
I played the £75 Mario Kart World on Switch 2 - was it worth it?
What's it like to play?
It's fair to say Mario Kart World makes a fantastic first impression, thanks to the console having more power under the hood.It looks spectacular compared to previous Switch titles, though we're still talking about cartoony graphics - make no mistake, the console is more powerful but it's no match for the higher spec PlayStation 5, let alone PS5 Pro.And in my three races the standout feature wasn't the swishy new graphics or the controller, it was a trick that is becoming Nintendo's hallmark: making the new feel familiar.Despite having never picked up a Switch 2, I stormed my way to consecutive first place finishes, much to the chagrin of those around me.
But it doesn't come cheap.The digital version of the game costs £66.99, it's another £8 on top of that for a physical copy - or pay an an extra £34.99 for a version of the Switch 2 with it built-in, something which pushes the console price to £429.99.According to industry expert Christopher Dring, these wallet-emptying prices are down to the costs involved in manufacturing - and President Donald Trump's tariff blitz.'These cartridges are exclusively made in Japan, which is a country that's just been hit with a 24% tariff from the US Government, and the threat of those tariffs may have impacted Nintendo's pricing decisions globally,' he said.
Mouse control and Donkey Kong destruction
But there's more to the Switch 2 than Mario Kart.Fans will no doubt have been excited to see the hotly anticipated Metroid Prime 4, the first game in the series in 18 years. But while they will be familiar with the typical way of playing - moving and aiming with joysticks and shooting with the "A" button - there's a significant new feature too.At any point in the game you can rotate the controller, put it on a surface and use it like a mouse. Fans of PC games will immediately feel at home with this, and it's a neat bit of engineering to be able to switch up on-the-fly without having to enter any menus.
The optical mouse controls pop up elsewhere too, with PC strategy game Civilization VII a game that massively benefits.But in both cases, I do wonder how long you can play with the controller like this before the ergonomics become an issue. I have to admit I found myself wondering why I wasn't just playing on my PC with mouse controls and a comfortable resting position.Still, the fact that this is built in to the hardware means we may see the Switch 2 as the obvious home of future PC ports to home consoles.And there is another trick up Nintendo's sleeve - both controllers can be held like this and used as mice, opening up some interesting possibilities. In particular, futuristic wheelchair basketball game Drag x Drive, where both "mice" are pushed to mimic moving wheels.Elsewhere, Donkey Kong Bananza will be the first time the ape mascot has had a platforming game of his own in 25 years, so there was some pressure on Nintendo to deliver a game which justified the wait.
For lack of a better term it's a destruct-em-up - you can destroy much of the floor and scenery in each level.But there's that dreaded price news again. A digital copy will cost £58.99, while a physical copy retails at £66.99.It seems Nintendo has a lot to offer Switch fans - but it will be taking a fair bit from them too.
Rivals and originals
Some other titles I got to see in action were updated versions of Cyberpunk 2077 and Yakuza 0 - both of which big hitters on rival consoles which were deemed too complex to run on the original Switch.Like the other Switch 2 games, they looked good - and of course they will benefit as the new console, like the original, can play games on the go.The original Switch created the genre of the hybrid console - one which works on a TV and as a portable system.But since that launch in 2017, things have changed a bit.Now, it has a rival in the Steam Deck, a hybrid machine with the power to play most PC games.Nintendo would say something its rivals don't have is that long list of exclusive titles.But there is a bit of a theme here: Nintendo has consciously gone for continuity.The console is the Switch 2, rather than having a completely new name. Many of those exclusives Nintendo is so proud of are new games in established series, while others are remasters of modern classics.
I had great experiences with these games in the 20 minutes I had with them.But for fans to get value for those high prices they will want something that holds up over weeks and months of gameplay.Will the Switch 2's slick nostalgia hit provide that? We'll start to see from 5 June.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Trump hiked tariffs on US imports. Now he's looking at exports – sparking fears of ‘dangerous precedent'
Apple CEO Tim Cook visited the White House bearing an unusual gift. 'This box was made in California,' Cook reassured his audience in the Oval Office this month, as he took off the lid. Inside was a glass plaque, engraved for its recipient, and a slab for the plaque to sit on. 'The base was made in Utah, and is 24-karat gold,' said Cook. Donald Trump appeared genuinely touched by the gift. But the plaque wasn't Cook's only offering: Apple announced that day it would invest another $100bn in US manufacturing. The timing appeared to work well for Apple. That day, Trump said Apple would be among the companies that would be exempt from a new US tariff on imported computer chips. The Art of the Deal looms large in the White House, where Trump is brokering agreements with powerful tech companies – in the midst of his trade war – that are reminiscent of the real estate transactions that launched him into fame. But in recent days, this dealmaking has entered uncharted waters. Two days after Cook and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang had a closed-door meeting with Trump at the White House. The president later announced Nvidia, along with its rival Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), will be allowed to sell certain artificial intelligence chips to Chinese companies – so long as they share 15% of their revenue with the US government. It was a dramatic about-face from Trump, who initially blocked the chips' exports in April. And it swiftly prompted suggestions that Nvidia was buying its way out of simmering tensions between Washington and Beijing. Trade experts say such a deal, where a company essentially pays the US government to export a good, could destabilize trading relations. Martin Chorzempa, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said that it creates 'the perception that export controls are up for sale'. 'If you create the perception that licenses, which are supposed to be determined on pure national security grounds, are up for sale, you potentially open up room for there to be this wave of lobbying for all sorts of really, dangerous, sensitive technologies,' Chorzempa said. 'I think that's a very dangerous precedent to set.' Though the White House announced the deal, it technically hasn't been rolled out yet, likely because of legal complications. The White House is calling the deal a 'revenue-sharing' agreement, but critics point out that it could also be considered a tax on exports, which may not be legal under US laws or the constitution. The 'legality' of the deal was 'still being ironed out by the Department of Commerce', White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters this week. Nvidia and AMD's AI chips are at the heart of the technological arms race between the US and China. Nvidia, which became the first publicly traded company to reach a $4tn valuation last month, creates the essential processing chips that are used to run and develop AI. The US government has played a role in this arms race over the last several years, setting regulations on what AI chips and manufacturing equipment can be sent to China. If China has less computing power, the country will be slower to develop AI, giving a clear advantage to the US. But despite the restrictions, China has been catching up, raising questions on how US policy should move forward. 'They haven't held them back as far as the advocates had hoped. The US has an enormous computing advantage over China, but their best models are only a few months behind our best models,' Chorzempa said. For US policymakers, 'the question they've had to grapple with is: Where do you draw the line?' The AI chips Nvidia and AMD can now sell to China aren't considered high-end. While they can be used for inference on trained models, they aren't powerful enough to train new AI models. When announcing the deal with Nvidia and AMD, Trump said the chip is 'an old chip that China already possesses … under a different label'. This is where a major debate on AI policy comes in. Those who take a hardline stance on the US's relationship with China say that allowing Chinese companies to purchase even an 'old chip' could still help the country get an advantage over the US. Others would say a restriction on such chips wouldn't be meaningful, and could even be counterproductive. To balance these two sides, the Trump administration is asking companies to pay up in order to export to China – a solution that people on both sides of the AI debate say is a precarious one. 'Export controls are a frontline defense in protecting our national security, and we should not set a precedent that incentivizes the government to grant licenses to sell China technology that will enhance AI capabilities,' said John Moolenaar, a Republican US representative from Michigan, in a statement. But Trump's gut-reaction to dealmaking seems focused on the wallet. On Wednesday, US treasury secretary Scott Bessent praised the arrangement and suggested it could be extended to other industries over time. 'I think that right now this is unique, but now that we have the model and the beta test, why not expand it?' he told Bloomberg. Julia Powles, executive director of the Institute for Technology, Law and Policy at the University of California, Los Angeles, said the deal opens up questions of whether similar pressure can be applied to other tech companies. 'What other quid pro quo might be asked in the future? The quid pro quo that would be of great concern to the [tech] sector is anything that reduces their reputation for privacy and security,' Powles said. 'That's thinking of government like a transactional operator, not like an institution with rules about when, how and for what it can extract taxes, levies and subsidies.' But that seems to be how the White House runs now. When explaining to the press how he made the deal, Trump said he told Huang: 'I want 20% if I'm going to approve this for you'. 'For the country, for our country. I don't want it myself,' the president added. 'And he said, 'Would you make it 15?' So we negotiated a little deal.'


The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
Trump hiked tariffs on US imports. Now he's looking at exports – sparking fears of ‘dangerous precedent'
Apple CEO Tim Cook visited the White House bearing an unusual gift. 'This box was made in California,' Cook reassured his audience in the Oval Office this month, as he took off the lid. Inside was a glass plaque, engraved for its recipient, and a slab for the plaque to sit on. 'The base was made in Utah, and is 24-karat gold,' said Cook. Donald Trump appeared genuinely touched by the gift. But the plaque wasn't Cook's only offering: Apple announced that day it would invest another $100bn in US manufacturing. The timing appeared to work well for Apple. That day, Trump said Apple would be among the companies that would be exempt from a new US tariff on imported computer chips. The Art of the Deal looms large in the White House, where Trump is brokering agreements with powerful tech companies – in the midst of his trade war – that are reminiscent of the real estate transactions that launched him into fame. But in recent days, this dealmaking has entered uncharted waters. Two days after Cook and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang had a closed-door meeting with Trump at the White House. The president later announced Nvidia, along with its rival Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), will be allowed to sell certain artificial intelligence chips to Chinese companies – so long as they share 15% of their revenue with the US government. It was a dramatic about-face from Trump, who initially blocked the chips' exports in April. And it swiftly prompted suggestions that Nvidia was buying its way out of simmering tensions between Washington and Beijing. Trade experts say such a deal, where a company essentially pays the US government to export a good, could destabilize trading relations. Martin Chorzempa, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said that it creates 'the perception that export controls are up for sale'. 'If you create the perception that licenses, which are supposed to be determined on pure national security grounds, are up for sale, you potentially open up room for there to be this wave of lobbying for all sorts of really, dangerous, sensitive technologies,' Chorzempa said. 'I think that's a very dangerous precedent to set.' Though the White House announced the deal, it technically hasn't been rolled out yet, likely because of legal complications. The White House is calling the deal a 'revenue-sharing' agreement, but critics point out that it could also be considered a tax on exports, which may not be legal under US laws or the constitution. The 'legality' of the deal was 'still being ironed out by the Department of Commerce', White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters this week. Nvidia and AMD's AI chips are at the heart of the technological arms race between the US and China. Nvidia, which became the first publicly traded company to reach a $4tn valuation last month, creates the essential processing chips that are used to run and develop AI. The US government has played a role in this arms race over the last several years, setting regulations on what AI chips and manufacturing equipment can be sent to China. If China has less computing power, the country will be slower to develop AI, giving a clear advantage to the US. But despite the restrictions, China has been catching up, raising questions on how US policy should move forward. 'They haven't held them back as far as the advocates had hoped. The US has an enormous computing advantage over China, but their best models are only a few months behind our best models,' Chorzempa said. For US policymakers, 'the question they've had to grapple with is: Where do you draw the line?' The AI chips Nvidia and AMD can now sell to China aren't considered high-end. While they can be used for inference on trained models, they aren't powerful enough to train new AI models. When announcing the deal with Nvidia and AMD, Trump said the chip is 'an old chip that China already possesses … under a different label'. This is where a major debate on AI policy comes in. Those who take a hardline stance on the US's relationship with China say that allowing Chinese companies to purchase even an 'old chip' could still help the country get an advantage over the US. Others would say a restriction on such chips wouldn't be meaningful, and could even be counterproductive. To balance these two sides, the Trump administration is asking companies to pay up in order to export to China – a solution that people on both sides of the AI debate say is a precarious one. 'Export controls are a frontline defense in protecting our national security, and we should not set a precedent that incentivizes the government to grant licenses to sell China technology that will enhance AI capabilities,' said John Moolenaar, a Republican US representative from Michigan, in a statement. But Trump's gut-reaction to dealmaking seems focused on the wallet. On Wednesday, US treasury secretary Scott Bessent praised the arrangement and suggested it could be extended to other industries over time. 'I think that right now this is unique, but now that we have the model and the beta test, why not expand it?' he told Bloomberg. Julia Powles, executive director of the Institute for Technology, Law and Policy at the University of California, Los Angeles, said the deal opens up questions of whether similar pressure can be applied to other tech companies. 'What other quid pro quo might be asked in the future? The quid pro quo that would be of great concern to the [tech] sector is anything that reduces their reputation for privacy and security,' Powles said. 'That's thinking of government like a transactional operator, not like an institution with rules about when, how and for what it can extract taxes, levies and subsidies.' But that seems to be how the White House runs now. When explaining to the press how he made the deal, Trump said he told Huang: 'I want 20% if I'm going to approve this for you'. 'For the country, for our country. I don't want it myself,' the president added. 'And he said, 'Would you make it 15?' So we negotiated a little deal.'


Metro
5 hours ago
- Metro
There's no reason to make a PS6 or a next gen Xbox - Reader's Feature
A reader feels a new generation of video games consoles is currently unnecessary, unless the new hardware and games are shown to do some different. The advent of a new console generation is an exciting and unpredictable time. Faster processors, beefier graphics cards and more teraflops than anybody knows what to do with. But with the recent PlayStation 6 rumours swirling, I can't help but wonder…do we really need that next leap right now? Technology is an ever-evolving thing and with it, so expand its capabilities. When a new console generation was released there was always a lot of fervour about what was new. Just think about some of the general leaps. 2D to 3D, SD to HD, long loading screens to near seamless worlds. But what can the PlayStation 6 and the Xbox (whatever it will be called, I mean who can guess at this point?) provide us? Just because they will be exponentially more powerful than their older brothers doesn't mean they'll offer anything truly new, problems we've already seen with the PlayStation 5 and the Xbox Series X. They both delivered iteration rather than revolution. I mean yes, they did give us practically zero load times, depending on the game, and we do have games running at native 4K, but what, if anything, did they give us over the previous gens? An example of this is the Nintendo Switch 2. Nintendo, known for their out-there designs like the N64 controller, and unique and engaging play systems (Wii motion controls), have just taken what was good about the Switch and plopped it into a bigger, sexier design and made it more powerful. Is this wrong? I'd say no, I think it's a great system, but it is missing some of that Nintendo charm and magic that they are known for. Sign up to the GameCentral newsletter for a unique take on the week in gaming, alongside the latest reviews and more. Delivered to your inbox every Saturday morning. So why is this going to matter to gamers? Don't we all want something new? To which the answer is usually yes. I mean for example, Sony once again released a PS5 Pro model, which can run a lot more games at 4K and a steady 60 frames per second, while toying with some ray-tracing. Most people don't need this, but for those who like to push boundaries, this is a great system. But my goodness, does this come at a cost! The cheapest PlayStation 5 is £430, while the Pro comes in at £690. That's a £260 difference, and amazingly, neither of those prices includes disc drives. If you want one of those, then that's another £70. So, can we possibly imagine how much a new console generation can start at? It's a little concerning. These companies know what they're doing, for the most part, and can potentially bring us some exciting and amazing surprises. More power is great, and I hope that the new generation can be a locked 4K 60fps gaming machine straight off the bat. But I do hope that outside of shinier and smoother graphics, we get these systems being used more creatively. Gaming is a creative space; let's keep it that way. More Trending If the PlayStation 6 is coming, I hope it's something more than just a PlayStation 5 in a nicer suit. I want to see something that surprises us, something that makes it feel like it's a true generational leap forward, something worth getting excited about. Otherwise, we're just buying the same console in a sharper tux. By reader Mike Wilson The reader's features do not necessarily represent the views of GameCentral or Metro. You can submit your own 500 to 600-word reader feature at any time, which if used will be published in the next appropriate weekend slot. Just contact us at gamecentral@ or use our Submit Stuff page and you won't need to send an email. MORE: I know what the gimmick for the next Zelda game could be - Reader's Feature MORE: Here's the one reason why I'm not buying Battlefield 6 - Reader's Feature MORE: Top 5 video game developers that have wasted their talents - Reader's Feature