Goriginal Content

EoD - Back in black

EoD - Smash controls

EoD - Instagram fun

Xeodrifter diary #13

GN Podcast #480

EoD - Smash Wii U!
 

New Super Mario Bros. U director compares 2D to 3D Mario popularity

“I don’t think it’s because one game is better than the other. It’s just that compared to 2D, there seems to be more people who are not as comfortable with 3D controls. And maybe a wider range of people were more accepting of the New Super Mario Bros. series, which may have seemed simpler to them.” - NSMBU director, Masataka Takemoto

I also think it has a lot to do with people being uncomfortable with change. They are used to Mario in classic 2D style, so they don't have a high barrier for entry when tackling a new Mario game in that style. Throw things into 3D and people are too afraid to pick up a controller and try.

Link

Also check out:
Discussion Preview
60 total comments (View all)
User avatar
27 Dec 2012 08:46

Other than Yoshi's Island [and now the best of the NSMB series in NSMBU], I personally prefer 3D Mario.

The other 2D entries just don't do anything for me / aren't as fun as the aforementioned [and 3D Mario].
User avatar
27 Dec 2012 09:29

I'm not seeing it. I don't mean I'm not seeing validity in 2D Mario's - what I'm not seeing is how people could not get used to the 3D controls. If this silly excuse is the reason they are turning 3D Mario's into 2D Mario's with a bit of running room, they really need to drop it.
No Avatar
27 Dec 2012 09:39

after the one-two punch of Super Mario Galaxy 1 & 2, I am much more interested in 3D mario games. They seem more like an "event" as well.

2D Marios are really fun, but right now they seem content with staying pretty similar to the design they came up with with the NEW series, which is fine, but I'm thinking the next go-round it will be time to switch it up massively.
User avatar
27 Dec 2012 11:03

Bobbuffalo wrote:
MegaShock100 wrote:Controls maybe a reason, but I think it is just a general lack of interest. Most of the people who bought NSMBWii and DS just don't care much for games, and they only picked up a Wii or DS for the "gimmicks" of touch screen gaming and motion controls. 2D Mario just happened to be a familiar name so that was one of the games they bought.


And yet, neither NSMB nor NSMBW had gimmick controlls.

Who is the dumb gamer again?


The only dumb gamer is you with your awful reading comp. I didn't say that 2D Mario had gimmick controls, I said Wii and DS had gimmicks, and games like Wii Sports and Nintendogs used those gimmicks. When consumers got tired of those games, they looked for something new to buy and 2D Mario was the familiar face. It also helped that it was the first new 2D Mario since World so it also took advantage of everyone's nostalgia.

And since you mention it, yeah these people are casuals. There's nothing wrong with that, but to pretend that they're not casuals is showing that you're in denial.

Devil_Rising wrote:How about this, folks? Perhaps 2D platforming is straight up just easier to get right into, and quite frankly, coming from someone who grew up with them, they're in general just more fun to play. They typically have more replay value. There is just something about 2D gaming that screams "VIDEO GAMES", something that a lot of modern 3D games seem to have been trying very hard to get away from. Or that newer developers simply do not know how to tap into.

That is one thing that I'll say for Nintendo, for sure, is that even their 3D games, still FEEL like video games, they don't feel like wannabe playable movies. 3D Mario, while I prefer 2D Mario, still FEELS like Mario.

But overall, that doesn't mean 3D games are "bad". Only that, at least in this man's opinion, there is something classic (and classic styled) 2D games had, an "it" factor", that typically gets lost in transition in 3D games.


How about this? Take your oversized nostalgia goggles. 2D games are more games because I grew up with them and they got the feelz! :lol:

M1 wrote:As much as I love 3D Mario, I still prefer 2D Mario.

2D games focus mainly on game play and multiplayer.
No 2D Mario game plays alike!

3D Mario main focus is being a showcase of what the system is capable of doing.
3D Mario has to push graphics, controls, and gimmicks.


None of your post make sense. I know you're normally a troll poster, but I'll bite.

No 2D Mario plays a like? No, the fundamentals are exactly the same, which is why NSMB saw major success, because it was a familar face thanks to the core gameplay (move from left to right, get from point A to point B).

Saying 3D Mario without any of it's "gimmicks" wouldn't be worth money is stupid and doesn't make any sense. Is like saying that 2D Mario without the levels wouldn't be worth the money. So basically, a game without the game wouldn't be worth the money? Boy, aren't you a genius. >.>

And the gimmicks you listed for Galaxy are grasping at straws.

Pointer? Barely used and mostly only for minor things like star bits collecting.

Graphics? Same could be said about SMB, SMB3, DKC, 64, Sunshine, and even NSMBU. Obviously the major 1st-party game will have impressive graphics. That's not a gimmick.

Gravity? Gameplay element. Is like saying all the new types of platforms or items introduced in 2D Mario are gimmicks. Would it have not been a gimmick in 2D games? Lol.

Space? Theme is not a gimmick. So were the distinctly different worlds in SMB3 a gimmick? What about the island themes in World or Sunshine? Were paintings the gimmick in 64? No, they were themes.

Space ship? Uh.. okay, how's that a gimmick?

Merging 2D Mario and 3D Mario? They've been doing that since 64, and there were a dozen of those stages in Sunshine. I don't see what the problem is, Galaxy 2 is the best Mario game because it plays more like 2D Mario, but with the complexity of the third dimension.

Though, I could argue that multiplayer was the gimmick in NSMBWii! And it's funny that you talk about how 2D Mario focuses on multiplayer, when NSMBWii and U are the only ones that really put this element at the center.

Anyway, I like both 2D and 3D Mario, and they both ave things that work for them and things that don't.
User avatar
27 Dec 2012 15:40

3D Land should be the future of the series, it's damn near perfect. 3D is a little harder to get into but I feel like 3D Land struck a great balance and feels like a real poppy 2D Mario game with 3D gameplay.
No Avatar
27 Dec 2012 19:09

By pure coincidence, I recently read an article on Gamespite/Toastyfrog that basically said the difference between 2d and 3d is essentially the prime objective. In 2d you need to survive and hit the flag pole. Every so often you have to beat down some sort of Koopaboss, but even the power ups are basically a means to an end. The main imperative is GO!GO!GO! before the timer runs out or something kills you.SMB2: Lost levels is a good example of this. 3d Mario, on the other hand, is more about exploring and collecting, sometimes talking to NPCS and sometimes figuring out how to do a task/reach an area that seems impossible. IMO Sunshine went too far in this direction. I still like it, but scouring nooks and crannies for one more rainbow colored coin can seem kind of tedious after awhile. Both 2d and 3d have their good aspects and bad aspects, but I really enjoy 3D Land, NSMBWII, NSMB1&2, and the Galaxy titles.
User avatar
27 Dec 2012 19:33

What I get from this, I‘m not allowed to enjoy both 2D and 3D Marios equally (with their flaws and all).
User avatar
27 Dec 2012 20:00

Radiant wrote:I'm not seeing it. I don't mean I'm not seeing validity in 2D Mario's - what I'm not seeing is how people could not get used to the 3D controls. If this silly excuse is the reason they are turning 3D Mario's into 2D Mario's with a bit of running room, they really need to drop it.

Oh my god thank you! THIS↑↑↑↑

Ever since the first Galaxy released, theres been less exploration and more linearity in all these newer 3D Marios, especially 3D Land. I absolutely HATE this New direction they're going with just to please these 2D lovers. :evil: Speaking of the 2D Mario games, I always appreciated them for what they were. The same goes for the newer ones since I never b¡†©нeď/cared for their art style, what music they had, or even the fact that they weren't 2D but 2.5D. But what really bothers me about them is how dumbed down somethings are in them in order to reach a wider audience, even sometimes never letting me choose if I want………WANT I TELLS YA! They never stop shoving 1ups down my throat, I'm punished if I even look or see a Super Guide block let alone for using a noob item in the handheld ones, they never stop with the focus on multiplayer (seriously as a single player it feels like I'm only given the privilege to play this cause theres plenty of room to go around cause this is New Super Mario Bros Multiplayer edition plus buy the sequel which so happens to also have single player as an added bonus! :D ), they never seem to bother focusing again on the single player level design like how the past 2D games did, never giving me another Mario World game again where I can go in all crazy directions left-right-down-up instead of more of this boring scroll up or straight to ur right and reach A FLAG POLE! :shock:
User avatar
27 Dec 2012 23:07

Had this been back in the NES and SNES days, I would've said 3D Marios hold no ground against 2D... But after the NSMB series... Yes, 3D Marios are better.
User avatar
27 Dec 2012 23:26

Mirr0rR3flection wrote:
Radiant wrote:I'm not seeing it. I don't mean I'm not seeing validity in 2D Mario's - what I'm not seeing is how people could not get used to the 3D controls. If this silly excuse is the reason they are turning 3D Mario's into 2D Mario's with a bit of running room, they really need to drop it.

Oh my god thank you! THIS↑↑↑↑

Ever since the first Galaxy released, theres been less exploration and more linearity in all these newer 3D Marios, especially 3D Land. I absolutely HATE this New direction they're going with just to please these 2D lovers. :evil:


Well, I just go Super Mario 3D Land, and I'm actually enjoying it. I'll give 3D Land credit for what it is, like playing a classic 2D Mario in 3D. The linear playstyle is not worthless. I wouldn't mind if they started a Super Mario 3D Land series (perhaps working as a 3D Mario series for handhelds) But if the 3D Mario on the Wii U keeps the linear playstyle of Galaxy 1/2/3D Land, we have a problem.
User avatar
28 Dec 2012 03:52

@Radiant
I couldn't agree more with you right now.

Your right they should keep the 3D Land style for handhelds, but if they so much as restrict me even further on consoles, I'm seriously gonna blow a major gasket. Your stepping on real thin ice with me Nintendo. :evil:
User avatar
28 Dec 2012 04:32

For me, 3D Mario titles are the grand, epic adventures with incredible sights, epic battles and crazy moments aplenty; While 2D Mario titles are nostalgic and gives me that feeling of when I was a kid playing them back in the NES/SNES days.


3D Land was a unique experiment, as it was combining both 2D & 3D gameplay of Mario titles into one project while making use of the 3DS' features(A experiment that IMHO worked very well. :D ). I think the next 3D Mario on Wii U will be more akin to SM64/SMG than SM3DLand.

And sometimes I don't get the NSMB series hate it gets: It's supposed to have that emphasis of nostalgia, and as I've said before I feel the games are for the next generation of Mario's fans while also giving us veterans another adventure to enjoy. :)
User avatar
28 Dec 2012 10:12

KoopaStomper27 wrote:I think the next 3D Mario on Wii U will be more akin to SM64/SMG than SM3DLand.


But Super Mario Galaxy is the game that started the linearity... You should have said "to SM64/SMSunshine than SM3DLand/Galaxy 1&2".

I don't trust that it will be, though. Unfortunately, the words of the developers and Miyamoto do not indicate that they believe that the linearity is something that should be kept to the Galaxy and 3D Land (and a potential series). It doesn't help that Galaxy 1 & 2 have gotten massive acclaim, and have even got labeled "perfect" (which flat out disgusts me). With that, it provides little incentive for them to move back away from the linearity. With that, I fear that the Wii U Mario will be much like Galaxy 1&2 and 3D Land. If it is, Nintendo is treading on very thin ice with me in regards to the Wii U. They already are. At this point, I'm really looking out for a 3D Mario being the only thing that could make me want a Wii U in the near future. If that 3D Mario turns out to be more linearity, I won't even bother.

It's just like... If I want linearity I'll get NSMB. The amazing thing about Super Mario 64 was not only that it took Mario into a 3D environment, but it also provided something different with the exploration aspects of the mostly open worlds.It feels like with Galaxy and beyond they took away what made the 3D Mario's something different. Now they all play like 2D Mario's with a little bit of running room. I understand that there was a long period of time where we didn't have a 2D Mario series ongoing, but that changed with New Super Mario Bros., and now Nintendo is practically pulling New Super Mario Bros. games out of their behind. It's just annoying that now the 2D series is back, our 3D Mario games are no longer feeling so...3D.
User avatar
28 Dec 2012 13:16

Radiant wrote:
KoopaStomper27 wrote:I think the next 3D Mario on Wii U will be more akin to SM64/SMG than SM3DLand.


But Super Mario Galaxy is the game that started the linearity... You should have said "to SM64/SMSunshine than SM3DLand/Galaxy 1&2".

I don't trust that it will be, though. Unfortunately, the words of the developers and Miyamoto do not indicate that they believe that the linearity is something that should be kept to the Galaxy and 3D Land (and a potential series). It doesn't help that Galaxy 1 & 2 have gotten massive acclaim, and have even got labeled "perfect" (which flat out disgusts me). With that, it provides little incentive for them to move back away from the linearity. With that, I fear that the Wii U Mario will be much like Galaxy 1&2 and 3D Land. If it is, Nintendo is treading on very thin ice with me in regards to the Wii U. They already are. At this point, I'm really looking out for a 3D Mario being the only thing that could make me want a Wii U in the near future. If that 3D Mario turns out to be more linearity, I won't even bother.

It's just like... If I want linearity I'll get NSMB. The amazing thing about Super Mario 64 was not only that it took Mario into a 3D environment, but it also provided something different with the exploration aspects of the mostly open worlds.It feels like with Galaxy and beyond they took away what made the 3D Mario's something different. Now they all play like 2D Mario's with a little bit of running room. I understand that there was a long period of time where we didn't have a 2D Mario series ongoing, but that changed with New Super Mario Bros., and now Nintendo is practically pulling New Super Mario Bros. games out of their behind. It's just annoying that now the 2D series is back, our 3D Mario games are no longer feeling so...3D.


Galaxy 1 wasn't linear at all.

Galaxy 2 was based on the feedback Nintendo received on Galaxy 1.
Many gamers got lost in Galaxy 1 like they did in Sunshine and Mario 64, due to the open world aspect.

Open world aspect has no place in platformers.
No Avatar
28 Dec 2012 20:55

FrenchFryGuy wrote:Mario was 2D before he was 3D. That's why people prefer 2D Mario to 3D. There. It's really that simple folks. Carry on.

That is simple, the only problem is that for many people, like me, it's not true. Jumping on Goomba's in 3D with an analog stick will never be as precise or intutive as doing it in 2D with a D-pad. Besides that, I don't like Nintendo's decision to have the 3D Mario games' levels be just a mishmash of platforms floating in nothing, with no coherent world or context. Mario Sunshine did have a more coherent setting, but it was so small in scope and comparatively pedestrian that it didn't even fit the series.

kevynwight wrote:I think Mario 64 was instantly understandable. I remember I got to see it running at a Diehard Gamefan (remember those stores?) before it launched in the US and it was intuitive from the very start. I think it was quite easy to "get" no matter who you are because we exist in three dimensions ourselves.

Agreed. I understood Mario 64 just fine, I just realized (after beating it and having the novelty wear off) that I didn't care for it as much. There are some parts I like, such as boss battles and platforming challenges, but continually re-visiting the same environments to collect trinkets gets tedious and old for me.
No Avatar
28 Dec 2012 21:00

BossBattles wrote:I am much more interested in 3D mario games. They seem more like an "event" as well.

I agree, they do seem more like big events. That would be due to the lavish visual style full of shiny effects as opposed to a bland and plastic-looking visual style that awkwardly combines 3D characters and 2D platforms, and grand orchestral soundtracks as opposed to the increasingly rehashed and clown voice-filled music in the NSMB games. I very much wish they would devote the resources to making the new 2D games as classy as the 3D ones, but it doesn't look like it's going to happen.
User avatar
28 Dec 2012 22:38

M1 wrote:Galaxy 1 wasn't linear at all.

Sorry to break it to ya…but… it was…

I should know since I played that linear piece of crap 4 times. (That includes the Luigi playthroughs)

M1 wrote:Many gamers got lost in Galaxy 1 like they did in Sunshine and Mario 64, due to the open world aspect.

Open world aspect? In Galaxy and the games that follow after it?! LOL

Much of the time I was set on a path that lead to the star. (←Linearity like the 2D games. Just replace a star with a flag pole.) Did I get to explore these so called "open worlds" and choose my own path to whatever star I may find exploring? NO I did not, majority of the time.

M1 wrote:Open world aspect has no place in platformers.

Be more specific. :|

In 2D platformers? Yes it has no business being there but you forget these are 3D platformers with 3D open worlds we're talking about here. Mario isn't in 2D in these games, hes in 3D here. He has more freedom here, so there should be no reason these newer 3D Mario games are being restricted to 2D limitations just to please the 2D Mario fans. That just alienates the 3D Mario fans who'd like to experience a Mario who is capable of doing extraordinary things that could never be made possible in a 2D Mario game. (Basically like someone else said the "EVENT" feel that I feel 2D Mario cannot replicate) While were on the subject of Mario here, I'd just like to say the 3D-looking Mario in these NSMB games is going to waste there. I mean why is he there?! Seriously why? Is the 3D just for looks?! Well anyway this is what I'd imagine 3D Mario games turning into sooner than later. Looks like Nintendo should just stop with the 3D games and like what @Jerome said "devote the resources to making the new 2D games as classy as the 3D ones" of the past if thats what'll make them more money. :\
User avatar
28 Dec 2012 23:08

@Mirr0rR3flection

Being in 3D doesn't mean it needs to be open-world. SM64 was an awful platformer because the actual platforming was virtually nonexistant, and what little there was in the open-world levels was not remotely challenging, which is the entire point of games.

The "freedom" you're talking about is nothing more than an illusion. In 64, you still reach the same end point. The "exploration" isn't meaningful, it's just to show of 3D graphics. Sunshine was much better because it was more of an experience so despite the non-challenging platforming (even though even the open-world levels had plenty of jumping, much more so than 64), it made up for it with all talkative characters, warm colours and soundtrack (though the music in 64 was pretty good too).

The only freedom 3D Mario should have is the freedom to experiment with more complex platforms structures like we say in the Sunshine void levels or in majority of levels in Galaxy.
User avatar
28 Dec 2012 23:37

@MegaShock100
I understand Super Mario 64 was an awful platformer, afterall it was Nintendo's first attempt to bring Mario into the 3D space so of course it wouldn't have been perfect the first time around. Btw I didn't really care for the challenge since the actual point of these games is to have fun, not to seek you to throw your controller on the ground from the pure frustration as a result from a hard level; quite frankly I cared more about the experience to be perfectly honest. I'd take the illusion of the experience any day rather than what we've been fed these past couple of years from Nintendo.

MegaShock100 wrote:The only freedom 3D Mario should have is the freedom to experiment with more complex platforms structures like we say in the Sunshine void levels or in majority of levels in Galaxy.

I believe we can still get this in a non-linear setting btw. I would say give Nintendo more time to make this for us but it seems their minds are made up on where to take future 3D Mario games. Well at least I hope you enjoy the challenge that comes out of these. Hopefully they don't dumb it down for you-know-who. :(
User avatar
29 Dec 2012 02:57

Mirr0rR3flection wrote:
Sorry to break it to ya…but… it was…

I should know since I played that linear piece of crap 4 times. (That includes the Luigi playthroughs)


No it wasn't.
You were able to choose the order you beat the levels.

A Linear game goes in order, without any choice in the matter.

Mirr0rR3flection wrote:
Open world aspect? In Galaxy and the games that follow after it?! LOL

Much of the time I was set on a path that lead to the star. (←Linearity like the 2D games. Just replace a star with a flag pole.) Did I get to explore these so called "open worlds" and choose my own path to whatever star I may find exploring? NO I did not, majority of the time.


What you want is not a platformer but an adventure game.
Platforming levels have a starting and ending point.

Mirr0rR3flection wrote:
Be more specific. :|

In 2D platformers? Yes it has no business being there but you forget these are 3D platformers with 3D open worlds we're talking about here. Mario isn't in 2D in these games, hes in 3D here. He has more freedom here, so there should be no reason these newer 3D Mario games are being restricted to 2D limitations just to please the 2D Mario fans. That just alienates the 3D Mario fans who'd like to experience a Mario who is capable of doing extraordinary things that could never be made possible in a 2D Mario game. (Basically like someone else said the "EVENT" feel that I feel 2D Mario cannot replicate) While were on the subject of Mario here, I'd just like to say the 3D-looking Mario in these NSMB games is going to waste there. I mean why is he there?! Seriously why? Is the 3D just for looks?! Well anyway this is what I'd imagine 3D Mario games turning into sooner than later. Looks like Nintendo should just stop with the 3D games and like what @Jerome said "devote the resources to making the new 2D games as classy as the 3D ones" of the past if thats what'll make them more money. :\


You obviously want an ADVENTURE GAME!

An open world platformer allows you to have full 3D movement and choose the order in which you complete the levels.

Mario 64, Sunshine, and Galaxy 1 all followed this format.

No platformer has ever succeeded at what you are requesting.

Also 2.5D is the new 2D.

Now go learn what a platformer is before continuing this debate.
User avatar
29 Dec 2012 05:03

M1 wrote:No it wasn't.
You were able to choose the order you beat the levels.

Uhhhh no I wasn't able to choose what stars to go after in a level most of the time. Much of the time I was set on a path that lead to the star/shinesprite/flag pole based on what I chose before entering the level. (Like the 2D games… which are linear btw) In the past 3D games I had more freedom to explore my options whether I was already in the level or not.

M1 wrote:A Linear game goes in order, without any choice in the matter.

…the Galaxy games and 3D Land are exactly this. Keep denying it cause your doing a rather poor job convincing me otherwise that its not. Please enlightenment me for real on why its not linear. :angel:

M1 wrote:Platforming levels have a starting and ending point.

Yes but I want my freedom to choose where it ends AGAIN like in 64 and Sunshine. Nintendo has pretty much taken that choice away with these linear Galaxy games and their forced planet hopping towards the goal. If I wanted that I would have just sticked to playing a 2D Mario game.

M1 wrote:You obviously want an ADVENTURE GAME!

Your basicly on an adventure in an open world that so happens to have platforming. Your point?

M1 wrote:(An open world platformer allows you to have full 3D movement and choose the order in which you complete the levels. Mario 64, Sunshine, and Galaxy 1 all followed this format.

The other two did but Galaxy practically had no such format. I was thrown planet to planet until I reached the star I chose to go after before entering the level. From start to finish like a 2D linear game, you know like reaching the flag pole at the end. ;)

M1 wrote:No platformer has ever succeeded at what you are requesting.

Super Mario 64 and Sunshine did. I could abandon sometimes the star/shinesprite I chose before entering the level and end up leaving the level with a totally different star/shinesprite I discovered while exploring. You wouldn't be able to do that in a 2D Mario platformer. :|

M1 wrote:Also 2.5D is the new 2D.

And you think thats good based off of all the complaining we hear about the NSMB series? Just cause its new doesn't mean we're suppose to like it.

M1 wrote:Now go learn what a platformer is before continuing this debate.

No… why don't "U" go learn that theres a difference between 2D and 3D platformers Mr. resident troll. You should know better than to group them as the same thing. Btw I'm shocked you didn't know there was open world platforming in ADVENTURE GAMES! :roll:
No Avatar
29 Dec 2012 05:16

Mirr0rR3flection wrote:
M1 wrote:No it wasn't.
You were able to choose the order you beat the levels.

Uhhhh no I wasn't able to choose what stars to go after in a level most of the time. Much of the time I was set on a path that lead to the star/shinesprite/flag pole based on what I chose before entering the level. (Like the 2D games which are linear btw) In the past 3D games I had more freedom to explore my options whether I was already in the level or not.

Mirr0rR3flection wrote:
M1 wrote:A Linear game goes in order, without any choice in the matter.

…the Galaxy games and 3D Land are exactly this. Keep denying it cause your doing a rather poor job convincing me otherwise that its not.

It seems you're both talking about different things. M1 is talking about linearity in the sense of which order you play the levels, and you're talking about linearity in the designs of the levels themselves. Mario 64 and Sunshine were non-linear on both counts, and the Galaxy games are non-linear in the former sense but highly linear in the latter.


Mirr0rR3flection wrote:
M1 wrote:No platformer has ever succeeded at what you are requesting.

Super Mario 64 and Sunshine did.

Well, they were successful in achieving this sort of gameplay. They weren't, however, as successful as Nintendo wanted them to be as far as sales and popularity, as Mario 64 sold quite a bit less than the 2D games preceding it, and Sunshine only sold about half as much as that. That's why they're making the new 3D games more linear, because they want them to sell like the 2D ones. From all I've read, it seems the developers would be quite happy to stop making the 2D games altogether and just make 3D games from now on, but they can't manage to make them sell as well.


Mirr0rR3flection wrote:
M1 wrote:Also 2.5D is the new 2D.

And you think thats good based off of all the complaining we hear about the NSMB series? Just cause its new does mean we are suppose to like it.

I would like a 2.5D design, or in other words a fully 3D-rendered game that scrolls sideways. The NSMB games are a strange combination of flat 2D platforms and objects with 3D characters layered on top, and it doesn't totally look right.
User avatar
29 Dec 2012 05:47

Actually...no, they're not. You could tell if they were "flat 2D platforms and objects with 3D characters layered on top." They'd LOOK flat. They don't. Those games are "2.5D", whatever that is. They are entirely 3D polygons. Which is why, while great games, they don't play as sharply as the old sprite based ones. It's incredibly obvious when a 2D, even pre-rendered sprite is mixed in with 3D polygons. And I don't think I've really seen any such thing in the NSMB games, at least not from Wii onward (I can't speak for the DS game, because I barely played it).
User avatar
29 Dec 2012 05:56

Jerome wrote:Mario 64 and Sunshine were non-linear on both counts, and the Galaxy games are non-linear in the former sense but highly linear in the latter.

Glad to see someone who gets what I'm trying to get across. :)

The former has not been my problem, its like you said the latter that has been my biggest issue with these newer 3D Mario games, let alone @M1 denying such linearity doesn't exist in the Galaxy games when in fact it does exist.
No Avatar
29 Dec 2012 21:06

Devil_Rising wrote:Actually...no, they're not. You could tell if they were "flat 2D platforms and objects with 3D characters layered on top." They'd LOOK flat.

They do look flat, very obviously so to me. In case you can't tell well enough from looking at the game regularly, The images of NSMBWii on the following page are rendered in HD, and make it very clear that static objects on the playable plane (like the ground, question blocks, pipes, etc.) are flat bitmap images. Didn't you ever notice that these things never shift in perspective at all, or that they're often slightly blurry due to scaling?


Mirr0rR3flection wrote:
Jerome wrote:Mario 64 and Sunshine were non-linear on both counts, and the Galaxy games are non-linear in the former sense but highly linear in the latter.

Glad to see someone who gets what I'm trying to get across. :)

The former has not been my problem, its like you said the latter that has been my biggest issue with these newer 3D Mario games, let alone @M1 denying such linearity doesn't exist in the Galaxy games when in fact it does exist.

I'm not personally big on lots of open scavenger-hunt-style levels myself, but even I agree that the levels in the Galaxy games and 3D Land seem a bit restrictive. I'd like to see a 3D Mario game with a similar approach to level design as the Ratchet & Clank series. Namely large, open-looking 3D landscapes with anywhere from one to a few linear but spacious main paths (sometimes intersecting with each other, and often featuring smaller secret side-areas branching off of those) and occasionally totally open levels.

View the full discussion!

Quickie Search

"Advanced" Search

Anti-social Tendencies

Advertisements

RSS feed trough

News Feed
Top Stories
Console News
Portables News
Podcast Feed
GoNintendo Radio Feed
Twitter Feed

Affiliates + Friends

Destructoid
Gamersyde
Modojo
TheBitBlock
Anime Your Way