Bleh, I kept bouncing back between a 7 and an 8 on this one, too, but like Wario, it just feels like it's lacking some originality.

Wario had the polish and expert level design this game lacks, but this game has some interesting ideas that Wario lacked.

*shrug*

...Wow, you sound like you suck at Kirby games.  I mean, REALLY suck at them.  No offense or anything.

And if the gameplay or design feels "unoriginal," it's probably because you've played the ORIGINAL game.  It's all throughout your post that you'd played it before.  Judging from your making the original out to be an icon, I'd say you probably played it a good deal, which would just about sap up any replay value to be had after you've REPLAYED it several times over.

Unfortunately, for the most part, there's not many places which make specific use of certain powers (a small handful use a very few amount) and it's largely a matter of personal preference whether you want to use the Sword or Bomb or what-have-you. Some of the abilities gained from these powers don't really do much to help, either -- why does Kirby need to stick to the wall as a Ninja when he can float endlessly?

For that matter, why does Kirby need any powers?  Why don't we just take all the items out of SMB3 as well, they don't serve any real purpose, do they?  It's not like KSS makes use of hammers to pound things down, or Wheelies to get through an area fast to find an unlockable, or the sword or boomerang to cut things down in GCO, or any number of other powers with useful means?  Unlike, say, the fire flower, which is used a great many times in the Mario games to break through all kinds of special--oh, that's right, IT'S NOT USED FOR ANYTHING LIKE THAT AT ALL.  Neither are any of the abilities in SMB3, save the raccoon tail used to reach tall places.

The other side of the coin is that many attacks (such as dashing attacks or aerial moves) often end up with the player getting hurt, since they involve charging into an enemy. This happened many, many times in my time with the title: I'd try to use a combo attack (which rarely ever comboed), nick the enemy, then be stuck within his hit box and be thrown to the side. It equates to many of the attacks making no sense.

Out of all the people who have played the original, or the few I know who've played the new one, not even a single one of them mentioned the same problem.  First you berate the game's difficulty, then you berate its control scheme when it works for everyone else out there.  You only wind up in their hit boxes if you get WAY too close.  If you're getting hit when you attack, then you just epicly failed the game.  That's all there is to that, nothing personally against you, but if you get hit when you attack in KSS then you really, truly suck at it.  A LOT.

Now, along with the previously-mentioned technical issues, Kirby does have some other aspects to mention, mainly the level design and enemy placement. As is the case with other Kirby titles (and the SubSpace Emissary in Brawl), the level design here is mostly uninspired and seemingly random.

But you don't care to make any specific references to areas of the game that seem "uninspired" or "random."  Now, I wonder why that is?

So many points in the game feel inconveniently put together so they don't flow very well, very much like how many attacks lead into the player getting hit unnecessarily. Kirby's main problem -- as it always has been -- is that enemies feel like fodder more than adversaries and the levels and controls just don't have the precision, fluidity, and expert pacing that more superior platforming titles (like the Super Mario games) demonstrate.

Are you out of your mind?  Has some little thing about Kirby traumatized you or something?  It has the same amount of fluidity and pacing as the Mario games, while actually making its abilities USEFUL.  Which, as duly noted earlier, is something you claimed it didn't.  Should I hold the Super Mario games to your same standard and see where they end up?  Because I don't think that you are holding them to the same standard when you say things like that.

Super Star was good for the SNES, but compared to many other DS platformers, this one's not quite the cream of the crop.

What, perchance, would you say IS the cream of the crop, then?  Super Princess Peach?  Yoshi's Island DS?  New Super Mario Bros.?  What, then?  The only one of those I've listed worth playing is New Super Mario Bros., so... are there some super awesome DS platformers I'm missing or something?  Please, enlighten me.

Link182, it's been a while since I've seen one of your tirades. Give it a rest! "No offence or anything"? "Nothing personally against you"? If that's the case, tone down the language. And write your own review, hosted on your own site. There you can post all the inconsistent arguments you like, and I, for one, will never read it.

Tone down what language now?  The only thing close to a curse word is the word "suck" and I dare you to find two other people on this whoooole site who don't use it in a like manner.

I don't think it's the greatest game in the world, but the facts are facts: there isn't anything wrong with the game when a person kills themself every time they try to attack, there's something wrong with the way the person plays the game; that's the case for this game, in the very least.  There are plenty of people who've played these games and get along fine without any sort of complaint like "the game doesn't let me attack without getting hurt."  Pretty much EVERY gamer out there can play a Kirby game without having to complain of "attacks often end up with the player getting hurt, since they involve charging into an enemy."  Know why?  It's because it's not a difficult thing, with or without powers, to avoid damage entirely and still take out the enemies in a reasonable amount of time.  The controls are the same as they were 12 or so years ago, correct?  So, let's say my sister, who sucks at video games, goes up and plays it.  She doesn't get hit when attacking enemies, she gets hit when they attack her.  Know why?  Because even though it's an easy thing to dodge enemy attacks, it's even easier to avoid enemies that you are yourself attacking.

This, this is how I came up with the fact that the reviewer (you I'm guessing from the way you got so uppity and defensive of its content) must suck at video games when the simplest task confounds them.  Everyone else who has played this or the original has been able to avoid taking damage on every attack of theirs save a few who make little, tiny mistakes in calculation.

Furthermore, instead of actually defending your review with examples or logic, you instead choose to put me down by saying you won't read my reviews.  Well, I'm crushed, really, truly, you've destroyed my self esteem with that single post.  I guess I'll just go lay down and cry myself to sleep, as I think I shall do now for the rest of my life.[/sarcasm]

So, do I reiterate my questions, or ask new ones?

I'll ask a new one.  Humor me, prove you're not whatever it may be I think you might be, and tell me one thing: what exactly is inconsistent about my argument, hmm?

While link182's tirade is a bit on the tacky/obnoxious side... I do agree with the fact that in this case there's nothing wrong with the controls and moves. The rest of the article is well written, but the parts where you critizise the game's shortcomings when it comes to controls and the movesets and the likes are laughable at best...

"...Wow, you sound like you suck at Kirby games.  I mean, REALLY suck at them.  No offense or anything."

No, I'm actually pretty decent at Kirby games because they're easy. But frankly, the controls could use some streamlining so they play better. If they level design had some work done to work around the controls that could work, too.

I'm sorry, but pretty much EVERY dash/combo move in the game is near useless because enemies only ever get hit by ONE of the hits in a combo and any move which involves one dashing into or through an enemy often results in one getting hit halfway through the move.

The way that the default aerial sword attacks work - you get bounced off the enemy after you hit them - is good and how much more of the moves should affect enemies. But they don't.

Anyway, good golly and geez, if you're so offended by my review, don't read it.
It's my opinion.
I love Kirby Super Star but I just don't think it's as good as other platforming games like the Mario titles, DKC2, etc.

I would say that New Super Mario Bros. is a much more well-designed game, yes. Yoshi's Island DS actually isn't bad, but it's lacking something the original had. Honestly, as I said, I think Kirby Canvas Curse is a more interesting platformer for the DS. I'd say Sonic Rush is a better platformer, too -- perhaps not by a whole lot.

Anyway, I'm not going to go through every single one of your complaints with my review right here. Maybe on the boards, perhaps, but not here.
Instead of trying to break my review down, why don't you write your OWN review that stands on its own and post it somewhere?

PS:
The attacking bit isn't a "boohoo I died" because I really didn't die very much (twice, I think, through this whole game), it's because from a mechanical standpoint it just doesn't FEEL good passing through enemies when I do attacks, them not recoiling, and me getting hit.
Is it hard? No. It's very manageable.
But it's something that I feel is a mechanical flaw.

So please stop trying to put me down as a gamer or some such, because you've never seen me play a game.

And no, I don't think the original Kirby game is that great, either. I think it's OK. Kirby's Adventure I really liked -- for an NES game.

I'm sorry, but pretty much EVERY dash/combo move in the game is near useless because enemies only ever get hit by ONE of the hits in a combo and any move which involves one dashing into or through an enemy often results in one getting hit halfway through the move.

This is simply not true though... it only happens when you hit an enemy with a dash attack that's not strong enough to kill it in the first place...

Right...which is pretty much EVERY boss/mini boss.

I'm sorry, you're right on that, MOST canon fodder enemies WILL die with those attacks, yes.
But even then, there are some normal enemies that don't die right away.
And specifically, this is an issue with boss enemies, since pretty much all attacks pass through them so you end up getting hit by attacks that require you to hit an enemy:
aerial sword spin, aerial hammer spin, dash hammer spin, a lot of the dashing fighting moves, the aerial down sword strike, the aerial down bird attack, the dashing yoyo attack...etc.

And yes, it IS true with many boss characters. Many of those attacks hit the enemy, then YOU get hit for hitting them. And yes, if you go about it some certain special way you'll pass through them, but I personally don't think I should be using combos attacks or aerial down smashes to PASS THROUGH enemies but just plain hit them.
I created a thread in the DS topic to discuss this.

I have no idea why everyone seems so much more defensive of Kirby than Wario, though. *shrug*

And again, this is just my opinion!

Link182, link182, link182... I guess you've realised that it's not my review now? And maybe one day you will learn the meaning of constructive criticism (hint: it's the opposite of trolling). We can even hope you'll learn that there's more to abusive language than using profanity vs. not using profanity.

As for inconsistency, your argument is inconsistent with the argument used in the review. For example, the reviewer made a good point about wall sticking being redundant when there's the ability to float, and then you launched into a diatribe about how you would have the SMB3 items equate to those powers. (Also see your second last quote from the review, and your response.)

You're also inconsistent in saying, "nothing personally against you, but … you really, truly suck at it. A LOT." If that is not personal criticism, what is? "Nothing personally against you" is just a scapegoat phrase.

And finally, you've been inconsistent in other arguments I've seen on this site. In the interest of brevity, I won't start listing them (indeed, it was for brevity's sake that I didn't continue with the argument last time).

Indeed, I would say that brevity is why the reviewer didn't make specific references to areas of the game that were uninspired and random, and why he didn't go on to list better platformers. He is an experienced reviewer, with many reviews on this site. You could look for DS platformers with better review scores.

You could reiterate your questions, but what would be the point? For the most part, your questions are riddled with sarcasm ("Why does Kirby need any powers?", "Now, I wonder why that is?", "Are you out of your mind?", "Has some little thing about Kirby traumatized you or something?", "Should I hold the Super Mario games to your same standard and see where they end up?"), not questions ("It's not like KSS makes use of hammers to pound things down, or Wheelies to get through an area fast to find an unlockable, or the sword or boomerang to cut things down in GCO, or any number of other powers with useful means?"), or unnecessary (the last questions). If you really want to know better platform games on the DS, look up GameRankings, or go and play them all yourself. Such an expert as you shouldn't need to read reviews. Or, like I said, you should write them yourself.

For the record, I've never met the reviewer. And for another, I usually get bored of our arguments after a few exchanges.

Thank you for helping to support my reputation, WHGB. I'm not sure why this out of all of my reviews sparked some conflict, because I've written much more scathing stuff.

I WILL step back a moment and admit...MOST platformers on the DS I think of that I feel are better than this are in fact ACTION games with platforming elements -- though, even then, this title feels more like a casual action title than a platformer to me most of the time. So I will concede to that.
But I still think there's much better platformers out there, and that's my own opinion.

Go read professional reviews (like at 1Up) and you'll see that they don't specifically point out every instance in which something is"unoriginal" or "boring" or "uninspired" because doing so would make the review very long. Go read IGN's reviews for really long stuff that goes into detail. There's a place for both, I'm just trying to stick to the more brief side of things and I simply can't go into specific fine-tuned detail about every little issue I may have.

Go read the thread I made to see some specific examples I could think of after the fact.
I'm done arguing about the validity of my own opinion -- which is what this is, so take it or leave it, that's why I wrote it.

I'm not even gonna set a toe into this little...argument going on here.

Although, personally, I dont see how Kirby going through enemies is a mechnical flaw. Well I guess if t could be a flaw to you, but its really just a mechanic of the game, not the game working incorrectly.

I actually like that it does that (and not all the time...at least in some of the other games, SOME attacks caused Kirby to jump back). The enemies still flinch and sometime are knocked away. With bosses, you're right. You have to be careful using dash attacks, and its something you have to get used to. Every once in a while I forget that fundamental mechanic to the game, and get hit.

Either make sure to execute the attack so that when it ends you dont get hit, or make sure it dies
Or dont use dash attacks that dont knock Kirby backwards.

Not a bad review. I did not feel like what you wrote would be for an 8/10 game, so I think the 7 you gave it fits (barely, imo, though)

^ I like this guy. This is exactly what I wanted to say about those dash attacks, but I was unsure how to explain it...

Yea, I can go with that.
I personally find it to be a flaw with the game's mechanics -- again, I refer to attacks like the aerial downward attacks. I have video proof in a thread in the DS section for this which shows Meta Knight using two aerial moves the way they seem meant to be used ona boss and both moves ending with the player getting damaged.
I'm sorry, but a downward aerial sword strike should pass through the enemy fully if it's gonna pass through them.
Etc.

But yes, AGAIN, I'm not saying it was something that caused me any great level of grief, it's just something I think should have been done a little better because it breaks up the flow of combat to me and I found it to be a design choice (or lack thereof, perhaps) that I feel breaks up combat more than it should. Not a glitch or anything of that sort. Again, agreeing with what you're saying and not saying it's a huge deal, just saying it IS something I noticed and have seen executed better in other games. That's all.

It is certainly manageable, of course -- it's just I feel it's the type of thing that shouldn't need to player-managed in the first place. That's all.

I'm glad you felt the 7 matched the review -- hopefully that's not bad. Because this really isn't a negative review, it's a positive one -- just not OVERLY positive. That's why it's a 7 (ie "good") as opposed to an 8 (ie "great") or a 9 ("amazing").

Thanks for the comments. THAT was a much better way of proving that point.

I still don't understand why everyone seems to care so much when I do it to Kirby and not so much when I do it to other games, though.
Oh, well.

If I may...  these comments are too long.  And with too much denotation.

So, yeah.  KSSU is all over the place!  Some places it's getting 90%, others 60%, it's just so confusing!  I think the reason for the lack of consistency is because some people have played the original and get messed up and call it boring because they've already played it!

Yeeeeaaa except I'm not calling it boring because I already played it.
I don't think it's that BORING, specifically.
I just think it lacks some polish in level design and mechanical design, etc.

But yea, there are definitely inconsistent review scores going around.

lol wow.

All of the dash attacks are not useless. Quite the opposite really, as most of them give you freaking invincibility frames. Just hold R once the attack ends to receive no damage at all.

lol wow.

All of the dash attacks are not useless. Quite the opposite really, as most of them give you freaking invincibility frames. Just hold R once the attack ends to receive no damage at all.

Now see, THAT would be a technical flaw. 

While link182's tirade is a bit on the tacky/obnoxious side... I do agree with the fact that in this case there's nothing wrong with the controls and moves. The rest of the article is well written, but the parts where you critizise the game's shortcomings when it comes to controls and the movesets and the likes are laughable at best...

Yeah, it was too obnoxious, I apologize for that.

I'm sorry, but pretty much EVERY dash/combo move in the game is near useless because enemies only ever get hit by ONE of the hits in a combo and any move which involves one dashing into or through an enemy often results in one getting hit halfway through the move.

Name ONE.  Just one, that's all I ask.  Name one dashing attack that gets you hit midway through.  Wheelie only hurts you if you stop or turn around midway through.  You bounce back from dash attacks.  The Ninja's combos all land on the enemy, such as the energy wave one (B near an enemy).  So I'm also asking you to name ONE combo that doesn't have most of its hits land on the enemy.  I mean one outside of Meta Knight.  If MK has a technical flaw, I'll believe you, since I can't vouch for any added aspect of the game.

The way that the default aerial sword attacks work - you get bounced off the enemy after you hit them - is good and how much more of the moves should affect enemies. But they don't.

I'm not quite following you; the phrasing confuses me.  What doesn't do what now?  After the "and" part, you don't really follow sentence structure... I think the "how" is misplaced or the thought isn't followed up.  Anyway, whether it's my own misunderstanding or not, please clarify your statement.

Anyway, good golly and geez, if you're so offended by my review, don't read it.

Kinda hard to be offended by a review without reading it, so there's really no way to do what you're asking of me.  And I'm not "offended by the review," just by aspects that don't jive.  I also think the score was accurate for the game, regardless of the context of the review.  Just so you know.  

It's my opinion.
I love Kirby Super Star but I just don't think it's as good as other platforming games like the Mario titles, DKC2, etc.

I'm still having to say, where does Mario fit in here?  I mean, you criticize KSS for things which Mario does poorer in, such as powers not being used to solve environment puzzles.  The Mario Bros. games don't feel any less like random level designs than the Kirby games; though, neither of them really feels all that random to begin with.  And calling KSSU unoriginal while admitting to having played the original quite a bit is kinda ridiculous.

I would say that New Super Mario Bros. is a much more well-designed game, yes. Yoshi's Island DS actually isn't bad, but it's lacking something the original had. Honestly, as I said, I think Kirby Canvas Curse is a more interesting platformer for the DS. I'd say Sonic Rush is a better platformer, too -- perhaps not by a whole lot.

Anyway, I'm not going to go through every single one of your complaints with my review right here. Maybe on the boards, perhaps, but not here.
Instead of trying to break my review down, why don't you write your OWN review that stands on its own and post it somewhere?

Don't you know that's not nearly as fun?    Besides that, I am completely unable to review any of the added aspects of KSSU, due to my lack of a DS.  I can say, however, that the controls from the original are completely unchanged, as the DS's number and layout of buttons is identical to an SNES controller.  Just tell me one thing: were any new additions or alterations made to the original games Spring Breeze, Dynablade, Revenge of Meta Knight, Great Cave Offensive, or Milky Way Wishes, other than FMV's?  Any gameplay altering elements, I mean?  Like, has the engine changed, is it less responsive than the original, are there more/less powers, has the helper ability been altered, etc.

PS:
The attacking bit isn't a "boohoo I died" because I really didn't die very much (twice, I think, through this whole game), it's because from a mechanical standpoint it just doesn't FEEL good passing through enemies when I do attacks, them not recoiling, and me getting hit.

I seem to recall most enemies reacting to damage, such as when hit they are slowed down by a minute margin for a split second; or on less-than-boss enemies, they do recoil and are stunned for a short time.  Again, if it's MK we're talking about, I don't have anything to argue with you for.  I've played the Meta Knightmare for the Kirby's Adventure remake, and I can say that it wasn't put together very well either, so I'd trust you if you said that was the same for this KSS remake.

Is it hard? No. It's very manageable.
But it's something that I feel is a mechanical flaw.

So please stop trying to put me down as a gamer or some such, because you've never seen me play a game.

And no, I don't think the original Kirby game is that great, either. I think it's OK. Kirby's Adventure I really liked -- for an NES game.

The original Kirby game is perfect in every way!  I hate you and I hope you die the death of a thousand dead guys! 

Yes, the original had its flaws, as does KSS.  And if you're getting stuck in hit boxes mid attack: YOU'RE TOO CLOSE!  You should be able to fit at least one Kirby between you and your enemy at all times for safety purposes. 

I'll append another statement to this one to keep its message accurate: I'm not speaking for MK, I don't know if it has a flaw or not, so I won't argue there.

I'm sorry, but pretty much EVERY dash/combo move in the game is near useless because enemies only ever get hit by ONE of the hits in a combo and any move which involves one dashing into or through an enemy often results in one getting hit halfway through the move.

This is simply not true though... it only happens when you hit an enemy with a dash attack that's not strong enough to kill it in the first place...

Even then, dashing always bounces Kirby off and away from his enemies when he hits them.

Right...which is pretty much EVERY boss/mini boss.

If you knew this, why were you trying to dash into them again?  O_o

I'm sorry, you're right on that, MOST canon fodder enemies WILL die with those attacks, yes.

You spelled cannon wrong, nyah nyah nyah!    No, I'm just kidding, don't kill me.  You did spell it wrong, but I'm kidding about the nyah nyah nyah part.  To be fair, ALL enemies in the game are cannon fodder.  Some more than others.  But that's equally true of every platformer in existence [that isn't in 3D].

But even then, there are some normal enemies that don't die right away.
And specifically, this is an issue with boss enemies, since pretty much all attacks pass through them so you end up getting hit by attacks that require you to hit an enemy:
aerial sword spin, aerial hammer spin, dash hammer spin, a lot of the dashing fighting moves, the aerial down sword strike, the aerial down bird attack, the dashing yoyo attack...etc.

To reiterate: TOOOOOOO CLOOOOOOOSE.  One Kirby should fit between you and your enemy at all times, more if you expect an attack from them soon.

And yes, it IS true with many boss characters. Many of those attacks hit the enemy, then YOU get hit for hitting them. And yes, if you go about it some certain special way you'll pass through them, but I personally don't think I should be using combos attacks or aerial down smashes to PASS THROUGH enemies but just plain hit them.
I created a thread in the DS topic to discuss this.

I have no idea why everyone seems so much more defensive of Kirby than Wario, though. *shrug*

And again, this is just my opinion!

Maybe it's because we've played the original KSS and can vouch for it, but many of us have yet to play the new Wario game.  Also, just to get this out there, I agree with a 7 or 8 rating for KSS.  9 would really be pushing it, as would anything lower than 7.  Again, there ARE flaws in the game; I'm only picking on the ones that I know don't exist, not the ones that might exist in added on parts of the remake.

Link182, link182, link182... I guess you've realised that it's not my review now?

Yes, I have figured out that you being uppity and defensive wasn't because it was your review, but because you're always uppity and defensive at everyone.    I never attacked the review itself as harshly as I did you.  Maybe that should've been the first clue that you didn't write it, but I was busy watching Iron Man and I guess I didn't think hard enough to figure it out right away.

And maybe one day you will learn the meaning of constructive criticism (hint: it's the opposite of trolling). We can even hope you'll learn that there's more to abusive language than using profanity vs. not using profanity.

Do me a favor, point out my "abusive language" that wasn't specifically directed at you.  It didn't exist in my first post, it just existed in the one replying to you.  I guess I'm trying to say I haven't anything against Eddy, but you on the other hand... well, let's not get into that right now.  And trolling is not picking on legitimate fallacies, trolling is saying something just to stir up controversy and start flame wars.  Maybe you'll learn that, eh Bobby boy?

As for inconsistency, your argument is inconsistent with the argument used in the review. For example, the reviewer made a good point about wall sticking being redundant when there's the ability to float, and then you launched into a diatribe about how you would have the SMB3 items equate to those powers. (Also see your second last quote from the review, and your response.)

1. Wall sticking is used more by helpers than by Kirby, as the helper cannot float for very long at all.  In fact, the majority of the abilities are most useful when playing as the helper.  The helper will even get abilities Kirby does not, such as Plasma Wisp can fly, Wheelie can be ridden by Kirby (who can then shoot stars out of Wheelie while riding), etc.

2. My diatribe about SMB3's powers being useless plays into the fact that the reviewer was complaining about Kirby powers being useless, when in fact powers in the Kirby game serve far more purposes than those in SMB3.

By the by, did you look diatribe up on the internet or was there a spare dictionary opened up to the "D" section just lying around for you to peruse?

You're also inconsistent in saying, "nothing personally against you, but … you really, truly suck at it. A LOT." If that is not personal criticism, what is? "Nothing personally against you" is just a scapegoat phrase.

Nothing personally against you, but I hate you and hope you burn in hell.  Gee, that didn't quite have the same effect as saying someone sucked at a Kirby game when they make a somewhat unreasonable complaint, did it?  Or am I missing something that you've managed to find in one of your encyclopaedia collections you use for internet discussions?

Yes, I can tell when a phrase is natural to someone and when it is somewhat alien to them.  Maybe next time you should practice saying "diatribe" in front of the mirror before you post, makes you look a little less like a poseur.

And finally, you've been inconsistent in other arguments I've seen on this site.

Well good golly Miss Molly, I've been inconsistent in other arguments on the site!  Why, I suppose that must mean every last one of them is inconsistent!  You're gonna get a medal for this one, yes you are!

In the interest of brevity, I won't start listing them (indeed, it was for brevity's sake that I didn't continue with the argument last time).

What, the bear/bare argument?  Really, that's what you pull out to use against me, the "you made a spelling mistake so everything you say is wrong" argument?

Indeed, I would say that brevity is why the reviewer didn't make specific references to areas of the game that were uninspired and random, and why he didn't go on to list better platformers.

You meant to append "in the first place."  You see, I don't think the reviewer would endorse multiple other games in their review, though in a subsequent post, if they're going to argue at all, they might as well do it 100%.  No reason to give a half-ass response, is there?  This whole thing would be over had Eddy said that he didn't have to defend his opinion against mine, or if he had mentioned some of the things.  He has mentioned them by now, though, and that allows me to better understand where he's coming from in some of the things he says.  Then again, there are people like you.  The people who try to seem extra smart on the internet because they're not pressed for time to go look something up before they post a response, unlike the real world, where these people give pseudo-intellectual answers and hope that no one around is smart enough to figure out that the Puppy Who Lost His Way is not a good comparison to the Industrial Revolution.

You could reiterate your questions, but what would be the point? For the most part, your questions are riddled with sarcasm ("Why does Kirby need any powers?", "Now, I wonder why that is?", "Are you out of your mind?", "Has some little thing about Kirby traumatized you or something?", "Should I hold the Super Mario games to your same standard and see where they end up?"), not questions ("It's not like KSS makes use of hammers to pound things down, or Wheelies to get through an area fast to find an unlockable, or the sword or boomerang to cut things down in GCO, or any number of other powers with useful means?"), or unnecessary (the last questions).

Wait wait wait.  My argument is riddled with unnecessary?  I think you phrased that a bit poorly.  See, bad spelling? Not so much a problem as bad grammar.  Grammar is important because it helps you understand what a person means.  I guess you just don't care much though.

I will admit, when read in the wrong context, much of my argument seems very stupid.  You have to figure out which parts are serious and which parts are stupid, something most people can do except for when the person has a fairly ambiguous nature to the subject.  The "traumatized" part was not a serious statement, nor was it meant to cast shadows upon Eddy's mental state, just so you know Blakeley.

If you really want to know better platform games on the DS, look up GameRankings, or go and play them all yourself. Such an expert as you shouldn't need to read reviews. Or, like I said, you should write them yourself.

Expert?  Me?  Hardly, though I thank you for trying to insult me with something never stated nor implied anywhere in anything I've said.  But that's not in the least bit what I was asking.  If you had read a little more carefully into the context, I was asking what "would you say IS the cream of the crop, then?"  Actually, forget context, because that's EXACTLY what I said.  I wanted to know what HIS opinion was.

For the record, I've never met the reviewer. And for another, I usually get bored of our arguments after a few exchanges.

That's another odd thing, you used it in plural when we've only argued twice counting this current one.  You were using a different handle back then, Mr. Blakeley.  As I seem to recall (and as the logged posts will point out) I'm not the one who started this "mini-vendetta," if you will.  If anything, your avatard did that. 

Thank you for helping to support my reputation, WHGB. I'm not sure why this out of all of my reviews sparked some conflict, because I've written much more scathing stuff.

Perhaps the difference is in the accuracy of the judgements made.  Or the interpretation of them.

I WILL step back a moment and admit...MOST platformers on the DS I think of that I feel are better than this are in fact ACTION games with platforming elements -- though, even then, this title feels more like a casual action title than a platformer to me most of the time. So I will concede to that.
But I still think there's much better platformers out there, and that's my own opinion.

Which I will respect.

Go read professional reviews (like at 1Up) and you'll see that they don't specifically point out every instance in which something is"unoriginal" or "boring" or "uninspired" because doing so would make the review very long.

There are a few places that list key points in the game that disappoint/amaze them.  Reviews do need a certain pacing and length, but there are several on this site alone that go well into 3 pages.  It is unreasonable to expect them listed in the review, but is it still unreasonable to ask what they may have been, now that the review is already finished and behind us?

Go read IGN's reviews for really long stuff that goes into detail. There's a place for both, I'm just trying to stick to the more brief side of things and I simply can't go into specific fine-tuned detail about every little issue I may have.

Go read the thread I made to see some specific examples I could think of after the fact.

I understand that you can't get über specific about everything, but I still want examples, which I'm hoping you will have one or two in this thread you spoke of.  Which I will read later, since I have a few things to do (namely, sleep ).

I'm done arguing about the validity of my own opinion -- which is what this is, so take it or leave it, that's why I wrote it.

I'm not even gonna set a toe into this little...argument going on here.

Although, personally, I dont see how Kirby going through enemies is a mechnical flaw. Well I guess if t could be a flaw to you, but its really just a mechanic of the game, not the game working incorrectly.

I actually like that it does that (and not all the time...at least in some of the other games, SOME attacks caused Kirby to jump back). The enemies still flinch and sometime are knocked away. With bosses, you're right. You have to be careful using dash attacks, and its something you have to get used to. Every once in a while I forget that fundamental mechanic to the game, and get hit.

Either make sure to execute the attack so that when it ends you dont get hit, or make sure it dies
Or dont use dash attacks that dont knock Kirby backwards.

Not a bad review. I did not feel like what you wrote would be for an 8/10 game, so I think the 7 you gave it fits (barely, imo, though)

I agree with Santuli here.


I guess I'm done for now, I'll get around to other threads mentioning this later on, I have other things to do right now.

EDIT: I will append another quote to my post, since I am awake and all.

Yea, I can go with that.
I personally find it to be a flaw with the game's mechanics -- again, I refer to attacks like the aerial downward attacks. I have video proof in a thread in the DS section for this which shows Meta Knight using two aerial moves the way they seem meant to be used ona boss and both moves ending with the player getting damaged. I'm sorry, but a downward aerial sword strike should pass through the enemy fully if it's gonna pass through them.
Etc.

I wish you'd said MK earlier, woulda saved me a lot of typing...

Even though after reading this post I had already altered my previous response.   

Guarding is a technical flaw? lol

Link182, your lengthy response is rather amusing, with many flaws, but again I've lost my interest. I look forward to sparring with you on some future topic!

Link182, your lengthy response is rather amusing, with many flaws, but again I've lost my interest. I look forward to sparring with you on some future topic!

Yes, and maybe next time you won't give up so easily?  Just kidding, just kidding.

A lot of my response could be nicer towards you, but... I don't know what it is about your avatar that makes me so gosh darned angry!  Is it the fact that your Mii looks angry that agitates me?

A lot of my response could be nicer towards you, but... I don't know what it is about your avatar that makes me so gosh darned angry!  Is it the fact that your Mii looks angry that agitates me?

Oh really? I rarely go into the forums themselves, so I am spared from all the avatars, signatures, etc. I just use the news page or review page directly. I wonder, if I changed that picture, would it be different? Or is it burned into your skull now?

Somehow, that avatar is worse...

but in a hilarious way!

Also, I think I'll apologize for the harsh words directed towards you, since you're basically a nice guy.

But, um... the avatar has melted my brain.  Gooey.

IDK. As long as its better than Kirby 64 i will pick it up.

I would say it's better than Kirby 64, myself.
That's a game I still have to get to reviewing at some point, by the way...

Well, Kirby 64 was good, just not the best.

I think I'll pick this up, maybe.

Well, Kirby 64 was good, just not the best.

Kirby's outings generally lack the finesse and expert execution of other titles in the genre.

Good, but not the best. Exactly my feelings on the whole series. ^_^;