u/elephvant

My wife and I quite enjoy occasional domestic weekend trips within the UK (usually Scotland) to stay in these isolated, picturesque little cabins that seem to be becoming increasingly popular these days.

Having done a few, we've found maybe about two-thirds of them provide a welcome hamper with local produce and often a bottle of Prosecco, but most of them keep it as a 'surprise' for when you arrive - and it really, really was an amazing surprise the first time it happened.

However, this morning I was in the supermarket in advance of heading off on one of these trips and was telling my wife about how it's annoying that I don't know whether it's worth buying a nice loaf of bread and taking it with us because we don't know if there'll be one there when we arrive...when I caught myself, and was like, Jesus Christ, listen to yourself.

Anyway, I bought a loaf, so maybe we're going to end up with too much nice bread and will have to spend some of our time lounging in the outdoor, woodfired hot tub thinking about how we're going to use it all up.

30 seconds later: Oh, it's a goal. Cash was playing Doue onside...

Personally, while I get the point they're trying to make (the next line is about games like Denshattack! deserving celebration in our current era of remakes, remasters and sequels), I think I'd say I disagree.

Firstly, because while games with gameplay and structure like this were more common back then, quality games of this type did still make waves back in the 2000s. Tony Hawk's, SSX, Jet Set Radio were all both highly rated critically and popular, and they're all still well remembered even today. And Denshattack is most definitely a quality example. Enough that I think it would also still be talked about in a similar vein.

Secondly, even if we do accept there was more creativity on display back in the early 2000s, I'm pretty sure a game in which you control a train carriage in a journey across a post-climate disaster Japan, with this much style, character and just overall polish would still have stood out as being something truly different.

Curious what other people think, though. This is far from the only comparison between Denshattack! and gen 6 games (and, yeah, I 100% agree it's a fitting one), but how do people think it would have been received if it (or at least a lower fidelity version) had been released in that era?

Delighted to hear this sounds like it's as good as its early trailers suggested. Never know with this sort of thing if it might be style over substance, but sounds like it really sticks the landing.

Out today!

What an absolute triumph Star Fox 2026 has been! We all joked about them remaking the same game, but...turns out it was absolutely the right thing to do. It feels like the full realisation of what Star Fox could be.

And for any potential follow-up, all I really want is more of this. In other words, I hope it's another 1 hour or so per run rail shooter with branching paths just with a new story, stages and characters etc and they don't try to tack on any core game altering gimmick.

However, there will of course need to be some new mechanics to keep things fresh and differentiate it as something new, and I think the best place for inspiration in that department is the arcade scene - and in particular 2D shmups.

With challenges, medals, unlockables and multiplayer I already feel 2026 actually has a real good amount of stuff to do as it is. But what a potential sequel could add that would keep the game fun as ever for casuals but massively increase depth and replayability for more hardcore fans is the sort of complex, often almost esoteric scoring system found in many late 90s/early 2000s 2D shmups.

Whether it's chaining, some sort of colour mechanic, shot absorption or whatever, these sorts of things can often be all but ignored by those who just want to get to the end and beat the stages/challenges, but can elevate a game to masterpiece level for those who get really, really into them.

I'm a huge 2D shmup fan and the innovation found within the relatively tight restrictions of that genre at its height was incredible. It might sound counter-intuitive, but the most creative ideas and adaptions often come precisely from being forced to operate within those sorts of restrictions.

That's why I really hope the seemingly positive success of this remake gives Nintendo the confidence not to alter the classic formula too much but instead try to refine it and innovate within its confines to, hopefully, one up themselves and give us a brand new classic.

I see these games all the time on the eShop and thought, hey, if they're good enough for Shiggy, they're good enough for me.

But while IGN and Nintendo Life etc all have top 10 lists for metroidvanias, platformers, strategy games etc, they never seem to have a list for ecchi puzzle games. Weird.

So, yeah, there are so many of them out there and just looking for what would be considered the Mt. Rushmore of the genre.

Gaming is kind of a weird thing because games can cover such an extraordinarily wide range of experiences. But the experience of playing Return of the Obra Dinn bears almost no relation whatsoever to that of playing Just Cause 3 beyond the fact they're both interactive media played on a screen. And yet, they are both just...games.

I predict over the next few years there's going to evolve something of a split in the industry between a more classic, traditional side and a modern, more consumerist side. The line, of course, won't always be clear, but I think it's been headed that way for some time - and I don't think it'll be a bad thing at all - with Sony's ditching of physical media accelerating whatever exactly that split turns out to be, with there supposedly being quite the overlap between physical media enjoyers and those who enjoy more classic and/or single-player focused games.

Probably the closest thing we already have is the way people make a distinction between indie gaming and AAA gaming. But the indie designator lost any sort of meaningful concrete definition long ago - despite the fact we mostly all agree on what an indie feel is.

I think we'll also finally see a positive designation for people who are into games in a kind of above and beyond way. It's always been weird to me that most other media-focused hobbies have a word for someone who's really into it - bookworm, film buff or whatever - and that you usually associate those descriptions with someone who knows a lot about that media and enjoys 'the good stuff'. With gaming it's almost the opposite. The only words we have are capital G gamer or hardcore gamer, both of which have (not unfairly) somewhat negative connotations and are often used to mock those who just 'consoom' while dismissing potentially interesting games as 'indie trash'.

And just as with other media, the line will be blurry and most people will find they enjoy things from both sides. But there will be something of a line and companies and manufacturers will more obviously cater to one side or the other.

And, hopefully, it'll be a good thing! Because everyone will get what they want. Because that's the funny thing about capitalism - yes, it leads to horrible big companies doing horrible things to make number go up, but it also means almost any niche will be catered to by someone (because that's also a way to make money), and while your more traditional, physical gamers aren't big enough to influence Sony and whatever they're planning to become, they most definitely are big enough to be worth catering to by someone.

I've been playing Rebirth since it came out on Switch 2 over a month ago and on Saturday I reached Cosmo Canyon and I think I heard Yuffie sing that like a maximum of two times. Since then I've barely had a chance to play, but I swear ever since it has been absolutely seared into my brain. 5 days - and counting. It's in my head while I walk to work, when I'm watching the World Cup, when I wake up in the morning.

There have been a lot of catchy bits of music in this game that have got stuck in my head a wee bit, but nothing compares to this.

I've not minded having the extra teams at all. They've acquitted themselves well and, even if they hadn't, they'd still have added to the experience, in my opinion.

I always love the group stages and the first two rounds of fixtures this year were no exception - you get your first look at how the big boys are shaping up, can properly assess who might be dark horses, and there's always a shock or two, with this year again being no exception.

But with this last round of fixtures, there's been so much less drama and interest than there should have been. After their draw with Cape Verde, Spain should have been in massive trouble - their game with Uruguay could have seen them out under the old format. Instead it was of little interest. France - Norway should have been a huge game - and in a normal year it still would have been since the difference between topping the group and finishing second would be clear cut, and would have been the difference in facing Germany or Ivory Coast. Instead, it was between Ivory Coast and Sweden, which is kind of 50/50 and Norway ended up making 10 changes with the game not really mattering very much.

Even the Iran game - that late goal being ruled out should have meant Iran looking like going through at Egypt's expense then things being switched back round again as it was ruled out. Instead it probably isn't going to matter that much as Iran will very likely make it through as a best third place, and Egypt were never at risk anyway.

The occasional inconsequential match can't be helped, but there have been far too many this year - especially compared to Qatar where there was drama and real excitement in almost every group.

Of course things will ramp up again in the knockouts, but I really hope this is something FIFA attend to for 2030. I know a lot of people think 64 teams is too many but they're not going back to 32 so I'd rather 64 and proper meaningful groups than 48 teams and this format.