How come Donkey Kong games get far less attention than Mario even though they're objectively better in pretty much...

How come Donkey Kong games get far less attention than Mario even though they're objectively better in pretty much every regard?

Nintendo makes more Mario games, he's their mascot nigga.

>ywn live in tropical paradise with the Kongs

Because Mario is the more popular brand. Also, a lot of people now-a-days think DK games are too hard.

They're too hard for casuals.

That review frustrates me

It's like he reviewed it based on the first world, not even maybe first 2 levels

There is absolutely nothing repetitive about Tropical Freeze's level design, the only, ONLY time i can agree is the bonus games, but he treats it like it's a problem for the entire game

>they're objectively better in pretty much every regard?
Hasn't been true since the SNES

"cheap" oh boo hoo, you have to understand and respect the consistent mechanics of the fucking game

yet they suck sony's cock for every shitty playable movie they put out

Yeah I don't understand. There's almost a new thing every level.

How do Donkey Kong manages to look more souless than the Rare's model even with better tech?

WE

Because you can't really innovate with DK. Hell the modern series plays the exact same as the snes series, and the spin offs don't quite hit the right notes

Wuz kongz???

Because Only deranged people with monkey fetishes think dk games are better than mario

>harsh checkpoints during boss battles

Motherfucker, having checkpoints at all during a boss battle is way too lenient already.

They sell pretty damn well and are immediately recognizable in other products, however attempting to compare its "attention" with the amount Mario gets is setting yourself up for failure.

but thats wrong

I was surprised at how much of a better game it was over 3D World.

There's something about Rare's old renders that make them look more... "comfy".
Now it's like Donkey looks less plastic but less interesting.

The only thing that Retro didn't do better than Rare was Cranky's character.

It's Gamespot in particular that makes me think Nintendo will eventually stop giving out review copies and instead give copies to YouTubers to do month long previews on.

I mean, what are they getting out of reviews? A day before release write up? That's not promotion. That's not letting people make an informed decision. Hell, Nintendo literally give out a write up with their game outlining the games attributes.

Alternatively, force reviewers to include a screenshot of their play time so readers can tell if they bothered to actually play it.

3d world was pretty and had some cute moments, but Donkey Kong has all that and some actual bite to it.

There is nothing wrong with having a challenging platformer, but Mario has been lacking in recent years.

...And you had to post the worst DKC to illustrate this.

it's the hair
Retro makes it look like fuzz while the Rare renders look more like thick hair

Because they aren't objectively better and you should probably stop using that word until you know what it means.

Because Nintendo's too busy milking Mario for all they can.

It gets better. Pic related.

I don't know how he can say TF was repetitive when every "world" in Rayman Legends followed the EXACT same pattern;

>Rayman level
>Rayman level
>Murphy level
>Rayman level
>Murphy level
>Boss intro level
>Boss
>Rhythm level

But hey, it's easy and checkpoints are handed out every time you blink so it gets a free pass.

They are objectively better though.

What's subjective is how much you enjoy them. It's fine if you enjoy, for example, NSMBU more than DKC:TF, but the latter is still the better game. Quality is objective.

That's not exactly a good comparison, a repetition in what stages are available isn't the same as level design

Your anger makes you a littl too biased. Rayman has some fantastic level design. But so does TF, in what sense the level design is repetitive if it's clear for anyone that played the game for more than the first two or three levels that Retro really did a lot of work to evade that

Explain how they're objectively better.

>the modern series plays the exact same as the snes series
But that's fucking wrong, retard.

>ywn

Yeah, they're real eye candy for some reason.

Explain

...

Everything looks like plasticine

They aren't as accessible.

This graphics style is off the hook. Too bad we'll never see a DK game that actually looks like this.

That might be why, dem 1994 Silicon Graphics CG
also nice get

The Rare games are slow paced and atmospheric and focus on exploration and on gimmicks (animals, companions, etc)
The Retro games are fast paced to the point that most of the time you can't even take it slow since the level literally falls apart as you land on it, and is focused on precise platforming, with gimmicks reduced to the minimum.
Even the controls themselves are differenti.

>The Retro games are fast paced to the point that most of the time you can't even take it slow
Only certain levels, and the animals, gimmicks, exploration, etc, is still there. They're a slight evolution on the same gameplay.

Half of the levels in TF work like that, and it keeps increasing till in the last world that's 80% of the levels. Every bonus level too.
And the gimmicks are extremely toned down, just see one animal vs all the ones of the old games.

Donkey Kong Country gets too hard for the average casual.

The only legit negative critiscms is the dull design and judging by the other 2 criticisms I'm guessing that the person didn't get very far in the game and probably didn't even get to see the different environments. I haven't played TF yet but DKC usually slowly progress environment types throughout worlds.