Nah, Wario Land 3 might be though.
Is Wario Land 4 basically a 'perfect game'?
- Thread starter CM30
- Start date
LesTheTimeSweeper
Wario Fan Supreme
I agree with this. I don't get all the people gushing over 4 while completely ignoring 3, which is honestly the much better game.
WL4 is not a hardcore head-scratcher or intricate maze like WL3, but neither are the others. They all spun their own magic, and WL4 tries to distill that into one streamlined experience, without being too much of one thing. As the last game of the original five, it draws elements from all previous Wario Lands.
The fact it's so respected simply means it succeeded in what it set out to do. It tried to cater to everyone, with equal doses in action, exploration, and puzzle solving.
The fact it's so respected simply means it succeeded in what it set out to do. It tried to cater to everyone, with equal doses in action, exploration, and puzzle solving.
Last edited:
I think 4 does a lot of things better than 2 and 3. Both of those are great games mind you, but they can be a little frustrating since it's essentially puzzle based and bosses revolve around not getting hit at all. Bringing back health was a good idea imo, and the design overall is just a lot more tight and fun in 4. The graphics are amazingly stylized, and the music captures the cool and funky feel of the game. It hasn't aged a bit, and I still go back to it constantly to replay. Can't say that about other games (although I do this often for all the Wario Lands 
).
).
I think the price is an entirely different beast. Like... if a game is way too expensive, that doesn't really affect the quality of the game itself, does it? If anything you should blame the company's business decisions, not their ability to make a good game.
I mean yeah, if I have to spend 60 bucks on a game that I can beat in one sitting, that really really sucks, sure. But if that one sitting was me having a blast, then that doesn't mean the game is bad, it just means it's overpriced.
Replayability is another thing...
Having replayability (like with the 3 different difficulty levels in WL4) is awesome! But is it something every single game needs to have to be good?
I mean, what about a Point & Click Adventure game, where once you've figured out the solutions, there's literally no more challenge left?
Does that mean it's a bad game?
What about a story focused game? Once you've played it, you already know what's gonna happen. Does that mean they have to make up a second story for a second playthrough?
What about Roguelikes? Those are 100% about replayability. Does that mean they are all masterpieces?
I think it depends on the game. Wario World, for instance, COULD have had more replay value, which would've been great... but ultimately, its absence is not what drags the game down.
What drags it down is the fact that money, health, continues, health refills, and all that stuff were entirely pointless, since you can't possibly run out of them. So you didn't need to pay any attention not to get hurt, meaning enemy attacks might as well not have been there. So you're mostly just blazing through the levels, with no care in the world.
The biggest obstacle was possibly not finding a collectible on the overworld, not figuring out a solution in a puzzle room, or not being able to get through a platforming challenge.
I've said it before, but you should only have been able to get a continue ONCE, after finding a special item in the overworld (just like in Luigi's Mansion 2).
Man, it's such a shame that a gameplay style with so much potential never got a sequel...
So yeah, replay value is a plus but no replay value isn't necessarily a minus. If the game is really fun then playing it again from the beginning will be fun in and of itself, making you wanna replay it anyway.
So I think there is such a thing as inherent replay value.
Thing is... what technically counts as replay value? Do the optional treasures is Wario Land 3 count as adding replay value? To me, not really. Because I don't consider the game to be over until you've found every treasure. So in that sense it doesn't have any replay value besides the music coin collecting.
Are the alternative chapters and endings in Wario Land 2 replay value? Not to me, because when you beat the main path, you've only played half of the game. To me, not even the really final chapter is replay value, because I always beat the game 100% anyway.
I guess it comes down to semantics.
Last edited:
I think the price is an entirely different beast. Like... if a game is way too expensive, that doesn't really affect the quality of the game itself, does it? If anything you should blame the company's business decisions, not their ability to make a good game.
I mean yeah, if I have to spend 60 bucks on a game that I can beat in one sitting, that really really sucks, sure. But if that one sitting was me having a blast, then that doesn't mean the game is bad, it just means it's overpriced.
Replayability is another thing...
Having replayability (like with the 3 different difficulty levels in WL4) is awesome! But is it something every single game needs to have to be good?
I mean, what about a Point & Click Adventure game, where once you've figured out the solutions, there's literally no more challenge left?
Does that mean it's a bad game?
What about a story focused game? Once you've played it, you already know what's gonna happen. Does that mean they have to make up a second story for a second playthrough?
What about Roguelikes? Those are 100% about replayability. Does that mean they are all masterpieces?
I think it depends on the game. Wario World, for instance, COULD have had more replay value, which would've been great... but ultimately, its absence is not what drags the game down.
What drags it down is the fact that money, health, continues, health refills, and all that stuff were entirely pointless, since you can't possibly run out of them. So you didn't need to pay any attention not to get hurt, meaning enemy attacks might as well not have been there. So you're mostly just blazing through the levels, with no care in the world.
The biggest obstacle was possibly not finding a collectible on the overworld, not figuring out a solution in a puzzle room, or not being able to get through a platforming challenge.
I've said it before, but you should only have been able to get a continue ONCE, after finding a special item in the overworld (just like in Luigi's Mansion 2).
Man, it's such a shame that a gameplay style with so much potential never got a sequel...
So yeah, replay value is a plus but no replay value isn't necessarily a minus. If the game is really fun then playing it again from the beginning will be fun in and of itself, making you wanna replay it anyway.
So I think there is such a thing as inherent replay value.
Thing is... what technically counts as replay value? Do the optional treasures is Wario Land 3 count as adding replay value? To me, not really. Because I don't consider the game to be over until you've found every treasure. So in that sense it doesn't have any replay value besides the music coin collecting.
Are the alternative chapters and endings in Wario Land 2 replay value? Not to me, because when you beat the main path, you've only played half of the game. To me, not even the really final chapter is replay value, because I always beat the game 100% anyway.
I guess it comes down to semantics.
Point and click/story games often include multiple ways to finish them, with varying outcomes. But you're right. There's no existing foundation for replay value.
Arcade and fighting games, for example, don't have any inherent replay value, outside of repeat plays/improving your performance or high score. I always saw arcade games as roller coasters. You get on for the ride, but once it's over, the longevity is strictly limited to repeat rides. Perhaps Treasure intended this for Wario World, being veteran developers of arcade brawlers like The Simpsons and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.
In the old days I totally understood space limitations, but during the 2000's onwards, I expected more bang for my buck. I think it's just good game design for developers to add something to keep their product engaging or challenging. Wario Land 3, for example, added a Time Attack mode and Golf minigame cave, at the very end...
I.M.Gibbon
Wario Fan Supreme
I think I like Wario Land 2 better, but I don't know if that's just the nostalgia talking.
I can relate. WL2 isn't the very best game... but it just means so much to me!
WLII was a feast! Undoubtedly the best handheld platformer of 1998. It was so vast, varied, and stuffed full of secrets, original ideas, creative touches...
My key gripe was Wario's design and movement. I'll never forget the first time I popped the cartridge in... My immediate disappointment was how loose and clunky he felt.
I didn't get the same feeling of power and boldness I relished so much in Wario Land: SML3 and VB Wario Land. In WLII he didn't feel like a heavyweight as much.
They made him quicker, but weaker/less buffed, and less imposing overall (attacking baddies felt more flimsy, and Wario really struggled to carry/throw the big boys).
The game's presentation also lost that big bold polish and sprite detail. Wario looked more thin and cramped, with less personality... (his face is blank instead of devious).
Last edited:
I never could think of any criticisms besides length (though I'm sure I mentioned some before and simply forgot about them).
But if I were to do a serious review, I'd probably look at every aspect. And I bet you, I'll find something I don't like about it, even if I'll likely find that the game still holds up even to this day. Last time I played it, it did, so hey.
But if I were to do a serious review, I'd probably look at every aspect. And I bet you, I'll find something I don't like about it, even if I'll likely find that the game still holds up even to this day. Last time I played it, it did, so hey.
I.M.Gibbon
Wario Fan Supreme
Hmm, I'd never really cross-examined sprites like that before. In that regard, WL4 probably does have the best looking Wario, yes.
It has the best looking everything. While I can't make an arguement for gameplay, I can say that 4 is visually, stylistically, musically, thematically, and humorously the best Wario game.
It leaves a huge impact on you for those reasons alone. From that moment you first enter that trippy portal you know you are having a video game experience that will stick with you.
It leaves a huge impact on you for those reasons alone. From that moment you first enter that trippy portal you know you are having a video game experience that will stick with you.
Not sure if I'd call it the "best-looking" Wario... He looked more grotesque and demonic in WL4. His eyes lacked pupils most of the time, and his teeth looked gnarly and disgusting... I remember a friend of mine absolutely hating his appearance in WL4. Each to their own, though.
Last edited:
Yikes Spike
Not related with Wreck it Ralph.
The artstyle is fine, but Virtual Boy Wario Land looked more alive for a limited color palette.
His eyes aren't lacking pupils. They just kind of merge with the outline of the hat, they're looking up and are towards the top right of the eye.Not sure if I'd call it the "best-looking" Wario... He looked more grotesque and demonic in WL4. His eyes lacked pupils most of the time, and his teeth looked gnarly and disgusting... I remember a friend of mine absolutely hating his appearance in WL4. Each to their own, though.
Wario looks so bad and weird in Wario Land 4 because we keep zooming in, the game was meant for the GBA's small screen, and wario looks much better on it.
Also his pupil is the rightmost black pixel in his eye (on that picture). If you can picture that, the artwork makes more sense
Also his pupil is the rightmost black pixel in his eye (on that picture). If you can picture that, the artwork makes more sense
Ahah! I just assumed that was part of his eyebrow. Some of the other sprites don't even have that, though; just a white eyeball highlighted in blue (it's pretty inconsistent).
VB Wario Land had the most refined, defined, and fleshed-out design (gee, what a mouthful).
So many little details in Wario's movements, like the way his eyes dart about warily while crawling/walking, or his expression changing from caution to a sneer. I don't even see that in modern platformers! None of it feels cramped or compressed, either. Every detail is clearly drawn.
Last edited:
Never had any issue with Wario's appearance in Wario Land 4. Like BlueJackG said, we must remember that this was for a small GBA screen. Of course it's gonna look weird when zoomed in.
