etc are what help make that system successful.

So both Microsoft and Sony need to focus on exclusive games as well. Microsoft needs to continue pumping out the Indie games, even if they are usually timed exclusives, such as Fez, Limbo, Trials, Super Meat Boy, etc. They have some big hitters when it comes to 1st party games in Gears of War, Halo, and Forza, and it's almost a guarantee those will continue to come. Sony needs the same and has been improving with their PSN games such as Journey and the Unfinished Swan. But they have also let off a lot of their studios and that doesn't bode particularly well for the future of exclusives. But they can always fall back on Resistance, Uncharted, Killzone, and Infamous. Neither company have the exclusives that even register on the same scale of Nintendo, but they need to promote the games they have and the other company doesn't.



3. Marketing

Microsoft and Nintendo know how to market their games. The same can't be said for Sony. Marketing is essential for successful games, and the biggest proof is Homefront. A game that was appallingly bad to most people but sold millions of copies. It benefited by being in a popular genre, but if it wasn't for the marketing, that game would have flopped.

So Microsoft and Nintendo...just keep doing what you're doing. Sony, come over here for a second. What are you doing? Have you realized how bad your commercials have gotten? Of course not, because most of your games have no commercials to critique in the first place. Most games don't need a ton of press because they fill a niche' market that isn't going to succeed simply because of a lot of marketing. But each game will have a specific crowd who will buy it regardless, but marketing can get sales of those unaware of the game. Look at Sly Cooper. That game is beautiful and wouldn't be terribly difficult to market, but nobody knew it came out which is disappointing. If you want to be a software juggernaut, you need to know what you are doing marketing wise. But you don't. Hopefully the new firm you are using will do a better job than the last one.



4. Apps

Long gone are the days where Netflix, Hulu, and Youtube are worth mentioning. They are almost a given. Instead these systems need something special that the other console doesn't have or won't have. Playstation Home can be considered in this topic, but nobody uses it. But no other console had something like it either. An interesting idea with poor implementation. The Wii U has an online community where help can be given or pictures can be drawn and it's super interesting. One of the best things the Wii U has going for it that the other systems should think about. Microsoft had my heart with "1 vs 100", and I absolutely loved it. But they didn't apparently and got rid of it.

So these companies need to find another killer app that will convince gamers that it's too awesome to pass up. Talks of DVR's using your console would be a nice addition, and Microsoft is rumored to have a Siri-like interaction with Kinect this time around. But they can't expect that something as small as Crackle is going to be a bullet point on the back of the box to sell gamers.



5. Online Service

This may be the thing that pushes the next console out in front of the other. I have been vocal about my disgust at Xbox Live and how it's nothing more than a glorified online pass. It would be one thing if they offered free online service and then with a Gold subscription you had the additional perks such as cross game chat and better servers, but instead you are paying simply to have online access. Good online access, but online access. If Sony were to make improvements to their online service and offer the same things Gold has but not charge for it, where does that leave Gold? Perhaps they will do something similar to PS+ where it focuses more on deals and games over things you should already have access to (such as Netflix).

Which is where I'm hoping Sony knocks it out of the park. PS+. Many consider it a rental service, and it partially is. You keep the games you buy, which can be found at discounted prices, but for those that complain about it being a rental service don't often complain about Microsoft's online being a "rental service". What I'm most interested in is the Gaikai acquisition and whether that may play a part in PS+. They have been pushing the idea of an Instant Game Library, but what if they were to expand on that idea and have a Gaikai service stream games if you have PS+. And not just one game a month, but have an actual library of games you can choose from. Yes it would still be a rental service, but it would remove the need to download and install games, more games would be available at any given time, and be one hell of an incentive to have PS+ all year round.





I am truly excited at the next generation of consoles. I'm not expecting a huge leap forward, but there's something special about knowing there's a new console looming on the horizon that could come in and sweep the rug out from under our feet and leave us speechless. But for them to do it, they need to improve on what made this generation of consoles so wonderful.

5 Underappreciated Games of 2012

I'm almost a month late with a game of the year post. And really, it seems to be somewhat unanimous what the top five games were with most sites. You are almost guaranteed to see X-Com, Journey, and Walking Dead in that list. I decided to instead make a list of games that I felt deserved some recognition. So here is my top 5 games that I feel were pretty good, but probably not GOTY material.

5.Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Future Soldier

Intimidation was always one of the factors for me to play a Tom Clancy game. They always felt less gamey and more about strategy with bad controls sprinkled in. At least from my small experience with some older games. But Future Soldier was able to make me finish the game by doing the reverse and making it more gamey and less about strategy. The strategy is still there, but it's far less important. And while the story isn't something I cared to follow and sending your teammates to do everything can make you sail through the game, I still found fun in the different items and weapons available while being able to use them with ease.




4. Gotham City Imposters

Gotham City Imposters has found a lot of comparisons to Team Fortress 2. Perhaps its the way the players run around, maybe how they handle, even how they look. But there is one thing that really makes it stand out to me as a fair Team Fortress 2 type game: I am god-awful at it. I'm lucky to pull off one single kill. Not to say I didn't have fun jumping into the Batman universe in this way, but I stink.Yet, the gadgets and customization of this game really make it what it is not to mention it's a competent and enjoyable shooter. But I think the greatest accomplishment of this game was that it wasn't the pile of crap people were expecting. A first person shooter set in Gotham where you don't play as Batman or the Joker, but normal people playing on their "sides"? I don't think anyone expected this game to be any good, but it proved them all wrong.



3. Final Fantasy XIII-2

This might be where you decide to ignore everything I post. Yes. I was a fan of Final Fantasy XIII-2. Hell, I was a fan of FF XIII. And while the sequel isn't quite the lengthy tutorial the first game is, it still has it's faults. The story is about as convoluted as one can expect in a Final Fantasy game, there's still a linearity to it that the creators don't seem to understand what the fans really want, and a chunk of the characters make you cringe; but the gem of this game is the battle system. Whereas past FF games were slow paced, the recent additions have sped everything up while making it more strategic with your paradigm shifts and just more engaging in general. Add in my 90's fascination with "collecting them all Pokemon-style" nostalgia that forced me to run through the world and find the best monsters to add to my battles, and this became one of the favorite games of the year.


2. Binary Domain

I loved Binary Domain more than Gears of War. There. I said it. I didn't think I would, nor did I think I would find a game that would ever leave my lips as a game you should play. But going in expecting to find a barely functional Gears of War clone, I was pleasantly surprised to say I found a really good Gears of War clone. But instead of creatures, replace them with robots that are more fun to shoot with characters that have more personality and humor. For the most part at least. Plus, they have a French robot. But if that's not enough, perhaps you should know there is actually a story worth experiencing and it gets completely bat shit crazy near the end. It doesn't make much sense, but how much of video games actually make any sense? I wasn't expecting it (nor would anyone more than likely), but what a reveal. And while it set up for a sequel, lack of sales would suggest this will be the last time you'll see this game.


1. Asura's Wrath

I was hesitant to put this game on the list. Every outlet seems to have someone on staff who adores this game, but in the end, it doesn't quite reach the top 10 of game of the year status. Which is understandable since the gameplay moments boil down to mediocre third person fighting, some rail shooting, and quick time events. This game should be written off as a game. But ignore the first two, because they are not good, and focus on the quick time events. They work. They provide a sense of importance that no other game does. So when Asura is having a finger the size of a continent come down on his head, that quick time event is something you want to do because you feel connected in the fight with Asura. Which brings me to the story, the real reason to play this game. It's nothing new. A godlike being who has the love of his life taken from him by other gods, so he seeks revenge. But it's the incredible art style, the amazing voice work, the sheer lunacy that happens in the story, and even to an extent the quick time events; everything adds up to make Asura's Wrath a game that should have been full of cliche's, but instead stands as a game that I had the most fun with this year. No other game even comes close to how eager I was to finish this game. Which sadly, I haven't. If only because the real ending of the game is behind paid DLC. And that is the worst thing about this game.

A Baby Boy and Handheld Gaming

Back in August, my wife and I had our first child. A baby boy. He has been one of the greatest additions in my life and I have no regrets. Less money, less sleep, less personal time, less time with the wife....as much as I enjoy all of them, he has brought a joy to my life I didn't know existed.

But at the same time, he has been a bane to my gaming hobby.

You see, my boy has a sixth sense. Instead of seeing ghosts, he has an uncanny ability to know when I'm playing video games. It doesn't matter if he's awake or asleep. I can't get in more than 15 minutes or so of gaming before he starts in with his crying. I don't know how he does it. And while I know my wife could take over completely for a few hours, I also don't want to feel like I'm pawning off my kid to her so I can shoot some people on Borderlands 2. Which by the way, I just made it through the game two weeks ago after playing it since release day. That's how much he has held me back from gaming.

However, I have found a savior to my gaming. Handhelds. I still don't get a lot of time in with them, but it's far easier to play with one hand using my 3DS than it is my PS3 controller. I can sit down and play with it while we watch cartoons, and don't even ask how much time I've put into it while sitting on the pot. I finally have a need for a handheld system that I haven't needed since I was in middle school. I still can't play it while we drive to the grocery store since I tend to be the chauffeur for everyone, but I have found myself putting more time into games like Pushmo, VVVVV, and more recently The World Ends With You. Which by the way, the three of those games are AMAZING.

So what's the point of this post? Well, since I haven't made one since September, part of it was just to show this blog isn't completely dead. As if anyone really reads it in the first place. The second was to tell those current and future parents out there that gaming isn't dead once a child comes into your life. Yes, console games can be a tad more difficult to work into your day. As much as I used to play to midnight or 1am while my wife was asleep, this little man wears me out. I'm lucky to make it past 10pm now. But I do wake up early on the weekends and get a few hours in each day, but otherwise, it has fallen by the wayside.

Handhelds are fantastic for not only kids, but for parents too. Don't dismiss them. I have never fully appreciated my handhelds the way I do now. The games are never as flashy as console games, but there are plenty of great games that I have played that I never would have had my lil man not been born. Do yourself a favor and pick one up. Vita, DS, 3DS, doesn't matter. Despite what people say, there are games out there on all systems (the Vita gets picked on for it's games, but that's a future post...) and many are worth experiencing. While I don't get the itch to play it when I have my console available, I find myself using it while I'm cooking dinner, rocking the baby to sleep, going to the bathroom, and if the wife reads in bed on her Kindle, I can play my 3DS.

But the third reason I made this post...to post pictures of the kid. How can I not? Just look at him! His cuteness makes me melt.

Mario Villain Shakeup

Mario has traversed the Mushroom Kingdom quite a few times, but it seems to fall back to a similar plot each time. Peach is kidnapped, Mario fights his way through 8 worlds only to find Bowser in the last castle with Peach hanging from a cage completely helpless. Tried and true, and a storyline nobody seems to criticize Nintendo for milking beyond it's worth.

So how do you provide some sort of shakeup to the Mario universe? Well, the easiest would be to provide a different villain of course. Most of the spin-off games have done so whether it be Smithy from Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars, Tatanga from Super Mario Land, or even the lame Princess Shroob from Mario & Luigi: Partners in Time. Is it impossible for Bowser to be knocked from the antagonist to no role at all in a main Mario game?

I think there are several characters that Nintendo can use that would allow for them to keep a familiar formula, but shock players when they reveal the new villain at the end. Here are some characters I wouldn't mind seeing replace Bowser:

Donkey Kong

Perhaps everyone forgot a particular game from the arcades featuring a monkey who kidnapped a woman and decided to wreak havoc on a known plumber using barrels? Well, that wasn't Donkey Kong. No, that honor would go to his father/grandfather (games conflicted with what his relationship was exactly) Cranky Kong. And while the original Donkey Kong arcade game wouldn't provide a good enough motivator for Donkey Kong to seek his revenge on Mario, the followup game does. In Donkey Kong Jr., Mario kidnaps Cranky and locks him in a cage and whips creatures at Donkey Kong Jr. to impede his rescue. Even though his revenge hasn't been sought out in the main continuity, he has done everything in his power to get back at Mario through karting and tennis matches...

Shadow Mario

Super Mario Sunshine gets a bad rap. Yes the overall idea was pretty stupid in which you jump around different world and clean up goo, but it was enough of a departure to provide an interesting take on Mario and his platforming. But I became most fascinated with the game when you notice a creepy Mario jumping around painting the world with gunk. And while the reveal of what Shadow Mario really was disappointed me and led me to more questions about potential Bowser relationships, the idea of a dark world-esque Mario hit a soft spot in my heart. He has since found a way to be incorporated into Super Mario Galaxy and Super Mario 3D Land, but not as the main force against Mario and minor differences to distinguish each version. Shadow Mario could be the Bizarro villain that Mario needs, but I guess they feel they already have that with Wario...another underutilized enemy....

Bowser Jr.'s....uh...whatever?

I really wish Nintendo would clear up everything with Bowser Jr. and the Koopalings. It was first thought that the Koopalings were his children, then his nephews, then some clones that had some extra splice to differentiate them. Then Bowser Jr. makes an appearance into the fiction and causes even more confusion. Which poses the question, what is his relationship to Bowser? If there is some creepy turtle mama out there that got the dirty on with Bowser, I would like to potentially see who that is. I see that turning out horrifically bad, so they could go the other route of him being a clone. Now, while Bowsers dark magic was able to cause the Mushroom Kingdom to be Mario's playland of killing innocent Toads and eating them (a much forgotten plot from the manual of the original game), he could have had some sort of scientist help create Bowser Jr. And in doing so, have a potential bad guy in the likes of Dr. Wily or Dr. Robotnik for the Mushroom Kingdom. Not my favorite idea, but it's still some sort of change...

Pauline

The original "princess" who wasn't really a princess. Pauline was the first love of Mario and the female who had no luck with monkeys. While she has made appearances since the Donkey Kong arcade game, she hasn't quite hit the same importance that Peach or Daisy have had. So what could possibly make her rotten against Mario? How about Mario being a "playa" who leaves Pauline for Princess Peach causing some jealous animosity between these characters. What if Pauline, who is still smitten for this world-renown kingdom-saving plumber, decides that she wants that attention back and the only way for her to get it is to remove the princess from the equation? There is absolutely no chance Nintendo would go the psycho bitch route with Pauline, but it's the one option that I'm somehow proud with coming up with.

Yoshi

Mario has put Yoshi through some shit. Not only does he donkey punch Yoshi on a regular basis, he does so to force Yoshi to eat various creatures in some awful carnivorous eating behaviors. I do believe Yoshi may very well be an herbivore as he doesn't mind eating the plants around his home. There's no creatures there, so clearly that's what they eat. But Mario don't care. He will continue smacking Yoshi on the top of the head to eat Spinies that Lakitu tosses down, he'll casually cast Yoshi off to his doom knowing there's another Yoshi egg around the corner, and force Yoshi to swim although we know he's a terrible swimmer and will die if Mario hops off. There are no characters in the Mario continuity that are treated as poorly as Yoshi. And with his fellow colorful brethren, he has the potential to overthrow (and eat) the entire Mushroom Kingdom to earn respect. And I would love seeing every moment of it.



I somehow doubt Nintendo would put any beloved characters in the villain status of a future Mario game, but there are so many choices to make it not only interesting but a huge change of pace. I'm tired of Bowser. I want someone new to make Mario's life a living hell, because he's kind of a dick. And these characters would be my choice to add some more life to the head rogue gallery of Mario.

Wii U? More like...Pii U!!!

Sorry, but the title was so dumb I had to put it. It in no way speaks for my personal beliefs on the console as they are still up in the air until I see more about it. I just found it so stupid that it made me chuckle.

So that's it. The Wii U has come to light more now than ever before. What once was shrouded in mystery is now revealed, or at least, most of it is. After Nintendo's conference last Thursday, the console has now impressed or shunned the audience at hand with both great news and less than stellar news. Here is a quick roundup of both news and my personal thoughts.

 1. The Release Date: November 18th

It is coming. Less than a week before Black Friday, Nintendo will drop the Wii U into the hands of gamers who pre-ordered the system months ahead of time. Because that's probably the only chance of getting one come November 18th as it'll take a page out of the Wii book and sell out instantly. Best of luck folks.

2. The Price: $299.99 - $349.99

There you have it. The price of the new console that we have all been curious about since the announcement back at E3 2011. Nintendo decides to go with two different versions. The first is the $299.99 Basic set which includes the staples that you should expect. A white Wii U (8 GB internal storage) with GamePad, AC adapters, an HDMI cable and a Wii Sensor Bar.

The second set would be the Premium or Deluxe version which also has the items from the Basic Set, but the Wii U itself will be black and have 32 GB of internal storage, a copy of it's mini-game bundle Nintendo Land, a stand and charging cradle for the GamePad, a stand for the Wii U, and a "Deluxe Digital Promotion" that seems to act like similar to Nintendo Club rewards in a way. When you purchase content through the eShop, you receive points that can be used on other things later.

3. The Game Lineup

The Wii U will have an explosion of games coming out within it's launch window which features more than 50 titles. Now, that launch window is a tad wide, so expect these to launch anywhere from November 18th - March 2013. While some aren't that exciting as they have released on other consoles such as Darksiders 2, Madden 13, Mass Effect 3 and Batman: Arkham City (Armored Edition); the Wii U does have more games that other consoles won't have such as the Premium/Deluxe set game Nintendo Land, Pikmin 3, Game & Wario, New Super Mario Bros. Wii U, and the most surprising, Bayonetta 2.

Also, whereas the Wii had games no higher than $49.99, the Wii U will continue the tradition set by other consoles and have them start at $59.99.

Backwards compatibility doesn't seem to be a worry as they have confirmed that both disc and digital versions of Wii games will be playable using the Wii U. However, Gamecube games will not be as fortunate, so don't expect to be able to pop in a disc of Super Mario Sunshine and play it come November 18th.

You can find the full list of launch games HERE at Joystiq.com

4. Controllers and Accessories

Other than the previously mentioned items such as the stands for the GamePad and console, the charging cradle for the GamePad, and sensor bar; the Wii U will also allow for gamers to use Nunchuks and Wii Remotes (w/Plus) as well. On top of that, they are also offering a new controller, that looks vaguely familiar to another controller from a different console, at a cost of $50 called the Pro Controller.

The GamePad themselves will not be sold separately at this time for reasons unknown. Some have speculated it's because of the potential cost (conversion from Japan price would have it at $170) and would turn away some consumers. Of all the rumors, that seems the most plausible.

The storage can also be expanded using SD memory cards or USB hard disk drives.

5. TVii

Shocking news. Wii U will support the likes of Netflix, Hulu, Youtube, and more. The biggest difference is that it is a feature that allows the GamePad to be used to watch these programs, but it also allows for TiVo as long as you have the necessary box that allows TiVo. Regardless of what cable or dish company you may use, Nintendo has confirmed that all in the US will support TVii and that it will be available come launch.

My Thoughts

So all in all, quite a bit of news and reveals for this console. But...somewhat underwhelming. With the console itself barely better than the PS3 or 360, it's hard to say that this will have the stopping power to hold up to the next consoles when they release.

While many have praised the quality of the GamePad, only having one makes me wonder what kind of couch co-op games I can play where one person has more options than other players. And when Nintendo won't announce a specific price for the GamePad, and not having any extra available, it should raise a red flag as to how they are approaching it. They just recently announced that replacing them if broken will have a "fee", but didn't comment on that price even.

Having TVii isn't that big of a deal as using a controller is hardly a pain to get through different apps like Netflix or Hulu, but perhaps I would need on hand experience to understand that fascination some have with it.

The game list is as expected. Lots of games I either don't really care about or have already played on a different console. Expecting gamers to jump at the chance to play an older game again seems absurd, but they do turn it around by having some nice additions such as ZombiU, Rayman Legends, and again (the one I would look forward to the most) Bayonetta 2. It shows they are trying to reach out to the hardcore fans, but at the same time, keep it's own player base. Regardless, the problem is that there is no wallet-wrencher of a game that will have players foaming at the mouth to purchase a new console. While the game list doesn't look bad, it just isn't solid enough to justify a purchase, especially with a launch window as large as this one.

Lastly...the price. $300-$350 seems like quite a bit for a console that many developers have said is just barely more powerful than what is already out there. It appears a chunk of that may come from the GamePad itself, it's also a deterrent when the sweet spot for most gamers will be around $250. Nintendo may have a similar road ahead with the Wii U that they did with the 3DS, and a potential price drop may happen the following year. But seeing that this is their next big console, I have a feeling that they will make a stand at keep it at that price for a while. And considering how many pre-orders have been made through Gamestop, I think they won't have to worry about sales for quite some time.