The GHZ Forum

http://www.nintendowiifanboy.com/2008/0 ... -to-japan/

I'm really thrilled that there's going to be a Wario Wii game that doesn't involve shitloads of minigames. 2D Platformer on a nextgen system is very nice.

Sounds promising. Personally I'm still waiting for a new Donkey Kong game to be announced, but Wario's future looks bright.

I sure hope this one's better than Master of Disguise.

I'm hoping it goes straight back to the original's formula of various cap forms like in the original Wario Land, instead of the transformation frenzy of the other three games (not including VB Wario Land, which I have never played).

Tiny screens make it look pretty awesome.

http://kotaku.com/5011778/crappy-look-a ... land-shake

So essentialty its kind of like a Wario version of Mischief Makers, in a way. Well, execpt the fact that Wario will still have more attack options that throwing stuff around of course. Can't complain with that!

G.Silver wrote:Tiny screens make it look pretty awesome.

http://kotaku.com/5011778/crappy-look-a ... land-shake

:o That article also shows something about Rhythm Tengoku Gold for DS. Sweet deal. :D

It looks like fun, but at the same time, I feel like I've played all of those levels in prior Mario games. For some reason, I tend to forgive such lack of innovation on the DS, but my expectations are higher for creative vision on the Wii. Perhaps it has something to do with shelling out twenty extra bucks.

I wonder if Treasure is making this one.

Wario Land 2 and Wario Land 3 are some of my most favorite games, period. If they can get a game anywhere NEAR that well-designed, I'm all for it.

On the topic of Wario Land, doesn't it seem odd that those games got the shaft in Brawl? Sure, Wario had his classic costume, but pretty much all his moves (except maybe his side-smash) were derived from WarioWare.

Shadow Hog wrote:On the topic of Wario Land, doesn't it seem odd that those games got the shaft in Brawl? Sure, Wario had his classic costume, but pretty much all his moves (except maybe his side-smash) were derived from WarioWare.

Yeah, I did notice that, and it severely disappointed me. The lack of music in that area was also off-putting; no Train Stage remix for the loss. At least he still had his original costume, I guess.

The trophy information even says "Wario didn't become popular until WarioWare", like they regard the Wario Land games as cheap Mario knockoffs.

Wario Land II is one of my all time favourite platformers. Recently tried Wario: Master of Disguise and talk about disappointing, it's quite a chore to play through. Does it get any better?

Universally negative reviews would seem to indicate that no, it does not.

It doesn't get better. The visual quality stays utterly bland and uninspired all the way through. I did sort of enjoy the take on a Metroid/Castlevania structure and control method, but it never really picks up. The second level (the museum) I think was especially bad, but after that I felt more involved in the puzzles and did actually want to play all the way through. I may have just been enjoying looking at a train wreck.

I liked the first Wario Land enough to actually get all the treasures, which was something I didn't normally do in games back then. I've never played any of the sequels but all this talk about them makes me want to play them now.

I've never played 3 or 4 but Wario Land 2 definitetly contains all the quality of the original and from what I recall, builds upon it in many ways.

The only downside I remember is that it didn't have a brilliant world map like the orignal, one of my all time favourite overworlds.

Protodude wrote:I liked the first Wario Land enough to actually get all the treasures, which was something I didn't normally do in games back then. I've never played any of the sequels but all this talk about them makes me want to play them now.

Complete ditto.
But it probably has to do with the fact that it was the only Game Boy game I've ever had, though I also borrowed Super Mario Land 2 and Link's Awakening.

Absolutely loved Warioland 4, it probably ranks among my favorite platformers ever. A lot of people I've talked to really extol the virtues of 2 and/or 3, but I never played either of them and I'm sure I'd be disappointed if I did.

I dunno, I never really got into WL4 - although playing it on an emulator can dampen the experience a tad, I'd imagine.

And no, you most likely won't be disappointed. Maybe you won't have the nostalgia factor like we (well, at least I) do, but you can still take them for what they are - REALLY solidly-designed platformers with heavy puzzle and collection (more so in 3) overtones. And invincibility. You can't lose. Sounds cheap, but they make it work so well that you'll never notice.

This makes me want to go dig up Wario Land 2, which I haven't even thought about in ages, though I played it a good amount back in the day.

Maybe they'll release this as a WiiWare game. I don't know why, but that makes the most sense to me. I might actually have to buy it if it's anywhere near as good as the last 2D home console platforming Nintendo game I bought - Donkey Kong Jungle Beat.

Apparently it's actually a full price disc title, which seems like another situation with Nintendo being a bit cheeky concerning pricing as there's no way the development costs on this title remotely rival most of their other full price games but they seem to think they can get away with anything just now.

Whooaa entitlement much? And based on such itty bitty screens, too.

The standard retail on any new game is around $50 (but not really anymore thanks to the 360 and PS3..), and that's regardless of the cost to produce it or the quality of the game. Should a new, awesome, 2D action game be cheaper than a new shitty 3D game? The difference in development "cost" for 2D and 3D is also something to be suspicious of in the first place, remember when Nintendo said New SMB was done in 3D because it was faster and cheaper?

The value of a game is in how good it is, not how much it cost to produce. There are exceptions for certain genres like puzzle games that, simply because of their nature, don't justify a high price point. The same thing can be said for most Wiiware/Xbox Arcade-type titles because they tend to either deliberately shorten the game or base it off something really old (like Robotron or Asteroids or something). But for a new, good 2D platformer with modern production values? Frankly I'll pay whatever they ask!

remember when Nintendo said New SMB was done in 3D because it was faster and cheaper?

Did they actually admit that?

G.Silver wrote:Whooaa entitlement much? And based on such itty bitty screens, too.

The standard retail on any new game is around $50 (but not really anymore thanks to the 360 and PS3..), and that's regardless of the cost to produce it or the quality of the game. Should a new, awesome, 2D action game be cheaper than a new shitty 3D game? The difference in development "cost" for 2D and 3D is also something to be suspicious of in the first place, remember when Nintendo said New SMB was done in 3D because it was faster and cheaper?

The value of a game is in how good it is, not how much it cost to produce. There are exceptions for certain genres like puzzle games that, simply because of their nature, don't justify a high price point. The same thing can be said for most Wiiware/Xbox Arcade-type titles because they tend to either deliberately shorten the game or base it off something really old (like Robotron or Asteroids or something). But for a new, good 2D platformer with modern production values? Frankly I'll pay whatever they ask!

Well I'm someone who's still heavily into sidescrolling games, whether it be platformers, space shooters or adventure. I would generally always agree that price should be based on quality too, however in today's market it's inevitable that production costs factor in there too.

On the other hand though if a game is a great sidescroller but has virtually no lifespan, regardless of whether the time spent with it is incredible, you rarely come out feeling you got value for money these days. LostWinds on Wiiware is a good example, fun little game full of great concepts and sets up a lot of potential for awesome puzzling, then it turns out you can do absolutely everything within the game world in less than 3 hours and it feels more like you paid for an extended tutorial mission that served to set up a sequel alone.

Anyway what I'm trying to say is I tend to be cautious with new sidescrollers charged at full price in the event they're over a little on the quick side. I'm all for quality over quantity though, I'm not the type of guy who thinks sequels should be "more of the same but 200 levels!!" but these days I tend to watch what I'm spending on games and buy them far less often, so I do like it when an expensive purchase (especially in the UK where "full price" is considered £40, roughly $70 odd US dollars) gives me more than a couple of days of play time. Nowadays I don't have the patience I had as a kid either to sit and replay games over and over based on their quality alone, though it'd be great if I did!