This review contains spoilers
I've only played a bit of specter knight, most of the original shovel knight (which during this insight I will refer to simply as 'shovel knight'). I finally BEAT one, and it happened to be this ^-^
Personally I found the Kings' moveset so much easier to handle than Shovel. Having to adjust my shovel downwards in the air is much more cognitively taxing than the Kings' automated spin attack which is great because the other issue I had with Shovel that led me to a great number of deaths is that I would have an enemy come after me, hit it and usually recoil which could lead to my death. Another problem would be that I would attack something in the air and not be able to pogo my shovel down due to both that animation and recoil. Whereas King plays like a charm and allows a more assertive approach to the enemies.
I also like how this offered a lore and background characterization to all of the characters you meet in shovel knight, because I found their non-committal entity status as simple vending machines in Shovel Knight deeply grating to the overall experience.
I loved the overworld airship that King gets to, its a visual feast and really gives whimsy to the whole adventure. They also nailed the mario 3 style map system this time by structuring the game in three separate acts with different pathways and tangents you can take whereas in the original at least it seemed a lot more like an afterthought. I also think making the levels much shorter overall was a good idea, but also something they were allowed to get away with as the fact was they had all these leftover assets from the other game and 2 expansions to work with instead of padding levels out. Although you could argue that the original Shovel Knight could have just had shorter levels with more of them strewn about on the map without the need for new asset per level.
The issues I have with King of Cards are twofold:
1. Non-Scarcity of Gold
Seriously! We need Scroge on the scene to lock this shit all up in a vault! In fairness, this is an issue that I have with at least the original shovel knight to. That being there's no tangible punishment for doing bad. The immediate response to this may be the issue of gold, but in both these games you can replay any level and your leisure and therefore gold loss as a setback is trivial. On top of this, and I don't know why they decided on this, you can return to the map on any level to reset your gold before you walk in, rendering any challenge or risk reward factor with deaths or checkpoint deletion mute. I feel like there was a very simple way to handle this, and that was just to trap your gold in the level until you completed that you dropped or at least yoink half of it. Making the economy at all more scarce would add a lot to the player experience I think as it would force players to plan their builds around the idea that gold is important.
One could argue that this might feel bad and unengage players, even lock some out from the end game, but realistically players are almost never going to run into a gold deficit to buy the essential upgrades, and if that was a worry the prices could be lowered to reflect concern for average player aptitude (ie: 30% or so). The overabundance instead creates the mario coin currency issue instead which is that none of the currency actually has stakes involved, instead it just feels good to pick up until it doesn't. I must emphasize here that the knockon effect is registering entire level design strategies obsolete. For example a lot of times I was met with a higher path that had gold involved and a lower path that was safter but I never even needed to experiment with the higher path except for the fun of it if I wanted to save myself some time grinding. I think developers should have faith and challenge players a bit more. Besides, you can make this version of quitting out early on levels a opt in option in the options.
2. Bad Final Boss (Multi-Phase)
This other one is a personal gripe really but I cant stand multi-phase bosses in action games, and the final boss here is a frustrating multi-phase boss. I have to doubt I'm in the minority so let me vent about this for a moment. Shovel Knight has always been really good about making its bosses seem to have more humanistic AI patterns, calling back to the 1 on 1 struggles for dominance you saw in something like Megaman with most finesse and folly. While I'm not opposed to the gaudiness of Shovel Knight imposing a more difficult challenge the Mario Bros. 3 style crunch the floor final boss is frusterating due to the instant death pits and the 2nd phase being mindful platforming, but since there's no save or reset between the 2 phases you have to play it out as if its one phase. There was pretty much no need for the final phase of the boss in the game and it detracts from the experience.
Multi-Phase boss fights tend to be more inhuman and artificial by design, as if you're dealing with an obstacle more than a legitimate antagonist that has been built up over the course of the game. It starts to feel more like several parts of a level instead of a boss fight. Following this, almost never during a multi phase boss fight do you win or even have a chance to win the fight all through the first time. Losing against a boss has this issue of fighter's memory which can not meaningfully be solved without either a branching path narrative based on the outcome (like in Lucah or Undertale) which is a rare inclusion. Or making it impossible to play again which would be a ridiculous thing to do. This is a cheeky critique of player vs. character memory from backup saves that I feel Undertale accurately touched on. Knowing the attack patterns is everything, and so slowly it can pull you out of the illusion being maintained and you begin to dehumanize the boss as just a piece of obnoxious code in your way. Not to mention the fact that rather than being filled with hype, a lot of players see it instead as a form of exhaustion and disappointment. Turning the player frigid and frusterated seeking out the The End screen over a sense of finality. This is why I've actually gotten to the end of a lot of games and literally just didn't finish them, because the multi phase boss fights pissed me off just that much. A great example of that is Senator Armstrong in Rising Revengeance. It's not that a cant beat the boss but rather that I don't care to do so and can quite easily just go and watch somebody else finish it. For me the Multi-Phase final boss seems to play into a cheesier 90s cartoon sensation for gamers that enjoy it which is this Dragon Ball Z esque perservance from the crater type thing. I might be being a bit mean here but I just find that sort of spectacle and surprise highly obnoxious rather than effective most of the time.
Anyway the final boss in King I beat, but it was hard as nails and I feel like that brings the mood and connection to the ostentatious player character down a notch. Which is a shame because I found Kings' personality and attitude of play really cathartic. It didn't matter to me that I was plowing through bosses with ease because it fit my player character better. Plus, the final boss didn't even play properly into the ending anyway which is just accepting the Enchantress' proposal. None of that extra phases was even necessary, it was just something they thought would look cool. I want to say that I admit that you could perceive this matter as petty, but it reflects a wider issue I have as somebody who as a narrative focused player tends to see bosses as a nuance and see a bad boss as game ending. One thing I recognized quite clearly while writing this review is that the only 2 games I can think of that don't suffer from expected boss fatigue of this sort that come to mind is Undertale and the recently played Klonoa, which may render for me proof that perhaps I should spin a yarn at some point about what they did right in this case. However I'll quarantine that to the actual game since fans of them would appreciate that more.
Overall King is a spectacular experience that doesn't overstay its welcome but has plenty in its design to search for if you care about extras. I feel like for those who just tuned in despite the spoiler, I want to say if you are going to start anywhere, I would argue this campaign over the original Shovel Knight first due to the piecemeal and non punishing level structure comparative to the others (if you kill all/most the checkpoints in shovel knight its a pain) and engaging backstory and characterizations but I imagine I'd be in the minority on that.
Personally I found the Kings' moveset so much easier to handle than Shovel. Having to adjust my shovel downwards in the air is much more cognitively taxing than the Kings' automated spin attack which is great because the other issue I had with Shovel that led me to a great number of deaths is that I would have an enemy come after me, hit it and usually recoil which could lead to my death. Another problem would be that I would attack something in the air and not be able to pogo my shovel down due to both that animation and recoil. Whereas King plays like a charm and allows a more assertive approach to the enemies.
I also like how this offered a lore and background characterization to all of the characters you meet in shovel knight, because I found their non-committal entity status as simple vending machines in Shovel Knight deeply grating to the overall experience.
I loved the overworld airship that King gets to, its a visual feast and really gives whimsy to the whole adventure. They also nailed the mario 3 style map system this time by structuring the game in three separate acts with different pathways and tangents you can take whereas in the original at least it seemed a lot more like an afterthought. I also think making the levels much shorter overall was a good idea, but also something they were allowed to get away with as the fact was they had all these leftover assets from the other game and 2 expansions to work with instead of padding levels out. Although you could argue that the original Shovel Knight could have just had shorter levels with more of them strewn about on the map without the need for new asset per level.
The issues I have with King of Cards are twofold:
1. Non-Scarcity of Gold
Seriously! We need Scroge on the scene to lock this shit all up in a vault! In fairness, this is an issue that I have with at least the original shovel knight to. That being there's no tangible punishment for doing bad. The immediate response to this may be the issue of gold, but in both these games you can replay any level and your leisure and therefore gold loss as a setback is trivial. On top of this, and I don't know why they decided on this, you can return to the map on any level to reset your gold before you walk in, rendering any challenge or risk reward factor with deaths or checkpoint deletion mute. I feel like there was a very simple way to handle this, and that was just to trap your gold in the level until you completed that you dropped or at least yoink half of it. Making the economy at all more scarce would add a lot to the player experience I think as it would force players to plan their builds around the idea that gold is important.
One could argue that this might feel bad and unengage players, even lock some out from the end game, but realistically players are almost never going to run into a gold deficit to buy the essential upgrades, and if that was a worry the prices could be lowered to reflect concern for average player aptitude (ie: 30% or so). The overabundance instead creates the mario coin currency issue instead which is that none of the currency actually has stakes involved, instead it just feels good to pick up until it doesn't. I must emphasize here that the knockon effect is registering entire level design strategies obsolete. For example a lot of times I was met with a higher path that had gold involved and a lower path that was safter but I never even needed to experiment with the higher path except for the fun of it if I wanted to save myself some time grinding. I think developers should have faith and challenge players a bit more. Besides, you can make this version of quitting out early on levels a opt in option in the options.
2. Bad Final Boss (Multi-Phase)
This other one is a personal gripe really but I cant stand multi-phase bosses in action games, and the final boss here is a frustrating multi-phase boss. I have to doubt I'm in the minority so let me vent about this for a moment. Shovel Knight has always been really good about making its bosses seem to have more humanistic AI patterns, calling back to the 1 on 1 struggles for dominance you saw in something like Megaman with most finesse and folly. While I'm not opposed to the gaudiness of Shovel Knight imposing a more difficult challenge the Mario Bros. 3 style crunch the floor final boss is frusterating due to the instant death pits and the 2nd phase being mindful platforming, but since there's no save or reset between the 2 phases you have to play it out as if its one phase. There was pretty much no need for the final phase of the boss in the game and it detracts from the experience.
Multi-Phase boss fights tend to be more inhuman and artificial by design, as if you're dealing with an obstacle more than a legitimate antagonist that has been built up over the course of the game. It starts to feel more like several parts of a level instead of a boss fight. Following this, almost never during a multi phase boss fight do you win or even have a chance to win the fight all through the first time. Losing against a boss has this issue of fighter's memory which can not meaningfully be solved without either a branching path narrative based on the outcome (like in Lucah or Undertale) which is a rare inclusion. Or making it impossible to play again which would be a ridiculous thing to do. This is a cheeky critique of player vs. character memory from backup saves that I feel Undertale accurately touched on. Knowing the attack patterns is everything, and so slowly it can pull you out of the illusion being maintained and you begin to dehumanize the boss as just a piece of obnoxious code in your way. Not to mention the fact that rather than being filled with hype, a lot of players see it instead as a form of exhaustion and disappointment. Turning the player frigid and frusterated seeking out the The End screen over a sense of finality. This is why I've actually gotten to the end of a lot of games and literally just didn't finish them, because the multi phase boss fights pissed me off just that much. A great example of that is Senator Armstrong in Rising Revengeance. It's not that a cant beat the boss but rather that I don't care to do so and can quite easily just go and watch somebody else finish it. For me the Multi-Phase final boss seems to play into a cheesier 90s cartoon sensation for gamers that enjoy it which is this Dragon Ball Z esque perservance from the crater type thing. I might be being a bit mean here but I just find that sort of spectacle and surprise highly obnoxious rather than effective most of the time.
Anyway the final boss in King I beat, but it was hard as nails and I feel like that brings the mood and connection to the ostentatious player character down a notch. Which is a shame because I found Kings' personality and attitude of play really cathartic. It didn't matter to me that I was plowing through bosses with ease because it fit my player character better. Plus, the final boss didn't even play properly into the ending anyway which is just accepting the Enchantress' proposal. None of that extra phases was even necessary, it was just something they thought would look cool. I want to say that I admit that you could perceive this matter as petty, but it reflects a wider issue I have as somebody who as a narrative focused player tends to see bosses as a nuance and see a bad boss as game ending. One thing I recognized quite clearly while writing this review is that the only 2 games I can think of that don't suffer from expected boss fatigue of this sort that come to mind is Undertale and the recently played Klonoa, which may render for me proof that perhaps I should spin a yarn at some point about what they did right in this case. However I'll quarantine that to the actual game since fans of them would appreciate that more.
Overall King is a spectacular experience that doesn't overstay its welcome but has plenty in its design to search for if you care about extras. I feel like for those who just tuned in despite the spoiler, I want to say if you are going to start anywhere, I would argue this campaign over the original Shovel Knight first due to the piecemeal and non punishing level structure comparative to the others (if you kill all/most the checkpoints in shovel knight its a pain) and engaging backstory and characterizations but I imagine I'd be in the minority on that.
Erato_Heti
1 year ago