Mario Kart Reviews (1/8)
"Super Mario Kart" (1992), or: the game that is not as janky as some people say, but not nearly as good as some other people say.
I don't like to claim that a game is "outdated", in the first place because i don't see development of anything as an linear simple progression, second, because an analysis that start with claiming that "old games are outdated", will always compare the logic of certain games, to our modern ones, that operate in an different logic, is doomed to fail to analyze a game in its particularities and just will grasp most of the general era logic. If you play NES and SNES games with good faith and open heart, and try to grasp their general logic, and then play its games with the logic in mind, they'll be way better. I firmly believe that a game should be analyzed on its own logic, with its intentions and objectives in mind. So i'll try, as little as possible, to compare with more recent Mario Kart titles, and try to see how it relates with another arcade racing games of the SNES catalogue (there's a notorious jump in logic from SNES/Genesis to N64/Saturn/PS1 logic in Racing games, particularly with the increasing distinction between Arcade and Simulation racing and the notorious passage from 2D to 3D). My idea here, is try to understand the designs built in "Super Mario Kart", its intention, integration in a cohesive system and execution, and evaluate this effort, and trying to see its short comings, not as a limitation of the time or technology, and how most of its shortcomings are due to design or execution failures.
I think "Super Mario Kart", is one of the games that suffer the most from the "outdated" label, not allowing most people to properly see this game design problems, and merely dismissing this game as an antiquity.
The first thing we notice in a Mario Kart, is always the handling of the car. In this game, specifically, is really heavy and maintain much more of the weight in center, you can see it is much more realistic and inspired by real Kart. SNES racing games tend to be heavier, but even comparing with another titles such as "F-Zero" (1990), a way faster (and more technical) racing game, is significantly more difficult to take turns in "Super Mario Kart". And with a drifting system that serves more for adjustement of position than as an racing tool (as later Mario Kart entries would do), make tight turns in this game can be a little headache. This, combined with the level design, that favours a ton of 90o angle curves, you have a game that feels extremely slow, not because the game itself is slow, but because you need to always stop accelerating to adjust when entering curves. This, by itself is not bad, this is how racing in real life works, and if this was a Racing Simulator, would be a reasonable choice, but for Mario Kart and its quite simple driving, just hinders the game, creating a stale and grindy gameplay at times. Combined with the excessive hazard use (this game is to Hazards, what "Mario Kart Wii (2008)" is to Items), this game will have you slowing down really often. After you get the grip, you will be able to drive without much harm, but is not the most fun you can get out of an Racing game in an SNES.
The items are really moderated here, playing the least comprehensive role in any Mario Kart game, being mostly used in 1 vs 1 situations. By one side, this avoids the bonanza that some Kart games can become, erasing the racing fun for an quasi-party game madness, by other, items play an fundamental role of regulating position in kart games, and getting behind here is a hell, where you don't get any tool to signicantly help you, and make comebacks a rare case. A bad start can really kill your race.
The game is quite charming in its visuals and music, the character roster is considerable, and they play different from each other what adds variety to the game, but the level design and the hard handling end up favoring way more the lighter characters, making Bowser and Donkey Kong Jr. (The two heavy characters in the game) not excellent racers.
The game also don't have the Mario Kart feel yet, not being as distinct from the racing games of the time (the great difference is items, that was a great add to the game, allowing interesting tool for 1 vs 1 and taking shortcuts, giving more depth to the races). AI is quite competent, without being unfair, the only problem is that the enemies have semi-spammable special items, that you don't have access to, what is a very cheap design decision.
The multiplayer is a great addition, to play with a friend instantly make this a better title, and battle mode can be quite fun. Particularly thinking how shallow this is for singleplayer content experience.
But we need to talk about the level design. A lot of people complain about the lack of variety in levels. What i beg to differ. The plain levels make sense, while being different from the crazy stuff we get nowadays, and they do a great job with putting some variety. You have 8 unique concept tracks, and some variations of these, that honestly feel different to play. In a 20 tracks game, this is enough variety. The problem is that a lot of them have bad design. Besides the 90o curves in every Ghost Valley or Bowser's Castle (that, as we said, don't fit the game's handling system), the excessive hazard in the track in most tracks, you also have Thwomps you can't see where are coming from beacuse they are out of sight in Bowser's Castle 3, the hazards that make you lose total control in curves and that are spread out on the field in the Choco Mountain tracks and the Vanilla Lake tracks would heavily benefit from a better color Scheme, since the ice blocks in the field have the same color than the snow on the field and are really really hard to see in movement, also while being everywhere on the track. The sole reason to the Mounty Mole latching onto you indefinitely (unless you jump out in water) not being the most stupid design decision in Kart Racing history is the existence of "Clashing" in "Crash Tag Team Racing" (2005), and the dead-end in Bowser's Castle 2 is not too far in the Dumb Scale. In general, most level have bad design.
"Super Mario Kart" for SNES, can be fun, cheap fun, but fun, but only at times. Is not even a cheap fun GAME, is a slightly bad game, with some cheap fun moments, mostly, when you're playing multiplayer, that's why you'll see way more people getting back to play "Mario Kart 64" (1996) than this one.
"Super Mario Kart" (1992), or: the game that is not as janky as some people say, but not nearly as good as some other people say.
I don't like to claim that a game is "outdated", in the first place because i don't see development of anything as an linear simple progression, second, because an analysis that start with claiming that "old games are outdated", will always compare the logic of certain games, to our modern ones, that operate in an different logic, is doomed to fail to analyze a game in its particularities and just will grasp most of the general era logic. If you play NES and SNES games with good faith and open heart, and try to grasp their general logic, and then play its games with the logic in mind, they'll be way better. I firmly believe that a game should be analyzed on its own logic, with its intentions and objectives in mind. So i'll try, as little as possible, to compare with more recent Mario Kart titles, and try to see how it relates with another arcade racing games of the SNES catalogue (there's a notorious jump in logic from SNES/Genesis to N64/Saturn/PS1 logic in Racing games, particularly with the increasing distinction between Arcade and Simulation racing and the notorious passage from 2D to 3D). My idea here, is try to understand the designs built in "Super Mario Kart", its intention, integration in a cohesive system and execution, and evaluate this effort, and trying to see its short comings, not as a limitation of the time or technology, and how most of its shortcomings are due to design or execution failures.
I think "Super Mario Kart", is one of the games that suffer the most from the "outdated" label, not allowing most people to properly see this game design problems, and merely dismissing this game as an antiquity.
The first thing we notice in a Mario Kart, is always the handling of the car. In this game, specifically, is really heavy and maintain much more of the weight in center, you can see it is much more realistic and inspired by real Kart. SNES racing games tend to be heavier, but even comparing with another titles such as "F-Zero" (1990), a way faster (and more technical) racing game, is significantly more difficult to take turns in "Super Mario Kart". And with a drifting system that serves more for adjustement of position than as an racing tool (as later Mario Kart entries would do), make tight turns in this game can be a little headache. This, combined with the level design, that favours a ton of 90o angle curves, you have a game that feels extremely slow, not because the game itself is slow, but because you need to always stop accelerating to adjust when entering curves. This, by itself is not bad, this is how racing in real life works, and if this was a Racing Simulator, would be a reasonable choice, but for Mario Kart and its quite simple driving, just hinders the game, creating a stale and grindy gameplay at times. Combined with the excessive hazard use (this game is to Hazards, what "Mario Kart Wii (2008)" is to Items), this game will have you slowing down really often. After you get the grip, you will be able to drive without much harm, but is not the most fun you can get out of an Racing game in an SNES.
The items are really moderated here, playing the least comprehensive role in any Mario Kart game, being mostly used in 1 vs 1 situations. By one side, this avoids the bonanza that some Kart games can become, erasing the racing fun for an quasi-party game madness, by other, items play an fundamental role of regulating position in kart games, and getting behind here is a hell, where you don't get any tool to signicantly help you, and make comebacks a rare case. A bad start can really kill your race.
The game is quite charming in its visuals and music, the character roster is considerable, and they play different from each other what adds variety to the game, but the level design and the hard handling end up favoring way more the lighter characters, making Bowser and Donkey Kong Jr. (The two heavy characters in the game) not excellent racers.
The game also don't have the Mario Kart feel yet, not being as distinct from the racing games of the time (the great difference is items, that was a great add to the game, allowing interesting tool for 1 vs 1 and taking shortcuts, giving more depth to the races). AI is quite competent, without being unfair, the only problem is that the enemies have semi-spammable special items, that you don't have access to, what is a very cheap design decision.
The multiplayer is a great addition, to play with a friend instantly make this a better title, and battle mode can be quite fun. Particularly thinking how shallow this is for singleplayer content experience.
But we need to talk about the level design. A lot of people complain about the lack of variety in levels. What i beg to differ. The plain levels make sense, while being different from the crazy stuff we get nowadays, and they do a great job with putting some variety. You have 8 unique concept tracks, and some variations of these, that honestly feel different to play. In a 20 tracks game, this is enough variety. The problem is that a lot of them have bad design. Besides the 90o curves in every Ghost Valley or Bowser's Castle (that, as we said, don't fit the game's handling system), the excessive hazard in the track in most tracks, you also have Thwomps you can't see where are coming from beacuse they are out of sight in Bowser's Castle 3, the hazards that make you lose total control in curves and that are spread out on the field in the Choco Mountain tracks and the Vanilla Lake tracks would heavily benefit from a better color Scheme, since the ice blocks in the field have the same color than the snow on the field and are really really hard to see in movement, also while being everywhere on the track. The sole reason to the Mounty Mole latching onto you indefinitely (unless you jump out in water) not being the most stupid design decision in Kart Racing history is the existence of "Clashing" in "Crash Tag Team Racing" (2005), and the dead-end in Bowser's Castle 2 is not too far in the Dumb Scale. In general, most level have bad design.
"Super Mario Kart" for SNES, can be fun, cheap fun, but fun, but only at times. Is not even a cheap fun GAME, is a slightly bad game, with some cheap fun moments, mostly, when you're playing multiplayer, that's why you'll see way more people getting back to play "Mario Kart 64" (1996) than this one.