The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Aside from the Cat Suit and the Boss Fight at the end yeah, that trailer still doesn't do much for me. Just doesn't seem like they showed off much of the creativity.
So, looking back... was Super Mario 3D World's E3 reveal trailer really that bad?
- Thread starter zroid
- Start date
ZombiePlatypus
Member
All M64/Sunshine/Galaxy needed were their initial trailers/reveals to assert what they were without a doubt, long before the games were available for everyone to play.
JordanN
Banned
Uninspired. Mario went from big open worlds to something very close to what I already played on the 3DS.
At least they didn't stick in two toads like the NSMB games. *bleck*
Edit: Did the trailer even show the gamepad? All are hedging Nintendo to do something with it and they don't do it with Mario?
At least they didn't stick in two toads like the NSMB games. *bleck*
Edit: Did the trailer even show the gamepad? All are hedging Nintendo to do something with it and they don't do it with Mario?
No, we can definitely have this conversation now, and...ok, someone hasl already said it better than me.
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
I think the reactions to the E3 trailer were a textbook example of the power of expectations to affect perceptions. It's like drinking a glass of dark liquid expecting soda, getting coffee, and choking - the brain thinks it's some kind of horrible rotten soda.
The trailer was a bit more bland than later ones, and the music was the primary offender. But there were so many calls of "3DS port" and people who literally thought they were looking at a 3DS game - including the technology displayed.
After the shock wore off it was easier for most of the gaming public to look a the subsequent reveals for the game with a more objective attitude.
The trailer was a bit more bland than later ones, and the music was the primary offender. But there were so many calls of "3DS port" and people who literally thought they were looking at a 3DS game - including the technology displayed.
After the shock wore off it was easier for most of the gaming public to look a the subsequent reveals for the game with a more objective attitude.
DICKS AHOY
Banned
Well in addition to the buffering issues I still felt they revealed almost everything in an incredibly anti-climatic fashion that a proper conference would've brought some natural flash to.
Iwata's casual "Hey look at this" and then starting to talk midway through a trailer with "this is the new X and it does this" instantly takes you out of this being a big E3 event, while it's more understandable in smaller-scale Direct's aimed squarely at Nintendo diehards. Compare DKCR's build up and reveal by Reggie in the 2010 conference to the sort of awkward "Oh you're looking at the newest Donkey Kong" Iwata reveal for DKCTF for instance.
Net_Wrecker
Member
Not necessarily Galaxy 3, but quite a few of us wanted this....
....across the entire title. Big levels, big vistas, big playgrounds, big scope. When the 3D World trailer hit and it mostly consisted of 3D Land looking stage design (and camera placement) it was disappointing.
As for the OP, I never thought the reveal trailer was all that bad, just a bit boring. What confuses me is the huge turnaround after more footage came out because the quality of 3D World was never in doubt IMO. In that regard, I'm still disappointed the game isn't what I want, but I'm sure it'll be great.
This is the real reason.
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
I thought it was a massive disappointment. I was expecting new, grand things, not a sequel to a handheld game. With that said, I'm now really excited for 3D World, even if it's not what I was fantasizing about when I heard "new 3D Mario at E3!"
ZombiePlatypus
Member
Not necessarily Galaxy 3, but quite a few of us wanted this....
....across the entire title. Big levels, big vistas, big playgrounds, big scope. When the 3D World trailer hit and it mostly consisted of 3D Land looking stage design (and camera placement) it was disappointing.
As for the OP, I never thought the reveal trailer was all that bad, just a bit boring. What confuses me is the huge turnaround after more footage came out because the quality of 3D World was never in doubt IMO. In that regard, I'm still disappointed the game isn't what I want, but I'm sure it'll be great.
I usually feel like open-world is really overrated, and linearity gets way too much unfair flack, but a game like that image would be amazing.
And we heard the same nonsense from people after the SMG2 reveal. "Oh, its just a level pack" they said, just as others make inane comments about 3DW being "something very close to what I already played on the 3DS".
They were wrong then, and will probably be wrong here.
DICKS AHOY
Banned
sunshine showed 'brand new and fresh' doesn't mean everything
ZombiePlatypus
Member
Moot point. SG2 is fantastic, but it's still a direct sequel. No one's arguing it's a series revolutionizing stepping stone to something brand new like the other mainline games. I promise you, a SG3 reveal would have been just as disappointing.
I still liked it. : (
Yeah it was bad. As in, the game didn't look bad, but the trailer was. It was incredibly bland. It used bland music, shown mostly bland levels, looked honestly pretty uninspired compared to previous 3D Mario outings. Very reminiscent of NSMB series which, while great, is getting very very tiring at this point. And while sometimes single suit in these games can be great fun (Cloud Mario, oh how I love thee), Nintendo insisting that Cat Mario and clear pipes are gamechangers was a slap in the face.
I know, PR speak, but it was embarrassing.
I know, PR speak, but it was embarrassing.
How is that a moot point? People whinged that SMG2 was a mission pack, and now they throw the same comments at 3DWorld, as if it is just a 3DLand port. Its directly comparable so long as people continue to make disingenuous comments.
ZombiePlatypus
Member
It may be the underrated underdog of the big games, but it at least still felt like, "big, brand new, nexgen Mario" both in reveals and during actual gameplay. Which is a lot more than can be said for 3D Worlds' trailers.
Because despite the shift in attitude towards that game, no one argues that SMG2 delivers a brand-new, series/genre defining, nexgen direction compared to its predecessor. It's just a bigger, badder SMG. (Which is amazing, but not revolutionary.)
Outtrigger888
Member
I always liked it. I thought the idea of four player multiplayer, in a 3d mario, with the smb2 cast, was one of the best things to happen in a mario game.
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
It did? It was just an extension of the Super Mario 64 approach but with a backpack hose. The Galaxy games were the real innovators.
ZombiePlatypus
Member
You can definitely argue that, but it at least had the advantage of a visual upgrade from M64 that felt substantial. With diminishing returns in visuals nowadays, it probably wouldn't be able to get away with what it pulled.
3D Worlds looks incredible and I cannot wait to play it. But does it feel like a big, bold, nexgen, new step/direction? No.
Wolfgang Jr
Banned
Looking back, the gameplay doesn't look too much different; but God Damn that music is AWFUL (for a trailer at least - it seemed really lazy - for a reveal you really need something epic).
Also, I had the thought that YouTube cat videos were getting real stale and Nintendo thought: "the world likes YouTube cat videos, lets add a catsuit!!". Just that thought, even if it is totally wrong rubbed me the wrong way
Also, I had the thought that YouTube cat videos were getting real stale and Nintendo thought: "the world likes YouTube cat videos, lets add a catsuit!!". Just that thought, even if it is totally wrong rubbed me the wrong way
It's just testament to Nintendo's inability to communicate a message properly. Reviews have done more to properly explain and build hype for this game than any promotional videos that Nintendo have put out. If it weren't for the reviews this game would have been in my "pick it up later" pile. Now I've got it coming on day one.
People presumed this was Super Mario 3D Land HD because that was exactly the product that Nintendo presented at the biggest trade show of the year. Just the same as they've spent more than three years struggling to explain what the Wii U is to consumers, now they are struggling to explain the software too.
There's no excuse for this. This console is dying and they seem to be keeping the few assets that could save it a complete secret to the general public. Nintendo Direct isn't working. Releasing games with little-to-zero TV advertising isn't working. What the hell is going on at Nintendo?
People presumed this was Super Mario 3D Land HD because that was exactly the product that Nintendo presented at the biggest trade show of the year. Just the same as they've spent more than three years struggling to explain what the Wii U is to consumers, now they are struggling to explain the software too.
There's no excuse for this. This console is dying and they seem to be keeping the few assets that could save it a complete secret to the general public. Nintendo Direct isn't working. Releasing games with little-to-zero TV advertising isn't working. What the hell is going on at Nintendo?
And yet, we cannot compare 3DW since its not out yet (or most places).
So many people here seem to have written the game off because it looked like 3DL, as if that were a bad game. Nonsense hyperbolic meltdowns have followed this game since the reveal and its ridiculous people are still spouting silly things like "I hope we get a real Mario game".
I think what your argument really boils down to is 3D World doesn't have one central gimmick which serves as a literal "gamechanger" from previous entries in the series. 64's whole premise was exactly that, while Sunshine added FLUDD, and Galaxy had the gravity mechanic.
I don't think there's anything wrong with wanting a new game to have some fundamentally new gimmick on which it sells itself, but then again I don't think there's anything wrong with 3D World's approach of basically perfecting the "2D Mario in 3D" gameplay which began in 3D Land. I do wonder how people would react to 3D World if 3D Land never existed. It would probably seem a whole lot fresher. I also wonder how people would react to 3D Land if it were released after 3D World. Probably a lot less favourably. In a way 3D World is the game they had envisioned from the start. 3D Land was like a test drive.
ZombiePlatypus
Member
It doesn't matter. Again, the point is M64/Sunshine/Galaxy had that instant magic, nexgen, bold new era feeling for the series from just the reveals and trailers. 3DW on the other hand, just looks like an extremely polished and insanely fun, elevated and beefed up direct-sequel to a handheld sideline game.
Could be a gimmick, a huge visual leap, or some new direction. It needed to offer something to feel, like you said, a game changer for next gen. Not having 3DL first would have probably helped 3DW. As it stands now, instead of something brand new, we have more of the same really fun stuff. Which, again, is great, but to pretend that's a tentpole game in your flagship series to lead off your nexgen system is kinda ridiculous.
Wolfgang Jr
Banned
^^^ THIS!
People were just getting over how BigN rehashed yet another NSMB as the Wii U's launch game and then they find out (or guessed) that BigN was just rehashing SM3DL as Wii U's big mario title. It was incredibly disappointing (at the time).
Youre being kind to Sunshine which really looked like more SM64.
Mauricio_Magus
Banned
I "kinda" agree with you, Nintendo has amazing games released and that will be coming out, and unless you're an informed gamer you don't even know they exist. And even informed games on GAF started a million "I'm not buying a Wii U anymore because it's not like Galaxy" threads.
I know there was no way for it to succeed, but the Wonderful 101 is fucking amazing and I assume most don't even know it exist, or even worse, think it's some sort of "Pikmin" game.
It wasn't dense enough in content and the pace was a bit slow, and the music was basically just a raw recording of a single instrument compared to what we now know we're getting in the soundtrack. It's a decent trailer, but it's not a "this is going to be a GOTY candidate filled to the brim with creative levels and visual design" kind of trailer. And if it isn't that, it isn't a Mario game worth getting hyped over.
ZombiePlatypus
Member
It had enough of a visual leap from M64 to make up for that and still retain that wow-factor. The days of games getting away with that are long gone though.
No. It was an appropriate teaser for what the game is. It doesn't give a lot away, but shows off the basic gameplay concepts. People that were afraid it would be as stripped down as 3D Land weren't paying attention to the actual size and complexity of the levels. The game also looked beautiful when the trailer is viewed in HD, which U-Stream failed to do. The levels they showed in the first trailer were still in the October trailer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_ax0-waUig
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_ax0-waUig
DICKS AHOY
Banned
Didn't help at all nearly every review I saw, while overall positive, felt the need to compare 101 directly to Pikmin 3 despite having only the most superficial of similarities. Why Nintendo left their first big collaboration with Platinum out of their 2012 conference is beyond me, which harks back to them having no clue how to properly communicate what sometimes wind up being genuinely great products.
well i mean if the audience reaction is negative then I still think it's fair to say that at least some of the blame lies with the trailer editor if a different trailer a couple months later of the same exact game got a far more positive reception
If an advertisement doesn't receive well, then it probably isn't a very good advertisement.
Fine. Keep creating the narrative you like for this series.
What people wanted was more Mario 64 at that point. I know I sure did. Really surprised we never got a Mario 64-2.
The water mechanics are a substantial addition though. It's part of every aspect of the game, and the enemies, and the environments.
Maybe.
The thing I'm sure of though is that the overall negativity towards Nintendo and particularly their showing during that direct, probably from quite a few people that expected them to put on a good showing versus sony and microsoft played a part in how badly it was received at the time. Also, for some reason a lot of people around e3 seem to be 10 times more sensitive, read at any other time and they're generally very reasonable posters.
Not to say that the E3 reveal was fantastic. It lacked mainly in the variety and novelty department in my opinion. There weren't enough new and fun looking things compared to the following trailers. I don't think it was bad or bland by any stretch of the imagination though, and that's what I said at the time. It's just mainly that people wanted Super Mario Universe, a game that would reinvent video games as a whole, instead they got something they already knew, and even if loved by most, it just didn't capture their imagination enough.
The thing I'm sure of though is that the overall negativity towards Nintendo and particularly their showing during that direct, probably from quite a few people that expected them to put on a good showing versus sony and microsoft played a part in how badly it was received at the time. Also, for some reason a lot of people around e3 seem to be 10 times more sensitive, read at any other time and they're generally very reasonable posters.
Not to say that the E3 reveal was fantastic. It lacked mainly in the variety and novelty department in my opinion. There weren't enough new and fun looking things compared to the following trailers. I don't think it was bad or bland by any stretch of the imagination though, and that's what I said at the time. It's just mainly that people wanted Super Mario Universe, a game that would reinvent video games as a whole, instead they got something they already knew, and even if loved by most, it just didn't capture their imagination enough.
ZombiePlatypus
Member
You're seriously gonna try to downplay the magnitude of the upgrade here?
You can argue that the fundamentals of the gameplay were similar (even though it still had FLUDD at least), but there's no denying it felt like a nexgen bump. It gave you that impression way before playing it. 3DW doesn't convey this upgrade in neither visuals nor gameplay.
Freezie KO
Banned
And imagine if they released a Guitar Hero game tomorrow when none had existed prior. Maybe people would be all over it, but I'm not sure the point of such hypotheticals.
There's nothing objectively "wrong" with 3D World's approach, but it wasn't and still isn't what a lot of people wanted. As you said, it's a refinement. Many people were hoping for the next revolution, particularly with the jump in hardware.
The real retrospective should be: "Was the second trailer really a game changer?" And no, it didn't change the game.
ZombiePlatypus
Member
Yeah pretty much. Especially since a lot of people were already kinda fatigued with yet another sequel to NSMB. We were ready for a proper new leap to something fresh, and yet they revealed more of the same again. They just chose a different Mario game to upgrade and beef up.
Not saying the new trailer isn't great, but the warmer reaction it got is probably partly because the first trailer already lowered everyone's expectations.
Nightstick11
Banned
I was and still am disappointed that the best developer studio on the planet was working on Mario.
Basileus777
Member
People had unrealistic expectations that Nintendo was going to put out something revolutionary that would save the WiiU. I think once the dust had settled, most figured 3D World would probably be a great game, after all, it's a follow-up to a pretty great 3DS title. I think it was more a case of mismanaged expectations than a problem with the trailer.
jts
...hate me...
This game was shit, 3DW seems to take a huge dump on it with its eyes closed, even from a gameplay perspective. You're just talking about this:You're seriously gonna try to downplay the magnitude of the upgrade here?
You can argue that the fundamentals of the gameplay were similar (even though it still had FLUDD at least), but there's no denying it felt like a nexgen bump. It gave you that impression way before playing it. 3DW doesn't convey this upgrade in neither visuals nor gameplay.
SMS was 6000 triangles. Big whoop.
ZombiePlatypus
Member
This game was shit, 3DW seems to take a huge dump on it with its eyes closed, even from a gameplay perspective. You're just talking about this:
SMS was 6000 triangles. Big whoop.
Wow you're completely missing the point. It might look laughable now, but at the time, it looked amazing and felt like a proper nexgen bump and new era for the series, compared to the Mario games it followed. 3DW damn well better knock Sunshine outta the water at this point since, y'know, it's 2 freaking gens later. But does it offer the same magnitude of a big, new, bump/direction in relation to the games we already got just before 3DW? Lol no. Not even close.
I agree with your point. I don't know why it's supposedly controversial. Sunshine was, and still is gorgeous. At the time, that water blew my mind.
I can definitely agree with this.
ZombiePlatypus
Member
Yeah, I think it still looks great today and it's really underrated but that's beside the point. When did the bar for nexgen titles become "It better look better than a game release 12 years ago!" ?
Miyamoto is the ultimate hype man at E3. But it's at the point that they need to start getting people familiar with his disciples because he will eventually retire.