• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Mario Kart 8 Deluxe review thread

Neoxon

Junior Member
There should be enough buttons, accelerate, brake, hop/drift, use item etc.

It's very likely it supports single Joy-Con controls.
I'm pretty sure you can use individual Joy-Cons for instant 2-player. It was shown in the Switch reveal trailer.
 

Arttemis

Member
I can't even remember the trailer.

Edit: Oh wait, it's the one with the two guys in the van. Now I remember.



I didn't want to jump the gun.
People expect flagship games to not support the standardized controller that comes with the system?
 

deleted

Member
Hopefully Nintendo isn't done with the game and will work on the few flaws that still remain.

Mainly better online features, a stock mode for battle and further battles stages, tracks and characters. DLC would sell in the millions for this game..
 

Seanlole

Member
I can't believe this game got higher reviews than the original. I't like a new entry for the series.
I have to buy it again.8
 

marc^o^

Nintendo's Pro Bono PR Firm
Gameblog.fr reviewer says he was really impressed with HD Rumble in this game. So whether it's HD Rumble or not, it seems it's better than in the original (knowing GamePad rumble was awful).
 

Fliesen

Member
Pretty much an instant buy for me then. Thanks!

same here - i love the fact that one switch is basically a all-in-one portable "instant multiplayer" machine, like the ones we had way-back-when
nintendo---micro-vs-system---punch-out----loose--p-image-321235-grande.jpg

with both controllers being part of the main package.

That console's gonna go far - i'm sure of it.
 
It's actually more expensive to buy the Wii U version at this point and you get less content. You have to buy the DLC packs and don't get the upgraded battle mode.
 
That's fine, but that's just your subjective take. I don't see why a specific type of upgrade or improvement of single player is expected just because the release is full price. But it's not unreasonable for you to feel it's not enough value for you, of course.
Okay, this is just a pet peeve of mine but what's the point in telling me it's my subjective take? I thought I already made that clear when I used "I" and "imo"?

I don't think it's that out there to expect them to improve the SP if they're already going to charge full price again on top of going out of their way to improve another lacking mode with the battle mode and making this version portable friendly. It just seems weird that they didn't do anything for the SP part of the game. But maybe they haven't heard any criticism about it over MK8's run so that's why they didn't bother, or maybe they just don't care. I mean it's clearly not that big of an issue for most people here so eh.
 

cw_sasuke

If all DLC came tied to $13 figurines, I'd consider all DLC to be free
The price point discussion would make more sense if the WiiU MK8 was a cheap game could be bought for 20 bucks or so. But no it's still full price and thats without DLC... Expecting a improved version that includes all the content for a new system to be cheaper just shows how delusional some people are to market realities.

Then again some people expected the Switch to be less than 200 as well.
 

jts

...hate me...
I wonder if the Mario Kart team is working on 9, now that Arms is almost out

Don't see the need for a Mario Kart 9 on the Switch, seeing as MK8D is a full price release that hits all the boxes, and there's no further significant graphical upgrades to be had with the Switch.

Also, it will be an evergreen title, sales wise.

It's a soft transition to Mario Kart as a service IMO, and DLC is all it needs.
 

DonShula

Member
I'm honestly not seeing how the pricing talk has any place in this review thread. The Switch version has more content and comes out three years after the original. The price is objectively justified.

Whether an individual finds that justified price to be compelling is subjective and doesn't diminish the game's review score in any way. Complaining about the price in a thread dedicated to reviews seems pointless. A reviewer has no idea whether you bought the original, when you bought it, or how long you played it. Why would you expect them to make a value judgment on your behalf? They review the game in front of them at the price Nintendo sets.
 
Is there any review that shows how online leaderboards work? With the paid online I would expect some improvements here but I bet Nintendo didn't even bother

Same question about the Mario Kart TV mode which was quite limited in the end.
 
I'm honestly not seeing how the pricing talk has any place in this review thread. The Switch version has more content and comes out three years after the original. The price is objectively justified.

Review threads are a good place for pricing talk, actually.

They're threads that are explicitly about how much value a game has.

You can express value through a review score, but you can also express them through a dollar amount.

(Personally, I'd rather games be scored by dollar amounts, as that's the kind of value consumers have to assign to them when buying them anyway.)
 
Cant wait for this next week! Switch is my first Nintendo console since my n64 and My first MK since the N64 days. Soooo hyped! One thing great about never owning a wii u is that these "ports" are all new games to me. Anyone else going full digital with this game? Have my 128 gb micro sd card coming today and I feel this is a perfect game to go digital...plus I never have to take out my zelda cart then :)
 
(Personally, I'd rather games be scored by dollar amounts, as that's the kind of value consumers have to assign to them when buying them anyway.)

Oh god no... You're allowed to have a personal preference but I would actively hate that approach. Though it'd be entertaining to see reviews in which games "score" dramatically higher than their MSRP. I'm imagining the Witcher 3 being "reviewed" at $200.
 

ZSaberLink

Media Create Maven
So it beat the original's score due to DLC and the battle mode? I guess the battle mode meant a lot, and to be fair 48 tracks is great.
 

TS-08

Member
Okay, this is just a pet peeve of mine but what's the point in telling me it's my subjective take? I thought I already made that clear when I used "I" and "imo"?

I don't think it's that out there to expect them to improve the SP if they're already going to charge full price again on top of going out of their way to improve another lacking mode with the battle mode and making this version portable friendly. It just seems weird that they didn't do anything for the SP part of the game. But maybe they haven't heard any criticism about it over MK8's run so that's why they didn't bother, or maybe they just don't care. I mean it's clearly not that big of an issue for most people here so eh.

This was your post that I first responded to.

You would think a full price rerelease would have an improved single player component

This is worded like it's some kind of objective evaluation - like it should just be assumed by everyone that it didn't improve. I initially responded that it did improve with the addition of the DLC. But then you responded with a fully subjective take about how that isn't good enough and what it would take for the game to be sufficiently improved for you. This is what I was referring to.

Get it?
 
Right now it has a Metacritic Score Equal to P5. What the hell is with this year and really damn high scores. At this rate SMO is a shoo-in for a crazy score.
 
Oh god no... You're allowed to have a personal preference but I would actively hate that approach. Though it'd be entertaining to see reviews in which games "score" dramatically higher than their MSRP. I'm imagining the Witcher 3 being "reviewed" at $200.

I mean, I don't think it'd actually work. The big problem with this approach in practice is that reviewers often don't pay for their games and so you'd probably see a lot of BS mental gymnastics like you just described. There's also this weird (and not necessarily correct) perception that old games are worth less than new games just because they're old.

I don't think anyone would ever arrive at the "correct" money-based rating system, just like how there's lots of disagreement about the best way to rate games using a numerical rating system.

But I don't really care whether a game is a 10/10 or a 6/10; I care about how much of my money I should bother to spend on it.
 
This was your post that I first responded to.

This is worded like it's some kind of objective evaluation - like it should just be assumed by everyone that it didn't improve. I initially responded that it did improve with the addition of the DLC. But then you responded with a fully subjective take about how that isn't good enough and what it would take for the game to be sufficiently improved for you. This is what I was referring to.

Get it?
That doesn't make any sense, you used subjective take on my second post where it's clearly illustrated that it's an opinion. There is no point in telling me that. I don't think that first post reads like an objective fact either when it starts with "you would think".
 
Glad you're sensible!

I think it was interesting that the fallout to MK having a great single player was Capcom's SFV ( another pretty bare bones experience) responding by adding a (albeit half baked) single player experience. I don't think Mario Kart needs that, but I do find it funny, that despite someone thinking the SP was bare bones, that it didn't effect the game's review. Guarantee another IP with the same layout would have been docked for that. Like DooM was for the multiplayer being bare bones and people shitting on that.

Probably best to have a debate on this stuff outside the review thread tho for MK8 deluxe tbh. Would be a decent thread/debate.

Agreed, I also think it's an interesting topic. I don't think it's specific to Nintendo, it's more about how good the multiplayer is on Mario Kart (and Overwatch and Rocket League to mention some non-Nintendo games). Perhaps the journalists and part of the public didn't like the MP on SFV enough to offset the shit SP and overall package, like they thought "yeah this is cool, but not cool enough to blind me from how little content there is", while Mario Kart made them go HOLY SHIT THIS IS AWESOME I DON'T CARE ABOUT ANYTHING WOO. It's not just about the amount of content, but also the quality in it. If you're going to do just one thing, it better be a damn good thing so people don't notice your lack of versatility.

DOOM being knocked from having a bad MP is kind of poor form on the critics because IMO the campaign is so ridiculously fun that I'd be pretty okay if it went the Wolfenstein route and didn't even have a MP mode. And in fact TNO was criticized for lacking MP, but that to me is not a bias towards Nintendo (or Blizzard or Psyonix) and just people expecting a shooter to be have that mode because of the expectations set by Call of Duty. That's one of many reasons I'm really not a fan of current gaming journalism. While I wouldn't call them biased, some reviewers can be at times a bit mindless with their criticism.
 

Bert

Member
So this is probably a really stupid question, but it's four player local, right?

What's the cheapest option for three extra controllers that aren't split joycons?
 

TS-08

Member
That doesn't make any sense, you used subjective take on my second post where it's clearly illustrated that it's an opinion. There is no point in telling me that. I don't think that first post reads like an objective fact either when it starts with "you would think".

"You would think" sounds objective because you are wording it like it is assumed by others and is based on some kind of precedent. That first post also assumed single player wasn't improved from the original release, but it was.

My pointing it out when I did makes sense because I was pointing out that your posts went from basically "they didn't improve the single player and are charging full price" to "they didn't improve it enough for me to pay full price," which is different.

But this isn't really an interesting conversation and I don't see you backing down, so I'm just going to drop it.
 
Top Bottom