Mario Party: Star Rush

[Lin Beifong]

Oh man, part of me hopes that the finished product will be a mess of barely finished assets, poorly implemented ideas, and mismatched placeholders, just so the title of "Star Rush" takes on a completely different meaning.

It's unfair , and causes blisters thanks to Minigames.

What Mario Party game ISN'T unfair? It's not known as the series that destroys friendships for nothing.

For starters, it took them like half the series to realize chance time is a crock of shit and to remove it.

It's like the Zelda cycle. Everyone hates the current game until the next one comes out, and that one gets hated and the previous game suddenly gets a ton of praise.

I firmly believe that cycle is an illusion created through blindspots in the public's perception. Back when Twilight Princess came out, I thought it was a poorly made game. I still think it has the same problems it did back then and wouldn't call it a good game, but I have made peace with it since then. People move on, that's the whole secret behind it.

The thing is that, while the idea of the obsessed raging nerd incapable of letting go may be entertaining, most people actually are not the lifeless shells the general public wants them to be. A lot of people will actually move on once they're done expressing their disdain for something. A shitty game comes out, and people start screaming about that. As time passes, the shit game loses relevancy, and with that people move on with their lives. That's why the number of complaints seems to go down; People still hold the same opinion about the game, but you don't hear about it because most people don't see the point in screaming about a game that's not even relevant anymore. It's not that the game suddenly got retroactively vindicated, you just perceive a decrease in disdain because less people are talking about it.

As for the "old game gets a lot of praise" part: I think that's a perception thing too. If a sequel to a poorly-made game is also shit, chances are it is shit for different reasons. So you might get a bunch of comments like "Well, at least (previous game) didn't do (shit feature in the sequel)", or "Man, that (shit feature in the sequel) actually made me miss (previous game)". At first glance these statements seem like compliments, and thus the general public will interpret them as such, and note an increase in praise for the previous game.

The thing is though: They actually aren't compliments. I think Super Paper Mario is a pretty bad game, yet I can, in good conscience, say that "Well, at least Super Paper Mario actually tried to have a plot/unique characters, unlike Sticker Star. It gave me something to talk about.", or "Man, the way Bowser was portrayed in PM:SS actually made me miss SPM". None of that means I suddenly love Super Paper Mario, or want more games like it. It just means that SPM, while still having a ton of other problems that ruin the game, did those particular things I mentioned better than PM:SS. I still don't like either game though.

So really, this whole "cycle" boils down to a perception issue. People just lapped up the idea of a zelda cycle because thinking of a whole fandom of people as one giant fickle nerd who can't make up his mind about which games he hates is more entertaining than reality. Don't believe everything you're told.

 

[Starlight24]

Chance time is the smallest of your concerns comparing the first game and the sequel.

Mario Party 1 is the most unfair game in the series , aside from 9 and 10 for being linear and almost impossible to ''come back''.

2vs2 and 3vs1 causes the loser to LOSE coins

This never happens in the sequels.

Bowser in this game is probably THE WORST in the entire series , always up to some bull*bleep* that you literally can't avoid if you reach him outside his spaces. Literally can cause a player to LOST a game because he actually takes stars away and it's completely unavoidable.

Boo steals coins FOR FREE.

Chance time in the first game is , from experience , waaaaay more rigged than in other games.

I tested this by playing with hard CPU and everytime they landed on chance time they stealed from the HIGHEST ranked player , and then restart and either they landed EXACTLY in the same space or Stealed again from the exact player , and the exact same thing.

In the sequel , this was beggining to be fixed , until it was finally taken out of the series.

What Mario Party is not ''unfair''?

Kinda like saying what Mario Kart is not unfair , as in each game you can get rekt , period.

But At least many games in the series of Mario Party have provided waaay more ways to either defend yourself or attack back , as opposed to the original game , ONLY TO BE TAKEN OUT since 9.

 

[Lin Beifong]

Chance time literally has options like "exchange all stars and coins", AKA your entire progress during the game, and that is not exclusive to the first game.

People losing coins for losing minigames is not inherently unfair, it's just harsh. You lost the game, you get punished. Seems legitimate to me. Future games decreased the harshness, but that doesn't really make it more fair. Harshness and fairness aren't the same thing.

As for the Boo thing: I fail to see the issue. You're stealing coins, so you're getting back more coins than you spend anyway. What's the big deal about it being free? In fact, the only thing the added cost does is lock poor players (i.e. the ones that need the coins the MOST) out of the feature. I'd say having it be free actually makes it LESS unfair.

What Mario Party is not ''unfair''?

Kinda like saying what Mario Kart is not unfair , as in each game you can get rekt , period.

Yes, Mario Kart is also unfair, but that doesn't really diminish the unfairness of Mario Party, just like the existence of the Empire State Building doesn't make the Washington Monument less tall than the average building.

Maybe the exact quantity of bullshit varies from title to title, but at the end of the day, Mario Party is just not a fair series in its entirety. Which isn't always bad, because it's a party game, not a competitive title.

 

[Xiahou Ba]

Doesn't this Zelda cycle also assume that the fanbase is a hivemind as well?

Also, I don't like some of the original Mario Party's stuff. One of the reasons it's more unfair than other installments is mostly due to the lack of a proper item system, something 3 and later on thankfully addressed (and brought some more depth to the gameplay). If you want to win in Mario Party, you have to take advantage of your items, most definitely.

Another thing is the control-stick spinning mini-games and the entire existence of Bash and Cash, later installments which later switched.

As for Fortune Spaces (yes I always call them that), that's one of Mario Party 7's, 8's and DS's greatest strengths, the removal of those damn things. Thankfully, exchanging stars is an extremely rare feat in my playthroughs (as well as giving away two stars from the roulette), but it's main reason Fortune Spaces are the absolute worst space you can land on, even worse than the space you're supposed to be scared of, the Bowser Space. There's something wrong with them when I'd rather land on a Bowser space all times rather than land on a Fortune Space once.

 

[Lin Beifong]

Doesn't this Zelda cycle also assume that the fanbase is a hivemind as well?

Yeah, that is the incredibly prevalent assumption. A lot of people seem to have such an immensely hard time understanding that fandoms aren't just one amalgamous blob entity instead of a whole lot of individual people with different (and even conflicting) opinions.

Sometimes there are situations where one subsection of a fandom complains about something, and then an entirely different subsection who likes the new thing complains when it gets taken out. And it's always, ALWAYS followed up by someone who can't wrap their head around the concept of groups, who blurts out "Gee, you whined when the thing was put in, and then you whined when it was taken out again. Make up your mind, (fandom)!"

It's a bit like going to an ice cream vendor and telling them you don't like vanilla and prefer chocolate, and the vendor goes "Wow, what? I sold twenty cones of vanilla ice cream to kids your age yesterday, and now you're telling me you don't like vanilla??? Make up your mind, collective children of that age group in this town!"



Anyway, all this talk about chance time suddenly reminded me of BSC's run of Waluigi's Island and how Ryan spent the entire game on the island where all the spaces constantly change (sometimes into chance time spaces). That thing was hilarious. Mario Party is such an entertaining game when you aren't the one playing it.

Oh man, I should watch that again.

 

[Starlight24]

It is unfair because :

A) 2vs2 , if 1 person screws up or even worse , the CPU does , then you get punished by no reason because it wasnt you who messed up.

This is most notable in Desert Dash ,Bobsled run and of course BOMBSKETBALL !



B) 3vs1

Bash and Cash it's the most unfair blood bath ever for whoever is inside the Bowser Suit. Ironically , this is not really cooperative , this is a scam , the each of the players literally get lucky if they have 1 bag of coins each , you can still manage to get nothing as one of the 3 players thus losing the minigame.

Bowl Over is clearly rigged for the 1 player to steal coins , the other 3 BARELY have chance to avoid the shell.

Tug o War ... i have no words , it's self explanatory.

Paddle Battle , same as Tug o War.

Pirahnas Persuit is hellish.

And then we have Pipe Maze , which i still don't get how on earth this minigame either exists or why is placed as a 3vs1.


Im not saying they need to baby the player , LIKE IN RECENT MARIO PARTY GAMES ,

YES , for anybody who actually didnt notice , you have ''lives'' in most minigames were you fall off the platforms and etc , which is so dumb.

But dang , the first game is a war zone.

Also , Boo steals for free and you cannot defend yourself , so it's just as luck based as Chance Time.

So yes , it is UNFAIR. And this doesnt happen in later entries.

 

[Cirdec]

It is unfair because :

A) 2vs2 , if 1 person screws up or even worse , the CPU does , then you get punished by no reason because it wasnt you who messed up.

This is most notable in Desert Dash ,Bobsled run and of course BOMBSKETBALL !



B) 3vs1

Bash and Cash it's the most unfair blood bath ever for whoever is inside the Bowser Suit. Ironically , this is not really cooperative , this is a scam , the each of the players literally get lucky if they have 1 bag of coins each , you can still manage to get nothing as one of the 3 players thus losing the minigame.

Bowl Over is clearly rigged for the 1 player to steal coins , the other 3 BARELY have chance to avoid the shell.

Tug o War ... i have no words , it's self explanatory.

Paddle Battle , same as Tug o War.

Pirahnas Persuit is hellish.

And then we have Pipe Maze , which i still don't get how on earth this minigame either exists or why is placed as a 3vs1.


Im not saying they need to baby the player , LIKE IN RECENT MARIO PARTY GAMES ,

YES , for anybody who actually didnt notice , you have ''lives'' in most minigames were you fall off the platforms and etc , which is so dumb.

But dang , the first game is a war zone.

Also , Boo steals for free and you cannot defend yourself , so it's just as luck based as Chance Time.

So yes , it is UNFAIR. And this doesnt happen in later entries.

I agree that 1vs3 minigames in the first Mario Party are the most unfair. But I like that, I think it makes the game fun. It's just coins you can lose after all, unlike Chance Time where you can lose Stars.
You should also add Crane Game to your list, stealing 1/3 of a player's coins is so overpowered, especially if it has 100+ coins.

 

[Lin Beifong]

It is unfair because :

A) 2vs2 , if 1 person screws up or even worse , the CPU does , then you get punished by no reason because it wasnt you who messed up.

This is most notable in Desert Dash ,Bobsled run and of course BOMBSKETBALL !

Uhm... welcome to the concept of a team battle? That's kind of how playing in a team works, you know? You are judged by the performance of the whole team. In a soccer match, the losing team doesn't suddenly win because one of their players did really well and didn't deserve to lose. The effort of the whole team decides the outcome.

Losing coins is harsh and the harshness can be chalked up to this being the first game in the series, but it is not as unfair as you're making it out to be.

Bash and Cash it's the most unfair blood bath ever for whoever is inside the Bowser Suit. Ironically , this is not really cooperative , this is a scam , the each of the players literally get lucky if they have 1 bag of coins each , you can still manage to get nothing as one of the 3 players thus losing the minigame.

Bowl Over is clearly rigged for the 1 player to steal coins , the other 3 BARELY have chance to avoid the shell.

Tug o War ... i have no words , it's self explanatory.

Paddle Battle , same as Tug o War.

Pirahnas Persuit is hellish.

And then we have Pipe Maze , which i still don't get how on earth this minigame either exists or why is placed as a 3vs1.

Yes, 1 had its shit moments, but its not like the other ones didn't have any of those. Stuff comes to mind like getting roped into a battle minigame and having to pay 30 coins while the other players pay 12, 11, and 4 respectively, and then losing that money because you got the game where the giant bowser head blows you up, while the one who paid 4 gets most of it. Purely chance-driven games in general, they're all over the series. There's plenty of shit in the other games if you look hard enough.

Also, there's lots of 3vs1 games that are skewed in either direction. Those games run on asymmetrical balancing, that issue is bound to come up fairly often.

Also , Boo steals for free and you cannot defend yourself , so it's just as luck based as Chance Time.

That statement makes no sense whatsoever. First of all: I already explained why stealing coins for free is not an issue, I'm not gonna do it again. Second of all, "defending yourself" does basically nothing. The range of coins still roughly stays the same no matter how fast you mash buttons. The only way to reliably defend yourself is the Gadd Light or whatever it's called, which you are not even guaranteed to get.

And third of all: You're comparing losing a bunch of coins to chance time? "swap all your stars and coins" chance time? The absolute, undisputed destroyer of game progress in the series? Those two things do not even begin to compare, so don't do it.

So yes , it is UNFAIR. And this doesnt happen in later entries.

My point isn't "It's not unfair", my point is "All the games have unfair aspects to them, so singling out one of them is silly and pointless".

 

[Princess Céline]

One thing I dislike about 2-4 is that hidden blocks on a board would sometimes contain a star. Despite how much I like the orb system in 6 and 7, the fact that you can pick up a Flutter orb or Golden Mushroom, as well as a Pink Boo orb in 7 is stupid. The Cashzap Candy in 8 is so unfair, especially in Team Battles.

One thing 4 does have going for it though is custom minigame packs.

On the topic of Crane Game, not only do you steal 1/3 of the unlucky player's coins, but those coins are actually subtracted from the Minigame Star totals. I'm not sure if Bash 'n' Cash does the same thing, but I think it does. Also, Boo in MP1 doesn't steal as much coins as he does in 2-4 just because stealing coins is for free.