The first Mario + Rabbids game is one of the best titles on the Switch, and I say that as a fan of neither Mario nor Rabbids (though a big fan of the turn-based tactical action games it takes inspiration from). Somehow bringing these two completely opposite worlds together pulled out the best out of each of them: Mario's inherent blandness toned down the Penguin of D00m zaniness of Rabbids, while the Rabbids' irreverent anarchy managed to finally bring some personality to the Mario characters (Peach with a giant shotgun is now canon for me). The balance was genuinely fun and funny, and the gameplay was extremely solid - once again a strange clash of worlds with the XCOM-esque base gameplay meeting Mario's platforming surroundings, but it managed to be both a more "casual" take on the formula as well as one that felt genuinely unique to play compared to many other games in the same genre. In terms of Switch's library, this was one of the the killer apps above many of the more obvious ones.
I got the second game when it came out and then eventually put it aside when other games appeared and stole my attention, and as part of my missive this year to clear my accrued backlog I picked it up again in the wake of getting my joycons fixed. I'm close to the end and... I'm finding myself stopping again. I typically write these rambles only once I've finished a game but I'm not really compelled to complete this game as such - I took this with me for a holiday with the aim to complete it during the travels etc but I'm at the final boss and I'm just not too excited to finish it, not at all due to the level of challenge (or lack of it). It makes no sense either because purely in terms of gameplay mechanics, it's mostly an improvement. The freeform movement during the battle sequences allows for a wider amount of tactical planning, the characters now have much more clearly defined niches with minimal overlap and changing the main form of customisation from different weapons per character to the interchangeable Sparks (power-ups each character can hold that modify stats and allow for particular special attacks) means you can technically bring any character to a fight and not be worse off. So I should be happy with this, right?
And I am, because it is fun to play, but paradoxically also less exciting than the last time. Part of it isn't even because of gameplay per se but rather the design. In the first game, the Rabbids invaded Mushroom Kingdom and the Mario gang had to deal with this unknown force by adapting to its zany antics and fighting fire with fire. The sequel has built an entire universe for the Rabbids, swapping twisted Mario environments into unique worlds full of brand new Rabbid characters (including one of the new playable characters) - and in the process they've actually made everything less interesting, because the original characters just aren't as fun because that contrast isn't there. That extends to the cast too. Gone is the anarchistic fun of Yoshi with a gatling gun (and in fact Yoshi altogether is missing completely, which is tragic), instead all the characters now have more whimsical weaponry but they manage to feel more toned down than the original choices: Peach has swapped her big flak gun to an umbrella with a gun barrel, Luigi's sniper rifle inspired by his Mansion hoover is now a bow and all the Rabbids use toy-like guns. It's like the original game went too far and Nintendo decided that Ubisoft needs to calm down a little. It's not as fun or exciting from a design perspective anymore, and just feels like a generic Saturday morning cartoon world that happens to have Mario in it.
That's one issue I have with Sparks of Hope. The other is that the base formula starts wearing down a lot more quickly. The original kept you on your toes throughout its length, even through the rote battles. The amount of combat has increased in the new game (lot more optional encounters on the map for example), but so's the amount of routine combat where you can knock down all the enemies within a turn if you know what you're doing. Which is great fun the first time around and then just mundane afterwards. The original was much better paced and each battle felt like a new kind of challenge or a combat puzzle; with Sparks of Hope, after a point in the late-game I've started to grow averse of combat. That's not something you want.
Sparks of Hope is still, despite everything, a good game. It does most things mechanically well enough that it's enjoyable to play and there's no gamebreaking flaws that would condemn it to harsher critique. But it also feels like a game that I'll never think about again once (if) I've completed it. The first game I still frequently refer to, and I continued playing it long after I finished the campaign as I wanted to clear some extra bits and just felt like playing it more. I'm not getting the same level of engagement out of the sequel. It's a more polished game, but it's been polished to the point that it's lost the edge that made the original so memorable.
I got the second game when it came out and then eventually put it aside when other games appeared and stole my attention, and as part of my missive this year to clear my accrued backlog I picked it up again in the wake of getting my joycons fixed. I'm close to the end and... I'm finding myself stopping again. I typically write these rambles only once I've finished a game but I'm not really compelled to complete this game as such - I took this with me for a holiday with the aim to complete it during the travels etc but I'm at the final boss and I'm just not too excited to finish it, not at all due to the level of challenge (or lack of it). It makes no sense either because purely in terms of gameplay mechanics, it's mostly an improvement. The freeform movement during the battle sequences allows for a wider amount of tactical planning, the characters now have much more clearly defined niches with minimal overlap and changing the main form of customisation from different weapons per character to the interchangeable Sparks (power-ups each character can hold that modify stats and allow for particular special attacks) means you can technically bring any character to a fight and not be worse off. So I should be happy with this, right?
And I am, because it is fun to play, but paradoxically also less exciting than the last time. Part of it isn't even because of gameplay per se but rather the design. In the first game, the Rabbids invaded Mushroom Kingdom and the Mario gang had to deal with this unknown force by adapting to its zany antics and fighting fire with fire. The sequel has built an entire universe for the Rabbids, swapping twisted Mario environments into unique worlds full of brand new Rabbid characters (including one of the new playable characters) - and in the process they've actually made everything less interesting, because the original characters just aren't as fun because that contrast isn't there. That extends to the cast too. Gone is the anarchistic fun of Yoshi with a gatling gun (and in fact Yoshi altogether is missing completely, which is tragic), instead all the characters now have more whimsical weaponry but they manage to feel more toned down than the original choices: Peach has swapped her big flak gun to an umbrella with a gun barrel, Luigi's sniper rifle inspired by his Mansion hoover is now a bow and all the Rabbids use toy-like guns. It's like the original game went too far and Nintendo decided that Ubisoft needs to calm down a little. It's not as fun or exciting from a design perspective anymore, and just feels like a generic Saturday morning cartoon world that happens to have Mario in it.
That's one issue I have with Sparks of Hope. The other is that the base formula starts wearing down a lot more quickly. The original kept you on your toes throughout its length, even through the rote battles. The amount of combat has increased in the new game (lot more optional encounters on the map for example), but so's the amount of routine combat where you can knock down all the enemies within a turn if you know what you're doing. Which is great fun the first time around and then just mundane afterwards. The original was much better paced and each battle felt like a new kind of challenge or a combat puzzle; with Sparks of Hope, after a point in the late-game I've started to grow averse of combat. That's not something you want.
Sparks of Hope is still, despite everything, a good game. It does most things mechanically well enough that it's enjoyable to play and there's no gamebreaking flaws that would condemn it to harsher critique. But it also feels like a game that I'll never think about again once (if) I've completed it. The first game I still frequently refer to, and I continued playing it long after I finished the campaign as I wanted to clear some extra bits and just felt like playing it more. I'm not getting the same level of engagement out of the sequel. It's a more polished game, but it's been polished to the point that it's lost the edge that made the original so memorable.