-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
After replaying Mario World, I realized it's not all that. 3, YI and NSMBU are better
- Thread starter AuthenticM
- Start date
even the ugly ones?
Super Mario 2 USA is on there, and no mention of Yoshi's Island or Wario Land. I leave content. Though it's kinda weird that Super Mario Maker and Super Mario Run are counted as mainline titles, but whatever.
I see your point, but you're giving more intensity to mine than I intended. Again, I don't necessarily mean that World is a worse game. I'm saying that Mario is Mario, and after giving us Super Mario 2 USA which flipped the game on its head and SMB3 that expanded on... well, everything SMB1 did, SMW felt less ambitious and imaginative. The levels and environments of Dinosaur Land aren't nearly as diverse and bizarre as those in the Mushroom Kingdom in 3. Mario was seen as the pinnacle of gaming and, dare I say, world-building for platformers back in the day. In that way SMW was too safe and it failed to live up to expectations. Still a great game in its own right obviously.
This would completely derail the topic so I'm not gonna elaborate too much, but I find it interesting that you brought up other Nintendo series to refute my argument: I'd actually argue that yes, those other games you mentioned also 'failed' in a way. Sunshine didn't crush 64 because, by and large, people think it's the black sheep of 3D Mario. The NSMB games aren't nearly as revered as the other 2D Mario titles because they're just unambitious, with mediocre music and the same old environments and assets over and over. It took Breath of the Wild for people to start thinking that okay, maybe this time Nintendo truly outdid Ocarina of Time (and maybe even the original Zelda, which it draws more upon). It took Retro to breathe some new life in Metroid (before that petered out eventually too). Kirby games are essentially the same game over and over. The broad point is: you could argue that Nintendo is 'bad' at the sequel game. They're great at making good games and maintaining a high level quality through most entries (at least compared to most developers). But they're bad at upping the ante in my opinion. They're often bad at reinventing a series in a way that, paradoxically, would live up to people's expectations. For all their talk about wanting to surprise people, they have a very formulaic approach to sequels, and when they break from it, they sometimes do it in ways that shows a blatant misunderstanding of what people like about them (Other M, anyone?). That's why BotW was so well-received. People expect an Empire Strikes Back after every A New Hope, but Nintendo keeps giving them The Force Awakens instead: good, competent, but mostly a rehash with a few elements switched around and sparse innovations. And sometimes they give us a prequel episode, ugh
.I really don't want to go off-topic here any longer though. Feel free to start a thread or to PM me if you really want to discuss this.
TheEndOfItAll
Neo Member
I don't understand the exercise of pitting games against each other when they're in different console generations.
SMW was great.
SMB3 was great.
NSMBU was forgettable, but fine. I enjoyed the challenge of it.
SMW was great.
SMB3 was great.
NSMBU was forgettable, but fine. I enjoyed the challenge of it.
SMB is still a fun game to speed run (without warp). Does it at least once a year.
And NSMB is also fun...
I give you super mario sunshine but that is because I suck in any 3D game.
EDIT:
The reason why I like NSMB DS is that I think it feels like a new take on SMB. Not a continue from SMB3. As I still like SMB I think that is a good thing.
NSMB Wii feels like it takes more from SMB3 and is probably a better game than NSMB. However I still enjoy playing NSMB.
It's on the easy side, but it's still my favorite for variety and exploration reasons. SMB3 was much more repetitive IMO from an enemy and environment perspective.
The world they created and visual style used just makes me want to revisit, again compared to SMB3 which feels sparse and tense and airship after airship.
The world they created and visual style used just makes me want to revisit, again compared to SMB3 which feels sparse and tense and airship after airship.
Nocturnowl
Member
The water and castle themes, so good!
Shame the OST isn't more varied but I like what's there.
Spinosaurus
Member
Yeah this is the one thing I can't knock SMW for.
petran79
Banned
Playing Super Mario Land on an original Gameboy. I wonder how I even managed to finish the game. Tiny dot Mario, choppy framerate, pixel collision...
I greatly prefer SMB3 overall but I can definitely agree there. SMW's soundtrack beats SMB3's. The castle theme is god-tier.
Meh. Disagree. Yoshi's Island is a Mario game, and the fact that it said Super Mario World 2 on the box is just extra confirmation. Comparing it to Warioland doesn't really make any sense, that's a completely different game that doesn't have you interacting with Mario throughout the whole game.
You don't control Mario in Yoshi's Island, unless you count the handful of times you get a star. Mario is, for all intents and purposes, your energy bar/timer. If "interacting with Mario" is your criterion, then I guess Yoshi's Island DS is Super Mario World 3/Super Mario Bros. 5, and also a Donkey Kong/Wario game since you get baby versions of those characters as well.
Heck, even if you did control Mario in a platform-like game, that wouldn't automatically make it a mainline Mario title. Donkey Kong 94 and Mario vs. Donkey Kong let you control Mario and they're very much platform-based, yet nobody considers them part of the main series. Donkey Kong Jungle Beat is a Donkey Kong platformer, yet nobody calls it Donkey Kong Country 4. Would it automatically become DKC4 if it said so on the box?
Yoshi's Island is a Mario spin-off and a Yoshi platformer. That's it. Just like - for better or for worse - Yoshi's Story. I'm not saying that in a derogatory way either. In all honesty, I'm not the hugest fan of Super Mario Bros. games. Yoshi's Island was my go-to Nintendo platformer (along with Kirby's Adventure). I liked it better than those precisely because it didn't feel like a Mario game. In what universe is a game where you control a dinosaur 99.9% of the time whose main mechanics are swallowing enemies and shooting eggs a continuation of Super Mario Bros. 1, 2, 3 and World? But I guess all it takes is a token role for a babified Mario and a marketing blurb on the box to make it a Mario game. Eh.
Fantastapotamus
Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
This is the worst thread on the internet.
NSMBU? What am I even reading here?
NSMBU? What am I even reading here?
Jonneh3003
Banned
One of the best Mario games.
Right?
So that makes it bad? Not good but dated, or even mediocre, but flat out bad? Also in no world are the 3D games bad games, god damn.
I need to lie down after reading this thread
MrSaturn99
Member
Spot-on. Sonic 1 is a little too acidic for my tastes, although 2 and (especially) 3 & Knuckles are vast improvements.
Yeah, I always dug the super warm Playskool-esque design of the backgrounds and whatnot. Ever since Mario Maker, I've come to appreciate the minimalist style of 2D Mario more (ironically, 3D Land/World are pretty much the 3D realization of that style and while I felt it worked for Land, I wasn't that crazy about World, go figure).
(also ironically, for all the criticism towards NSMB aesthetics, NSMB2 actually does have a couple backgrounds inspired from SMW. Generally, I prefer that game's use of color to the other three)
My point is that from a design standpoint Lost Level is a footnote that is kinda like design documents of content they didn't manage to put into games.
Some stuffs reappear in subsequent games, Yoshi is famously known for being a "leftover" from SMB1 that they couldn't implement before SMW for example.
SMB2 is also a massive success that they even choose as the 1st game they put marketing dollars behind to push the GBA.
Remember that Yoshi Story's tech demo for GBA? Yoshi Story a little better than Lost Level did on Famicon, that's probably they sold Super Mario Advance/SMB2 instead (which sold an additional 5.57M on GBA making it the 6th best selling GBA game after being the 4th best selling NES game).
Lost Level on the other hand is that "game that was not good enough so they sold something else instead".
choppy framewhat?
WarioFan63
Member
Super Mario World 2 being on the box isn't really confirmation. Thats something that was never really part of the Japan title and they just dropped it altogether for the GBA. The SNES Classic menu and marketing drops it too.
I sort of see the SMW2 label being more like how Tetris Attack has that name in spite of nothing to do with Tetris.
polyh3dron
Banned
it's shit because:
1. The music is shit
2. Stale aesthetic, with repurposed assets and a completely unchanged style from 3 NSMB games that came before it
3. BAH BAH
4. The music is shit
All reasons why SMW is vastly superior to it.
Combichristoffersen
Combovers don't work when there is no hair
SMB3 Bowser isn't bad, he's just kinda dull. SMW Bowser isn't great either, but it felt like more of a proper boss fight than SMB3 Bowser. SMB3 is still the overall better game IMO.
DustyVonEric
Member
Or we simply like SMW the most.
I've been playing Mario since Donkey Kong in the arcade.
Chaotic-Strike
Banned
It's good that you finally saw the light OP.
It's too bad they didn't include All-Stars in the SNES mini, or alot of people could enjoy the superior Mario platformer: SMB3.
It's too bad they didn't include All-Stars in the SNES mini, or alot of people could enjoy the superior Mario platformer: SMB3.
cartman414
Member
Lol, and yet I supposedly think SMW is a bad game.
Super Mario 2 USA is on there, and no mention of Yoshi's Island or Wario Land. I leave content. Though it's kinda weird that Super Mario Maker and Super Mario Run are counted as mainline titles, but whatever.
I see your point, but you're giving more intensity to mine than I intended. Again, I don't necessarily mean that World is a worse game. I'm saying that Mario is Mario, and after giving us Super Mario 2 USA which flipped the game on its head and SMB3 that expanded on... well, everything SMB1 did, SMW felt less ambitious and imaginative. The levels and environments of Dinosaur Land aren't nearly as diverse and bizarre as those in the Mushroom Kingdom in 3. Mario was seen as the pinnacle of gaming and, dare I say, world-building for platformers back in the day. In that way SMW was too safe and it failed to live up to expectations. Still a great game in its own right obviously.
This would completely derail the topic so I'm not gonna elaborate too much, but I find it interesting that you brought up other Nintendo series to refute my argument: I'd actually argue that yes, those other games you mentioned also 'failed' in a way. Sunshine didn't crush 64 because, by and large, people think it's the black sheep of 3D Mario. The NSMB games aren't nearly as revered as the other 2D Mario titles because they're just unambitious, with mediocre music and the same old environments and assets over and over. It took Breath of the Wild for people to start thinking that okay, maybe this time Nintendo truly outdid Ocarina of Time (and maybe even the original Zelda, which it draws more upon). It took Retro to breathe some new life in Metroid (before that petered out eventually too). Kirby games are essentially the same game over and over. The broad point is: you could argue that Nintendo is 'bad' at the sequel game. They're great at making good games and maintaining a high level quality through most entries (at least compared to most developers). But they're bad at upping the ante in my opinion. They're often bad at reinventing a series in a way that, paradoxically, would live up to people's expectations. For all their talk about wanting to surprise people, they have a very formulaic approach to sequels, and when they break from it, they sometimes do it in ways that shows a blatant misunderstanding of what people like about them (Other M, anyone?). That's why BotW was so well-received. People expect an Empire Strikes Back after every A New Hope, but Nintendo keeps giving them The Force Awakens instead: good, competent, but mostly a rehash with a few elements switched around and sparse innovations. And sometimes they give us a prequel episode, ugh
I really don't want to go off-topic here any longer though. Feel free to start a thread or to PM me if you really want to discuss this.
Canvas Curse? Squeak Squad? Amazing Mirror?
WarioFan63
Member
It shouldn't really matter that you were used to the aesthetic as the levels themselves were fun.
The bah bah hate also never made sense to me. It just felt like an extension of sound effects they started using with the N64. You hear it every time you go to select a star in Mario 64, but I can't imaging people were that putoff by it there.
Yoshi's Island was developed by the main Mario Team and was considered by those people their next main game. In the way it's also the missing link between World and 64: to 100% finish YI you have to revisit the the same levels looking for collectibles.
For the record I don't see the Mario Land games (and the Wario ones) as mainline Mario games. They were developed by different team and had no influence over the main series.
petran79
Banned
Original monochrome Gameboy. No emulator or VC. No 60fps. more like 5fps
1 milimeter off and you lost.
balladofwindfishes
Member
#2 Isn't really true for NSMBU. The backgrounds are significantly different and the entire game's aesthetic has a more cooler color palette.
No it wasn't. The game released in Japan was just called Yoshi's Island. The decision to call it SMW2 was a decision made by the suits at NoA.
ResidentWeevil13
Member
Wikipedia isn't the best source, but it's telling me the game was released in Japan as "Super Mario: Yoshi's Island"
スーパーマリオ is "Super Mario" in katakana, yes.
That said, the same thing goes for Wario Land being preceded with "Super Mario Land 3" even in Japanese and nobody considers that a Mario game.
Hatty
Member
Its not really bad but its definitely one of the worst Mario games
also World made fortresses and castles a bit too similar, whereas SMB3 had fortresses and the castles were god damn flying ships.
Barrel Cannon
Member
LOL at the hate for NSMBU. Gameplay wise it's the best mario game. The speed running and crazy shit you can do at a higher skill level is insane.
As for the thread topic. SMW is still great fun and I really loved the music in it. It felt like a happy welcome to the Mario series. I started with SMB/SMB3 and then only played SMW but at such a young age those bright colors and the music really appealed to me. I also don't consider the level design all that great, but still love speed running it because it is by far one of the easiest one's to speed run and although I'm really good at mario titles I'm not on the level of those runners who make it look like they are on TAS levels of good
As for the thread topic. SMW is still great fun and I really loved the music in it. It felt like a happy welcome to the Mario series. I started with SMB/SMB3 and then only played SMW but at such a young age those bright colors and the music really appealed to me. I also don't consider the level design all that great, but still love speed running it because it is by far one of the easiest one's to speed run and although I'm really good at mario titles I'm not on the level of those runners who make it look like they are on TAS levels of good
QisTopTier
XisBannedTier
Wowfunhappy
Member
Joe Schmo has never never played a 2D Mario game. He wants to know if he should get an SNES Classic to play Super Mario World, or if he should pick up New Super Mario Brothers U.
Or maybe he played World and thought it was okay, and would consider picking up NSMBU if it's considered as good/better. Or vise versa.
The problem with Sunshine it that is do lack some polish. Some areas are very difficult due to camera control.
The none fludd areas are really good.
(I personally have only played Mario 64 on the DS. I rather play Sunshine but that is due to controlls that feels wrong)
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2012/09/24/miyamoto-tezuka-interview.aspx
http://shmuplations.com/yoshi/
You can see it was considered the next game in the Mario series both by the development team and the Japanese audience.
EraErr0r1
Member
Thank you for writing this so I didn't have to.
I did appreciate that there was some seriously solid platforming in U, but I just can't get past the above points.
To this day I crave a Mario 2D platformer that has the same love and care placed into its creation as Odyssey appears to have.
It can't be denied that the NSMB games were made by a lazy and cocky Nintendo (besides maybe the original DS version). They just can't hold a candle to games developed with them at their best and Super Mario World is one of them - time constraints and all.
EDIT: People trying to discredit Yoshi's Island as not being a mainline Mario game? Blasphemy! This thread is insane.
or you can get over yourself and accept that people dont like a mario game you do instead of pretending every opinion you disagree with are people lying for a meme
Flying Fish
Neo Member
Sunshine was good but really needed a better way to keep track of blue coins. And the Pachinko level from hell needs to go. Game could really use a remake like SM64DS.
jadedm17
Member
Art style is something I couldn't get past even as a huge Mario and platform lover; I played maybe an hour each of New Mario and New Luigi U before selling.