|
|
Post by Fryguy64 on Jun 9, 2005 6:31:52 GMT -5
But Colosseum is excellent anyway. Snagging is just as exciting, and the battles are great fun. I want a Ludicolo as cool as Miror B.'s  |
|
|
|
Post by kirbychu on Jun 9, 2005 19:13:07 GMT -5
Colosseum was okay... but I actually preferred the Stadium games. I miss using rented Pokémon to enter tournaments. I miss the crazy mini-games that had me in hysterics (especially the jumping Magikarp or the one where the Clefairy would get hit with the squeaky hammer), but strangely, the thing I miss the most is Stadium 2's Pokémon school thingy. You know... the exams. I loved that! And I hate exams!  When I heard about Colosseum I was expecting all of that with an RPG mode added in. I was kinda disappointed. But it's still a fun game. |
|
|
|
Post by Andronicus on Jun 10, 2005 22:15:00 GMT -5
On Mario.
I guess the Mario RPG games are spin-offs too, huh?
I mean, the Super Mario platformers are the core series, and the RPGs are a kind of mix of verious side-projects...
Hmmm...
That sort of just dawned on me...
|
|
|
|
Post by Fryguy64 on Jun 11, 2005 3:46:26 GMT -5
Yes, that's why I've given it a "Mario RPG" subsection in the Mario gamelist rather than consider it a straight-out "Mario game". The problem is that there are now subdivisions within the RPG list! One SMRPG, two Paper Marios and two Mario & Luigis. This is going to cause some problems |
|
|
|
Post by Andronicus on Jun 11, 2005 4:18:48 GMT -5
Oh, I wasn't questioning your Mario gamelist layout Fryguy - it's done very well as a matter of fact - I was just saying, is all. ;D But yeah, there are certainly divisions within. I thought that PM was actually the sequel to SMRPG, in the sense that it was originally going to be called SMRPG2 - although, I could be totally wrong... And the M&L games are made by some of the people who worked on SMRPG, aren't they (again, I could be misinformed)? Plus, elements of M&L are found in PM:TTYD as well. I guess they all link in to each other in some way or another. Plus, we never got SMRPG over in in AU (I think that applies to all PAL territories), it can't be in my collection unless I find an old copy in an online auction or something. Anyways... No big deal. I do hope they give us more PM games though - a Paper Luigi for the DS or something would be absolutely great if you ask me. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Dances in Undergarments on Jun 12, 2005 6:42:44 GMT -5
SMRPG is made by Square Enix, Paper Mario (1 and 2) is made by Intelligent Systems, while Mario & Luigi (1 and 2) are made by Alpha Dream. So no, not the same developers. But whenever there is a new Mario PRG it is almost always called an "unnofficial sequel" to the last series. PM was referred to as the "unofficial sequel" to SMRPG, M&L was referred to as the "unofficial sequel" to PM.
And you could split the Mario series into some many sub-series, anyway. There are like, 3 sub-divisions under "Mario Platformers", then a bunch under those, etc, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andronicus on Jun 12, 2005 7:27:17 GMT -5
I never said they had the same developers.
I know Square Enix did SMRPG, Intelligent Systems did the PM games and Alphadream did the M&L games.
What I meant was to say that I was under the impression that certain individuals who had worked on SMRPG under Square Enix were also working on M&L (hence the Geno cameo).
I could be misinformed, but that is all I was saying.
And the PM game was titled something else pre-release in Japan - something to the effect of SMRPG2 or something - I don't know, and am probably wrong.
Anyways - they're all different, but I'll lump them together for argument's sake.
;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Dances in Undergarments on Jun 12, 2005 9:20:43 GMT -5
Oh yeah, you said "some of the people", I thought you said "the same people". Ah, whatever.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fryguy64 on Jun 13, 2005 3:00:35 GMT -5
Alphadream is made up of breakaway Square Enix staff, so it wouldn't be a surprise really.
As for the Super Mario main series being divided up, I agree to a point. They could be split into Bros, Land, World, 64, etc... but sometimes the crossover is blurred - SMW being called SMB4 on the Japanese cover art, and YI being called SMW2 in western versions only.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dances in Undergarments on Jun 13, 2005 4:21:23 GMT -5
Plus, does SMB2 (the US one) fall under Bros., since it is completely different?
|
|
|
|
Post by Andronicus on Jun 13, 2005 4:30:42 GMT -5
Too much break-up...  I tend to stop at the following: - Super Mario series: SMB, SMB2, SMB3, SMW, SMW2-YI, SM64, SMS, SML, SML2, SML3-WL (maybe), SMA, SMA2, SMA3, SMA4, and this new SMB game for DS. - Mario RPG series: SMRPG (even though PAL never got it), PM, M&L, PM2, M&L2. Then the spin-offs go under their respective sub-categories. Makes it easier for me, rather than having one or two games per category. Of course, these categories only really hold up in the Western regions - in Japan the games are called different things, but I'll stick to what suits me. End! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Fryguy64 on Jun 13, 2005 8:32:37 GMT -5
Plus, does SMB2 (the US one) fall under Bros., since it is completely different? Yes, even though it was originally intended as a different game, it was developed in-house and converted into a Mario game by the in-house team. So it counts... even though it shouldn't. |
|
|
|
Post by Andronicus on Jun 13, 2005 21:28:32 GMT -5
Say what you will, but I actually enjoy SMB2.
In fact, the GBA version (SMA) is a lot of fun, with those small added extras.
;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Wildcat on Jun 13, 2005 22:34:37 GMT -5
Jumping a back a bit into the thread...
I may be in the minority here, but I felt that Mario Sunshine did not match the quality of SM64. I felt the backpack was too essential element of the game that when it got stole from you in the secret zones it made the game a lot more frustrating to me. The game also didn't control quite as well to me, either. *shrugs* I also am in a bit of a minority when I can say that Wind Waker, while a great game for the most part, was not as engaging as OoT to me...or most other Zeldas, for that matter. I liked the battle system a lot, the dungeons were overall fine (I did not like the two person dungeons that much, personally...mainly due to how you had to use the Wind Waker to use the second character), but the Triforce shard gathering bothered me greatly. I would much rather gather the shards in dungeons or even mini-dungeons (btw, before I get jumped, I have no problem with Tingle or his brothers...he makes me laugh). I will agree that the N64's library probably wasn't Nintendo's strongest (I have over 40 GC games in contrast to the 15 or so N64 games I own now), but in my opinion, SM64 and LoZ:OoT are better games. The Gamecube has had many games that stand out compared to the few the N64 did to me however, so I agree that Nintendo has done just fine this gen in terms of enjoyable and engaging content.
I do also add that Rare probably wouldn't have been as huge a contributor this gen compared to the N64's, judging by their quality and quantity drop working for Microsoft. Two games for the Xbox in one gen, one a port of a good N64 game and one that gets ridiculed constantly? I am somewhat interested in PDZ, though...
|
|
|
|
Post by Dances in Undergarments on Jun 13, 2005 22:54:28 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure you're in the majority, not the minority, thinking that SM64 > SMS and OoT > TWW. I agree with SM64 being better, for a number of reasons. Obviously theres the originality factor, but SM64 also had much more varied landscapes. Obviously setting SMS on a tropical island restricted any chance they had of varying the levels a bitm ore. Sure, Pinna Park is pretty fun, and the weird hotel isn't too bad, but the lack of, say, a snow level really hurt it.
OoT vs. TWW I can't comment on because I've only played a bit of OoT, and Wind Waker was the first Zelda game I played.
|
|
