You have chosen to read my Princess Peach: Showtime! review. This is on you, now.

I think it's worth reflecting on how Peach wasn't really even a character in the original Super Mario Bros. She was a destination. The MacGuffin you needed to reach in order to rightfully claim you'd won the game. The idea to expand beyond that in any way was largely an act of convience, as Fuji TV's Yume Kojo: Doki Doki Panic was rebranded as the second Super Mario game. They needed a roster of four heroes, and there had only been four sentient things in the Mushroom Kingdom that weren't enemies. They took the spritesheet for Lina and drew "The Princess" on top.

I don't point this out to demean or belittle Princess Peach. Far from it. The act of repurposing and rebranding is at the very core of what videogames are. Mario, himself, was the result of seeing what could be done with an unwanted Radar Scope arcade board, and missing out on the opportunity to use Paramount's Popeye characters. OXO, Tennis for Two and Spacewar! were all experiments to see if large-scale supercomputers designed for complex business calculations and global warfare could be used for the purpose of fun. Peach has quite rightly earned the title of Princess of Videogames. A direct descendant of the cathode-ray tube amusement device.

From her first playable appearance in Super Mario Bros 2, she was treasured by little sisters, cartoon studios, and boys who valued the float-jump more than the societal pressures of homophobia and gender stereotypes. By Mario 64, her significance to the Mushroom Kingdom was fully fleshed-out, positioning the entire game within her castle, and illustrating her unwavering benevolence, ethereal presence, and also, her sense of fun with the introduction of her personally-commissioned Secret Slide. She was a true representative of videogames, and a welcoming presence for audiences who may have felt uninvited to the games gang.

In 2024, I feel Nintendo are more aware of the weight of their history. Back when they last tried this, with 2005's Super Princess Peach, there was an air of carelessness. It was a throwaway game, fobbed off to Chubby Cherub/Shrek: Reekin' Havoc devs, Tose, and launched to a market whose respect for Nintendo had already taken a beaten from the likes of DK: King of Swing, Super Mario Ball and Classic NES Series: Ice Climber. Now, Nintendo treat Peach with due reverence, having her host Universal Studios meet-and-greets in her own personal bandstand, as the highlight of millions of holidays. People are thrilled to meet her, regardless of how much spaghetti she's made for them.

Right now, we're in a very odd period for the Mario brand, overall. Nintendo have embraced the idea that there's no unified vision of what Mario is. In the last year, we've had a mainline 2D entry closely modelled on the art direction of Masanobu Sato, a major Hollywood movie that denied post-1994 backstories and reinstated the NES-era US canon, a remake of a very of-its-time mid-nineties Mario RPG, and the announcement of the remake of a very distinctly eccentric fan-favourite GameCube RPG. Mario has become Mr. Video again, appearing in all sorts of different projects, merely as a comforting presence. He's a doctor and an artist and a kart racer and an umpire and we're not supposed to take any of it very seriously.

The dynamic sits awkwardly in relationship to why New Super Mario Bros took its iconography so seriously in the first place. Back then, it was a relief to see the series discard all the bullshit and get back on target, reinstating what was Real Mario Shit. Goombas were Goombas again, and if there were any weird offshot baddies, fans would need to adopt such convoluted nomenclature as "Mega Para-Biddybuddies". It felt like the programmers had taken more control, with the world defined by hard parameter references. There's a stiffness to that approach that I have a lot of affection for, and it was the lifeblood of the Wii U era (particularly in Europe and Japan). It brought us closer to the logic of the software, subconsciously making us better equipped to appreciate and understand it. It was fiercely objective. It's easy to see why this approach wouldn't resonate with the wider public, though. If Nintendo wanted to catch on to mainstream appeal, they'd need to foresake the concrete utility of their playing pieces and expand their surface-level appeal. During the promotion of the New Super Mario Bros sequels, developers explained that Peach hadn't been made playable in the game because of how her float-jump would affect the balance of the level design. In Showtime, she doesn't even have the float-jump.

Ah - Here we are.

I don't really like Princess Peach: Showtime very much.

I could come out with excuses, justifications, characterisation discrepancies... I just think it's boring to play. Levels are formulaic and repetitive, there's little dexterity to its gameplay, the rewards system feels like you're playing the game wrong if you're not constantly digging at the scenery to find every hidden item, performance and presentation is way below where it ought to be for a game with this focus, yada yada yada... I don't think it really matters. I just didn't want to play the game very much. The first couple of days I had it, I was telling myself I was too busy to calm down and enjoy it. I spent multiple days away from it before completion, and only went back to it out of obligation. I really wanted to care less, and not bother coming back.

As much fondness as I may have for the character, I'm clearly not the target audience for this. And I don't mean to imply that it's a game strictly for young girls, either. But it probably is for fans of recent Yoshi games. I'm certainly not one of them. As I dodder around, looking at the nice artwork, but wondering what I'm supposed to be getting out of it. It's a bit of a shock to see Mystical Ninja's Etsunobu Ebisu come back to a directing role to make something so devoid of spark or humour. Though the different costumes grant Peach a range of diverse abilities, the structure of each introductory level is largely the same, and the bulk of her more intricate actions are automated. In a move that recalls Metroid: Other M, all core actions have been distributed between two face buttons, and if there's anything particularly acrobatic or impressive, it doesn't often feel like you were very involved in performing them.

Showtime is fun in theory. The level themes are bold and exciting, Peach's costumes and in-character voice clips are cute, there's a lot of great art and punny design. I saw one review compare it to Kirby and the Forgotten Land and became incensed. That's a game that loves being a game. It celebrates the medium, embraces all the tropes that come with being a platformer, and sets up young audiences to embark on a future, exploring many wonderful videogames. Showtime is like Paper Mario with all the jokes, strategy and compelling gameplay stripped out. It's an RPG without story or combat. If you wanted to dedicate a budget to having a team design a bunch of charming adventures for Princess Peach to go on, I can totally get behind that, but why make this game when your passions and energy were better suited to a series of YouTube shorts, or a pop-up book?

There's definitely things I wanted to like. I felt like I should have liked. There's several parts of the concept that feel like they're paying off on things they established with Peach's character years ago. The fact that Odyssey ended with her setting off to explore the world in a bunch of cute outfits feels like it was leading up to an idea like this. They're making a game with Cowgirl Princess Peach, for god's sake. How haven't I come away raving about it? It's just all so tame. Mermaid Peach sings underwater to guide helpful fish, and that sounds like something I should have adored, but they never take the next logical step with one of those trademark Nintendo Switch vocal themes. Why didn't they want this game to be brilliant?

Something that surprised me is how bothered I was by the stageplay concept. The notion that to some level, this was all pretend. That Peach is taking on the role of a character for each level. Her voice sounds different for a bunch of them. I don't really feel like this is a game about Peach. It's about her playing the part of generic characters. I didn't feel any sense of drama until the very end, when she emerges outside of the Sparkle Theatre, as herself. It was the first thing since the intro that the game was trying to convey as authentic. Maybe if I just believed in the game - like there was a real throughline that meant each level was an important new part of a story - I wouldn't have been so bored with it. You really don't have to do a lot to get me with this stuff. I honestly found myself crying when I first heard Odyssey attempt to finally convey Peach's perspective on her relationship with Mario. Is this what a good story has to offer a game? As it is, it felt like I'd bought a colouring-in book, and for some bizarre reason, it was important that I finish every page.

This is very much a 'me problem'. I hope I've established my criticisms as fiercely subjective. I can see some folk getting a lot out of this. I've heard some say that they loved Yoshi's Woolly World. I certainly don't want to convince Nintendo that people don't like Princess Peach games. It's just that I had to play through Sexy Parodius and Third Strike before I'd gotten through this, just to remind myself that I do enjoy playing videogames.

Nintendo fans have been waiting years and years for Peach to finally get the spotlight starring in her own console game. It's finally here, and was the wait worth it?

Princess Peach Showtime is overwhelmed with spectacle. So much spectacle which unfortunately leaves little room for substance.

The game is pretty much a Action/Adventure in the most restrictive sense, where I'm almost inclined to call it an on-rails game. Coming from the freedom and fun that was Super Mario Bros Wonder, Princess Peach Showtime is the antithesis of that where your hand is held the whole way through and are forced to partake in scripted segment after scripted segment.

Levels are structured like stage plays, each one having their own genre, where in each one Peach gets a cool transformation to suit the genre of the stage play. Cowboy, Ninja, Chef, Mermaid and much more. At a core level, all stages are 2.5D platformers, but some stages gimmick involve more unique gameplay like cooking or singing.

Showtime's biggest strength is in it's subtitle. The game is filled with glits and glamour. So many cool and amazing looking segments, I could swear the game had a bigger budget than Mario Odyessy. Unfortunately most of these cool segments you find in each stage barely qualifies as gameplay and is more of a cutscene where you are lucky if you're even given the opportunity to press a button.

I honestly feel like this game was targeted towards an even younger audience than the typical Mario game for all ages, which is fair, but honestly Peach deserves better.

One top of all of this, the game somehow runs even worse on the Switch than Tears of the Kingdom did which is baffling considering that this is a much smaller game in scope.

Princess Peach Showtime is one of those games I'll play through once and probably never pick up again. Once you've seen everything spectacular about it, there's no reason to go back and experience again as the gameplay itself barely has anything to offer.

It's still a well made game however... maybe this game was not made for me, but something your younger sibling might enjoy.

This is about exactly what you'd expect from a Good Feel game, which is to say an easy game that is mostly style over substance. It's a very charming game and a lot of that is just the fact that it's the second Princess Peach solo game ever, and the first that isn't a wee bit sexist. Seeing her in so many wacky situations and not with Mario or any other major Mario character (aside from Toad shortly) is pretty neat, all the new designs and silly situations are just pretty cool to see especially for Peach.

The game is simple and doesn't feel like stand out amazing but pretty much every power-up is fun. A few of them are very similar ideas but are so bite-sized that you don't really feel it. The only power-up I dreaded seeing again was the detective power-up. The whole game is very easy but you really feel it with the detective power-up because the puzzles are so nothing and simple you don't get much satisfaction from them (says the 23-year-old man playing the game made for 5-year-olds) and they're also just extremely slow compared to the rest of the power-ups. I only really have like 2 major negatives overall. One negative is the performance has very weird hitches, it's not a huge issue because the actual levels are pretty much entirely smooth but very oddly so many starts of cutscenes and especially the loading screens fucking TANK and are at like 3 fps the entire time it's very bizarre. The other negative and the one that actually matters is how the game handles collectibles. It's very anti-QoL in this regard, very similar to older Kirby games in that if you miss a collectible or goal at a specific part of the level or if you fail the little goal or even get pushed into the next screen by accidentally doing the main goal before the bonus goal (which happened to me a lot) you just cannot retry or go back to get that collectible. You also can't just go back to a level, grab the one you missed, and then leave the level to keep it. It's very frustrating getting caught off guard by a new mechanic for an ability and missing out on a gem and just not being able to try and get it again without redoing the entire level and being forced to finish it again. This is totally the kind of game where I'd very much want to 100% each level and get all of the things but I'd pretty consistently miss a single collectible on most levels and I don't have a drive to basically replay the entire game.

Collectible frustrations aside this doesn't feel like a very replayable game, a lot of the joy is that initial surprise and charm of each new level and experience and after that it's just a pretty average game overall. That's not a terrible thing, and like I mentioned at the start it's average Good Feel and just having Peach being the star over like a Yoshi or a Kirby helps it a lot and makes it feel more worthwhile in their catalogue in 2024 at least. Overall fine for a quick one time playthrough but also pretty hard to justify for $60.

Yeah, this game really isn't made for me at all, but it's a peach game revolving around theatre, two things I still like! So I picked it up (on sale at QVC ofc) and...had a good enough time? Let me go down the list of playstyles.

Swordfighter- These were good. Swordplay works well enough and jumping over enemies at the right time is fun!

Detective- Oh my god, these blow. A huge departure from everything else in the game and slows the gameplay to a crawl.

Dashing Thief- Very fast and fun feeling. I really had no problems with these, every time I got to play one I was having a good time.

Patisserie- Again, another one that is too different to me. The minigame in it is fun enough but gets old fast.

Kung Fu- Love these. Really fast and fun gameplay and the sections where you have to parry all the attacks are great. Probably some of the best parts of the game.

Figure Skater- I really like these actually. It felt good to skate around and collect shit. Not the greatest, but still fun.

Cowboy- Fun enough, but nothing special really. At least the horse riding was entertaining.

Ninja- Very fast and cool. I enjoyed the stealth sections, but it kinda felt like a worse mix of Dashing thief and Swordfighter.

Mermaid- Definitely in the bottom 3. Just kinda boring, nothing special. Rhythm game sections aren't fun.

Mighty- THE BEST sections, super fun, super cool, and has a great balance of the different styles within it. Best parts of the game easily.

Radiant- Just a final boss form. It's a whatever fight, I think it is very funny that Peach gets basically a Super form in this game though.

So yeah, overall the game has more fun sections than unfun. The bosses all being themed after different parts of theatre production was also really cute to me. It just felt like the game switched up to much to really make it's own identity for itself. Still, it's a good enough time, but I'd wait for a sale.

My god, what a success. I've never played a franchise revival that gets so much right. Toys For Bob have proven that they understand much of the original Crash trilogy's appeal and that the series still has plenty of wriggle room for growth that the subsequent Crash outings weren't inspired enough to capitalise on.

Linear corridor-pushing platforming is back to Crash again with a base moveset as shrunken down as it was in 2 more specifically. What ensues are levels that are meticulously and appropriately balanced towards tight and challenging platforming around your more limited toolset. The devs have said "When we think about hazards and enemies and how they’re distributed, they stream across in almost a rhythmic way, so we’ve been really focused on how do we maximize that and use that differentiation to really push Crash gameplay", and that much is demonstrated in how the game retains the core trilogy tenets while also being more momentum-based than before.

For variance, new masks are thrown into the mix with controlled segments that require you to make use of their unique abilities - as well as entire characters that control very differently from the heroes. This is about as welcome as this kind of shakeup could be, these levels being immediately more cognisantly put together than the more extraneous-feeling vehicle segments in Crash 3. It's so nice that they're rarely ever necessary for completion, too, if the player doesn't happen to be keen on the way any given side character's levels play out.

I'd be remiss not to mention how gorgeous the game is. Toys For Bob seemed like the right choice for Crash after their art team's stellar work on the Spyro Reignited trilogy - proving that they are essentially the masters of stage and character design, adding details and changes to the base work that make the world feel effervescent.
I LOVE what they've done with the character redesigns here, taking their old shapes and making them as stylised and expressive as the GPU can handle. Coco's new style is a particular standout; she's never looked this good. Cortex's taller design is quite enlightened too. It suits his character so perfectly for him to try and look as big as he thinks he is, only for him to be a wee rodent when anyone else in the cast enters the frame.

It feels almost cruel and unfair to compare 4 to the remake trilogy that came out just a few years prior, but it's worth noting how incredibly dated that game already looks. A remake mired in bizarre visual choices that, while all minor in the grand scheme of things, illustrates a full image of a team that doesn't know what to do with the paints provided. I wish I could embed images for comparison's sake, but please believe me when you can pinpoint any minute detail from 4 (the water, fire effects, character shadows, foliage, animation, the list goes on) to their direct counterpart in the remake to see it almost completely botched. It all sounds like nitpicking, and it is, but art is an art babye.
https://twitter.com/BeachEpisode/status/1382872345321291785

Where things get particularly interesting with Crash 4 is sadly also where my problems begin. If you were to go into 4 with the same completionist ethos as you would in the OG trilogy, you'd get chewed up and spat out by some senselessly cruel design choices that are actually quite baffling. Crash 4 should act as a case study for how much goodwill can be diminished by level after level of "fuck you", bosshi-like cruelty. Where 100%'ing a given Crash game used to simply add about five or so hours onto the total playtime as you aim for optional collectables, 4 is quite literally padded front and back, forcing you to play through each given level (twice), with an "N.verted" visual filter. Doubling the level count in the laziest way conceivable. This wouldn't be so bad if not for the fact that the levels in Crash 4 are considerably longer and more densely packed with crates than ever before. I have to specify; it's not so much the difficulty being the problem; the content surrounding the difficulty is so disproportionately bloated. Racking up tens of minutes in a single level as you try to break every crate you can as you scan every nook and cranny with a fine-tooth comb, only for you to come to the end of a level, one crate short, it's enough to knock a star off a total score (and it did).

One of Crash 4's best elements is how unpredictable it is from a pacing standpoint. There are numerous points where you think you're in the final runup to the end only for the trapdoor beneath you to fall out, revealing a whole new slew of levels. This would normally be quite exciting, if not for how easily you could get burnt out at any point by the game's padded nature, making it hard to savour how much of a rambling journey the game takes you on. Sure, you could ignore these side things and sprint to the ending. You'd definitely finish the game with a more positive take away than me! But I am a simple man who wants those unlockable skins.

While I'm effortposting far too much about this orange marsupial game, I might as well add that I love the interdimensional story this game is trying to tell. Its sense of humour gets me to a tee and is filled with very subtle winks to even the prior games that are now rendered "not canon". Cutscenes with incredible squash n stretch tex avery loony tunes esque animation that conveys character better than any game I've ever played. I love it to death.

Crash 4 is a fleshed out, wonderfully well-studied sequel. Built with a uniquely high grade of technical skill that is often diminished by design choices that can feel a little misguided. This is one of the most concrete building blocks I have ever played, and is one iteration away from complete perfection to my eyes. (Like... just make it so the checkpoint boxes tell you how many crates you missed. That would help SO MUCH). I'm hoping Toys For Bob continue pumping out wall to wall bangers now that Skylanders seems to have bitten the dust; they're more qualified than most to make gorgeous, satisfying and engaging platformers that are absolutely drenched in personality.

i finished this game. and i say this with a great relief, not enthusiasm. this game is not difficult -- it's frustrating. if you want to make a difficult game, then at least give the player tight controls, impeccable camera angles and a depth perception that doesn't make you fail a jump you thought you could clearly make. these mistakes were made in the first three games of the franchise and i hope that, by now (22 years later), they were improved somehow. well, they weren't. i died hundreds of times in this game: most of the times not because it's difficult, but because it's greatly unfair.

when i heard about the N.verted levels i was quite excited to play the game again. now, as i said before, i feel relieved i was able to finish it at all. and i don't intend, by any means, return to this game ever again.