Reviews & Previews

Mario is one of the biggest video game franchises ever created. In fact, the entire franchise has accumulated a staggering 675 million-unit sales. That’s over 300 million more than Pokemon and almost 400 million more than Call of Duty. However, not every game in the Mario series has gone down well. Several decent titles in the series ended up underappreciated and lost in history. It’s time to go back and give them the credit they deserve. We have listed 5 Mario Games that were underappreciated.

Super Paper Mario

Super Paper Mario is a classic 2D platformer with a twist. You have the ability to flip the camera from a 2D view to a 3D view, yet the levels themselves remain 2D by design. This allows the player to come up with some creative answers to bypass areas that otherwise seem impassable.

Whilst it sits at a very fair 85 on Metacritic, many fans were not so pleased with it. Rather than an attack on the game itself, they didn’t like its affiliation with Paper Mario. Old school Paper Mario was supposed to be a turn-based RPG. Moving away from that formula was brave but still widely criticized by many. Super Paper Mario’s case probably wasn’t helped by being the direct successor to The Thousand-Year Door. You know, one of the best turn-based RPGs ever made.

Over the years I think many have come to appreciate Super Paper Mario. It has a very unique story that even sees Bowser teaming up with Mario’s crew. Like classic Mario platformers, you can choose to play as several characters and they all have various special abilities. The best part is that a regular playthrough can easily take in excess of 25 hours to complete. A solid amount of content to couple with its innovative platforming fun.

Mario Strikers Charged

It was only just doing some research on this game I realized I’ve known it by a different name for years. Apparently, only in Europe was it called Mario Strikers Charged Football. In North America they just dropped the football bit entirely. I get that it may have been confusing with the NFL and all but calling it Charged Soccer couldn’t have hurt, right? Either way, I guess North America wasn’t their primary audience for this game.

As the European name would suggest, Mario Strikers was Nintendo’s attempt at creating a football game. Mario has been golfing, played tennis, and now was his time to give the world’s biggest sport a crack. Like many Mario sports games, it suffered from its mediocre single player. However, it did have something not exactly typical of a Nintendo multiplayer experience.

It’s net code was sensational. Especially for 2007 Nintendo Wii’s standards. What this meant was that Strikers Charged Football had a weirdly strong competitive scene. Nothing like modern eSports of course, but you could get a legitimate tournament going if you looked in the right places.

Unfortunately, Nintendo hasn’t shown Strikers much love over the past decade. It did find its way onto the Wii U Virtual Console but never got an actual Wii U game. Similarly, we have yet to see a Switch entry either. It’s difficult to see this changing anytime soon.

Mario & Luigi: Partners in Time

Low-key, the Mario & Luigi games are some of the best in the entire franchise. Despite this, their recent sales have been pitiful. Did you know that the Bowser’s Inside Story remake on 3DS only sold 9,500 units in Japan in its first week? Its failure likely caused developers AlphaDream to file for bankruptcy just 10 months later.

Regardless, that doesn’t mean it’s a bad series. In fact, that very game that failed in itself was still a pretty good title. It’s just that Nintendo released it on a dead console and didn’t market it. Seriously, who is going to buy a 3DS game in 2019?

The pinnacle of the series for me was Partners in Time. Released in 2005 on the Nintendo DS, Partners in Time is the prequel/sequel to Superstar Saga. As the name would suggest, you travel back and through time to see the events that happen both before and after Superstar Saga.

It was a wacky game that focused on aliens and time travel. Most that have played it will agree it was something special. Another brilliant addition to Mario’s vast RPG collection for sure. But not many have played it since Nintendo, once again, didn’t market it properly and it was overshadowed by other more mainstream games. After all, this was the year of God of War, Shadow of the Colossus, and, perhaps worst of all, Animal Crossing: Wild World.

When put in the face of an Animal Crossing game, no one cared in the slightest for Partners in Time. It’s a tragedy, really. If there’s one game on this list I encourage you to give a try, its this one. It deserved so much better.

Super Mario Bros. 2

Coming in as the oldest entry on the list, Super Mario Bros. 2 originally released in 1988 for the NES. However, it wasn’t actually a Mario game at all. The real Super Mario Bros. 2 was very similar to that of the original. Effectively, it was just a slightly harder version of the same game. Nintendo decided that the recently crashed American market wouldn’t buy into such a similar and difficult product.

Their plan then was to reskin another Japanese platformer called Yume Kōjō: Doki Doki Panic. They slapped on some generic Mario visuals and sold Doki Doki Panic as Super Mario Bros. 2 in the western market.

When gamers later found out they had been robbed of the real version, they weren’t happy. Everyone could tell Mario Bros. 2 in the west didn’t quite feel like a Mario game. Despite all this, I’d argue it’s a far better game than people give it credit for.

The gameplay and platforming as a whole are both incredibly polished. Also, despite being a reskin, it did still feature several characters all with unique abilities. For example, Luigi jumps higher than the others, Princess Peach glides with her Parasol, and Toad can move quicker. Having unique playable characters back in 1988 is a bigger deal than it might sound.

Nintendo must have realized it had some potential since Super Mario Bros. 2 was later remastered on the SNES. Equally, the Japanese version was released as The Lost Levels in the west in 1993.

Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games

Unlike the other four entries on this list, Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games is not overly slept on. It tends to sell well and has functioned well as a fun party game across several Nintendo platforms. Instead, it’s here because I think a lot of people don’t realize how good it actually is.

Mario & Sonic is not just a good family game, it’s a great sports game. Over the years it has declined, likely due to AlphaDream’s financial issues, but the early titles were fantastic. They took a wildly abstract idea and pulled it off in the face of doubt.

Who would ever have expected to see these age-old video game rivals competing not over sales, but to win a 100m sprint? These games also use the Nintendo console’s various signature traits better than most other exclusives. From motion controls to the Wii U’s tablet, they’re all integrated one way or another.

Given AlphaDream’s closure, I’m not sure what to expect from this series going forward. If I had to guess, SEGA will probably take over again and assign one of their teams to the job. Perhaps Sumo Digital could be a good candidate given their excellent work on Sonic Racing.

Do you remember cheat codes? From gaming’s youngest years well up to the late 2000s, cheat codes were an essential for most games. And then one day, they just died out. Seemingly overnight something happened that changed the approach of most publishers. They realized they could charge for something that was previously free.

The commercial success of loot boxes and modern gambling mechanics in video games has reshaped the fundamentals of game development. The priority for many publishers is no longer just to ship as many $60 games as possible. Instead, they now see an opportunity to keep charging the same customer over and over.

At first, it seems a tad selfish, but it could be considered fair game. They’re just a company trying to maximize profits, right? The problem is how they choose to go about it. These modern AAA publishers exploit gambling mechanics popularized in casinos to trick players into paying up.

Gambling’s Near Miss Fallacy

The most important aspect of keeping a player hooked is cognitive manipulation. Under no circumstances does a casino want you to realize you aren’t going to win. Obviously, when that fact sinks in the spending naturally stops. But how are they going to convince someone to carry on when the odds are so stacked against the player in the first place. This is where R. L. Reid’s near-miss theory comes into play.

A near miss never suggests a player has lost. Instead, it is a special kind of failure where the player perceives themselves as almost winning. The outcome is the same as a loss, yet a player’s cognition will view it as being closer to a win. Casinos implement this strategy in several ways. For example, have you ever noticed that slot machines regularly land on two out of the three matched symbols? That’s no accident.

Modern video games are just as guilty of this practice. Games like DOTA 2 and CS: GO use scrolling visuals that showcase everything the player can win. By design, many of the common drops are placed next to rarer, more expensive items. With CS: GO, when a player opens a crate they see an indicator showing what they’ve won. If a player sees this indicator very narrowly miss out on that special knife worth $500, they’re likely to think they just missed out.

This is not the case. All loot boxes are scripted algorithms that determine what you win before any visuals are shown. The visual indicator means nothing. It is solely there to promote a near miss gambling mentality. By tricking less informed players into thinking they got close to a big drop, publishers know they are more likely to keep spending.

Loot Boxes Are Designed To Be Exciting

Casinos are exciting. That much is obvious. They use bright lights, flashing strobes, and loud noises to trigger all kinds of natural human reactions. When in a prime gambling mindset, the average person turns into an adrenaline-fueled junkie. They’re practically breathing endorphins.

Loot boxes implement the exact same design strategy. Many loot boxes feature overly dramatic opening sequences with flashing lights based on the rarity of received items. FIFA may be the most controversial example of this. FIFA’s packs have players go through a stadium tunnel. If they receive a bad card, they will only travel partially through it. There will also be very few lights or audio to accompany the reward. But what happens if you land something very valuable?

Firstly, you go through a huge, shiny door followed by the raining down of bright sparkling light. Next, the side of the tunnel lights up and the player’s home nation comes up in the center of the screen. You continue to move through the tunnel and see the player’s position as you approach the end. This position indicator has two bright lights illuminating it. As you leave the tunnel you see the player’s team and then, at last, their card. For so-called “Walkouts,” the player will run onto the pitch covered by confetti and begin dancing to a firework filled background.

This obnoxious design is there to excite players. If this was purely a gameplay decision, there would be no harm. However, it’s being implemented to get you hyped about the idea of buying more loot boxes. FIFA may be the most extreme example of this glorification of gambling, but most AAA games are guilty of it.

Removing that Feeling of Investment

Casinos do not use real money. Not directly, anyway. Instead, customers trade in real cash for chips or casino tokens. There are a couple of practical reasons for this. Chips are generally easier to count than actual cash. Also, chips are designed to be weighable to quickly calculate their monetary value on the go. However, these are more so convenient side effects of their actual purpose.

Mark D. Griffiths’ study on the use of chips states: “Participants gambled significantly more with chips than with real cash.” It’s a simple concept that works scarily well. Remove the obvious value of real cash and replace it with abstract pieces of metal. By doing so, players don’t realize how much is actually at stake. We are trained throughout our lives to understand the value of cash, but casino tokens don’t come as naturally to us.

Many video games use this strategy for their own gains. To be fair, some games allow players to purchase content upfront, for cash. Popular mainstream titles like Overwatch allow players to purchase loot boxes with real money. However, it is far more common for publishers to lock them behind in-game currency. This currency is buyable for real money but has no inherent value. It is simply a means to unlock loot boxes.

A lot of games do this. Apex Legends, NBA 2K20, Call of Duty, Fortnite, Battlefront 2, and FIFA, just to name a few. By offering meaningless digital currency, it removes the victim’s ability to link spending with loot boxes. What is 4000 FIFA Points even worth? What does that mean to the average person? Publishers are relying on this abstract value to take advantage of gambling prone individuals.

Things Are Somewhat Improving

2019 has seen a general decline in loot boxes.  Many publishers are realizing that the overwhelmingly negative PR that comes with them may not be worth it long-term. In their place, we’ve seen the rise of the battle pass. Battle passes are not guilt-free and still trigger some gambling linked behaviors, but they’re a far more pro-consumer approach. Instead of relying on RNG, you pay upfront and get rewards based primarily on playtime and skill.

It’s difficult to tell where the future of video game monetization lies. Today I’ve only discussed how key gambling mechanics are used to exploit gamers. Remember that mobile inspired microtransactions also exist and, arguably, can be even worse since they often directly affect the game’s progression model. Hopefully, recent developments and governments getting involved will prevent, or at least deter, publishers from persisting this any further. If not, I fear the future of gaming could be pretty bleak.

What do you think about gambling mechanics in the games industry? Has it gone too far or are publishers justified in trying to make more money? Have you or someone you know been affected by gambling mechanics in games? We’d love to know so be sure to drop your thoughts in the comments below.

Just a few days ago, Infinity Ward announced Modern Warfare’s first seasonal content drop. With that announcement came a clear message to fans. They plan to bring back a range of classic Modern Warfare maps from years gone by. The already announced free additions of Vacant, Crash, and Shipment are nice, but there’s still plenty of options for later seasons. Here are my top five Infinity Ward maps that Modern Warfare needs most.

Call of Duty 4 – Crossfire

Contrary to many people’s thoughts, Call of Duty 4 didn’t have perfect maps. A lot of them were prone to spawn camping or overly easy flanking. However, it definitely still had some gems that Modern Warfare could benefit from. I think both Vacant and Crash were obvious choices but what’s next? In my opinion, Crossfire is a perfect fit.

One of Modern Warfare’s current problems is that maps aren’t well suited to multiple gun types. An open map like Piccadilly suits Rifles and Snipers whilst Hackney Yard heavily favours shotguns and SMGs. Many older Infinity Ward maps did a better job of accommodating multiple play styles and gun choices.

Crossfire is a great example of this. The open central lane is a powerhouse sightline for talented snipers. However, both edges of this narrow map give options for flankers to get behind the enemy team. Most buildings use multiple entry points making it difficult to camp them for extended periods of time. Not to forget that Crossfire’s bus is practically iconic at this point. You’d always find a pesky sniper or LMG user set up in there for some high-risk, high-reward plays.

Modern Warfare 3- Hardhat

For me, Modern Warfare 3 is a pretty forgettable game. It played like a watered-down, inferior Modern Warfare 2. Despite this, it did still have a handful of notable maps that have survived the test of time. I initially considered Dome and Arkaden for this slot instead but eventually settled on Hardhat.

Hardhat is defined by its iconic map design encouraging fights for control over the center. This was Infinity Ward at their best. There are three primary entry routes including the legendary sniper’s tunnel. Players who fight hard to gain access to the middle are rewarded with great power positions. This meant strong sightlines coupled with the large quantity of nice cover, allowing good players to dominate.

Modern Warfare could benefit heavily from a map where the best positions are central rather than on the wings. Right now, many players camp the outer regions of maps in buildings with their claymores covering entrances. If you force players to fight over the middle of a map instead, gun mechanics and prediction become the defining factors of who gets to stay there.

Modern Warfare 2 – Highrise

I put Hardhat on this list as I felt it was an underappreciated good fit. Highrise can be considered it’s opposite. Everyone loves Highrise. Frankly, rightly so too. This map was born in the prime age of when Infinity Ward developed to have fun. Rather than worrying about the competitive viability of a map, they designed it to be fun to play.

As the name would suggest, Highrise features some pretty impressive high ground options. You can scale the rooftops of one side of the map or climb the crane to hit some crazy trick shots. Highrise’s highlight feature was how many options it gave you. You could rush underground to try and catch the opposing team off guard. There were powerful lanes both right and left, both featuring varying levels to make engagements less predictable.

None of that is why I think Highrise would be a good fit for Modern Warfare though. Modern Warfare has a problem where many of its maps allow for teams to sit back and camp in spawn. This is because Infinity Ward insisted on making it newbie-friendly. Perhaps the worst offender for this is Piccadilly. There are too few methods to push the enemy team without being picked off. This is where Highrise steps in.

Thanks to the massive amount of options given to the player, it’s very difficult to camp in spawn. There are simply too many ways for them to create an angle on you. The best way to succeed on this map is aggressive, high paced gameplay. That’s the exact kind of encouragement

Call of Duty 4 – Pipeline

I’m not sure if Infinity Ward will add this many more Call of Duty 4 maps. If we assume Crossfire makes the cut, four maps from one game is probably enough already. In saying that, if they were to add a fifth I believe Pipeline would be a good candidate.

Pipeline is unusual by older Call of Duty game’s standards. Whilst technically still three-lane, it was far more focused on verticality and high ground control than any other map. I think in the past this was considered a negative but for Modern Warfare it’s a natural fit. Many existing maps such as Aniyah Palace, Tavorsk District, and Rammaza already opt for a similar, if not as extreme design.

Despite these similarities, Pipeline does something better than all of them. The high ground may have been strong, but it also left users vulnerable. Being too aggressive would result in an enemy picking you off from range. I feel Modern Warfare’s maps lack this potential of counter play. Currently, high ground control is way too strong. If someone sets up in a building with an M4, they can often feel unkillable.

If that’s not a big enough argument, consider how Pipeline has never had its chance to shine since its debut. Advanced Warfare featured a remake called Atlas Gorge, but it just didn’t work out. Unfortunately, that game’s insanely high pacing did not translate well to Pipeline’s long, punishing sightlines. Obviously, Modern Warfare’s far slower-paced gameplay would be a better

Modern Warfare 2 – Skidrow

Last but not least is Modern Warfare 2’s best multiplayer map. Rust is arguably Infinity Ward’s most iconic map ever, but that doesn’t mean it’s good. Sure, a tiny map like that will encourage more gunfights but we already have Shoot House and, the soon to be Shipment. Adding another tiny map seems unnecessary.

Skidrow’s best selling points happen to play the counterpart with Modern Warfare’s biggest flaw. This traditional three-lane map stands out from the crowd thanks to all the side rooms attached to each lane. It gets difficult to predict where enemies are going to be. Obviously, the downside to this is there are a fair few camping spots. However, consider that this also means it’s harder for campers to scout all possible flanking spots.

Honestly, how good a fit Skidrow is isn’t even my top priority. Instead, I just love the idea of bringing back a map with sightlines like this beauty. That central corridor is exactly the kind of thing Modern Warfare needs. It features both LMG and AR friendly long-range sightlines but also a plethora of flanking routes to cause problems. This is a great example of a map that was designed to make the community play smarter.

Right now, Modern Warfare is starved for this kind of map. Infinity Ward has effectively designed a game where slower-paced, low-skill playstyles are rewarded. By bringing back iconic, well-designed classics like Skidrow we might be able to shift back toward a faster-paced Call of Duty. At least that’s was I’m hoping for.

So, what do you think about these Infinity Ward Maps post? Please leave your comment in the comments box below.