The Nintendo "Off My Chest" thread (BE CIVIL)

[LiveStudioAudience]

I don't know how much Nintendo could really control this nor do I really know its financial potential, but I really want the Switch and its successor to be home to more ports of old (controller friendly) PC games. Playing the classic Doom titles, Portal 1/2, Quake, and now Dark Forces feels so perfect for the console, and I'd love to see more of them. Let's get the best point and click titles on there, maybe a few older Elder Scrolls, and Unreal Tournament while we're at it.

 

[Quillion]

I find it ironic that Peach (as seen in Showtime) sounds a lot better when her VA is allowed to speak in lower pitch, while Wario sounds a lot better when his VA is allowed to be in higher pitch (as seen in Wario World).

 

[RealLuigisWearPink]

I don't know how much Nintendo could really control this nor do I really know its financial potential, but I really want the Switch and its successor to be home to more ports of old (controller friendly) PC games. Playing the classic Doom titles, Portal 1/2, Quake, and now Dark Forces feels so perfect for the console, and I'd love to see more of them. Let's get the best point and click titles on there, maybe a few older Elder Scrolls, and Unreal Tournament while we're at it.

Highly desperately need Lemmings on the Switch, it annoys me to no end it hasn’t been officially ported to anything since the PSP (damn you Sony)

The Incredible Machine would be fun too

 

[RealLuigisWearPink]

Time to be a Pokemon fan dramatic thunder

Kanto games are good, actually. I know there's been a huge backlash against the infamous Genwunner crowd, but it feels like somewhere along the way people decided it's a bad region when it isn't. Is it outdated and basic? Yes, but not any more than any of the other franchise-starting games in Nintendo's catalog. Besides, Fire Red and Leaf Green fix all the problems and are easy A+ tier Pokemon games.

On the flipside, Unova went from being the most overhated region to being overrated, but that's just the cycle of Pokemon games lol. Good games, but I still think Hoenn and Sinnoh were the peak of the franchise.

 

[Quillion]

On the flipside, Unova went from being the most overhated region to being overrated, but that's just the cycle of Pokemon games lol.

I legitimately think the "Pokémon cycle" is more of a thing than the well-known "Zelda cycle".

 

[Lenidem]

I legitimately think the "Pokémon cycle" is more of a thing than the well-known "Zelda cycle".

What do you mean by that?

 

[fogbadge]

What do you mean by that?

im guessing by how quickly people go from loving it to hating it and vice versa

 

[Swamp Sensei]

What do you mean by that?

Thing old - people like

Thing new - people hate

New thing become old - now people like

New new thing - people hate

Repeat unlike heat death of the universe.

 

[fogbadge]

Thing old - people like

Thing new - people hate

New thing become old - now people like

New new thing - people hate

Repeat unlike heat death of the universe.

and start cycle anew in the next universe

 

[Lenidem]

I see. Didn't know about those "circles", thanks for the explanations!

 

[Quillion]

What do you mean by that?

What Swamp Sensei said is the Pokémon cycle now.

That being said, the Zelda fandom is more in a world vs. dungeon war over which should be the "meat" of the series.

 

[Quillion]

You know something? Pokémon is just as designed to be simple and easy as Kirby is.

Yet only the former gets **** for being easy.

People are just hypocrites about difficulty sometimes.

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

You know something? Pokémon is just as designed to be simple and easy as Kirby is.

Yet only the former gets **** for being easy.

People are just hypocrites about difficulty sometimes.

There are a lot of factors to explain this, but two significant ones are their respective genres and how difficulty is presented in both games. Pokémon, even with as big as it is, has a great deal of competition within the RPG sphere and even technically has other monster raising/battling titles similar to it. Comparisions to other series become a practical inedibility and the perceived flaws (whether related to challenge or not) feel more heightened when fans see other games of its type seemingly executing concepts better than what Pokémon is doing.

Kirby on paper should be in a similar boat, but 2D platformers (even with the indie scene) aren't as common as they once were, and Kirby's fairly distinct blend of platforming with beat em up and/or puzzle elements makes it largely exist within its own space. You can compare it to the likes of Mario or DK by comparison. but both series (especially the latter) don't have that many entries that often these days so even that is only so striking a juxtaposition. Kirby games can be easy; it's just trickier to find a game like it that exists as the superior and/or harder counterpart that one could argue it should be emulating.

Moreover, Pokémon tends to make its challenge so self-imposed and so based on working around mandatory gameplay elements like EXP share that resentment about its lack of difficulty is not terribly surprising. It's a franchise that often leans into Nintendo's more stubborn tendencies about having the experience in a specific way, options be damned, and the subsequent reception is very frustrated as a result.

By contrast Kirby can be a moderate or even breezy for the main playthrough; it's just that the best entries have consistently included in game hard modes or challenges like the True Arena to really test the player's abilities. It's not Hollow Knight level difficulty necessarily but it is a spike in comparison to the main modes and is consistently designed to be an escalation of what the core game is. I don't think it's a coincidence that Star Allies had one of the easiest main modes with a lack of hard optional challenges at launch and was one of the most consistently criticized Kirby entries of the last 15 years because it was so basic to get through. The complexity and selective difficulty that the series had been polishing since Return to Dreamland through Planet Robobot felt missing, which many fans noticed.

Pokémon does get a lot of unfair cheap shots for its difficulty. but I can see the argument that other first party series are able to get a better range of challenge than it often does.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

The more I look at how Nintendo fans talk about Rare Replay, the more I start to think they don't actually want to play the games on it and instead want it on Switch as a bizarre console war "Reclaim the games Nintendo RIGHTFULLY OWNS (but didn't actually make)" statement. I guess this goes for Rare IP fandom in general, where a lot of what they want seems to have a weird ulterior console war motive. It's good that Rare games are on Switch now, don't get me wrong, any game being on an extra platform is inherently good, but I can't help but have a bit of distaste towards how MS is making a bigger deal out of old Rare games than anything else they're providing to Nintendo - Grounded opening the partner direct and old ROMs being the bombastic close-out just rubs me the wrong way, and I've made my distaste for Banjo's Smash inclusion VERY clear over the years

 

[Quillion]

There are a lot of factors to explain this, but two significant ones are their respective genres and how difficulty is presented in both games. Pokémon, even with as big as it is, has a great deal of competition within the RPG sphere and even technically has other monster raising/battling titles similar to it. Comparisions to other series become a practical inedibility and the perceived flaws (whether related to challenge or not) feel more heightened when fans see other games of its type seemingly executing concepts better than what Pokémon is doing.

Kirby on paper should be in a similar boat, but 2D platformers (even with the indie scene) aren't as common as they once were, and Kirby's fairly distinct blend of platforming with beat em up and/or puzzle elements makes it largely exist within its own space. You can compare it to the likes of Mario or DK by comparison. but both series (especially the latter) don't have that many entries that often these days so even that is only so striking a juxtaposition. Kirby games can be easy; it's just trickier to find a game like it that exists as the superior and/or harder counterpart that one could argue it should be emulating.

Moreover, Pokémon tends to make its challenge so self-imposed and so based on working around mandatory gameplay elements like EXP share that resentment about its lack of difficulty is not terribly surprising. It's a franchise that often leans into Nintendo's more stubborn tendencies about having the experience in a specific way, options be damned, and the subsequent reception is very frustrated as a result.

By contrast Kirby can be a moderate or even breezy for the main playthrough; it's just that the best entries have consistently included in game hard modes or challenges like the True Arena to really test the player's abilities. It's not Hollow Knight level difficulty necessarily but it is a spike in comparison to the main modes and is consistently designed to be an escalation of what the core game is. I don't think it's a coincidence that Star Allies had one of the easiest main modes with a lack of hard optional challenges at launch and was one of the most consistently criticized Kirby entries of the last 15 years because it was so basic to get through. The complexity and selective difficulty that the series had been polishing since Return to Dreamland through Planet Robobot felt missing, which many fans noticed.

Pokémon does get a lot of unfair cheap shots for its difficulty. but I can see the argument that other first party series are able to get a better range of challenge than it often does.

This just makes me hate when games have to be compared to one another instead of doing their own thing. It just leads to genericism that AAA games and indie games alike often face nowadays.

Also, I wish these difficulty-complaining simpletons would stop giving a **** about whether a game is difficult or easy and focus on HOW a game is difficult or easy. Learn the difference between Devil May Cry 2 easiness and Kirby easiness as well as Crash Bandicoot difficulty and Mario Lost Levels difficulty.

I'm realizing that gamers in general just love talking crap about things that are either design goals or artistic decisions as if they were a bad thing like linearity, repetition, slow pacing, difficulty, large scale... next you'll tell me they'll start to complain that games starring humans is a bad thing.

All that said, this is why I like this forum at the moment. In this lull between Smash games, most threads are pretty small, so we don't get a lot of bad apples spoiling the whole bunch.
----
Speaking about easiness, I think Peach Showtime is easy in a bad way. From what I played of it, it's somehow both unfocused and the core gameplay is really basic.

 

[Wario Wario Wario]

I'm realizing that gamers in general just love talking crap about things that are either design goals or artistic decisions as if they were a bad thing like linearity, repetition, slow pacing, difficulty, large scale... next you'll tell me they'll start to complain that games starring humans is a bad thing.

This x googol. Gamers love to pin everything they dislike on some mysterious meddling force - "The corporate mandates", "the budget", "the deadline", "the censors", "listening to the 'fake fans'/critics", "the hardware", so on - instead of just accepting that they can disagree with an artist's intent.

A bit of a personal anecdote, but you see this a lot in NASB discussion. People call the lack of 2/4 TMNT as "the Turtle Problem", when a "problem" would imply that the other 2 turtles just slipped out of the devs' hands somehow or they forgot about them; people say NASB2 is the game "the devs wanted to make all along" when it has a completely different design mentality from the first game, as if every line of code in NASB1 had its own game-breaking glitch that transformed it into something unintended and unplanned; and I've even seen people openly admitting to believing made-up, unsourced development stories "justifying" the cuts from 1 to 2 as "deadline issues" simply because "it makes them think more highly of the devs".

Easily the worst part of this effect, though, is once people realise "this was the artist's intent", the narrative shifts to "why DIDN'T corporate interferre?", which is wrong on so many levels. Going back to two earlier discussion points from this page, I see "Well, Microsoft SHOULD'VE forced Rare to make Banjo games!" a lot now that Rare choosing to do Kinect Sports but not Banjo is becoming common knowledge, and in NASB roster talks you often get "Nick should've said NO to Hugh! Nick should've FORCED THEM to keep Lincoln!" (there was a lotta weird hypocrisy surrounding Hugh when he was a hot topic BTW, in any fandom "they should do what the fans want ALWAYS!" people will come up with the weirdest excuses and justifications when the rest of the fans want something they don't, they often end up being the biggest gatekeepers, though I guess that's basically the crux of their mentality, even if they disguise it as wanting everyone to be happy)

On a much more serious note, transitioning from "Jimmy Neutron's dad" to "Literal Racism", this is the mentality we're seeing the recent Sweet Baby drama - weird 4channers and Kiki Farms people can't accept that their edgy games are made by people who value diversity, and think people being hired to help guide portrayals of diversity are being somehow forced onto devs when, no, representation is hard, and needs assistance from those with experience and historical knowledge.

 

[Jotari]

There are a lot of factors to explain this, but two significant ones are their respective genres and how difficulty is presented in both games. Pokémon, even with as big as it is, has a great deal of competition within the RPG sphere and even technically has other monster raising/battling titles similar to it. Comparisions to other series become a practical inedibility and the perceived flaws (whether related to challenge or not) feel more heightened when fans see other games of its type seemingly executing concepts better than what Pokémon is doing.

Kirby on paper should be in a similar boat, but 2D platformers (even with the indie scene) aren't as common as they once were, and Kirby's fairly distinct blend of platforming with beat em up and/or puzzle elements makes it largely exist within its own space. You can compare it to the likes of Mario or DK by comparison. but both series (especially the latter) don't have that many entries that often these days so even that is only so striking a juxtaposition. Kirby games can be easy; it's just trickier to find a game like it that exists as the superior and/or harder counterpart that one could argue it should be emulating.

Moreover, Pokémon tends to make its challenge so self-imposed and so based on working around mandatory gameplay elements like EXP share that resentment about its lack of difficulty is not terribly surprising. It's a franchise that often leans into Nintendo's more stubborn tendencies about having the experience in a specific way, options be damned, and the subsequent reception is very frustrated as a result.

By contrast Kirby can be a moderate or even breezy for the main playthrough; it's just that the best entries have consistently included in game hard modes or challenges like the True Arena to really test the player's abilities. It's not Hollow Knight level difficulty necessarily but it is a spike in comparison to the main modes and is consistently designed to be an escalation of what the core game is. I don't think it's a coincidence that Star Allies had one of the easiest main modes with a lack of hard optional challenges at launch and was one of the most consistently criticized Kirby entries of the last 15 years because it was so basic to get through. The complexity and selective difficulty that the series had been polishing since Return to Dreamland through Planet Robobot felt missing, which many fans noticed.

Pokémon does get a lot of unfair cheap shots for its difficulty. but I can see the argument that other first party series are able to get a better range of challenge than it often does.

Pokemon's issue is that it's difficulty is mindless. It really takes very little to no effort to beat a Pokemon game playing it with any random Pokemon you like. And that's great for children and new players just getting into the game, but Pokemon ironically actually has a very deep and highly polished combat system. Pokemon is good, actually...but a Pokemon game will rarely if ever actually ask you to properly engage with it's mechanics and work to achieve something. They insist on making the depth of its gameplay exclusive to PvP, and ocassionally some kind of Battle Frontier like post game area (and that usually has some gimmicky caveats), and to do well in them suddenly you're expected to spend dozens of hours breeding perfect Pokemon. By which point, why bother? It's quicker, easier and more fun to just go on the unsanctioned website Pokemon Showdown.

Kirby, in comparison, is easy, but it's not mindless. You don't have much risk of getting a game over, but you will take hits of you're not careful and some of the bosses can genuinely take a life off a seasoned player like myself. I've recently got my partner, who is 50 years old, into video games and she absolutely loves Kirby. It really makes me appreciate how good the difficulty of Kirby is. It's easy in an approachable and engaging way, which can be hard to achieve.

 

[RealLuigisWearPink]

The more I look at how Nintendo fans talk about Rare Replay, the more I start to think they don't actually want to play the games on it and instead want it on Switch as a bizarre console war "Reclaim the games Nintendo RIGHTFULLY OWNS (but didn't actually make)" statement. I guess this goes for Rare IP fandom in general, where a lot of what they want seems to have a weird ulterior console war motive. It's good that Rare games are on Switch now, don't get me wrong, any game being on an extra platform is inherently good, but I can't help but have a bit of distaste towards how MS is making a bigger deal out of old Rare games than anything else they're providing to Nintendo - Grounded opening the partner direct and old ROMs being the bombastic close-out just rubs me the wrong way, and I've made my distaste for Banjo's Smash inclusion VERY clear over the years

Nah I just want a legal way to play Rare’s N64 output. My other options are spending an exorbitant price on fallible 25+ year old cartridges, buying an XBox One for one game, or waiting for Nintendo to add them to their crappy NSO service one game a century. And a Nintendo release of Rare Replay could include more games like the DKC trilogy or Diddy Kong Racing!

Some of us just wanna play games you know . I’m not denying the people you talk about exist but I don’t think they’re the majority

 

[Jotari]

Nah I just want a legal way to play Rare’s N64 output. My other options are spending an exorbitant price on fallible 25+ year old cartridges, buying an XBox One for one game, or waiting for Nintendo to add them to their crappy NSO service one game a century. And a Nintendo release of Rare Replay could include more games like the DKC trilogy or Diddy Kong Racing!

Some of us just wanna play games you know . I’m not denying the people you talk about exist but I don’t think they’re the majority

For pure games the collection I'd love to see is a Treasure collection. They were such a great studio, but their titles are so disparate across so many consoles and now so old, it's hard to play many of them. Surely Nintendo or someone else could pay for the liscence to release a bunch of them at once. That Treasure no longer exists would make that an easy proposal.

 

[Champion of Hyrule]

For pure games the collection I'd love to see is a Treasure collection. They were such a great studio, but their titles are so disparate across so many consoles and now so old, it's hard to play many of them. Surely Nintendo or someone else could pay for the liscence to release a bunch of them at once. That Treasure no longer exists would make that an easy proposal.

Treasure does still exist, they just haven't made a game in a while.

 

[Jotari]

Treasure does still exist, they just haven't made a game in a while.

A while being 10 years and counting.

 

[Quillion]

Pokemon's issue is that it's difficulty is mindless. It really takes very little to no effort to beat a Pokemon game playing it with any random Pokemon you like. And that's great for children and new players just getting into the game, but Pokemon ironically actually has a very deep and highly polished combat system. Pokemon is good, actually...but a Pokemon game will rarely if ever actually ask you to properly engage with it's mechanics and work to achieve something. They insist on making the depth of its gameplay exclusive to PvP, and ocassionally some kind of Battle Frontier like post game area (and that usually has some gimmicky caveats), and to do well in them suddenly you're expected to spend dozens of hours breeding perfect Pokemon. By which point, why bother? It's quicker, easier and more fun to just go on the unsanctioned website Pokemon Showdown.

Kirby, in comparison, is easy, but it's not mindless. You don't have much risk of getting a game over, but you will take hits of you're not careful and some of the bosses can genuinely take a life off a seasoned player like myself. I've recently got my partner, who is 50 years old, into video games and she absolutely loves Kirby. It really makes me appreciate how good the difficulty of Kirby is. It's easy in an approachable and engaging way, which can be hard to achieve.

I'll say that at least Pokémon makes you engage with the whole Elemental RPS thing. You're get the farthest playing most basically that way.

Also, can't you argue that Kirby's combat system, or at least the games that follow the Super Star combat system, are actually quite versatile and polished in their own right? Yet enemies generally attack very slowly and you won't have a lot of "squads" assault you at once. It is pretty mindless in its own right.

 

[Jotari]

I'll say that at least Pokémon makes you engage with the whole Elemental RPS thing. You're get the farthest playing most basically that way.

Also, can't you argue that Kirby's combat system, or at least the games that follow the Super Star combat system, are actually quite versatile and polished in their own right? Yet enemies generally attack very slowly and you won't have a lot of "squads" assault you at once. It is pretty mindless in its own right.

I think that's true for Star Allies, but not the others I've played.

 

[Quillion]

I think that's true for Star Allies, but not the others I've played.

Star Allies' problem is that its level design is bland. Its enemy behavior is just about the same as the other games.

 

[Jotari]

Star Allies' problem is that its level design is bland. Its enemy behavior is just about the same as the other games.

Khe actual allies just auto ganging up on any enemy you come across so you don't even need to do anything (and if you wanted to there's too much going on to even do anything meaningful).

 

[Quillion]

Khe actual allies just auto ganging up on any enemy you come across so you don't even need to do anything (and if you wanted to there's too much going on to even do anything meaningful).

Only if you leave the friends in your party. You can dismiss them at will as long as they're not required (though they often are tbf).

 

[ninjahmos]

Well, I'm just gonna go out and say it.

I really wish Nintendo would pay just a little more attention to their other IPs. Most of the games they've released have usually been Mario this, Zelda that - with at least one Kirby or Metroid game or announcement every now and then.

 

[Swamp Sensei]

Well, I'm just gonna go out and say it.

I really wish Nintendo would pay just a little more attention to their other IPs. Most of the games they've released have usually been Mario this, Zelda that - with at least one Kirby or Metroid game or announcement every now and then.

Which IPs in particular? Because Nintendo has been pretty generous this generation. We've had several revivals and even F-Zero got a new game. Most of the IPs in Smash (not counting retros) have had a new title on the Switch.

The only true no shows are DK, Earthbound, Wii Fit, Punch Out!! and Kid Icarus.

 

[ninjahmos]

Which IPs in particular? Because Nintendo has been pretty generous this generation. We've had several revivals and even F-Zero got a new game. Most of the IPs in Smash (not counting retros) have had a new title on the Switch.

The only true no shows are DK, Earthbound, Wii Fit, Punch Out!! and Kid Icarus.

Don’t forget Star Fox, 1080, and Wave Race

 

[Swamp Sensei]

Don’t forget Star Fox, 1080, and Wave Race

I admittedly missed Star Fox, but they have had Star Link, which is like a Star Fox game.

 

[Quillion]

Well, I'm just gonna go out and say it.

I really wish Nintendo would pay just a little more attention to their other IPs. Most of the games they've released have usually been Mario this, Zelda that - with at least one Kirby or Metroid game or announcement every now and then.

Given how expensive game development is even with Nintendo's restraint on their project scale, it's gonna take a miracle for Nintendo to see the value of their lesser IPs. That's just how it is.

Don’t forget Star Fox, 1080, and Wave Race

These in particular? I hope that Nintendo doesn't shy away with giving them mid-scale studio support as opposed to a small-scale team or the full triple-A experience.

Peach Showtime seems to be doing well for itself despite its mid-scale production. Nintendo should run with giving the lesser IPs that kind of support.

 

[fogbadge]

Another Code, Advance Wars, Big Brain Academy and Famicom Detective Club be like "What are we, chopped liver?"

 

[Baysha]

Given how expensive game development is even with Nintendo's restraint on their project scale, it's gonna take a miracle for Nintendo to see the value of their lesser IPs. That's just how it is.

I honestly think Nintendo should pull a Cadence of Hyrule and give a license for these lesser IPs to an established indie studio and publish that.

 

[Quillion]

I honestly think Nintendo should pull a Cadence of Hyrule and give a license for these lesser IPs to an established indie studio and publish that.

They did it for the Advance Wars remakes too. (though I would argue that Wayforward has grown into "big indie" rather than just plain "indie")

Though for the three that ninjahmos mentioned, Star Fox, 1080 Snowboarding, and Wave Race, maybe those would need a mid-size studio.

Though I am interested in seeing a Star Fox indie farmout if they go for the SNES extremely low-poly style. Hell, maybe they can just make it a 2D shmup altogether but with all the Star Fox trappings like the comms, barrel rolling, and charge shots.

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

I'd love to see an indie company do an N64 level sequel to the 1997 Star Fox game. Something along the lines of a hypothetical 2000/2001 follow-up that we never got with the feel of a game really pushing that system's hardware. 5th gen looking titles are in vogue at the indie level anyway so I think it would do well even beyond the obvious appreciation for Star Fox 64.

 

[Quillion]

I'd love to see an indie company do an N64 level sequel to the 1997 Star Fox game. Something along the lines of a hypothetical 2000/2001 follow-up that we never got with the feel of a game really pushing that system's hardware. 5th gen looking titles are in vogue at the indie level anyway so I think it would do well even beyond the obvious appreciation for Star Fox 64.

Can't help but think that would send another message of "Nintendo is resting on Star Fox 64's laurels" again.

 

[LiveStudioAudience]

Can't help but think that would send another message of "Nintendo is resting on Star Fox 64's laurels" again.

Perhaps, but ideally it would be a fresh team actually hypothetically building on that game rather than just another gameplay reset and/or reusing the same levels. Even just something like a Star Fox 64 2 being the proverbial Rogue Leader to Star Fox 64's Rogue Squadron would be a remarkable good step for the series.

 

[ninjahmos]

OK, hear me out…

What if Nintendo and SEGA collaborated and made a Star Fox game that was co-developed by Sonic Team? It could be directed either by Takashi Iizuka or Kazuyuki Hoshino, and the lead composers could be Hideaki Kobayashi, Takahito Eguchi and Yutaka Minobe.

It could even have secret missions based on certain SEGA games, like Space Harrier, After Burner, Phantasy Star Online, or even Burning Rangers.

 

[Quillion]

OK, hear me out…

What if Nintendo and SEGA collaborated and made a Star Fox game that was co-developed by Sonic Team? It could be directed either by Takashi Iizuka or Kazuyuki Hoshino, and the lead composers could be Hideaki Kobayashi, Takahito Eguchi and Yutaka Minobe.

It could even have secret missions based on certain SEGA games, like Space Harrier, After Burner, Phantasy Star Online, or even Burning Rangers.

I'm all for SEGA doing a Star Fox game, but the team should be one who has experience in that sort of thing, not Sonic Team.

 

[Quillion]

They missed an opportunity to call 2023-2024 the Year of Peach. Not only is it SMB1's 40th anniversary, but Peach has so many (co-)starring roles in Wonder, RPG Remake, and Showtime.

Remembering this post, I forgot that SMB1 was released in 1985, so Peach's wave of starring roles falls short of the anniversary of her debut.

But then I realized: we may be celebrating Peach now, but what if 2025 is The Year of Bowser instead?

Even better, what if 2025 is a dueling year between Year of Peach and Year of Bowser and Nintendo asks everyone to take a side?

(Side note fun fact: Super Princess Peach (the better Peach game) was released in October 2005, around the 20th anniversary of her debut.)