Do you think that Nintendo is abandoning their casual focus...

It's nothing like that. The Switch has just lived long enough and been successful enough that we've reached the point where Nintendo hit their quota for the big crowdpleasers and can now make more experimental or unusual shit.

>Release one of the simplest and easiest Kirby's that can be 100%'d significantly faster than any others
>Abandoning their casual focus
Wut?

It's not really experimental though, if anything it's less experimental. They're doing stuff the rest of the industry has been doing for a decade. Like adding a progression system to your game is not an experiment in 2022, not having it would be the weird thing yet that's what they've been doing - even with RPGs, a genre that was created entirely for progression systems. It's possible you're right and that as soon as the next console comes out they'll go back to what they used to be doing, but it feels like they're actually changing to me.

Post the 100% screen and your play time with a timestamp.

It's 3D, which immediately cuts out a huge chunk of casual players. I know that sounds ridiculous, but it's true. I remember playing Mario 3D World with my parents who loved the NSMB games and the 3D was evaporating their brains, they simply could not comprehend it. And like I said they added a progression system which is obviously a mechanic that is geared toward the core audience who wants to engage with the side content, experiment with different options and thoroughly explore the levels. Nothing about this game is more casual friendly than a standard 2D Side scroller. That isn't to say it's hard, because obviously it's easy, but when you talk about casual vs core focus it's not really about difficulty, it's about complexity. The more options you give to the player the harder it is for casual players to get into it, but the more interesting it is to experienced players.

They both took huge steps backwards but in different directions. Depends which one you hate more motion controls or open world garbage

Yuzu doesn't have playtime unfortunately.
Game leaked early and I 100%'d it before it even released officially.
You can ask anyone who's completed it though, the game is short as fuck. Stage replayability is barely there unless you skip through everything and miss secrets. The only Waddle Dee cages I didn't get on my first run of stages was shit like
>Defeat X enemy with specific powerup

Attached: Desktop Screenshot 2022.03.24 - 23.02.12.62.jpg (2560x1440, 876.05K)

Kirby and the Forgotten Land is the best selling Kirby game of all time though

BotW's open world is fun because the game is designed around it, rather than it being shoved in their purely to pad out playtime in an otherwise linear game like GTA or Ubisoft games. It's just fun to mess around with the physics system, either by finding unique ways to kill enemies in the overworld, or finding ways to abuse mechanics to complete the minidungeons in unintended ways. I cant tell you how many shrines I completed without using the intended solution, and that's very satisfying.

howlongtobeat.com/game?id=98273
hltb says it's around 13 hours, over 20 if you collect everything

Yes. Joycons are still mandatory with every console yet hardly any games use that shit.

Yes, because they realize they aren't reeling in enough new kids to prolong some of their longer-lasting franchises. New kids don't care about consoles, they play on their phones or PCs and call it a day. Kids still care about Pokemon and maybe Animal Crossing though, which explains why both of these have the least amount of genuine effort put into them.
So they have to turn towards nostalgic adults to preserve some of these franchises, such as Kirby. In other words, as you've already stated:

>Maybe they've realized the 5 year olds and grandmas who bought the wii aren't coming back.

The game doesnt have much design in the first place, it's just open world ubisoft garbage.

>The only Waddle Dee cages I didn't get on my first run of stages was shit like
This is obvious bullshit because a lot of the missions are only clear in hindsight. Yeah by playing skillfully and thoroughly exploring you can find *most* of them in a level, and fully clear *some* of them, but a lot of the time there will be some random mission you would never think of.

>BotW's open world is fun
It's not though, it's garbage.

I actually didn't mind getting those waddledees because the game is fun so I don't mind replaying levels.
A bunch of Kirby games have shit like that though, like in Kirby 64 when you needed certain power to get a shard that you might not have had the first time around

Kids are too busy playing "adult" games like fortnite and call of duty. Yes I know these aren't "adult" much like all video games, but in the minds of children they see things like kirby, pokemon, etc and they imagine being made fun of by their peers. Adults that have grown up playing these games don't give two shits though which is a bit of funny irony, but the point stands that this is Nintendo's new demographic.

I believe you'll start to see Nintendo games shift to try and be more competitive not really with their fellow AAA titles, but more in line with competing with the big name indie games and genres that are popular. One pro nintendo has always had on their side is they aren't afraid of trying new things, new gimmicks in their games and they're often (not always) successful. Case and point, the switch and the Wii

>Do you think that Nintendo is abandoning their casual focus?
that's a completely retarded thing to say because nintendo have abandoned the casual focus since at least the wii u where they had exclusives like the wonderful 101, xenoblade x or splatoon

the switch has a rather balanced catalog of exclusives with games that are targeting the casual/super mainstream audience (mario kart, animal crossing, mario party, pokemon, ring fit adventure), games that are more appealing to a more dedicated playerbase but still with huge appeal (breath of the wild, smash bros, splatoon) and actual niche titles for muh hadrcore gaymer (fire emblem, metroid dread, astral chain, xeno 2 and 3, bayo 3)

Focus does not mean 100% commitment. There is a sliding scale to these things. Like the Wii was more casual than the Wii U, and the Wii U was more casual than the Switch, but the Switch is still more casual focused than the gamecube for example. Even though things have improved a lot that doesn't mean they can't be improved further.

My friend has a 4 year old sister whos been playing through the new Kirby with no problems.
That's what spring breeze mode is for.

It's funny when Star Allies' highest difficulty is literally harder than 100%ing an average Mario game

I'm not talking about difficulty, I'm talking about complexity. Donkey Kong country is very difficult but not very complex. Xenoblade is very complex but not very difficult. The new Kirby didn't add much if any difficulty, but it added complexity, and that's what has me excited. I don't care about how difficult games are, that makes no difference to me, but I like having more depth to the game's mechanics and design.

I think Miyamoto said that he at least stopped trying to cater to casuals during the slump era of the WiiU.

What's with your perpetual butthurt at BotW? Especially since it's objectively the most hardcore Zelda in a long time. Enemies actually do damage, you get one shot by arrows, Trial of the Sword in Master Mode is legitimately tough. Seriously enemies in mainline Zelda games haven't done real damage for like three console generations.

>it's objectively the most hardcore Zelda in a long time.
LMAO

You need better bait than that

No, because Nintenbro only pretends to give a fuck without actually delivering content. They can suck my fucking kahk.

Some kids like kirby.

Attached: Kirby.jpg (779x603, 82.87K)

Hes genuinely right about enemy difficulty though zelda combat has been piss easy for a really long. What actually makes botw more "casual" to you?

You’ve been the one baiting, but go on and tell me how 3D Zelda was actually in a good place before BotW.

No? Kirby is still extremely casual. Pokemon Snap is extremely casual. The new Mario Strikers isn't even out yet and it still looks more casual than the previous Strikers game.

Nintendo is just continuing the decades long trend of becoming more and more casual.

I think the shift is as simple as Nintendo realizing kids aren't growing up with 2D games anymore. Those days are past.

Their first exposure to videogames after touch control slot machines on their mom's iPad is probably Minecraft. Theyre exposed to 3D games at a young age so asking them to work around a z-axis isn't overwhelming as long as you can't easily fall off an edge. It's letting them push series like Pokemon and Kirby that used to feel really restricted into a more modern style of game design, and they'd seeing the returns on it to prove it works.

BotW is absolutely kneecapped by being generic open-world shit. It would outright be Dark Messiah 2 if it had actual level design.

>Do you think that Nintendo is abandoning their casual focus?
No

Attached: Super_Smash_Bros._Ultimate.jpg (254x392, 77.28K)

what do you mean by progression system?

List ONE(1) fucking Zelda game more difficult than BOTW. The only one you could say is Zelda 2. I mean BOTW isn't hard or anything, but compared to the rest of the series except Zelda 2, it might as well be.

smash IS a casual game.

Phantom Hourglass.

I feel like that's more attributable to the shitty control scheme. The game is piss easy with a D-Pad/buttons control hack.

So is Kirby, what's your point?

...

>open world garbage
Oh, it's you.

It has actual world design, only open world game designed from the ground up to entice you to find things naturally

Nah, they're just still figuring out HD game creation. once they figure out how to make it formulaic we're back to Wii, not that the platforms since Wii branched out much.

Being casual or not hard is the least of Breath of the wilds sins, sadly you cant talk about it without the same autist whose been doing shit for the past 5 or so years going "LOL U REACTED IN ANY WAY POSSIBLE UNDER THE SUN I TROL U" when presented with facts why the games bad. Like if the guy wasn't already dox'd i'd suggest it but hes just a sad faggottous person.

>find things naturally
What, Another bokoblin camp? Another horse stall/stable area that means nothing? Ohboy i might find another group of guardians to parry! so deep and engaging!

Like look, BOTW's overworld design is nice, but they did fuck all with it. I'd rather give up 50 or even all of the shrines for them to use the over world better. You cant even use treasure chests you find as an excuse because the weapons are all trash until you get the master sword, which operates on charges anyways so whats the fucking point. This games not hard, its badly designed. Completely mediocre at being open world AND Zelda.

Matter of fact if you removed Link, Ganon, and Zelda from the game it'd be unrecognizeable as a Zelda title, and thats not even inciting the stupid "Zelda cycle" that people bring up as a deflection.

>this retard

30h+ on my switch to 100% it

There were problems with BOTW but I still think it's a really good game, in fact if only they copied Elden Ring and brought back legacy dungeons like in older Zelda games AND gave you a lot of different types of weapons that you have a chance to get from enemies without durability that grant a different playstyle it would be a really really good game

I don't give a single fuck if you like what you find or not, it has good world design.

I finished Elden ring without summons and I'm getting filtered by Kirby's last coliseum

Attached: full (1).png (600x450, 281.1K)

>If botw 2 is as shitty and casual as botw 1
Nigga if you want souls Combat you play a Souls games.
BOTW is about exploration, not having to die 30 times to figure out 1 boss.

BotW is the only Zelda game aside from Zelda 2 where it's remotely possible to die without having to do a self-imposed challenge run, so I wonder what you'd consider all the others.

Oracle of Ages. its puzzles and dungeons actually require you to think.