It's not a meme review this time I swear!!!

I've been wanting to do a full-fledged Luigi's Mansion review for awhile because its a game that has a special place in my heart. Since this will total out to be my 190th review, I figure now would be the perfect time to do so.

One random day in my early childhood not too long after I began playing video games, I was at Target checking out the video games section. Upon doing so, I discovered one particular game that caught my eye, Luigi's Mansion for the Nintendo GameCube. Despite not owning a GameCube or having the cognitive abilty to realize not every single game was on the Ps1, I begged my parents to get me this game. Alas I never did until years later when I began collecting GameCube games. I probably got about halfway finished with the game until I dropped it along with 95% of the other games I owned. Since then I've beaten this game & its 3ds remake about 3 times in total. With every time I finish this game, I grow more fond of the game that was most likely underappreciated during its initial release.

Usually its Mario that gets the spotlight and saves the day, but not this time. Mario got scammed and turned into a painting by King Boo. To help save his brother, Luigi, with the help of a scientist named Professor E.Gadd, ventures into King Boo's mansion. To assist Luigi on his quest to rescue Mario, E.Gadd gives him the Poltergust 3000, a machine that will allow Luigi to do some Ghostbusting.

The game is split into 4 parts consisting of a variety of different portrait ghosts to collect. The first part of the game serves mostly as a tutorial for the remaining 3 parts of Luigi's adventure. During part 1, E.Gadd teaches you how to use the Poltergust and the first few rooms & portrait ghosts serve as a way to getting use to the game's controls & mechanics. Overall, the game feels incredibly well-paced and each part doesn't overstay its welcome.

Atmosphere aside, the gameplay is probably the best part of the game. You explore each room looking carefully for ghosts & money by sucking up everything around you. Once you find a ghost, you need to hit it with your flashlight. If the light connects, it will play a sound that prompts you to suck up the ghost. Sucking them up is pretty much like a game of tug-of-war as you will need to maintain a grip on your controller as the ghost will attempt to escape. It is not only something unique that hasn't really been done before previously, but it also makes the gameplay incredibly addicting. The money hunting isn't super important to the game and you can skip collecting coins if you so choose, but if you want to get a better ending then you will need to collect as much cash possible.

There are really only a couple of minor issues I have with the game overall. The main issue being how frustrating Boo collecting can be sometimes. Thankfully, there are no soft-locks in regards to it, but there will be plenty of times that a Boo will run into a room you can't access if you fail to immediately get it in your Poltergust. You can always go back and get it once you progress further, but it's one of those things that really bothers me during my playthroughs since I tend to struggle with getting them in one try. The only other thing I take issue with is the controls taking a little bit to get used to, but overall its not that big of a deal.

Luigi's Mansion is a game with fun, addicting gameplay, phenomenal atmosphere & aesthetics, and great pacing. It's a one-of-a-kind game that can't be replicated.

Another Crab's Treasure feels like it was made as a psyop to get me specifically to buy and play a video game.

A mechanically competent souls-like with a vivid, super-cute art style featuring a ton of great jokes and some genre-best platforming? I've been following this game since its announcement and I'm so pleased that Aggro Crab pulled this off. To be all these things while managing to tell an interesting story is massively impressive for the small studio's sophomore title.

As much as I love the game, I can't dismiss the significant bugs and other performance issues. ACT is magnitudes more technically ambitious than the studio's first game and it comes close to buckling under that pressure at times--particularly on console. What should be seamless transitions into new areas had me wishing for a AAA-style "squeezing through a crack in the cave wall hidden loading screen." There are other moments and monsters that can completely wreck the game as well. At the time of this writing, there's a blue pufferfish in the late game that the dev is requesting no one kill because it can crash the game (I killed it twice and it made things super crunchy until I reset the game but don't tell anybody). I played on Series X and experienced these issues. Apparently the Switch version of the game is notably worse with some folks feeling scammed by the markedly poor experience.

So if you're on the fence, give this one more time to cook. The dev is actively putting out patches and hot fixes for the big things and I'm hopeful bigger fixes will come with the game's success. In spite of all that, I was enamored for my entire playtime.

Aggro Crab has become one of my day one purchase developers.

Mobile games are, as an art form, pretty under-discussed and greatly under-valued. If you're my age (or a little younger) and grew up with parents not interested in indulging their child's burgeoning interests in things that genuinely brought them great joy, then it's very likely mobile games were a large part of your early time with gaming. Nowadays any child has a low-grade supercomputer in their pocket perfectly capable of running Final Fantasy X better than the PS2 could, and the major mobile games are poor imitations of AAA releases with embarrassing gacha mechanics. It can be pretty hard now to place yourself into the context of a point in history where mobile gaming was an entire medium unto itself. But I was there. I saw the rise and fall of Angry Birds, I saw that brief window of genuine critical acclaim for Monument Valley. Most of all, I was on the ground floor when a young puzzle game developer decided to dip their toes into the burgeoning market of mobile games.

Once upon a time, Popcap were masters of their chosen field. As far as browser-based, low-bar-for-entry desktop puzzle games go, entries like Peggle remain some of the best. Light entertainment is deceptively difficult to make. It's easy to set a skill floor low enough for literally anyone to start playing, but it's far harder to match it with a skill ceiling high enough to be genuinely compelling for those who want to sink their teeth further in. Popcap could consistently make these ridiculously charming and polished games that you and your grandmother could play and have equal amounts of fun with. You and I may not understand it, but Bejewelled is still being downloaded by millions of folks every year. In their prime Popcap paved the way for mass-market casual gaming as we know it today to exist.

Seeing their potential after Bejewelled 3's enormous success on mobile devices in late 2010, EA purchased Popcap. They then ordered sequels to the company's big-name IPs, included a bunch of annoying microtransactions in them, and sold out Popcap's integrity for a big old chunk of change. Popcaps's made nothing but drivel since, and the rest is history. Or so the stories go.

Look. Plants vs Zombies is a great tower defence game. It's dripping with charm, the levels are delightfully designed, and it's a perfectly sized experience with a nice smattering of side content that makes the whole meal feel fuller. It's a damn fine game. But, if you can ignore the microtransaction hell that EA hath wrought (which, despite all odds, you legitimately can), PvZ 2 is better. I feel like it's a bit of an open secret with PvZ die-hards, but as far as tower defence games go it's a consistently fun and very charming experience with an onslaught of exciting gimmicks. I like the diversity of the worlds, I like the continually increasing challenge, and I even liked that art style change! On whole it's a deeper and more diverse experience than the first game. I have little doubt in my mind that a PC port removing the microtransaction-based features of 2 would shift public perception completely over which game is better. Popcap was still ahead of the pack when it came to these kinds of games come 2013.

But it's not 2013 anymore. In the intermediary, Popcap has spent almost all of its time trying to figure out what to do with this franchise. They sandwiched surprisingly solid major-budget console shooters around a less-than-successful stab at a mobile card game (in a sort of Clash Royale vein), and while I have no doubt the coffers remained plenty stuffed, it's clear the creatives were never really clear on what they should be doing. So, they return to the golden goose. It's time to bring back Plants vs Zombies, in earnest.

This conversation happened years ago. Anyone paying attention knows this game has been to development Hell and back many times since its initial announcement. Now it's allegedly released, for realsies, and it stinks of a money grab pushed out as quickly as possible. Whatever charm was originally present, in the diversity of plants, in the personal customisation of builds, in the mission design, in the art direction, in the dialogue or the characters themselves, in the goddamn World Map! It's gone! Eviscerated in place of a Funko-ian aesthetic and the blandest soundtrack known to man. Of course, 2 was swimming in predatory practices, but the key to it was that they were genuinely optional. Whether by intent or miracle, progression was still satisfying, unlockables felt vital and exciting. 3 completely removes player customisation from the equation, and embraces the dead-on-arrival mechanic of the 'lives' system, restricting you to 5 attempts on a level if you were to lose. You probably won't, no real challenge or puzzle is present in any levels I've seen (from what I can tell about 1/4 of the game's total), but they've just included a way to segment access for kids so that the gameplay becomes more addictive to their developing brains. PvZ 2 was addictive to my little kid brain. You wanna know why? Because it was fun as hell! We've forgotten the effectiveness of that method!

No one on planet Earth should be surprised by this. PvZ 2 and the Garden Warfare games were enjoyable despite the monetary practices built around them. I was just hoping we'd get that. I only wanted to glimpse the studio that once upon a time was the bastion of its own micro-industry. We don't even get a peak. I'm not sorry that this game is bad. I'm sorry that I care. That I genuinely see the value in these games as an art form. That I know what this team was once capable of. That I expect better. But I do.

If ever there was a genuine artistry to the casual gaming experience, if ever there was integrity to those who made the games that define the early experiences of this medium for millions, I know deep down it's long gone. And that little version of me blasting through ancient Egypt on his iPad mini at the ripe old age of 10 is never quite going to be able to live with that. PvZ 3 might as well be the definitive documentation of the downfall of mobile gaming.

But the greatest injustice, the final mockery, is that it's still a little fun. The gameplay loop is fundamentally there, and sparks of the original appeal remain. In a way, that's worse. If this was truly nothing at all, I'd be happy to ignore it completely. But I can't. I know this could have been a real game, but it refuses to be. For that, it is all the more actively depressing.

Cancer is a group of diseases involving abnormal cell growth with the potential to invade or spread to other parts of the body.[2][7] These contrast with benign tumors, which do not spread.[7] Possible signs and symptoms include a lump, abnormal bleeding, prolonged cough, unexplained weight loss, and a change in bowel movements.[1] While these symptoms may indicate cancer, they can also have other causes.[1] Over 100 types of cancers affect humans.[7]

Tobacco use is the cause of about 22% of cancer deaths.[2] Another 10% are due to obesity, poor diet, lack of physical activity or excessive alcohol consumption.[2][8][9] Other factors include certain infections, exposure to ionizing radiation, and environmental pollutants.[3] Infection with specific viruses, bacteria and parasites is an environmental factor causing approximately 16-18% of cancers worldwide.[10] These infectious agents include Helicobacter pylori, hepatitis B, hepatitis C, human papillomavirus infection, Epstein–Barr virus, Human T-lymphotropic virus 1, Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpesvirus and Merkel cell polyomavirus. Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) does not directly cause cancer but it causes immune deficiency that can magnify the risk due to other infections, sometimes up to several thousand fold (in the case of Kaposi's sarcoma). Importantly, vaccination against hepatitis B and human papillomavirus have been shown to nearly eliminate risk of cancers caused by these viruses in persons successfully vaccinated prior to infection.

These environmental factors act, at least partly, by changing the genes of a cell.[11] Typically, many genetic changes are required before cancer develops.[11] Approximately 5–10% of cancers are due to inherited genetic defects.[12] Cancer can be detected by certain signs and symptoms or screening tests.[2] It is then typically further investigated by medical imaging and confirmed by biopsy.[13]

The risk of developing certain cancers can be reduced by not smoking, maintaining a healthy weight, limiting alcohol intake, eating plenty of vegetables, fruits, and whole grains, vaccination against certain infectious diseases, limiting consumption of processed meat and red meat, and limiting exposure to direct sunlight.[14][15] Early detection through screening is useful for cervical and colorectal cancer.[16] The benefits of screening for breast cancer are controversial.[16][17] Cancer is often treated with some combination of radiation therapy, surgery, chemotherapy and targeted therapy.[2][4] Pain and symptom management are an important part of care.[2] Palliative care is particularly important in people with advanced disease.[2] The chance of survival depends on the type of cancer and extent of disease at the start of treatment.[11] In children under 15 at diagnosis, the five-year survival rate in the developed world is on average 80%.[18] For cancer in the United States, the average five-year survival rate is 66% for all ages.[5]

In 2015, about 90.5 million people worldwide had cancer.[19] In 2019, annual cancer cases grew by 23.6 million people, and there were 10 million deaths worldwide, representing over the previous decade increases of 26% and 21%, respectively.[6][20]

The most common types of cancer in males are lung cancer, prostate cancer, colorectal cancer, and stomach cancer.[21][22] In females, the most common types are breast cancer, colorectal cancer, lung cancer, and cervical cancer.[11][22] If skin cancer other than melanoma were included in total new cancer cases each year, it would account for around 40% of cases.[23][24] In children, acute lymphoblastic leukemia and brain tumors are most common, except in Africa, where non-Hodgkin lymphoma occurs more often.[18] In 2012, about 165,000 children under 15 years of age were diagnosed with cancer.[21] The risk of cancer increases significantly with age, and many cancers occur more commonly in developed countries.[11] Rates are increasing as more people live to an old age and as lifestyle changes occur in the developing world.[25] The global total economic costs of cancer were estimated at US$1.16 trillion (equivalent to $1.62 trillion in 2023) per year as of 2010.

Despite being a Nintendo fan since forever, I just recently played the OG, that many still consider a title that holds up

And in a sense yeah, it still is kinda decent, definitely not a bad time.
But as a platformer especially considering what will come up later... the original SMB is weird.
If we have to compare it to something I wanna say that Super Mario Bros is like..... the Formula 1 car of Mario Games.... lemme explain.

Racing cars tend to go all out: they tend to reach victory as quickly as possible, while also try to make riskier moves to give it all... but once they try to turn around they feel slower than anyone else, meaning that changing direction is kinda stiff, since turning a high speed going car is tough and may take some time.

I know it is a weird comparison, but Mario in SMB feels really similar to me: he is fast and you feel tempted to go forward at higher speed. The game kinda makes you want to sprint forward with less hesitation, for different reasons: you can't go back on the left side of the screen so going forward is your only option: whenever you exit pipes, piranha plants step where you were, as an indirect signal to suggest you to go forward; running at higher speed means you can potentially find hidden passages like the infamous pipes in 1-2, that makes you literally jump worlds. Jumping Cheep cheeps and Lakitus can be completely skipped if you just keep on running,

The issue is that the moment you hesitate..... ehhhh mario feels like a car that is struggling stopping: it's not and immediate top but it's slippery and extremely janky. I feel that enemies like Hammer Bros and Bloopers are so hated mainly because they tend to stop your flow and more likely kills you because of the wackier way you turn around.

Most of the levels are also linear, with the only exception being the castles with labyrinth like paths (which kinda sucks, I can't believe these have been brought back in some instances of NSMB Wii), meaning that you barely get this feeling of turning a car on the highway, but it doesn't mean I felt it kinda too much. I ain't sure if this is because of the version present on the NSO, or the fact I grew up with later titles before jumping on SMB, but regardless I felt the jankier controls way harder.

Not to mention that the variety of the levels, while of course revolutionary at the time, today ust feel too samey. I swear I remmeber playing a level in world 7 and being pretty sure it was the same I found in world 2 or something. Having all levels not changing that much compared to other titles also bland the whole mushroom kingdom together, and you feel kinda like you saw everything the game has to offer around the fourth world or something.

Overall of course SMB is a mile stone that everyone should try at least once, its importance cannot be overstated and so on,... but I feel it didn't age as well as other people may claim. Sorryyy.