Why is Kirby's big fat damn Switch debut not as grand or as anticipated by casuals as Mario's or Zelda's...

Why is Kirby's big fat damn Switch debut not as grand or as anticipated by casuals as Mario's or Zelda's? What is HAL not doing right?

>Kirby
>anticipated by casuals

because even kirby is too casual for casuals

Kirby is just nowhere as popular as Mario and Zelda, also the game looks like more of the same, fans will buy it but others ignore it.

>Megaman X
>More difficult than standard Megaman

What?

Super Mario bros 3 is hardly casual to beat

>Metroid harder than Megaman
Nice meme.
The only thing funnier is that I've seen people who suck incredibly hard at Kirby.
Kirby is never anticipated, he's just...there. He sells well, has loyal fandom, well recieved by critics. Never GOTY material, never absolute shit.

Mario was the triumphant return of 3D Mario.
Zelda was re-imagining the series.
This is just "another" Kirby game. Everyone is getting it, but it just doesn't generate the same amount of hype.

megaman is for casual faggots who cannot into level desing and need a predetermined path to follow

Kirby games are low risk/high reward for Hal and Nintendo, the core game hasn't innovated whatsoever since Superstar and likely never will.

Because I've already played that game before on the Wii, 3DS, DS, SNES and GBA. Kirby games are still great for the literal toddlers they're aimed at, but I'm gonna sit a decade out and see if Nintendo actually changes the formula a little for established fans.

where's DK?

>More of the same

>Ability fusion returns after a decade
>Animal Friends come back after 2 decades
>Buff Dedede
Sure thing dude.

Kirby games are fucking whack.

Kirby games are always really good at doing something completely fucking bonkers for a finale. The finale in Robobot was literally something straight out of fucking Starfox and it was spectacular.

Should have been 3d kirby

Robobot's finale was Starfox meets Gurren Lagan and it was incredible.

There're always spin-offs with different gameplay in between main games, though. You didn't like any of them?

Kirby isn't as popular as either of those and his adventures have gotten kind of samey since the Wii era.

Nobody wants 3D Kirby. Like Castlevania, it works best in 2D.

>Cave Story
>easier than megaman or metroid
You are fucking stupid

>Kero Blaster
>harder then Cave Story
Lolwut

>his adventures have gotten kind of samey since the Wii era.

You mean since the SNES era.

Robobot's finale was better than anything from Starfox Zero

There were 4 completely different Kirby games on that system.

Because every modern Kirby game feels the same.

>Yoshee harder than kirby
Nyet

And the gameplay hasn't innovated since.

And no adding robots isn't an innovation.

I always see Kirby (and Yoshi) as Nintendo's B-tier licenses. They'll sell, they're (generally) be fairly well received, but they won't really innovate or do anything particularly spectacular. Doesn't help that they provide pretty much no challenge.

Because its been the exact same fucking game since RtDL?

It needs something new. Like being 3D or something.

Casuals have probably never played it but it's secretly Nintendo's GOAT franchise

>And the gameplay hasn't innovated since
64 introduced ability mixing. Amazing Mirror introduced 4 player co-op.

>Like being 3D or something.
see

You mean (you) don't want 3D Kirby.

Kumazaki has pretty much made New Super Kirby

I'm not calling them bad but to everyone who isn't a hardcore fan they all rook same

So two games in over 20 years actually did something slightly different. I wouldn't exactly call that an accomplishment.

Because it's Christmas so people are focusing on 'what can I get right-the-fuck-now
Also Kirby's a big name, but not a big franchise

As an aside, is the new Metroid game on 3ds good?
I haven't touched that thing in a while

They're intended to introduce children to the Nintendo brand, which is why they play so safe with the games.

>Mega Man X harder than Classic Mega Man
What retard made this?

This chart is so wrong it's not even funny

It's like trying to make Smash Bros a 3D fighter; it sounds like a good idea on paper until you realize that the existing control scheme doesn't work in three dimensions.

Lack of innovation. People would feel the same about Mario if it was still a 2D platformer and LoZ if it was only ever top down. But both have re-evaluated their conventions several times to deliver fresh new experiences.

HAL play it too safe, they think 1 new gimmick and the same gameplay as ever is enough. But they should bother making a 3D Kirby platformer with some real new ideas if they want to impress.

Give me one reason why a 3d control scheme for Kirby is not viable

But it worked perfectly fine.

The new Mario and Zelda games were ambitious, took some risks, and tried something a little new.
Star Allies looks like fun, but it looks to be pretty much the same engine from the past 3 games + spinoffs, and the only "new" features are borrowed from Super Star or Crystal Shards.
I'll still buy and enjoy the game but its nothing ambitious or exciting, so there's nothing to build hype.

they stopped trying after ssu
>not a Kirby game
>subgames were better than main game
>one-time gimmick with super star gameplay
>ROM collection
>one time gimmick with super star gameplay
>two glorified subgames
>a worse Canvas Curse
>one time gimmick with super star gameplay
>two glorified subgames
>mediocre arena fighter
>one time gimmick with super star gameplay

>power mixing
>every level had a distinguished atmosphere
>cool 2.5D angles integrated with the level design

Now it's just
>Superstar powers with a new one a little now and then
>Every level is "wheee happy"
>levels are entirely 2D aligned with simpler visuals

>What is HAL not doing right?
They keep rehashing return to dreamland

>cool 2.5D angles integrated with the level design
I wish Robobot did that more often. Haven't seen it in Star Allies.

The feel of progression was crazy, I can't believe it's the only Kirby game that's done it so well. Like, you can tell the next stage begins where the current one ends, after the little break room they always do, so it feels like you're travelling.

It's too slow. It needs a turbo mode.

>It's like trying to make Smash Bros a 3D fighter
It plays fine. It just severely lacks content.

Fucking Ripple Star, man.

Kirby thrives off being able to perform multiple different attacks with only one button and directionals. 3D movement means more complexity in controlling Kirby, therefore the controls for Kirby's abilities also becomes more complex. Increasing the complexity makes the game harder for beginners, who are the target audience for Kirby games.

If you really want a 3D Kirby you might as well play Super Mario Odyssey.

I miss the more "natural" level design. I'm sick of blocks.

It would be slow as fuck with wide empty levels

>>cool 2.5D angles integrated with the level design
Planet Robobot has this this in abundance

Kirby is a tertiary Nintendo game, it's popular but not gargantuan like Mario or Zelda.
It'll sell anything between 0.5 and 2m

have you even touched 3D rumble, blowout blast, or the new thing

I don't fuck with Eshop shovelware garbage.

We're talking about the core series here.

>no
then quit spouting bullshit about it not working when those literally make it work

>>power mixing
who cares if every ability can only do one thing
superstar-style is more fun
and a variant of power-mixing is in anyway

>I don't fuck with Eshop shovelware garbage
One is in Robobot.

Yeah and they're all garbage

>he guys you know how kirby has big tall levels for you to run and float and fight through?
>well fuck that noise. Have some tiny catwalks, an awful overhead camera, and even MORE linear levels!

Again, not core Kirby games. They only work by removing features from the 2D games, not adding to them. But I guess some people are desperate to preserve a stale franchise.

So like a minigame? Again, we're talking in terms of core gameplay here.

>THE CONTROL SCHEME DOESN'T WORK
>it does in these
>BUT THE LEVEL DESIGN
literally never even praised that

>a 3d kirby game without copy abilities is barely functional
>GUYS THIS COULD TOTALLY BE A REEL GAME

Retard

Battle Royale is gimped as fuck. The only thing it does right is making 2D Kirby not slow as shit.

>hey look at these neat 3D Kirby spinoffs!
>so what if they completely lack what makes 2D Kirby enjoyable?
>what were we discussing again? lol

I really hope you're just pretending to be retarded.

>it does in these
It doesn't. You don't have a bunch of ability moves and some have been simplified.

This thread got me thinking. What if these glorified 3D minigames are just HAL slowly building on an actual 3D game? The first few tested the controls of regular Kirby, and the newest added simplifies abilities. What if they're just slowly checking whether Kirby is compatible with full 3D or not?

Are you faggots retarded? All he's saying is that 3D controls work fine in Kirby.

>implying any of them have even tried the modes
Shit, there's one faggot who didn't even play Robobot

But they don't. The copy abilities alone are pure trash in 3d

No, you are retarded.

No one is saying you cannot make a 3D Kirby game.

What we are saying is that a 3D Kirby game would be inherently inferior to the existing 2D Kirby gameplay, because what you lose in the transition to 3D is the very thing that people like the most about 2D Kirby.

>No one is saying you cannot make a 3D Kirby game

>What we are saying is that a 3D Kirby game would be inherently inferior to the existing 2D Kirby gameplay, because what you lose in the transition to 3D is the very thing that people like the most about 2D Kirby.

So 3D Kirby would be inferior to 2D Kirby because it wouldn't be 2D Kirby? Fuck off, it wouldn't be the same but there's nothing to say it couldn't be on equal level or even better than 2D Kirby.

In which case Kirby Switch is an indicator that they failed.

>3D is inferior to 2D because it isn't 2D
Never mind that they could potentially make a good 3D game.

>implying SA took effort to churn out for the Switch

Or maybe they're gonna keep the 3D minigames going a little bit more, until they feel they found the proper formula. Even then, I just said they may be checking whether making a 3D Kirby is feasible, not that they plan to make the rest of the games 3D.

t. illiterate

It would be inferior because, as pointed out already, 3D Kirby requires over-simplified copy abilities and level design. Moving Kirby in 3 dimensions means you can't map multiple copy attacks to the cardinal directions, not to mention navigating a floating character in a 3D space is inherently less precise.

Name any Kirby game since Superstar that required real effort to make.

In which case they're wasting their resources.

see

What are the benefits of making Kirby 3D?

>Wasting their resources
In minigames that take an hour at most to win? I'd say they're playing it pretty safe.

>Name any Kirby game since Superstar that required real effort to make
Air Ride
Canvas Curse
Mass Attack

DL3

Adding to that, 64, Amazing Mirror.

Tilt N Tumble

>3D Kirby requires over-simplified copy abilities

Because Kirby's abilities aren't already overly simple. There are very few moves that require more than 1 button.
Have you ever played a 3D game? Why would the level design have to be simplified?

Innovation. Something the series has been lacking for quite a while.

>It would be inferior because, as pointed out already, 3D Kirby requires over-simplified copy abilities and level design. Moving Kirby in 3 dimensions means you can't map multiple copy attacks to the cardinal directions.

Why couldn't the moves just be tied to different combinations of button presses like 3D Mario? It's like you're trying to make 3D Kirby seem impossible by trying to force a hypothetical 3D Kirby into a 2D Kirby skeleton.

>I'd say they're playing it pretty safe.
For a good reason, Kirby just isn't fun in 3D.

I'd say Air Ride is as close as you can get to making Kirby work in 3D, and even without the air machines it's a far cry from the 2D titles in terms of quality gameplay.

Too bad they buried it along with DL2 and Crystal Shards.

>3D Kirby requires over-simplified copy abilities and level design. Moving Kirby in 3 dimensions means you can't map multiple copy attacks to the cardinal directions
The majority of the abilities would work without any changes though. I mean, sure, you'd have things like Sword missing some moves or being unable to use Gazer Spiral but the rest use basic mixes of single input/charge.

The level design would need to be dumbed down because Kirby can now fucking fly in any direction. It would be Mario 3D world-lite garbage, as seen in 3D rumble

>as seen in 3D rumble
Which nerfed his flight

>innovation
Worthless buzzword. What EXACTLY would 3D bring to kirby?

And he's slower and less fun to control because of it

Fuck off, retard. You don't know what innovation is? No wonder you like this shitty baby series.

>The level design would need to be dumbed down because Kirby can now fucking fly in any direction.

They could give Kirby limited floating like Kirby 64.