Does Mario Sunshine Deserve The Hate It Gets?
- Thread starter Wellscha
- Start date
Rhazer Fusion
Member
No please. Keep open world out of Mario.
I liked Sunshine, but imo it was way too hard. Wasn't the most memorable or best Mario, but still pretty good if I remember correctly.
SUPERJEM94
Banned
Does it deserve the hate?
No. It's not the best Mario game out there(it's not the worst), but it's fun game.
No. It's not the best Mario game out there(it's not the worst), but it's fun game.
kinoki
Illness is the doctor to whom we pay most heed; to kindness, to knowledge, we make promise only; pain we obey.
It's the worse Mario game I've played. It's the only Nintendo game that I've played and put down because I felt it was a bad game. I've put down a few because they were uninteresting or boring but never before bad. Does it deserve hate? No. That nerd hyperbole.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
I'd say it's the game with the best game mechanics and controls. It also has an unusual amount of bad level / mission design for a Mario game. Those blue coins and Yoshi in particular... It does not deserve any hate but Sunshine is a huge missed opportunity, considering how enormously fun it is just to move Mario through the game world.
Zelda? It was as good as it gets for Zelda. Two games, both with a completely different approach and, unlike Ocarina of Time and Majoras Mask, even art direction. Now we are lucky if we get one Zelda per generation and maybe some filler stuff like Hyrule Warriors.
ZombiePlatypus
Member
Nope. To me, it happens to be a Mario game that captures that carefree, beachy summer vibe so well. I really, really want some sort of an updated re-release of it. Be it HD or 3D.
Nostremitus
Member
I loved Mario Sunshine. Using the waterpack to pull off insane jumps was really fun. I never tried to 100% it, though.
Hyperfludd
Member
Game's alright.
Adam_Roman
Member
It just needs a better physics engine. If Nintendo did an upgrade similar upgrade to it as they did to Wind Waker, I'd totally get it.
MegamanPoweredUP
Member
I'd pick Sunshine over Galaxy any day.
EatinOlives
Member
It's astoundingly unpolished for being a 1st party Nintendo game, and 100%ing it is pure frustration.
Really unique game overall but there's plenty to dislike in the package.
Really unique game overall but there's plenty to dislike in the package.
The problem with Mario Sunshine is that it's sandwiched between Mario 64 and Mario Galaxy. There's quite literally no way you can look at Sunshine and say it's an outstanding game when the Mario before it and the Mario after it are masterpieces.
Sunshine is an alright platformer but it's a weak Mario game. The mechanics, presentation, difficulty balance, and lack of variety makes the game feel like a spinoff rather than a main Mario game. They built the entire game around the FLUDD system, and the system just wasn't that good.
Mario 64 redefined what a platformer could be thanks to the camera, controls, variety, graphics, music, and of course gameplay mechanics. The exact same could be said for Mario Galaxy. Mario Galaxy is, from top to bottom, a phenomenal platformer. It does everything right -- the presentation, mechanics, graphics, variety, music -- all exceptionally well-crafted. Yes, the Starbit system isn't excellent, but unlike Sunshine, they didn't build the entire game around the system. The game took full advantage of the hardware it was on and created what is, without a doubt, Nintendo's best creative effort of the past decade.
Given all of the above, it's easy to see why Sunshine has the reputation of being a mediocre Mario game. After people played 64 they expected Mario 128 to be another revolution. After people played Galaxy, they fully realized that Sunshine was a bad Mario effort from Nintendo.
Sunshine is an alright platformer but it's a weak Mario game. The mechanics, presentation, difficulty balance, and lack of variety makes the game feel like a spinoff rather than a main Mario game. They built the entire game around the FLUDD system, and the system just wasn't that good.
Mario 64 redefined what a platformer could be thanks to the camera, controls, variety, graphics, music, and of course gameplay mechanics. The exact same could be said for Mario Galaxy. Mario Galaxy is, from top to bottom, a phenomenal platformer. It does everything right -- the presentation, mechanics, graphics, variety, music -- all exceptionally well-crafted. Yes, the Starbit system isn't excellent, but unlike Sunshine, they didn't build the entire game around the system. The game took full advantage of the hardware it was on and created what is, without a doubt, Nintendo's best creative effort of the past decade.
Given all of the above, it's easy to see why Sunshine has the reputation of being a mediocre Mario game. After people played 64 they expected Mario 128 to be another revolution. After people played Galaxy, they fully realized that Sunshine was a bad Mario effort from Nintendo.
See, reading this thread it seems like hate isn't the right word for it. Most people seem to be disappointed, mostly. Not me though, I remember it as a bad game. It's pretty and Mario (largely) controls well, but there is so much padding in the levels that they grind to a halt. Also not a big fan of how Fludd slows your momentum to a crawl, although I've seen that speed runners have some fancy tricks with it.
Even as a kid I was like most others mostly into the Fludd-less levels with their neat acapella soundtrack and focus on pure platforming. But when for every 10 minutes of fun, basic platforming you have to play 60 minutes of slow, boring levels I'm satisfied with saying that it's a bad game. Obviously all imho, if you like it that's great so even then I can't say that I "hate" it.
Maybe the last half of it is better, I wouldn't know because over the many attempts I've made to reconnect to the game over the past decade I've never gotten beyond the ten hour mark.
Even as a kid I was like most others mostly into the Fludd-less levels with their neat acapella soundtrack and focus on pure platforming. But when for every 10 minutes of fun, basic platforming you have to play 60 minutes of slow, boring levels I'm satisfied with saying that it's a bad game. Obviously all imho, if you like it that's great so even then I can't say that I "hate" it.
Maybe the last half of it is better, I wouldn't know because over the many attempts I've made to reconnect to the game over the past decade I've never gotten beyond the ten hour mark.
And alas, this goes for me too. I love the Gamecube as a piece of hardware, but Nintendo's mainline titles were big disappointments for me on it. They picked up the slack with the Wii, though, delivering many of my favorite Nintendo titles ever.
It's a good game, but when every other game in the Mario series is a generation/genre defining title, "good" is not enough.
It feels unpolished and rushed, which sadly, happened to other Nintendo games that gen, like Wind Waker, because the Gamecube flopped hard.
The good:
-Music is pretty great, miles better than New Mario Bros.
-Graphics, especially water, were awesome for the time.
-Good boss battles
-The Fludd-less levels are basically primitive Mario Galaxy levels.
The bad:
-It feels like they wanted to incorporate some elements of the successful N64 Rare platformer formula with the blue (or purple, can't remember) coins, but it was a chore.
-Fludd was a good idea in theory, but it made the game extremely easy.
-Camera movement was horrible.
-Yoshi felt like a half-assed idea.
Beyond that, it had terrible marketing in America which generated some more "hate" from people still expecting mature games from Nintendo.
It feels unpolished and rushed, which sadly, happened to other Nintendo games that gen, like Wind Waker, because the Gamecube flopped hard.
The good:
-Music is pretty great, miles better than New Mario Bros.
-Graphics, especially water, were awesome for the time.
-Good boss battles
-The Fludd-less levels are basically primitive Mario Galaxy levels.
The bad:
-It feels like they wanted to incorporate some elements of the successful N64 Rare platformer formula with the blue (or purple, can't remember) coins, but it was a chore.
-Fludd was a good idea in theory, but it made the game extremely easy.
-Camera movement was horrible.
-Yoshi felt like a half-assed idea.
Beyond that, it had terrible marketing in America which generated some more "hate" from people still expecting mature games from Nintendo.
SporeCrawler
Member
It was something like an open world mario game. It also shows what problems giant mario levels bring to the table (for example that you have to repeat 10 minutes of jumping because you missed the last jump) nevertheless its an excellent game
I am Christina Aguilera
Member
My quick thoughts: almost every time that I try to think of a segment of Sunshine that I found truly enjoyable and memorable that doesn't involve just running around the hub world with that music, I always quickly realize that I'm actually thinking of something from Super Mario Galaxy 1 or 2 instead. I do like the theme park level, though, I just don't like the combination of that wall and that camera within that theme park level.
Also, Bloopers knocking you down 5 stories in Ricco Harbor after you just spent 15 minutes getting back up there is infuriating. It's like a C+ game, but it's still worth seeing through, I think.
Also, Bloopers knocking you down 5 stories in Ricco Harbor after you just spent 15 minutes getting back up there is infuriating. It's like a C+ game, but it's still worth seeing through, I think.
Mario Sunshine is an outstanding game.
JailDesigner
Member
One of the best Mario games. Miles better that the late generic plastic ones.
It's probably the most flawed Mario game I've ever played in a technical sense. Some design decisions were baffling and the whole game honestly feels rushed and unpolished. I consider it the weakest of the 3D Mario games and would never attempt to 100% it like I did with every other title.
However, if you're basing your opinion on a normal playthrough then no, I don't believe it deserves any hate. It's a fairly good game that stands above most of its platforming peers imo, only really suffering when being compared with other entries from its own series. Mario controls really, really well in this game, and it's a shame the level design isn't up to the same standards.
To be fair, I don't really see that much animosity against it nowadays and, in true revisionist fashion, there's actually been a lot more praise towards it (alongside a lot of other games from the gamecube era).
However, if you're basing your opinion on a normal playthrough then no, I don't believe it deserves any hate. It's a fairly good game that stands above most of its platforming peers imo, only really suffering when being compared with other entries from its own series. Mario controls really, really well in this game, and it's a shame the level design isn't up to the same standards.
To be fair, I don't really see that much animosity against it nowadays and, in true revisionist fashion, there's actually been a lot more praise towards it (alongside a lot of other games from the gamecube era).
Stallion Dan
Member
Yes, FLUDD was a dud.
Azure Dream
Member
It's the Mario they rushed out of the door. There's all sorts of little unpolished edges (and some big ones) that betray it as a weaker moment in Nintendo's history. It's not a terrible game, it's just clearly not quite at the level they wanted to make it. And that's even after the US got an improved version. (Holy crap that Japanese camera was so, so bad. The Pachinko level was almost unplayable.)
Beren the Empty-Handed
Member
I'm not sure it gets hate, but it does get a large amount of criticism. And it should - it has a lot of problems. Everything from level design to the music.
So second best Mario? Because Mario 2 fucking rules.
Similar threads
- Locked