Just finished the medieval floor; best one so far, and the boss was actually fun to fight.
| Dyotropic said: Is it a better experience if you play this co-op? I want to play this, but I don't have any friends in real life. |
Great game via solo, exceptional via coop. Excellent teamwork mechanics make the coop, IMHO, very special. I'd like to see more couch coop games.
I've found that turning on movement while aiming has helped me a lot tho I still wish I could invert the controls. but I've played coop with my son and we enjoyed it so much I will wait until the weekend to continue with him and play other games during the week
| RolStoppable said: I rate this game a 6/10 now that I've finished the story. There are just too many things that annoyed and frustrated me. First is the control scheme that doesn't use the face buttons for anything worthwhile and then opts to use the crappy stick button to switch between characters. The stick buttons should only ever be the very last resort in any control scheme and not have an important function like in this game. It would have been so easy to use Y to switch between characters, A to deactivate Gooigi, B to dash (why was this removed since the second game anyway) and leave X as an additional action button to open doors and such. Next are the bosses that are routinely annoying because they require you to figure out the right action at the right moment while everything else will just loop the boss pattern. Then there are the random spawns of ghosts on already completed floors when you go there to look for the gems you missed. It's so damn stupid that you have to clear rooms again and again in order to search them for gems without having to worry about getting hit. If I wanted more ghost encounters, I'd just play scarescrapers. Which brings me to the lame multiplayer mode that doesn't even have splitscreen. Given how scarce time seems to be in scarescrapers, how big is the chance to clear them when both players have to stay together instead of being able to split up? It's basically a statement that you should pay for online. That sucks butt. Other odd design choices are hidden achievements that will probably not net any valuable rewards, and the removal of an upgrade system that you could use all the money for. The sensible thing to do after the second game would have been to flesh out the upgrade system with several steps for parameters like reach of the stream, HP depletion rate and strength of smashing ghosts around. I don't mean significant stat boosts for each step of the way, just enough that you are about 50-100% stronger in the end than you were at the very start. The progress structure with floors that are self-contained and basically constitute individual levels is fine, but this game left me with disappointment because there could have been done more with it, and easily so. I am also getting similar feelings to the Pikmin series, meaning that the gameplay formula is getting stale for me with the third installment. The last hope I have for this game is that it turns out that additional time is plentiful in scarescrapers, but otherwise that mode is certainly botched for offline use on a single console. Looks like this game can be tossed on the pile of great graphics don't make a great game. |
A shame you could not enjoy the game as much as you'd like to, but your criticisms of it are wrong because I don't agree with all of them.
lol jk. 
I'm curious where this game ranks for you compared to the other LM games. So far I'm enjoying it but I'm pretty sure LM2 will be my favorite still.
Just finished the garden floor. Taking that room apart with the buzzsaw was sooo damn satisfying haha. Also I think this game has the most beautiful grass in any game I've ever played; the way it sways and ripples in response to the Poltergust and the way it's translucent when you shine the torch through it, just gorgeous.
I finished the story last night, but there are still plenty of gems and Boos I missed. I will go back to the game for that. I also haven't played the multiplayer yet, so that will be fun.
My ranking of the trilogy is this right now.
1. Luigi's Mansion 3: Fun cutscenes, gameplay, room design, a step-up in almost every way from Dark Moon.
2. Luigi's Mansion: The best designed mansion in the series, the best controls, the best atmosphere. The massive flaw is how short it is. I really wish we would get the PAL Hidden Mansion in North America at some point.
3. Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon: Several steps forward, and several back. The difficulty spikes are ridiculous, and thus I never beat this game. The mission structure is annoying, and the controls are not great. I appreciate the fun new features in this game, but there's several things I really dislike (as I've mentioned). Though I enjoy the lighter tone in Luigi's Mansion 3, I still don't like that this game changed the atmosphere from the first game.
Also note that even though Dark Moon is the best-reviewed game in the series (slightly edging out the 3rd), it has more mixed reviews than Luigi's Mansion 3. I do want a Luigi's Mansion 4, but I think we should wait until Switch 2. October 31, 2024 would be a really good release date. While Nintendo's at it, release a remaster trilogy collection a couple months to a year before that game.
Lifetime Sales Predictions
Switch: 151 million (was 73, then 96, then 113 million, then 125 million, then 144 million)
PS5: 115 million (was 105 million) Xbox Series S/X: 57 million (was 60 million, then 67 million)
PS4: 120 mil (was 100 then 130 million, then 122 million) Xbox One: 51 mil (was 50 then 55 mil)
3DS: 75.5 mil (was 73, then 77 million)
"Let go your earthly tether, enter the void, empty and become wind." - Guru Laghima
| RolStoppable said: The three games don't rank far apart, but where exactly I'll put LM3 is still up in the air because I have to spend more time on the multiplayer to see if it's salvageable. LM1 is the shortest one and without multiplayer, but the gameplay formula was still new. The combat had depth to it despite its simplicity and the mansion was fun to explore. LM2's mission structure in story mode isn't as good as what the other two games offer, but the five mansions were varied. The multiplayer had some annoying glitches, but it was free to play online. I don't mind that scarescrapers have been made shorter in LM3, especially that infinite floors got scrapped. If scarescrapers turn out to be beatable without too much stress, then I'll upgrade the score to 7/10 which is the same as I'd give the other two games. LM has been quite a consistent series in terms of quality, each game coming with its own pros and cons. The order in singleplayer is 1 > 3 > 2, for multiplayer it's 2 > 3 > 1 where the ranking can't be anything else for the first game. |
You factor in whether the online is paid or not? Don't think that's fair, it's not the game or developer's fault for the system-wide paywall. Otherwise a fair evaluation, I definitely get behind your ranking. 7/10 should be a sure thing, 10 floors is the max for Scarescraper so it's well beatable assuming your teammates are competent enough.
| Wman1996 said: I finished the story last night, but there are still plenty of gems and Boos I missed. I will go back to the game for that. I also haven't played the multiplayer yet, so that will be fun. My ranking of the trilogy is this right now. 1. Luigi's Mansion 3: Fun cutscenes, gameplay, room design, a step-up in almost every way from Dark Moon. 2. Luigi's Mansion: The best designed mansion in the series, the best controls, the best atmosphere. The massive flaw is how short it is. I really wish we would get the PAL Hidden Mansion in North America at some point. 3. Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon: Several steps forward, and several back. The difficulty spikes are ridiculous, and thus I never beat this game. The mission structure is annoying, and the controls are not great. I appreciate the fun new features in this game, but there's several things I really dislike (as I've mentioned). Though I enjoy the lighter tone in Luigi's Mansion 3, I still don't like that this game changed the atmosphere from the first game. Also note that even though Dark Moon is the best-reviewed game in the series (slightly edging out the 3rd), it has more mixed reviews than Luigi's Mansion 3. I do want a Luigi's Mansion 4, but I think we should wait until Switch 2. October 31, 2024 would be a really good release date. While Nintendo's at it, release a remaster trilogy collection a couple months to a year before that game. |
I'd be down with that release date if it means we can finally get another Mario Strikers. I'd like to think those posters on the movie floor are a hint to this, even though they're just referencing their past works.
Yeah, the filmmaking floor is... not great. The whole sequence of getting the bucket, to get the brazier, etc is just way too cryptic and inadequately hinted. I never would've guessed what the fuck to do without consulting an online walkthrough. Reminds me of the bad old days of "guess what the developer is thinking" game design. Much clearer signposting needed.
At least the boss fight was awesome and I wasn't forced to ghostbust Morty; I liked him.
Last edited by curl-6 - on 07 November 2019
The museum of supernatural history boss was freaking epic.
Next up, Floor B2; I have heard a lot of bad stuff about this one, about how difficult and frustrating it is, so I'm dreading it almost as much as Luigi right now lulz
| RolStoppable said: Yes, I factor that in because paid online was no secret to the developers. The game should have some scaling in place for scarescrapers, whether that is offline or online. The most basic scaling is to make the time limit and the time bonuses from clock items change depending on the number of players in order to make the game mode beatable regardless of the number of players. I still have to properly test scarescrapers, but it's definitely a negative for the game if the developers forced online and LAN for the multiplayer to be any fun. |
It's no secret but what are they supposed to do about it? The lack of scaling is it's own issue independent of paid online, it would still be a flaw if it were suddenly made free.
Ha that's a crazy conspiracy theory, that the devs purposely put in this flaw to push paid online. However there's no proof of this, and this plan makes little sense when it doesn't affect those with 3 local friends and it can still affect online play. Would be easier and more effective to just make it online only.
EDIT: Actually there is scaling, atleast I recall so for the money mission. Total amount required reduces for each player missing.
Last edited by Lonely_Dolphin - on 09 November 2019
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
Currently Online 
