I can understand the idea that not every game has to be a huge change, and if it were like, I dunno
like only 2 kirby games that did the whole "look, it's kirby, he jumps on platforms and eats enemies and it's cutesy" i could understand
but kirby's been running that since the gameboy and NES
I am just fine with them radically changing it up
you gave the example of paper mario, I love paper mario
the fact that the thousand year door wasn't drastically different was okay, it was just the second game in the series (although I would've been fine if they DID drastically change it)
but let's say they get up to like, Paper Mario 7, and it's still the same kind of thing
I think by then we would or should be asking for a breath of fresh air
e: and even then I'm not saying a new kirby game like that would be BAD, just the one they're doing now is cool too?? i mean what if they consider this like a sidestory game or something, even mario has done WAY different stuff in "side" games (paper mario is a good example!!! compared to super mario bros. and such)
like only 2 kirby games that did the whole "look, it's kirby, he jumps on platforms and eats enemies and it's cutesy" i could understand
but kirby's been running that since the gameboy and NES
I am just fine with them radically changing it up
you gave the example of paper mario, I love paper mario
the fact that the thousand year door wasn't drastically different was okay, it was just the second game in the series (although I would've been fine if they DID drastically change it)
but let's say they get up to like, Paper Mario 7, and it's still the same kind of thing
I think by then we would or should be asking for a breath of fresh air
e: and even then I'm not saying a new kirby game like that would be BAD, just the one they're doing now is cool too?? i mean what if they consider this like a sidestory game or something, even mario has done WAY different stuff in "side" games (paper mario is a good example!!! compared to super mario bros. and such)