I'M FINISHED!
Um exCUSE me Sakurai but CLEARLY the best choice for Smash Bros would be my fav niche character HOWEVER you are clearly INCOMPETENT and
As well as people wanting Peach as a playable character. Nintendo can't do anything right.
Super Mario 3D World for Wii U
- Thread starter Darklord
- Start date
As well as people wanting Peach as a playable character. Nintendo can't do anything right.
I believe 3D World will do something similar to 3D Land as what Galaxy 2 did for Galaxy.
However, while SMG2 was like a filter through which the best of SMG emerged and was refined into dazzling brilliance, 3DW looks to be more like a hot pot in which 3DL is the base ingredient, and then every awesome idea either used or unused in previous Mario games, both 2D and 3D, are mixed together to bring forth the most delicious and perfected Mario broth yet.
mmmmm...
However, while SMG2 was like a filter through which the best of SMG emerged and was refined into dazzling brilliance, 3DW looks to be more like a hot pot in which 3DL is the base ingredient, and then every awesome idea either used or unused in previous Mario games, both 2D and 3D, are mixed together to bring forth the most delicious and perfected Mario broth yet.
mmmmm...
Forced co-op is almost always so lame though. Usually, what cooperation that occurs naturally in a dynamic setting (a Mario stage or a Halo battlefield) trumps most any forced co-op I can think of. And the ones it doesn't trump, a couple of Portal 2 puzzles, it makes up for by allowing the players to engage in the process more frequently than when compared to the elaborate process it takes to get any meaningful structured co-op off of the ground.
This is true. Co-op "mechanics" can be fun and engaging, but they tend to bring the pace of the game to a crawl unless you are really in perfect sync and know what you're doing. The exception is something like Rayman Legends' Murfy stuff, or Boost Mode challenges in NSMBU. That is how to fit co-op really well into the framework of a fast-paced platformer.
Agreed. I was annoyed by that 3D Land. It felt so very lazy of the dev team. I hope they created a map screen at the very least.
catstronaut
Member
I love that four-player co-op is equivalent to lazy game design now. Like you can just slap any garbage game together and add three players and it'll become an instant classic.
catstronaut
Member
I really love the look of certain Mario Kart 8 levels, but other ones look like they forego any Mario style and just arrive at some sort of bland realism. Like Dry Dry Desert, that just looks like it could be in a Modnation Racers game, if United Front got their act together and developed a modicum of style. But it doesn't have that Mario feel. Certain other stages look fantastic, though.
Either way, 3D World has great graphic design. I feel like if you actually made a Mario diorama, if you really took the characters and places and made little train-set villages out of them, you'd arrive at something that looks a lot like 3D World.
Either way, 3D World has great graphic design. I feel like if you actually made a Mario diorama, if you really took the characters and places and made little train-set villages out of them, you'd arrive at something that looks a lot like 3D World.
Freezie KO
Banned
Dry Dry Desert is sorely lacking smiley faces on the clouds.
InfiniDragon
Member
I for one am really glad Peach is playable. I use her in any game where they give me the option.
Totally agree.
I absolutely adored the hub in Galaxy 1. For me, the game was a perfect unification of gameplay, theme, and narrative. You suddenly find yourself on this mysterious ship, and right away you know this game is going to be very different. Over time you unlock different parts of it (a kitchen, a garden. . .), and if you'd like, also learn its back story. The way everything came together, the way all the different dimensions of the game reinforced one another, just truly blew me away.
I find myself becoming more and more excited for 3D World, but yeah, I'll definitely be disappointed if we end up just walking in a straight line again. (I expect to be disappointed.)
The Wario Land world map was so cool, I love that game, it's one of my all time favorites.
Exactly what i'm feeling. It dawned on me suddenly that this could end up being the best Mario game ever, and that's an exciting realization
Exactly what i'm feeling. It dawned on me suddenly that this could end up being the best Mario game ever, and that's an exciting realization
It really depends on what you're hoping to get out of your Mario game. I'm really pleased that other people are referencing the hub worlds of previous games. Yes, it meant you didn't just jump straight into another level, but I do think that they bring something to the table that's lost when you go the 3D Land route of "random self-contained stage floating independently along a straight line."
Really, I expect to get Mario 3D World, play through it, find a number of levels where I can go "oh, that was cool," and then pretty much immediately leave it all behind. But to this day I can still fire up Mario 64 or Sunshine and just fool around. Sunshine in particular was great for this, I loved setting up my own little parkour runs for myself in the plaza or within the courses. Level designs in 3D Land (and, at least from what we've seen so far, 3D World as well) may be much more focused and intelligently constructed, but there's just not the same sort of "here's a playground, see what you can do" sort of feeling that you'd get from the older 3-D Mario games.
That's true. While i'm now really excited for the game, i'm not sure how much i'd actually want to replay it or go back to it. Mario 64 will always be a game I can go back to, more so than many games I have played in my life. I was actually really disappointed when SM3DW was announced. What I truly want is an open-world 3D mario platforming adventure with a world map that has the mushroom kingdom dab in the middle. Something between OOT and Mario 64. 120 stars spread throughout the world, light RPG elements, epic bosses, seamless landscapes full of platforming bliss and adventure. I'm just really surprised and pleased that maybe this game is 100 times better than I thought.
ElectricKaibutsu
Member
Yup, that's what I want too but I doubt we'll ever get it. I don't remember the exact quote so I'm paraphrasing but Miyamoto said Zelda and Mario games should be completely opposite of one another. Mario should be strictly linear and Zelda should be about exploring. Miyamoto was lamenting how they've gotten mixed over the years and wants them to be separate again.
I think an open-world 3D Mario set in Mushroom Kingdom is pretty much every fan's wet dream. It's also 99.99999% unlikely that it'll ever exist.
Yeah? Well, fuck Miyamoto. I ain't afraid to say it! Koizumi sneaked in a little bit of his unique vision for Mario with the grandiose feeling of the first Galaxy game, and then Miyamoto forced him to tone it back and just have Galaxy 2 be another straightforward Mario premise. I'm not saying that Mario games should be riddled with cutscenes or emulate Zelda's exploration, but I really don't agree with Miyamoto's stance on how a 3D Mario game should be. Leave that minimalist approach to the 2D Mario's. The 3D games should be showstoppers!
Dion Blaster
Member
I think the only problem with a game like that is how often you'll just be running for a while with nothing to platform, lots of open space. Sunshine had a bit of this problem. Mario 64 was just compact enough not to feel empty. That really is the gold standard for "open world" platforming imo. And I would rather they stay further on the Galaxy/3DL side of that spectrum rather than towards Sunshine. Of course hitting the exact formula of 64 again would be most preferable for my tastes.
Zeer0id hit the nail on the head with "obstacle course." Once the game is too spread out to feel like there is one obstacle leading into another, it's too spread out imo. 64 took that about as far as it could go to me, while still getting the obstacle course vibe. Sunshine (and the Banjo games) had (some) levels that took the open-ness too far imo.
It's interesting you say that, because almost word-for-word, I feel exactly the opposite. That is to say, I loved every Mario platformer (even the oft-maligned NSMB DS), but which games do I like going back to? That's easy. SMB3, SMW, SMG, SMG2, and SM3DL.
SM64 and SMS, to me, feel like curiosities, interesting to observe and wax nostalgic on, but not terribly fun to play anymore (in broad terms). Since Nintendo, in my opinion, began to perfect the art of 3D platform design with Super Mario Galaxy, I've come to realize that the older brand of exploratory design is inconsistent with what I believe makes platformers enjoyable. Platformers are often referred to as obstacle courses, and that's an apt analogy. I'd also say your "playground" analogy is a good one, because a playground is not unlike an obstacle course whose components have been stripped of their original function and then tossed together haphazardly. It sacrifices (level) design in lieu of supposed freedom. Except, that freedom isn't all it's cracked up to be, because what it really amounts to is partaking in the same individual activities you would otherwise, just without the momentum or engagement with the game creators you derive from a tightly designed obstacle course.
No, it isn't. The only location I want to see in HD is a Boo Mansion and I'd take a Luigi's Mansion substitute for that. Open-world is a fad. You know what happens when you mindlessly follow fads? You end up like Sonic the Hedgehog. I want a new Mario game set in cooler themes. I don't want an open-world one, that sounds as dumb as a Pokemon MMO.
I certainly understand where you're coming from, and I'm not averse to the "obstacle course" style of Mario experience compared to the "playground" style. What the latter lacks in directed momentum I think is made up for in self-generated motivation. If my gamecube were around at the moment, I could pop in Mario Sunshine and head for the Noki Bay's "secret" shine objective, which basically installed a tightrope course high above the main area. I used to love spending time just bouncing from rope to rope, trying to see what shortcuts I could devise or hang off the ropes and use FLUDD to spin Mario and launch him halfway across the level to a different area, just to see where my abilities would lead me. A similar series of tightropes in a typical "3D Land/World" setting would just be bounced up to the top and left behind in favor of the next obstacle. Since these games have timers and even in the developer direct, they talked about the appeal of speedruns, you're actually being encouraged to not experiment with the platforming world that Mario provides, instead putting your focus into doing what the level designers wanted you to be doing.
But really, my bigger issue when comparing the 3D ____ series to the likes of 64 or Sunshine isn't even so much the issue of linear challenges vs. exploration, but more in the way those levels are organized and packaged. Someone who's played Mario 64 in their past can likely recall a number of the levels and tricks in that game. I could rattle off the names of all 15 courses and I still have those maps burned into my mind after running through them so much. Fast forward to 3-D Land. Can you list your favorite levels from that game, by name, off the top of your head? I remember there was a level involving jumping across clock gears, at least one with a bubbly background and a bunch of boos...airships and castles naturally...but, take the clock tower for instance. When in the game did that appear? Was it 3-1? 4-5? Who knows. I played it, it was fun, I moved on to the next course and dealt with whatever that was, then moved on again. Because there's no reason or theme behind the way the series of levels is presented to you, it makes each individual level feel kind of disposable in a way. And when those individual levels are really all that makes up the game...
Do you see what I mean when I say I'm concerned for how "memorable" this recent trend in Mario games will turn out?
The hub world and large, open levels were the best thing about Sunshine! I really hope Nintendo goes back to that in a future title. The Galaxy/3DLand-style more linear courses are fun and all, but I prefer the 64/Sunshine style. Unfortunately for me, Nintendo seems to be moving away from that in Mario games (even spin-offs like Paper Mario. Sticker Star was very disappointing for me).
GAF A60-Rim A
Banned
If they can formulate a way to make it sell evergreen (like that idea I've seen suggested many times about combining "suggested" linear ways forward through demarcated path textures and guiding blocks and arrows, with complete freedom to stray from those paths)... then I think the concept is likely rather than unlikely.
But it may take a few generations of bridge titles like this one, I don't know.
SatoAilDarko
Member
Its funny I think Galaxy games are the best and the only thing to make them better us to be a bit more like 64/sunshine. Namely a large hubworld as well as some more objective open-ended levels. Still I felt like this was still in Galaxy though in a smaller scale. That's why I don't like it when people equate the galaxy games with 3D land. Yeah levels were more linear but there were plenty of go explore and find stuff levels. As well as solving one area to move to the next.
3D Land/World is really 2D Mario objectives with elements of 3D Mario. I would much rather have had 64/sunshine than 3D world and this is from someone who loved 3D Land. I feel that Galaxy was the best evolution of 64/Sunshine because in addition to the openness of areas in the latter it was able to add in the linearity that is a core part of the Mario experience. I can only hope that they will return to the true 3D Mario style later. If only the 2D style and 3D Land games didn't sell better.
That's true. 3D Land was much more linear and smaller scale than the Galaxy games. Hopefully 3D World, being on a much more powerful home console, will be more like Galaxy.
TheVampire
Banned
So just how long do you think it takes Nintendo to make this new Mario game?
It looks alot like the DS version.
I just want a new proper 3D Mario like 64 or Sunshine
It looks alot like the DS version.
I just want a new proper 3D Mario like 64 or Sunshine
I have been thinking about this for awhile, and wondering what else they can do. It would be interesting if they made a Mario game based in a big city, or something like that. That is the best I can imagine.
So just how long do you think it takes Nintendo to make this new Mario game?
It looks alot like the DS version.
I just want a new proper 3D Mario like 64 or Sunshine
This is a proper 3D Mario. In single player, it's not as "isometric" as 3D Land or multiplayer. You have full use of the camera and it plays like all previous 3D Marios
TheVampire
Banned
It still seems like little effort was put into making it coming off the DS version.
GrotesqueBeauty
Banned
I find this patently ridiculous, like when people suggest 2D platformers are simple affairs that should be download only. It's bewildering how anyone can watch gameplay videos of the game and earnestly claim there's some lack of effort. Whatever your stylistic preferences the sheer craftsmanship of the development team should be patently obvious.
TheVampire
Banned
Well you tell me: What would be harder and take longer to make?
Mario 3D World for Wii U or some new Mario Wii U game that is like 64 or Sunshine?
Well next year is Daisy's 25th anniversary, although I don't expect them to do anything about it.
As far as linearity vs exploration there's room for both, and I actually expect this to get a better balance than the previous games. Galaxy felt pretty linear outside of some of the larger levels...which I actually didn't mind, but maybe felt too linear at times, possibly cause it could be contrasted directly with some of the few big levels. My hope with 3D World is that there's more big levels with more crap to do while still being linear, like that 2-1 level looks decently sized enough to look around for stuff without being wide open and devoid (and I didn't know the coin block head was in there).
Aesthetically I think the main issue is just that it's all really geometric vs Galaxy having a lot of more organic looking landforms. We haven't seen much of 3D World yet so who knows if everything is like that or mixed up...I could see it sticking with the geometric style just cause it's probably easier to platform on, like everything is clearly defined as a result.
And while looking at videos this one caught my eye, nothing special about it but I thought Peach's animations looked awesome/hilarious, particularly the running and when she pops out of the vertical pipes (edit-and fire flower Peach has different hair!):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsYY0KtfgRM
Sounds pretty anachronistic.
And it will take them as long and as much hard work as any sort of 3D Mario game would, but you can choose not to believe that I guess.
And it hasn't been developed 'coming off the back' of 3D Land - it started development whilst 3D Land was still being worked on. But you can choose not to believe that too.
GrotesqueBeauty
Banned
At this point I don't have any reason to believe that Super Mario 3D World is either more or less difficult to make than any other 3D Mario game. I'm sure it poses its own unique set of challenges.
My question is why you assume it's so much easier...
Apart from the graphical similarities and the return of the Tanooki suit, soooo much is different:
- twice the framerate of the 3DS version, 60fps baby
- 4 player mode with a competitive layer in each stage
- 4 different characters with different running and jumping physics, far more ambitious than NSMB series multiplayer ever was
- New cat power up with a deep move set + return of all time favorites: Frog, Kurobo shoe
- Return of old time enemies
- Ability to grab and throw items (we saw a snow ball example) as in SMB2
- Free Camera on 360 degrees + new vertical camera layer to see what's upper and below characters
- New gameplay mechanics with transparent pipes, controllable dinosaurs
- Ambitious boss battle
We saw all these differences, in a preview that is a small glimpse of the full game.
Little effort you said?
GrotesqueBeauty
Banned
If you add up all the shines strictly from blue/red coins in that game it's some absurd number, like almost half. Never mind the uninspired shadow Mario challenges that have unfortunately crept their way into every new 3D Mario in recent memory.
Ha, Peach obviously is a bit rusty on this adventuring lark compared to the other characters.
Madnesslink5
Member
A Mario game consisting of entirely these type of levels (`the secret of Noki Bay` FLUDD-less levels from SMSS) would be my game of the forever, I could replay those levels again and again and again, try to set new records etc. Not to mention if they added extra challenges to each level such as the purple coin challenge. Man I want that so bad.
The only thing I'm willing to give him is that Nintendo Tokyo making a Mario game like Mario 64 or Sunshine after having making Mario games in a different style (not to mention Jungle Beat) would, at the very least, require a gear change for the development studio.
Besides that though, I don't know why people believe they have any access any game developers thoughts or detailed knowledge of the development process or environment to simply state one type of game is easier to make. Look at it this way, even from our perspective we know that both games have different strengths. Mario64 style for world building/exploration and Galaxy style for pace and platforming tightness. What makes you think one style requires more effort or time? Asset creation? What assets 64 style eats up with its larger areas Galaxy style eats up in variety. What development time a 64-style game would take up in building world cohesion a Galaxy game would take up in taming the radically different nature of mechanics found from level to level or even sections of levels to sections of levels. I just don't know why people don't think a Galaxy type game doesn't have enough substance for a development team to go all in the same way they'd do a Mario-64 type game.
Nostremitus
Member
The moment the camera panned back to show Mario 3D World during the direct, a thought struck me. Is 3D World an up-ported 3DS sequel for 3D Land?
With all the issues the Wii U's launch had and Nintendo's admitted problems with developing HD games, did Nintendo rush what would have been a 3DS game to the Wii U? If so, could they still be working on a Galaxy-esqe game that was simply taking too long to produce to fit their needs?
With all the issues the Wii U's launch had and Nintendo's admitted problems with developing HD games, did Nintendo rush what would have been a 3DS game to the Wii U? If so, could they still be working on a Galaxy-esqe game that was simply taking too long to produce to fit their needs?
They've been working on this since 2011. They hinted at it from the 2011 Iwata Asks for Super mario 3D land. They've wanted to do this for a long time.
The 4 multiplayer component is something they've wanted to do for more than a decade.
They said in the Iwata Asks that Super mario 3D land was a crossroads for new 3D mario games. This was what they were hinting at.
This is the next 3D Mario game
Will they be working on a successor to this game, yes. Of course they are always working.
I view this as Super mario Galaxy 2, they had a lot of leftover ideas and thought it would be great to make a new 3D mario game focused on these ideas.
Up-ported, that really gives a disservice to the difference between 3DS hardware and Wii U.
I thought those levels is what galaxy is based on?
Is there any proof to the frog suit yet. I keep seeing people mention it but somehow I keep missing the proof.
Davey Cakes
Member
Indeed.
I liked Sunshine but it's a big bag of filler. Like you said, half the game is blue coins. If you want to get 120 Shines you're going to be spending A LOT of time looking around for those damn coins rather than actually playing through levels.
To be honest, I like red coin and 100-coin challenges and I even enjoy the idea of blue coins but they needed to set a limit, not dedicate a huge portion of the game to these.
It's why I think people who say Sunshine is the best (even if they're few and far between) are out of their minds. There's just not enough actual content if you're going for 100%. The great thing about the Galaxy games is that there is far less filler (you're doing a lot more actual traversal of levels and completing a lot more actual game challenges) and nothing feels arduous or repetitive, for the most part. In the case of Galaxy 2, all of the content that could be construed as "filler" is kept for the post-game in the form of Green Stars.
And, if we look at 3D Land, that's a game that's basically ALL levels and nothing else. Yes, the second half is remixed but that's beside the point.
Certainly not mine. I like the linear approach much better for 3D Mario. I do at least agree Miyamoto should step aside for Koizumi to do whatever he wants.
catstronaut
Member
Considering the objectives in the first world of Mario 64 are "run up this mountain four times in a row," I 'd definitely say following 64's design would be the easy route.
Madnesslink5
Member
Maybe, I don't know. I can definitely see that some sections of certain galaxies are based on that `pure platforming` aspect, however I was on about pure platforming levels like those FLUDD-less ones in SMSS, whereas in Galaxy there is still a fair bit of `exploration` I shall call it.
Would you not say that Super Mario 3D World is somewhat like that? Seems to me it being pure platforming is what people are disliking here