Where Mario Kart Went Wrong

Anything to do with games at all.
User avatar
Green Gecko
Director
Joined in 2008
Location: Sussex
Contact:

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by Green Gecko » Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:17 pm

Please don't quote walls of text to add minimal comment, it's a short scroll upward. Thanks.

RIP in peace Wii U | Support GRcade | t: @GRcade | FB: GRcadeUK | YT: GRcadeVideo | Twitch: GRcadeUK
Image
Image
User avatar
Suffocate Peon
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Arv

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by Suffocate Peon » Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:36 pm

I completely forgot there was a Mario Kart DS and that I played it lots. Jesus. And online a bit too.

User avatar
FudgeDiver
Member
Joined in 2018

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by FudgeDiver » Mon Feb 12, 2018 9:01 pm

Vermilion wrote:
FudgeDiver wrote:DS is only disliked by people who can't handle the snaking


To be fair, snaking did ruin the online matches.


DS online was awful anyway, not sure on the specifics of how they did it but it sure worked weird

DS Download where only 1 person isn't shyguy is the only way to go

User avatar
Johnny Ryall
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Macraig
Location: Box Elder, MO

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by Johnny Ryall » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:21 pm

FudgeDiver wrote:DS is only disliked by people who can't handle the snaking


The most physical pain a game has caused me

User avatar
After Christmas Name Change
Bizarre Title
Joined in 2008
Location: Bered Kai Nev

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by After Christmas Name Change » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:40 pm

It's an interesting post, SP, but a strange one. Is this meant to be an opinion piece - ie a piece of creative writing, an article, almost like a magazine/ journal contribution - or more of a rant/ ramble/ succession of thoughts?

I don't understand why you've chosen to try and mirror the series to Smash Bros. You talk about Melee as if it were the result of a consistent upward arc of recreation and innovation that eventually led to the perfect entry in three series, and lament the fact that Nintendo didn't do the same with MK, but you ignore the fact that SSBM is the second game and there are three more instalments. Plus not everyone thinks MK64 is the definitive entry. Bear in mind that the way you love MK64 but hate the changes MKDD brought, is the way some feel about the change from SMK to MK64.

If this IS a creative writing piece, I'd say you'd have had more success highlighting the similarities between the two franchises. Both have an original entry that was loved and is still held up by purists to be superior (even though most would disagree). Then they have an immediate sequel with generation- defining multiplayer within its genre that is still loved and played to this day. Then there are a few entries that some people like and some people don't, with some controversial innovations and changes, before the release of a definitive "next-gen" Wii U iteration that's generally accepted to be the most technically astute entry as well as being superbly playable, and probably the outright "best" in the series if you entirely discount any nostalgia factor.

You also seem to have DKR on a bit of a pedestal. Yes, it was great, but in terms of handling and certainly multiplayer, it's not aged anywhere near as well as MK64. And it certainly wasn't so good that it would redefine the genre that Mario Kart created... which is why it didn't.

User avatar
Jezo
Member
Joined in 2015
AKA: Jezo

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by Jezo » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:45 pm

Suffocate Peon wrote:
Jezo wrote:I started skipping through when you said the new mechanics in Double Dash didn't change the gameplay. That's just straight up wrong.


How?


The ability to hold 2 items and swap them on a whim added a new strategic twist to item management. The character on the back could also be knocked down temporarily making the characters unable to switch. It's not a massive change or some revolutionary new way to play, but it still changes the gameplay from that of regular Mario Kart.

Image
Image
User avatar
Met
Member
Joined in 2015

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by Met » Tue Feb 13, 2018 12:16 am

Team building also played into it more than very slight stat boosts: the Kongs had a stronger area denial, Toads had access to extended boosts, etc.

Whether that was for better or worse is another discussion, but to say character specific items didn't change up the system is just wrong.

User avatar
Suffocate Peon
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Arv

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by Suffocate Peon » Tue Feb 13, 2018 12:38 am

After Christmas Name Change wrote:It's an interesting post, SP, but a strange one. Is this meant to be an opinion piece - ie a piece of creative writing, an article, almost like a magazine/ journal contribution - or more of a rant/ ramble/ succession of thoughts?


Just an alternative take, an argument really. I kept reading MK8 be mentioned with; 'i don't see where the series can go from here', and it rankled. I replayed Diddy Kong Racing in the summer and it just made me realise i wanted to make a kart racing game more than doing anything else in the world. I can't, obviously. F-Zero GX pushed the futuristic racer and there's been others, but the kart racing genre is left to Nintendo entirely, and cheap rip offs, it's not seen as legitimate really. I think, if like Trials, a new Mario Kart allowed players to create their own levels with a really diverse set of options, you'd seen genuinely astounding results. The thing with Trials is that i felt an excitement there i'd not felt in ages, and this was still in comparison to the official levels, where the same track editor is used. Even a track that is inspired by Aliens for instance, so not something new, more the thrill of seeing how they found inventive ways to capture the film, like amateur homemade attempts being more creative than expensive blockbusters.

After Christmas Name Change wrote:I don't understand why you've chosen to try and mirror the series to Smash Bros. You talk about Melee as if it were the result of a consistent upward arc of recreation and innovation that eventually led to the perfect entry in three series, and lament the fact that Nintendo didn't do the same with MK, but you ignore the fact that SSBM is the second game and there are three more instalments.


I don't see why that's relevant though?

The comparison with Smash Bros is to ask if the kart racing genre allows for the same kind of invention, 3D vs 2D, which ties into Trials where you merely drive from left to right, the levels can be complex because of the simplicity and linearity of the gameplay. And also whether the series leans towards the hardcore gamer more meaning Nintendo would be more creative with it. I didn't play much of Brawl except online. I think I spent so many hours with Melee i didn't want to do it again. For me Melee reminds me of late 90s Rare or the early PS2 Pro Evo games, or PS2 Rockstar, there's certain times when it seems like a developer is pushing ideas, and you follow a game's development differently, as though they are really trying to make the best thing possible. And every month you read about another new feature that's been added. Melee is actually too fast for me, but in terms of taking the N64 original and within a few years with more technology, they really pushed the characters and levels. I always want more and more and more, and I remember unlocking the F Zero levels and thinking they had accessed the most brilliant ideas, because the N64 game never hinted at that level of invention. So they really looked at everything. And didn't use it as mere cosmetic difference, leaping from one F-Zero craft to another was new, being sat on a track as you need to leap to avoid was new. I need to play the game again to refresh my memory, but it pushed the concept to an end point.

After Christmas Name Change wrote:Plus not everyone thinks MK64 is the definitive entry. Bear in mind that the way you love MK64 but hate the changes MKDD brought, is the way some feel about the change from SMK to MK64.


I don't think MK64 is best or definitive, same goes for DKR. I don't want to mention other games because then it appears as though I am pointing at the other as if it is perfect, and it's not that at all. It's more; this game moved the genre forward 20 years ago, and current Mario Kart isn't matching the level of its ambition then. I don't think 4 cups with 4 tracks in each, or however many cups are included in total is enough really. It's like F-Zero GX, it was a rock hard, but its story mode with its challenges displayed a passion for the genre, it shows the kind of invention that if you were making a game like that would want to do. My favourite games had that. Mario Kart is not made with the same level of commitment, there's none of that cohesive passion. The guys who design the menus do their thing, the course designers do their thing. I actually spent like a week rewriting the opening post and still it doesn't seem clear.

[quote="After Christmas Name Change"If this IS a creative writing piece, I'd say you'd have had more success highlighting the similarities between the two franchises. Both have an original entry that was loved and is still held up by purists to be superior (even though most would disagree). Then they have an immediate sequel with generation- defining multiplayer within its genre that is still loved and played to this day. Then there are a few entries that some people like and some people don't, with some controversial innovations and changes, before the release of a definitive "next-gen" Wii U iteration that's generally accepted to be the most technically astute entry as well as being superbly playable, and probably the outright "best" in the series if you entirely discount any nostalgia factor.

You also seem to have DKR on a bit of a pedestal. Yes, it was great, but in terms of handling and certainly multiplayer, it's not aged anywhere near as well as MK64. And it certainly wasn't so good that it would redefine the genre that Mario Kart created... which is why it didn't.[/quote]

I don't think DKR redefined the genre but it moved it forward, it did things I never expected. I don't think it's perfect or anything. I'd say Smash Bros Melee pushes that type of fighting game to the limit of what you can do. I don't think any kart racing game ever has.

I just think Miyamoto made a mistake. I forgot to make this point, but it's like there was a refusal to accept the genre. You race around in karts, pick up items, is that not enough? Same goes for F-Zero. It's kind of complicated because i believe Nintendo's need to appeal to people who left gaming is genuine, it makes sense, but i also know the need to attach to a gimmick is to sell. If you accept the genre then you just be creative within it, same for all genres in all mediums.

Last edited by Suffocate Peon on Tue Feb 13, 2018 12:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Suffocate Peon
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Arv

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by Suffocate Peon » Tue Feb 13, 2018 12:54 am

Jezo wrote:
Suffocate Peon wrote:
Jezo wrote:I started skipping through when you said the new mechanics in Double Dash didn't change the gameplay. That's just straight up wrong.


How?


The ability to hold 2 items and swap them on a whim added a new strategic twist to item management. The character on the back could also be knocked down temporarily making the characters unable to switch. It's not a massive change or some revolutionary new way to play, but it still changes the gameplay from that of regular Mario Kart.


Well that's very slight.

Like the ability to upgrade items when you re pick them up in DKR i wouldn't say alters the gameplay, but i think it's neat. In boss races it was a genuine choice whether to use the homing missile or wait to get the 10 straight shot missiles, given the delay in waiting. I'd say that was more of an addition than what Nintendo came up with, tbh, yet it gets overlooked and isn't something other kart racers included i don't think.

I don't care much about the items in Mario Kart, it's more of a side point. The interesting thing about having three shells is they act as armour. Where and how to place bananas. Can't think of much else ?

The character specific items..Mario Kart has never nailed this. Again, Smash Bros does this with ease, it's the perfect stage to allow each character to be distinct. I don't know how you do this in a kart game.

User avatar
Met
Member
Joined in 2015

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by Met » Tue Feb 13, 2018 3:37 am

I don't really get how you can compare Smash Bros and Mario Kart. They're completely different genres. At the core of it, a racing game is the player Vs the track with the occasional player to get in the way, while a fighting game is player Vs player (with the stage occasionally getting in the way in the case of Smash).

The nature of a constantly changing opponent compared to a static opponent means your mechanics can be more fluid to match.

Would I like to see a kart game where one racer builds meter to maintain speed (like the coins), while one has a card system to boost speed or defense (like the boxes) and another focuses on attacking to slow people down? I think it would be interesting, sure. But it would be unbalanced as all hell. Fighting games get around it because everyone has so many options: if a character has good aerial options most characters have anti-airs to counter. They can maybe grab out of the air to force the fight onto the ground.

Racing games are mechanically a lot shallower in that respect because your main goal isn't outplaying your opponent, it's outplaying the track. And the track isn't going to throw out a surprise raw super at the start of the second lap.

Tl;Dr: it's dumb to compare mechanical depth in Kart and Smash, you may as well compare mechanical depth in Kart and space travel.

User avatar
Suffocate Peon
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Arv

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by Suffocate Peon » Tue Feb 13, 2018 5:01 am

Met wrote:I don't really get how you can compare Smash Bros and Mario Kart. They're completely different genres. At the core of it, a racing game is the player Vs the track with the occasional player to get in the way, while a fighting game is player Vs player (with the stage occasionally getting in the way in the case of Smash).

The nature of a constantly changing opponent compared to a static opponent means your mechanics can be more fluid to match.

Would I like to see a kart game where one racer builds meter to maintain speed (like the coins), while one has a card system to boost speed or defense (like the boxes) and another focuses on attacking to slow people down? I think it would be interesting, sure. But it would be unbalanced as all hell. Fighting games get around it because everyone has so many options: if a character has good aerial options most characters have anti-airs to counter. They can maybe grab out of the air to force the fight onto the ground.

Racing games are mechanically a lot shallower in that respect because your main goal isn't outplaying your opponent, it's outplaying the track. And the track isn't going to throw out a surprise raw super at the start of the second lap.

Tl;Dr: it's dumb to compare mechanical depth in Kart and Smash, you may as well compare mechanical depth in Kart and space travel.


Hmm. How is it not clear what I'm saying? It's nothing clever. It's just; heh didn't Smash Bros Melee use the rich history of Nintendo far better and really push the concept to its end point and throw a ridiculous amount of ideas at you, and heh why can't Mario Kart do that.

User avatar
Met
Member
Joined in 2015

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by Met » Tue Feb 13, 2018 5:30 am

I don't know what you want from Mario Kart, in that case. Because outside of the aspects which seem to just be "I want it to be a different genre" or are, frankly, superfluous to the game itself, it seems to do everything you want.

You ask for themed tracks and we have courses based on major Mario levels. You ask for themed items and we're throwing around mushrooms, stars and shells. The game draws from Mario history plenty. Hell, it's even moved into pulling from other Nintendo games.

The only point that really holds water is the speed of the game and layout of the tracks. And to that, yeah, we have 200cc and if that's not enough maybe you want to play a different game. As for track design, I wouldn't mind narrower courses, but the level of bullshit in the game would make it a clusterfuck, potentially not in the fun way.

User avatar
Suffocate Peon
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Arv

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by Suffocate Peon » Tue Feb 13, 2018 6:44 am

Met wrote:I don't know what you want from Mario Kart, in that case. Because outside of the aspects which seem to just be "I want it to be a different genre" or are, frankly, superfluous to the game itself, it seems to do everything you want.

You ask for themed tracks and we have courses based on major Mario levels. You ask for themed items and we're throwing around mushrooms, stars and shells. The game draws from Mario history plenty. Hell, it's even moved into pulling from other Nintendo games.

The only point that really holds water is the speed of the game and layout of the tracks. And to that, yeah, we have 200cc and if that's not enough maybe you want to play a different game. As for track design, I wouldn't mind narrower courses, but the level of bullshit in the game would make it a clusterfuck, potentially not in the fun way.


I'll copy over my replies from rllmuk as a shortcut to further detailing, should just about make sense without the stuff I'm quoting.

MK64 is probably the better multiplayer game. But DKR is the better singleplayer, and still is. Replaying it recently it wasn't just a nostalgia rush, it's genuinely good. The silver coin challenge idea isn't new or bold, but it just reminded me how simply satisfying a kart racing game can be, needing to take these difficult lines and routes whilst still maintaining a good lead. DKR came out of nowhere at the time, it was the sheer adventure of the game, the ease at which it innovated, Rare were peerless at the time for all the ideas they'd include in their games, that as a teenager was so exciting. Around that time Beetle Adventure Racing came out as well, as well as Snowboard Kids. Now, to others these might be rough games, but i don't care about polish personally. Their enthusiasm mattered more, and in a way, like Rockstar's PS2 games, the roughness added to their charm.

The obvious point about the space levels was the surprise, even though they're brilliant anyway with some great music. It wouldn't be nearly as cool just unlocking a new cup, you had to enter the hub and be in awe of the potential. And space isn't all that out there, but none of its zones hinted at entering that type of theme.

I think, really, how can racing games in the late 90s inspire more than the ones 20 years later?

I hate all forms of tacky glitz, and want continuity with the original Super Mario Bros. This is a stylistic taste thing maybe others disagree with. I wouldn't want blocks on the ground like Super Mario Kart but they've obviously tried different things before settling on the ? diamond boxes of MK64, wanting them to be sparkling and stand out, even if it looks tacky.

I want a visual purity to the series, i think it's fine Mario Party carries the gloss, i think Mario Kart ought to dial back on the excess. I think most people focus on just the unfairness in the games, like Kalimari Desert I read is awful because the train offers too much randomness, but i love the visual minimalism of the level and always thought the train was simple and brilliant. I like M64's tracks for their length, and the sparse backgrounds, there's a peacefulness to being way out in front of the rest. Tbh, your opinions on MK64 in the past far exceed my whole post in terms of an alternative take, though they are very interesting.

It's not yearning for the past, it's identifying the giant leaps made THEN and the feeling it gave THEN, and wanting new games in a genre to make similiar leaps, aware of the 20 years of pop culture everyone has consumed in the mean time. So, merely carrying on where DKR left the genre wouldn't be enough. Beetle Adventure Racing had you leap through the air into a volcano and dodge T Rexs, both exciting then as a teenager when a few years before I was racing around a dirt course driving a Sabaru. I want a kart racing game to be strawberry floating mental, I want an embrace of full on glitching, I want to race through the falling vomit of an alien, I want to be at the mercy of an malevolent robot, I want tracks that morph and transform, a lap to lap major restructuring, a track that's graphically unfinished why not, a Daffy Duck style being drawn as you race 4th wall breaking perception altering.

But it is Nintendo I know. Could at least have done a Pikmin level. All those creatures.

Item boxes: They don't really need to stand out if they pop up in your path every 10 seconds of a race, it's just a preference really, meant to express how simple and dry and minimal the graphics could be. I want more of the playfulness I think of something like Yoshi's Island, graphically more in tune with that and the original Super Mario Bros. Yoshi's Island uses monsters and creatures in a way few games do. Mario Kart picks a theme for a level then constructs it, it's not an organic approach really, they define too much of what you expect before you even begin to race. Just realised there's a subway level in the recent ones, urgh. So yeah..less literal, more expressionistic and playful. It's really the opposite of realism I want. So Nintendo might do a 'Monster Land' and it might be as sterile as walking around a toy shop or something, i want more elegance and interactivity rather than just excessive graphical detail littering the track.

I mean, Neo Bowser City looks cool in the fly over, but it's all prettiness kept at a distance, and doesn't tie into Bowser at all. I think Toad's Turnpike in M64 makes little sense as well, but it's at least an idea not seen before, and distinct with it. One of the first tracks I tried and was pretty amazed by it. Mario is supposed to be part of a created world, and Mario Kart should add to it. The update of Toad's Turnpike in Double Dash did away with the dodging trucks on the motorway aspect except for a tiny bit of the track which seemed so confused. They re use far too many of the same tricks, jumps landing on mushrooms, the track splitting off, the odd underwater splash, rotating hazards. MK64 at the least was more pure with it, Yoshi Valley fitted the character and was pretty mysterious, not knowing who was in first place. If you're going to do a track with multiple routes where you have to figure out the quickest way , yeah why not commit to it entirely? They could expand on these ideas. So Nintendo apply the general form to every track, regardless of how inventive it appears. They're not being specific, thinking; this track will go heavily in this direction. So by 'purity' i include this.

User avatar
jawafour
Member
Member
Joined in 2012

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by jawafour » Tue Feb 13, 2018 8:21 am

Crumbs, that's quite a thread title, Suffo'!

To be honest I have only dabbled with Mario Kart until 8 arrived so I can't really compare versions to any great extent. I have played 8 quite a lot on both Wii U and Switch, though, and it feels hard to imagine that Kart has "gone wrong" when the multi-player action is, in my view, tremendous fun. Single-player I'm not so fond of but I have rarely played it in that mode.

I like some of the ideas you have suggested and I would like to see them arrive. Even so, I can't quite be sure if your main thrust with this thread is "Mario Kart is bad" or "Mario Kart is good but I want it to be better".

User avatar
Met
Member
Joined in 2015

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by Met » Tue Feb 13, 2018 8:58 am

i don't really know what to say other than that I disagree with almost everything you said, but I'll try anyway.

Suffocate Peon wrote:MK64 is probably the better multiplayer game. But DKR is the better singleplayer, and still is. Replaying it recently it wasn't just a nostalgia rush, it's genuinely good. The silver coin challenge idea isn't new or bold, but it just reminded me how simply satisfying a kart racing game can be, needing to take these difficult lines and routes whilst still maintaining a good lead. DKR came out of nowhere at the time, it was the sheer adventure of the game, the ease at which it innovated, Rare were peerless at the time for all the ideas they'd include in their games, that as a teenager was so exciting. Around that time Beetle Adventure Racing came out as well, as well as Snowboard Kids. Now, to others these might be rough games, but i don't care about polish personally. Their enthusiasm mattered more, and in a way, like Rockstar's PS2 games, the roughness added to their charm.

The obvious point about the space levels was the surprise, even though they're brilliant anyway with some great music. It wouldn't be nearly as cool just unlocking a new cup, you had to enter the hub and be in awe of the potential. And space isn't all that out there, but none of its zones hinted at entering that type of theme.


Mario Kart has literally always had a space course. It's had volcano courses. It's had jungle courses. It's had ice courses. It's had mountain courses. It's had underwater courses. It's had sky courses. It's had city courses. It's had castle courses. It's had toybox courses. It's had mechanical courses. It's had courses in the future. It's had courses in the past. It's had haunted house courses. It's had beach courses. It's had a course on a boat. It's had desert and dessert courses.

I couldn't care less about how you drive from one course to another. Drive through a giant painting? Get dropped by Lakitu? That's not why I'm here. I'm not here to drive around inside Peach's castle, I'm here to throw shells at my friends.

Suffocate Peon wrote:I think, really, how can racing games in the late 90s inspire more than the ones 20 years later?

I hate all forms of tacky glitz, and want continuity with the original Super Mario Bros. This is a stylistic taste thing maybe others disagree with. I wouldn't want blocks on the ground like Super Mario Kart but they've obviously tried different things before settling on the ? diamond boxes of MK64, wanting them to be sparkling and stand out, even if it looks tacky.

I want a visual purity to the series, i think it's fine Mario Party carries the gloss, i think Mario Kart ought to dial back on the excess. I think most people focus on just the unfairness in the games, like Kalimari Desert I read is awful because the train offers too much randomness, but i love the visual minimalism of the level and always thought the train was simple and brilliant. I like M64's tracks for their length, and the sparse backgrounds, there's a peacefulness to being way out in front of the rest. Tbh, your opinions on MK64 in the past far exceed my whole post in terms of an alternative take, though they are very interesting.


Yeah, I also liked driving through barren, single-coloured expanses with nothing happening.

Suffocate Peon wrote:It's not yearning for the past, it's identifying the giant leaps made THEN and the feeling it gave THEN, and wanting new games in a genre to make similiar leaps, aware of the 20 years of pop culture everyone has consumed in the mean time. So, merely carrying on where DKR left the genre wouldn't be enough. Beetle Adventure Racing had you leap through the air into a volcano and dodge T Rexs, both exciting then as a teenager when a few years before I was racing around a dirt course driving a Sabaru. I want a kart racing game to be strawberry floating mental, I want an embrace of full on glitching, I want to race through the falling vomit of an alien, I want to be at the mercy of an malevolent robot, I want tracks that morph and transform, a lap to lap major restructuring, a track that's graphically unfinished why not, a Daffy Duck style being drawn as you race 4th wall breaking perception altering.


Pretty much everything you described is in the games already. Grumble Volcano is, funnily enough, inside a volcano, that collapses as you race with falling fireballs. I'm not sure what you mean by "at the mercy of an malevolent robot" but there are Thwomps, giant statues that attack you, and all manner of stage hazards in various courses. The only thing you have a point on is the one being graphically designed as you race, which could be a decent Mario Paint track. But at this point I ask, what happened to "i think Mario Kart ought to dial back on the excess" and "I hate all forms of tacky glitz"?

Suffocate Peon wrote:But it is Nintendo I know. Could at least have done a Pikmin level. All those creatures.


There's literally 2 F-Zero tracks, an Animal Crossing track and a Hyrule Castle track. Even that's more than they needed since it's, y'know, Mario Kart and not Nintendo Kart, but semantics.

Suffocate Peon wrote:Item boxes: They don't really need to stand out if they pop up in your path every 10 seconds of a race, it's just a preference really, meant to express how simple and dry and minimal the graphics could be. I want more of the playfulness I think of something like Yoshi's Island, graphically more in tune with that and the original Super Mario Bros. Yoshi's Island uses monsters and creatures in a way few games do. Mario Kart picks a theme for a level then constructs it, it's not an organic approach really, they define too much of what you expect before you even begin to race. Just realised there's a subway level in the recent ones, urgh. So yeah..less literal, more expressionistic and playful. It's really the opposite of realism I want. So Nintendo might do a 'Monster Land' and it might be as sterile as walking around a toy shop or something, i want more elegance and interactivity rather than just excessive graphical detail littering the track.


Toads have subways, I guess. Mushroom Kingdom commuters need to get to work somehow. It's a fun track so who cares? For individual item boxes per level, sure, why not? But at the same time what does it add? I thought you hated all forms of tacky glitz? The current item boxes are eye catching and you can tell at a glance if the line you're taking will net you something or not.

Suffocate Peon wrote:I mean, Neo Bowser City looks cool in the fly over, but it's all prettiness kept at a distance, and doesn't tie into Bowser at all. I think Toad's Turnpike in M64 makes little sense as well, but it's at least an idea not seen before, and distinct with it. One of the first tracks I tried and was pretty amazed by it. Mario is supposed to be part of a created world, and Mario Kart should add to it. The update of Toad's Turnpike in Double Dash did away with the dodging trucks on the motorway aspect except for a tiny bit of the track which seemed so confused. They re use far too many of the same tricks, jumps landing on mushrooms, the track splitting off, the odd underwater splash, rotating hazards. MK64 at the least was more pure with it, Yoshi Valley fitted the character and was pretty mysterious, not knowing who was in first place. If you're going to do a track with multiple routes where you have to figure out the quickest way , yeah why not commit to it entirely? They could expand on these ideas. So Nintendo apply the general form to every track, regardless of how inventive it appears. They're not being specific, thinking; this track will go heavily in this direction. So by 'purity' i include this.


Bowser has had almost as many kingdom designs as he has games that feature good looks at them. Why wouldn't toads have a city? You think the Mushroom Kingdom is just the castle and the gardens around it? Rogueport is a pretty big port town, for example. Mario has been in hundreds of games, there's probably justification for literally anything. as for gimmicks, there's a healthy mix of gimmick tracks where you have to dodge wigglers and drive through leaf piles for a hidden mushroom to raw racing.

tl;dr: yeah, I suppose better single player content would be nice, but I barely even play the grand prix modes as is because Mario Kart is a party game and I'm probably not going to boot it up unless I have 3 other people. Otherwise, everything you want is already in the game or just flat out foreign to me, I guess.

User avatar
Jezo
Member
Joined in 2015
AKA: Jezo

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by Jezo » Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:17 am

Suffocate Peon wrote:
Jezo wrote:
Suffocate Peon wrote:
Jezo wrote:I started skipping through when you said the new mechanics in Double Dash didn't change the gameplay. That's just straight up wrong.


How?


The ability to hold 2 items and swap them on a whim added a new strategic twist to item management. The character on the back could also be knocked down temporarily making the characters unable to switch. It's not a massive change or some revolutionary new way to play, but it still changes the gameplay from that of regular Mario Kart.


Well that's very slight.


Glad you agree.

The ability to upgrade items in DKR is a gameplay difference compared to Mario Kart because it changes the way you think about item use.

We're done here lol.

Image
Image
User avatar
The Watching Artist
Scrub
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by The Watching Artist » Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:39 am

Deluxe

Image
User avatar
Tomous
I Pissed My Pants
Joined in 2010
AKA: Vampbuster

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by Tomous » Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:52 am

SP, you want Mario Kart to dial back the excess and have simplistic, strawberry floating mental courses with alien vomit?

User avatar
FudgeDiver
Member
Joined in 2018

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by FudgeDiver » Tue Feb 13, 2018 12:15 pm

And you should win things for playing

User avatar
Trelliz
Member ♥
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Where Mario Kart Went Wrong
by Trelliz » Tue Feb 13, 2018 12:16 pm

Met wrote:Racing games are mechanically a lot shallower in that respect because your main goal isn't outplaying your opponent, it's outplaying the track. And the track isn't going to throw out a surprise raw super at the start of the second lap.


For kart racing, sure, but in even half way sim/simcade games you very much are outplaying opponents. You have to keep pace, slipstream opponents, pick overtake points and even fake them out to open a line, all while stopping the guy behind you doing the same while staying in the right gear and not going beyond the grip of your tires at the same time and crashing into them or the wall. And keeping an eye on tire wear and fuel use - do you pit first to undercut and spook them into pitting unecessarily or keep going on older tires to get some distance.

Sorry if i'm going on but i find the argument that racing games are shallow is often made in a perjoratively reductive context.

Tragic Magic wrote:RTCW is a mega plex of origami, you young bugger, enjoy the taste.
Women are so lovely.

Never pre-order or pre-purchase a console, game or season pass.
Forza 7 lootboxes microtransactions

Return to “Games”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Frank, kerr9000, Pedz, Photek, Somebody Else's Problem, Vermilion and 44 guests