Super Mario

It's more enjoyable since I didn't spent a dime on that Yakuza powered company.

Luigi is in the Mushroom kingdom after you get ALL the moons including the ~99 you can buy from the shops
He tells you about the balloon thing

Luigi does the Balloon mini game

got any more assets?

There's an unfinished/beta version of the map in the OP and some strings of code related to some unused costumes, but other than that nothing too major has been found so far

There's also this retextured model of Mario from 3D World with his NES colors, not sure what it would have been used for though

Maybe it would've worked like his 64 costume?

That or it was just used for testing early on before the Odyssey model was finalized

Here's the beta world map
and a few other miscellaneous changes

WHERE IS BEANBEAN KINGDOM

But how do you tape something onto a ghost?

More Peach SFM porn when

Why do people like Peach so much?
She's not particularly attractive or anything. She's pretty but had she been in any other series she'd have nowhere near as much popularity.

At least its not Baby Peach or Rosalini

Loogy has a backpack on so it seems like it would've been something akin to what peach did in the game, with him literally backpacking around the world
Or maybe he'd be playable and instead of having OP hat moves he just has some shit in a backpack or something, which is at least better than "he's mario but slippery and with higher jumps"

Never understood the appeal myself either, especially bowser-peach garbage. Repugnant stuff. Also Mario is half peach's height or somewhere around there. I could attribute it to a facet of autism, but that's more a cop-out from actually having to research the matter, even if it's accidentally right.

Does the Mario fanbase have a cuckolding fetish with all the Bowser shit out there?

I'm gonna need some Pauline X Peach SFM, stat.
Where would they put the new levels? The current map already goes around the world, as well as to the moon and back. I guess they could fork a couple paths from existing levels, but there only seems to be room for 2 or 3 extra levels. That they kind of shot themselves in the foot by letting you can buy an unlimited number of moons after completing the main game, thereby making collecting moons in the new levels kind of pointless. They'll most likely make an Odyssey 2 than expand on the existing game.
A man can dream.

Never underestimate the power of a blond woman with dick sucking lips.

She has the body of a 12 year old boy bro

Maybe just a placeholder for the 2D areas?

...

...

new mario was shit

Best music coming through

...

...

My guess is that it's being saved for DLC. I wouldn't mind black overalls with a red shirt and no gloves like SMB3 either, or just more retro colors overall

Siiva is a gift

They're Nintendo loving soyboys. Do you think those wojack memes taking the piss were making fun of nothing? Their reaction is because they're offended on being called out for being the worst fags and the best goyim.

And opinion discarded.

lol ok

Good or bad, anything past 1 is just a bad meme that should've been disregarded and using it as an example for anything is just asking for trouble.

3's about as popular as the first one, it's just as relevant, especially when only talking about incredibly basic game mechanics like equipping items and pressing buttons to swing
Also, every souls game after Demon's is a meme you goddamn poser

Isle Delfino is on the map, but where are the other Mario universe locations?

Where's Diamond City? Where are the Yoshi and DK Isles? Where's Sarasaland?

Honestly not even cuckholding shit, Mario should be with pauline, they're so much better together than peach and mario it's not funny, and if continuity even really matters anymore I doubt bowser gives a shit about stealing peach's magic powers for himself considering he seems exceedingly more adept, and this is even ignoring the fact they rebooted the series after one of the galaxy games.

Where the fuck is Beabean Kingdom? It's borders mushroom kingdom, but they decided to make Mushroom Kingdom an island. They know it exists, because they just recently remade Superstar Saga.

The only time companies will ever give a shit about lore is when they can sell and package it as a product, like Vaati and Dark Souls.

I hope they remove ruined kingdom for being gayer than AIDS

There's nothing saying they can't add them later. Delfino's placement doesn't even match up with how it's presented in Sunshine but that's just my autism flaring up again

M&L is a spinoff and nothing that happens in it is relevant to Odyssey

but user, don't you love dark souls?

For once, I'm glad.

Apparently M&L and Paper Mario are no longer canon to the main games, which I think is stupid.

You really want color splash and fucking bowsers minions to reflect on the main Mario games? Because that's what you're gonna get.

Well, no, not anymore. I'm just reminiscing on when the Mario RPG games were good (aka before SPM).

So is there an unused good game?

Japs are dumb.

Super Paper Mario was good, especially in retrospect

It was okay, but it marked the deviation from the previous two games that continued on to ruin the franchise. Much like how FFX is "okay", but it was a marked decrease in gameplay quality that continued on until peak shit in FFXIII and is still felt strongly in FFXV.

Anyone that thinks mario has a "canon" in the first place is fucking retarded

Not really because the subsequent game, the one that really did ruin the franchise, ignored almost everything about it. The only thing it retained was the shitty platforming except they made the platforming even shittier

No it wasn't.

If you think SPM was good you are wrong.

I played and beat it for the first time last year and it's fucking garbage. I'd have a really hard time thinking good aspects that game had.

Ironic because M&L and Paper Mario both have top-tier Mario lore. I did not look at the Mario universe the same after playing TTYD.

I thought it was fine for what it was, people only hate it because it wasn't a true sequel to TTYD.
Sticker Star on the other hand deserves all the hate.

No, I hate it because everything it does it does poorly, I started playing it knowing very well it wasn't like previous paper Mario games and had no expectations when I started it.

At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo later came out saying that Sarasaland is actually an alien kingdom, even though the Desert Kingdom in Odyssey had a number of references to it. Would that mean wanting to fuck Daisy would be xenophilia?
Also, you ask about Diamond City, but not Kitchen Island? How could you?

Neither did I. I have a neutral opinion on it gameplay wise. First mario game to make me cry

Fictional characters that do not perfectly follow human anatomy aren't humans. Wanting to fuck your waifu with eyes so big they take up half the inside of her skull is xenophilia.

...

Use ghost tape you fucking idiot

I wanna fuck that.

I'm surprised Sarasaland hasn't returned in general to be honest. The supernatural theme of each world would be great for a Luigi's Mansion game

Not even Subcon, I mean both Nintendo teams were dissolved into one, right?

I'm really hoping all the Mushroom Kingdom models and textures get ripped so I can make a quick HD SM64 demo that looked better than that Unreal engine thing.

Speaking of which I hope Throwback Galaxy gets ripped too for the same reasons.

Models-resource.com is where I go to for this stuff.

Subcon is a dream world, of course it's not going to appear on a world map.

Make cappy porn pls

...

Gee, it's almost like Nintendo makes video games with no intention of connecting them together.

gave me a chuckle

Joe is fucking ridiculous. Everything is dark souls with him, it's absurd. Guess he knows his audience.

This might sound weird but his videos are too basic. He just describes simple fucking information about the game that anyone with a brain would be able to tell, describing mechanics and how they work with no goal or point. And he's technically correct, but the videos are ultimately pointless. a good autistic game analysis establishes a concept with facts, then moves into well-reasoned opinions based off those facts. Joe just states the facts and gives up there.

"guys what if we took the turn based formula with likable characters everybody loved and then just said fuck it and made it generic platforming"
Good idea

Does TTYD emulate well? I want to give it a go

Bretty gud unless you have a shit rig.

Should neighbor the mushroom kingdom

But it's a fucking island.

It's still got likable characters, they're just abstract cube motherfuckers instead of toads goombas and argonians

What about Shyguys and Pokeys being real?

What about luigi and peach and toad being real

That's not the point, plenty of people felt cheated of another Mario RPG because they came to feel acquainted with Paper Mario being synonymous with that genre, seeing the mishmash of platforming and rpg with the 3d gimmick that is only used by a single character is off putting to those who liked the earlier ones for taking a slower approach to the game. Though I'd still pick that shit over Nu-tendo's games.

THAT WAS MY COCK, LUIGI

What about humans being real?

Hey, I remember you!

I'll pass

The map was designed after the levels, even look at the way that levels are placed in a line with a difficulty curve slowly going up between them, I just don't get how people don't understand this.

...

But that's what he does. In the SMO video he takes an autistic amount of time grouping together all the moons by type and how they are awarded (facts), and then reasons that the game is like that because it's catering to younger audiences (well-formed opinion). I'd agree with you on some videos. There's a few where the facts he gets to back up his arguments are flimsy, or that the conclusions he comes to are simply uninteresting. I felt the latter on his Little Nightmares video, he didn't end up saying much of anything interesting in that one.

DS gets brought up in a lot of game analysis videos because it's one of a few handful of games that almost everyone has had exposure to, as well as being a game that is very easy to mechanically dissect and understand. You could say the same for Mario Bros, which I bet is why he compares the two in his video.

I wonder if they'll do an Odyssey 2 and make the map completely different

Not much interesting but a lot of correct information that structurally breaks down why the game is nothing special I would say. How people can defend the game when he pretty much points out that only 20% of the game actually has decent mechanics implemented essentially tells you all you need to know as to why you shouldn't buy a Switch for Odyssey. 64 is still the best 3D Mario. There's very little padding and almost every star has an intended mechanic you need to use to get to them. The movement controls are also much better than Odyssey with more momentum and not having to rely on the same exact combo for every moment you want to excel past the intended method of movement.

I can't necessarily refute this on a technical level.

...

why do people shill this tool? Seriously the guy has not produced a single valid video to date. The next pretentious Hbomberguy, Errant Signal. It's the tiered quintessential dropout English major attempting to cashing in on sophomoric game critique all over again. It so rampant that its almost a Trope. The angry review was so tiered that people where craving something substantive, but instead of good reviews we get pretentious and wordy subjectivity. I can't wait for this trend to die.

New Mario best parts are in post game, too many pointless easy Power Moons but the game overall objectively is very fun

Well he objectively breaks down every moon in the video and why the majority of them are shit even IN post game. And frankly I agree with him eceleb status aside. Many of the moons post game are just sitting there waiting to be grabbed without any real challenge.

on

that's because it because those stars are scavenger hunts not the same brand of challenge as traditional platforming. However, the few good platforming parts and boss fights are good enough to really sell my on the value of the product overall. The easy shit is just comfy. Its biggest flaw is not the percentage of easy too challenging but rather how that was poorly placed due to the "open world" nature. You are objectively docked points for defending Joseph Anderson's faggotry.

Odyssesys soundtrack is trash, only 1 or 2 good songs and they're not even memorable. Say what you want about Sunshine, but the soundtrack was one of it's stronger points, I love that game.

Is it meant to look this absurd?

If it's not the Dark Souls of Super Mario, I want nothing to do with it

Yep!

The last thing I think of in Mario is going on a scavenger hunt. Where you aimlessly run around and look for new objects without any challenge or effort.
So 10% of the game? Jesus you're scraping the bottom of the barrel here. Keep in mind that even to GET to most of those sections you still have to wade through garbage platforming and "look I see a moon" being the hardest challenge for most of them.
Again I could care less about the guy. The points he brings up are valid however.

1 is still better than 3.

No, see, him pointing out the objective flaws of the game in the most straightforward way possible is wrong because he makes long videos and that means everything he says is a lie

Yes, and?

but user he doesn't point out "objective flaws", but rather makes a series of subjective opinions and then couches that opinion in wordy long form video so that nobody takes the time to point out the flaws in his reasoning or where he is being intellectually dishonest.

I have seen videos from a guy who did just that, but for hbomberguy's Dark Souls 2 shit. The end result was around seven hours long and split across 8 or so videos.

yes I mentioned MauLer in my first post regarding this topic.

The most dishonest thing he does is frame peach's castle as a handholdy tutorial level for ten minutes
And it actually fools people, because the "endgame content" is legitimately that retarded
But yes, his reasoning is totally subjective, having to sit through a literal hour of "you got moon" cutscenes, those toadette 'chievo dialogs, a complete segmented list of every single moon in the game and what has to be done to get them, all that compiled information is just, like, his opinion, man
Bad game design is not an opinion, it's clear to the audience, which is why he doesn't have to tell people it's objectively bad, and can freely say he personally doesn't like things

I think you're just mad that you can't necessarily refute his points.
It's almost like he states several times in the video that people may disagree with the concept of thinking that a moon piece sitting in plain view with next to no effort of a "good" example of game design.
Not to Nintendo fans apparently.

sitting in plain view and being able to obtain with next to no effort*

Are you autistic

No I happen to think that Odyssey is a bad game.

Stopped watching when he started talking about Dark Souls. Why is it so hard for youtube faggots to just stay on topic for one whole video?

...

you user this issue is clearly over your head and you lack the philosophical training to recognize these nuanced distinctions. Maybe you didn't know this but the "objective opinion" meme has always been a joke taking the piss out of fedora tippers like yourself who demand opinion is analyzed like a science. You cannot use objective facts to lend substance to subjective valuations. For example my statement "Some of the power moons are scavenger hunts" is a fact. My opinion on if scavenger hunts is fun is Subjective. I could wast my time trying to explain to (you) why Joseph Anderson video is retarded and figuratively it would be throwing pearls to swine.

Can't we all agree that the best Mario game would be something in the same vein as 3D World but with Mario 64 level of control?

Yes and that's great but I was asking if you were autistic due to your severe lack of social awareness

Go to sleep, type more tomorrow. You're dying fam. I'll even help you out when I'm in the mood tomorrow, fap for now.

I'm still not wrong.

You are not, but get some rest, you're stumbling and fumbling over what you say. Take a breather, man.

YES!!

The problem with the sentiment is that earlier Mario games were more inclined towards completing a challenge than running around and doing tedious jobs that didn't require thought or a challenge. When I say he objectively breaks down the game I mean he objectively states what percentage of moons ARE scavenger hunts or have an aspect where you put very little effort into getting it. The opinion part is whether you find that fun. And considering earlier games had much less of this sort of design I would say that by an opinionated measure that running around with no obstacles in a MARIO game is not fun as it completely spits in the face of what the games were OBJECTIVELY about. If you watch the video he explicitly states that many of the areas where you collect the moons might be fun. So objectively, yes Odyssey might be fun. But you also have to acknowledge by that metric that ANY game might be fun provided it meets the specific audience. so I guess by this same stream of logic, games like Gone Home and the Walking Dead are "fun" despite the fact that they barely reach being a game.
And I could waste my time explaining why running from 1 side of the map to the other in a desert isn't actually fun compared to earlier titles but I would be throwing good taste to a nintendofan.

Unless you have a counterpoint to what I'm explicitly stating about how the game doesn't function as an enjoyable Mario game you're not really doing much better in the social awareness department.

When he looks at collated and organized footage of all the available moons and says 90% of them come from content that is not challenge-based or substantive, that's a factual position he makes a demonstrative argument for using collected footage
When he says he thinks that's bad and makes the game boring, that's his opinion, man
This is not difficult

I don't know why I would, given that I agree with you
I think I'll just continue to make fun of you for not understanding incredibly blatant sarcasm

Google poe's law. In my defense you're not really structuring your posts well enough for that to be more obvious. though I guess that's the point

user, you directly quoted me saying every objective fact was wrong because of the length of the video
And then another one of me saying facts were opinions
Do I have to put a fucking ":^)" at the end of every sentence

holly shit, mentally retarded people like yourself is why nobody invest any time into effort post.

Listen man, I've been in a lot of modern Nintendo game threads. And Ill just say that your argument was at least 5x more well presented than a lot of arguments I've seen by comparison. We also have people who make some pretty schizo posts on this site like the user who thought there was no such thing as a weeb or the EYE autist. You can't necessarily blame me for taking you seriously on a board full of retards.

It's not a subjective opinion that the majority of the moon pieces in the game are without obstacles or effort to get. It is a subjection opinion as to whether their fun or not. Try reading the entirety of my post before you blow an autistic gasket.

but 90% is quite frankly hyperbolic and the scope of the game is so much larger then Mario64 that if (for the sake of argument we accepted your 90% figure) the remaining 10% is just as challenging and substantive in terms of gameplay in-game-time that it is at least equivalent. Most importantly that Comfortable and non challenging 90% is not evidence that the game is not good or fun. I happen to like it and my only critique was what I stated earlier in the thread regarding the pacing where I believe its open world nature lends to an imbalance of Challenging "Fun" vs Fluffy "Fun".

sorry for that run on sentence*

Well if we're on the focus of subjectivity then I can't say that in the least. Part of the reason is because the movement controls are just garbage compared to 64 or arguably Galaxy. You have your single combo for the hat jump and that's about it. After that you're stuck doing that for the rest of the game. Add to that the fact that the long jump, the stop backflip and the FUCKING wall jumping are nerfed or reduced in stature to hell and you have to consider if it's really just as fun and entertaining as the original games. So if you want to argue substantive then why is the movement less so? And even IF the 10% of that game is entertaining, that still doesn't negate the fact that you have to play at least 40-60% of the bad potions to get to those segments. If you're going to enjoy Odyssey then just admit it's a guilty pleasure. Looking at the game and playing it for about 15 hours at a friends house I can say I genuinely do not enjoy playing it but that it made for good eyecandy and had a lot of flare and personality as far as tone and art direction goes, not to mention the "nostalgic" aspects the game likes to ride so hard. The problem either way is that people who play the game are likely bought over by those aspects rather than the actual gameplay. Which is lacking for a Mario game.

What if there's multiple inhabitable planets in the Mario universe? I mean, Galaxy pretty much proved that.

There is no "Mario Universe" Shigeru Miyamoto explained the Mario characters as actors in the same vein as Bugs Bunny. Just characters that serve as tools to tell different stories with disconnected continuity and setting. Like how Bugs Bunny finds himself in Pismo Beach, California in one episode but in Antarctica in another episode. Same with Mario, continuity is unimportant, just the setup is.

90% was my generalization, it's been a while since I sat through the whole video but he does go through every individual moon, categorizes them into type, and goes over all of them starting from what he considers the laziest, and he goes a good way through the 800 moons in the game before he gets to anything resembling traditional mario challenges

It amazes me to this day that people think Nintendo gives a shit about continuity in their big franchises. We had a thread a few days ago where anons were crying that Zelda had no linearity in the timeline. As if this information was already common sense since fucking Windwaker.

There's certainly a grey area once you pass around the 600 moon mark. Which I think says it all about Odyssey.

Too be fair, Aonuma was hyping a Zelda timeline back when Wind Waker launched because WW was obviously a direct sequel to OoT. But then shit falls apart since Majoras Mask was also a sequel to OoT. And basically no games made before WW cared about continuity, so the writers had to retroactively include them in the timeline and the whole thing is fucking retarded.

All I'll say is that Hyrule Historia was a mistake.

It didn't have to be a mistake if Aonuma just started the timeline at Wind Waker and didn't care about the older titles. He could've put the older titles into a vague and out of order "sometime after Skyward Sword and Minish Cap but sometime before Wind Waker" and nobody would've cared

That's a character from thrill kill.

user, WW takes place hundreds of years after OoT, it's not a "direct sequel"

100 years actually
The prologue explains fuck all happened to link between OoT and Wind Waker because he was fucking dead while Ganon was fucking shit up and flooding the world. Effectively its a direct sequel

That doesn't explain how majora's mask also being a sequel is in conflict with that

Exactly, which is why the timeline is retarded. Doesn't MM take place in another dimension and/or timeline to Wind Waker?

According to the timeline table:

I'm pretty sure Aonuma never realized MM was a parallel world

Yes, to both of those
It's a continuation of OoT link's story after he was returned to his original time, which was always a thing that happened at the end of OoT and not something they made up
The timeline split is only retarded in the sense that it's incredibly simple and straightforward for a game that dealt with time travel as a core mechanic

What if WW, Spirit Tracks, etc. are all just dreams Link has between MM and BOTW?

Which you can tell was a complete afterthought because it's obvious that none of the games prior to Majoras Mask really cared about continuity. Notice MM was the first game Aonuma was the sole designer. The entire timeline shit was all his idea

user, I think it's more likely Aonuma just wanted to re-use a bunch of OoT assets to be able to complete the game in as short a time as he did and that's what started all the parallel world rumors. Don't get me wrong, it actually shows Aonumas great talent as a game designer. But overall I think he really lacks a solid direction for the series, as Skyward Sword clearly shows, and how BotW greatly contrasts it as far as linearity goes. Something he should've realized by WW was where he should've stuck with from the beginning.

That would be on par with the ending to SMB2. It just deflates the experience. I would rather the games not have a linear timeline anyway. Focus on plot has a tendency to fucking ruin games.

Ya know, you kinda got me thinking in the comparison of WW to BotW. Both are open world games with vast expanses of fuck-all in them and only "islands" of things to actually DO, but WW made it more blatant that there actually WAS something to do and everything else was a grand travel to grasp the world.

You felt a sense of relief and happiness when you came upon an island, which was it's own mini dungeon. BotW only has the shrines, which are annoying grinds at best for a reward that just isn't worth the amount of time put into it.

Here's my theory behind BotWs design philosophy, don't get your panties in a bunch here because I don't claim to know the designers intentions, but this is how I feel was behind its design as someone who's played many hours of it on CEMU.

In BotW, there really is no unused space, the world itself is the substance of the game. Shrines only exist to drive the player across the map, as focal points to force players to explore. The real point of BotW is exploring. Every mechanic in the game is geared completely to encouraging the player to go off the path. Collecting items off the ground is seamless, you can glide, you can climb mountains.etc Even weapon durability is geared towards forcing the player to explore, weapons, something normally seen as something to use to mach 'B' at enemies until they die, now break, and this forces you to constantly be moving, finding new weapons and monitoring durability. BotW is actually superior to WW in this regard because in WW the ocean was literally just a clever tool to mask load-points on the GCNs limited hardware

Just because MM wasn't in the same physical space as hyrule doesn't mean it wasn't real or couldn't have any effect on hyrule, I think you're having trouble understanding what parallel world means here
I have no idea what you're trying to say here
No idea about the story, but Tingle is a joke character, like Beedle or Dampe(who is the only terminian character in MM to share a name with his hyrulian counterpart), who are universal constants in any game they appear in, like Link and Zelda, and really don't have much of a relation to the continuity
Wasn't this fan theory bullshit
Also, the giants are directly stated to be considered deities by the people of Termina, and they do have a direct connection

Whether they "really cared" or not is up to you, but Zelda II was a direct sequel as well, and featured a scale representation of the first game in it's world map
user the game literally begins with link falling down an alice in wonderland style hole
It wasn't some accident, it was the explanation for why all the character models were reused

Well, I guess the whole Odyssey part of the story is about seeing things that don't really fit the Mushroom Kingdom's style. Kind of how in M&L:SS your enemies are lankier versions of the normal troopers but there's plenty of odd fellows that look like beans.

Zelda II is an exception. Nintendo also made a Mario Bros. 2 as a sequel to Mario Bros

It's not really an exception, ALttP was also always a prequel, even if they never took it all that seriously

The problem with this theory is most of the mechanics that force the player to keep moving are shit.

Look you seem to miss the fundamental point that value (in a modern context) is subjective. Anderson's video is calk full of cherry picked examples where he downplays all the challenging parts of the game and hyperbolic plays up the easy part to all to add the illusion of substance to his subjective opinions. He is playing a rhetorical game where he selects facts and states them in the most monotonous unfair manner then acts as tho those facts are validation for his subjective conclusion. Someone could use the same facts and parent all of them in such a way that makes them seem entertaining to the audience but they still would be engaging in a dishonest "is-ought" sleight of hand. In fact one could use the same tactics to make any game seem good or bad depending on how you biased the article.

Most egregious example of this is when Anderson prescribes motive to the game developers stating (as if a fact) that "Exploration" was the goal of the new game but then uses examples of the small over wold size of each level to show how it failed at allowing the player to Explore. This is just one example of this time of intellectually dishonest strawman rhetoric the guy uses and this type of fallacious reasoning goes on for two hours. Its fucking painfully stupid if you understand even basic logic.

This type of wish-washy rhetorical shenanigans is great for trolling but you are deceiving yourself if you actually think the nonsense is anything short of classic sophistry. Weather the author liked or Disliked the game is not material and when talking about standards you are faced with fundamental metaphysics that cannot be ignored. Superficially speaking value is purely subjective and on that note these things cannot be empirically measured, that is unless you are basing your standards on some type of Platonic Idealism or Teleology but when we start disguising these things from idealism or Purpose driven metrics the language used changes to reflect these standards. One cannot arbitrarily jump form moral subjectivity to Idealism on a whim.

...

He showcases dozens of examples man. I've played the game. The "challenging" parts rarely get more difficult than anything in fucking 3D world and he shows multiple examples of Mario literally running to moons with nothing of challenge blocking your path. You think a 2 hour video ISN'T going to show hundreds of examples that back up his point? The final FINAL level is a joke compared to just about every Mario game released outside of maybe 64 which didn't much have one. Play 3D worlds final challenge if you don't believe me.

The game was sold on that premise. fuck 64 was sold on that premise. And frankly I don't think you're doing much for your argument if you're essentially stating what he said himself, that the worlds are often much to small for the exploration to be worth it.

How many times does it need to be stated that the fucker posts basic facts of what he's describing before he ascribes any opinion to them? He states that the bosses are easy and rather tedious (opinion) and then goes on to explain that during many of them you simply can't attack them and MUST wait (fact). He mentions that a grand majority of the moons require very little effort and are overly easy to acquire and that they ended up padding the game instead of allowing the player to be challenged and interact with new mechanics (opinion). He then shows hundreds of examples of Mario doing nothing but walking as a goomba across a desert doing absolutely nothing, dressing up to get a moon from an NPC several times by treading through the map with NO obstacles or obstructive challenges outside of collecting coins (which is a problem in itself), or simply seeing a small hidden blank area of a wall and move to that area to find a moon with no challenges or difficulty. He basically backs up his points thoroughly and unless you want to post even 50 examples that counter this claim I can't see your point at all about your criticisms against him. He nearly described every moon in the game and somehow you think he's somehow exaggerating about what he's saying? What about removing or nerfing half of the fun movements 64 and prior games had in favor of the hat movements that force you to do 1 combo throughout the entire game? Is that a stretched opinion when he directly shows you how fucking badly they nerfed the wall jump compare to other games (he even showed comparisons in the video)?

I think you're either mad that somehow a youtube faggot managed to have a solid argument or that you can't handle the fact that you spent money on a bad game and you're in buyers remorse. Either way you're not even trying to counter any specific argument he made. Though I can hardly blame you, the video is 2 hours But even then you can't take any specific examples? I fucking hated playing Odyssey, it was a chore. I was tired of running to places doing nothing but grabbing moons I didn't feel were deserved. I was also fucking tired of throwing my hat all over the fucking place to see if I could get a moon out of half of the sharp tipped objects in the game. He was dead on in the assessment that you're going to be doing retarded shit half the game just hoping you get something out of it. After 13 hours I had to drop the game partly because of that. It's a fucking grind with a beautiful art direction. But it's still a fucking grind.

And opinions about some eceleb being wrong doesn't make you're valid either.

I wanna tape on a dildo owo

If exploration wasn't a goal of the game, why have open worlds with moons spread out and placed in a way such as to encourage exploring the worlds?
If exploration isn't a goal, why make the player explore the worlds to find randomly placed moons several separate times each?
What was the goal of all this tedious easy bullshit if not to encourage exploration? Was placing so many moons in barely hidden, easy to get locations all over all the worlds meant to evoke some other method of gameplay not related to exploring the world?
Do I have to go through the entire fucking list of moons myself to prove how retarded you are?

DO IT

That'd have made a little more sense. In reality, the book makes it clear that this split occurs during the battle with Ganondorf, not the final battle with Ganon. That boss battle where Ganondorf is floating around, pounding his fist on the ground and eager to play tennis? Yes, that was the moment where the game over potentially happened and Link fell.

why do people try to put together a clusterfuck that clearly was not intended to have an order or relation, its not better than fanfiction

Does it actually say that or are you just assuming it because it calls him "Ganondorf"
Hilarious if true

It states that. It's one united timeline until the first split right at the penultimate battle (page 90), and the second split after the final battle (page 91). Ganondorf doesn't use the Triforce of Power to transform into OoT Ganon except in the very beginning of the adult branch (page 122); in the classic branch (page 92), he uses the complete Triforce to instead transform into OG blue pig beast Ganon, and the child branch (page 110) is the one where he just kinda gets the Triforce of Power from a "divine prank."

I can't see her as sexy when she's pretty much chibi-tier proportions.

You seem to forget that modern Nintendo is also appealing to casuals who have a harder time getting their dopamine fix, you can have different target audiences fam, this game isn't going to be about finding a "Blue Moon", that is to say, it isn't about carefully hidden items that will drive away potential buyers, this game even has a babby mode for fucks sake.
This will encourage younger players to keep going. That's it, end of.

...

By walking around the world and seeing moons moons to get, yes
And if they want to continue playing the game enough to beat it, the amount of walking and looking steadily increases due to the lowering number of available moons(with occasional spurts of brand new moons to encourage backtracking and treating the whole area as if it was new again)
Almost like they're exploring the world
"exploration" doesn't refer exclusively to checking every nook and cranny for hidden things

Well the kid timeline has Link tell Zelda that 'Dorf is gonna usurp the crown. Zelda tells daddy, daddy then incriminated 'dorf like a sand nigger and even sets up an execution with the sages, but because the triforce was split at another point in time in another time, he was already bound to it (because the timeline isn't linear, if a fucking musical instrument can reset, speed, slow, or otherwise fuck with everything, the triforce probably has as much in terms of restrictions, which would be fuck all), just as link and zeldo are bound to it.

If the goddamn song of storms exists outside the bounds of linear time, then so does the thing made by the gods that constantly shifts between existing in the physical world and only having a metaphysical presence, and that can literally grant wishes

I was going to say this is wrong, but looking at a list of the bosses, it's around 5 out of 13 of them. Under half, but definitely not "every boss has skips" tier.
Which is stupid, because for most of them it's easy to think of ways around it not being vulnerable in the "defend" phase. Like having some way to climb on top of the flower boss, when he's upside down, or nailing Mecha Wiggler's face when it's dashing, to stop it.

Anyway yeah, I still enjoy fucking around in Odyssey because of the movement system, but it's very much a pretty empty and shallow game, and personally I've wound up going back to leaving Cave Story in my Switch.

Why do I get so much joy out of seeing Ridley sip out of a hummingbird feeder?

Thanks for the OSV, OP! Believe it or not I've been looking for one all over the place and have been unable to find it - even in the share thread archives, etc. Thanks!

cmon faggot.

...

Found the odyssey fanboy.

By that logic fucking a being as distorted as you is xenophilia.