|
|
Post by TV Eye on Aug 25, 2012 15:47:47 GMT -5
Side note, how can you hate multiplayer games? Nothing's better than playing through a game with some friends sitting next to you. It's become a major priority nowadays. It seems that no game company has the balls to make an amazing single player experience anymore. Hell, to my knowledge Bethesda is the ONLY company which makes first person games that have no multiplayer in them. It's nice if it's something like Conker's BFD where the multiplayer is a side addition, but when they go all out and make it the main focus of the game (Live and Reloaded) then the single player experience suffers because of it. |
|
|
|
Post by Koopaul on Aug 26, 2012 1:11:42 GMT -5
Welp I think it's on another forum atually, but hear me out.
Fryguy, earlier you made comparisons to SMB3 to SMW and the New Super Mario Bros series.
And you simply can't do that. SMB3 and SMW are incredibly distinct from other Mario games. All Mario games had their own distinct look, sound, and feel.
Each one was their own flavor, a new telling of the Mario formula. Each new title would bring many brand new things to the table while leaving others behind.
For example, when Nintendo made World they didn't bring back the main item Super Leaf or the many different suits... They gave us a new flying item that worked differently. They gave us Yoshi. They gave us new mechanics like the Spin Stomp and throwing shells upwards.
For each new title, the game's physics were different. Different setting. Different sounds. Goombas were pretty much absent in SMW! Hell every game ended it's stage differently, SMB3 ended with Card Roulette, SMW ended with Giant Gates. They were still Mario, but but each was a whole 'nother beast.
Back then Nintendo purposely left things out from SMB3, because those were the things that made SMB3... SMB3. And not Super Mario World. Now everything is coming back and being used over and over again.
Fryguy, these are not "bad games" these are... the SAME games!
Nintendo will try to convince us otherwise, but putting sprinkles on vanilla ice cream doesn't stop it from being vanilla.
That's actually a good analogy...
SMB tasted like vanilla ice cream.
SMB3 tasted like Strawberry ice cream.
SMW tasted like mint ice cream.
NSMB tasted like vanilla with whipped cream.
NSMBW tasted like vanilla with chocolate sprinkles.
NSMB2 is vanilla with whipped cream and a cherry on top.
And NSWBU will be vanilla with rainbow sprinkles.
Basically, while all those games taste great, I'm sick of Nintendo giving me the same flavor but putting on different toppings. Give me chocolate already!
Do you get it now Fryguy? They are not bad games, just lazy and uninspired.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shadrio on Aug 26, 2012 2:29:46 GMT -5
My reason to not liking the series as much as another Mario fan is simple:
The game, with its its pros and cons, ultimately doesn't appeal to me at the price offered, my main issues being presentation and difficulty. Also, the whole "grab the coins" theme isn't appealing enough for me to dish out 28k pesos, money I could use to buy something like hats in TF2/DotA2 Luigi's Mansion 2, Pikmin 3 or Xenoblade (if it ever gets here, grr).
But whatever, that's just me. I don't intend to preach my stance on the series to anyone and offering it as the correct one. I just love the old ones much more, because, as Koopaul said, they feel like different games while the "New" series feels like it depends too much on nostalgia (a big no-no for me) and too much same old, same old. The level design is great though, but chances are if I ever get together with people, we're mainly going to play modded Brawl, Left 4 Dead or DotA 2.
Of course, this is coming from the guy who has yet to buy Super Mario Galaxy 2. Why? I'm a cheap ass.
|
|
|
|
Post by kirbychu on Aug 26, 2012 4:40:30 GMT -5
For example, when Nintendo made World they didn't bring back the main item Super Leaf or the many different suits... They gave us a new flying item that worked differently. Bad analogy. The only classic powerups in the NSMB series are the Super Mushroom, Fire Flower and Star (which were all in both SMB3 and SMW). Everything else does something new, including the flight item which gives vertical flight as opposed to the horizontal flight seen in both SMB3 and SMW. It's a self-contradictory argument. I'd also say that the Wiimote spin was a much bigger gameplay change than the spin jump or throwing shells upwards ever were. Those things were nice, but only actually any use in stages that were designed for them. The Wiimote spin changes the way people play in any stage, meaning you have to be much less careful with your jumps, giving you more freedom to explore and try things out. In multiplayer, the same is even more true of the bubble move, and it adds a lot of coordination between the team to make sure everyone isn't using it at once. You're also disregarding multiplayer again for no reason. Multiplayer alone makes NSMBWii completely distinct from the rest of the series. Most of your complaints seem to be cosmetic things, like what enemies look like and what sound effects they make. It's less about the flavour of the ice cream here and more about the packaging. "I'd be able to enjoy this strawberry ice cream just as much as the chocolate if it came in a different colour container!" When it comes down to it, Nintendo have brought back a lot of old elements because that's what most people who grew up with the games want. Remember how everybody was pissing themselves with excitement around here when they revealed the Koopalings were coming back? I remember that same thing happening when we saw flagpoles in the DS game. Give it a year or two and, for some reason, that excitement turns into hatred. Fans don't know what they want, and the ones who think they do are the worst, because they're generally demanding a game only they want to play and will get mad if they don't get it. You think they're being lazy by using old enemies, but it takes just as long to program a fan-favourite Goomba into the game as it would to put in an unfamiliar new enemy. And most fans are gonna be happier to see the Goomba. In fact, I think it's more likely that fans would grow to hate that new enemy for replacing Goomba, in the same way that fans initially hated Bowser Jr. for replacing the Koopalings. NSMB and NSMBWii sold more than SMB3 and SMW combined. They're doing something right. |
|
|
|
Post by Da Robot on Aug 26, 2012 5:36:30 GMT -5
One thing I want to ask is, are people angry that we are getting two sidescrolling Mario games in one year? (Which Iwata has said will be the only ones for each platform, which if true could mean it could be another 5 years (wait for new hardware) till we see a new sidescrolling Mariogame) I have a feeling the flagpole ain't going to be removed from series anytime soon, it works as a good "final bonus" device that can be also used by multiple characters and individual level elements can make it easier/harder to jump higher on. (imagine trying to make SMB3 card roulette work with multiple players and also the only thing you did with that was run at full speed and jump at it (admittly a few levels put enemies in the way)). Kirbychu pretty much said this but I'm gonna leave this quote here. "People don't know what they want until you're given it to them
And then they don't know what they they want next: they think it's more of the what they liked last time."Neil Gaiman That's actually a good analogy... SMB tasted like vanilla ice cream. SMB3 tasted like Strawberry ice cream. SMW tasted like mint ice cream. NSMB tasted like vanilla with whipped cream. NSMBW tasted like vanilla with chocolate sprinkles. NSMB2 is vanilla with whipped cream and a cherry on top. And NSWBU will be vanilla with rainbow sprinkles. Basically, while all those games taste great, I'm sick of Nintendo giving me the same flavor but putting on different toppings. Give me chocolate already! That is a wonderful and also delicious analogy right there . . . Of course, this is coming from the guy who has yet to buy Super Mario Galaxy 2. Why? I'm a cheap ass. You aren't the only one . . . |
|
|
|
Post by Fryguy64 on Aug 26, 2012 8:31:47 GMT -5
I'm going to have to side with Kirbychu on this one. The New Super Mario Bros. games introduce a fair number of new gameplay elements each. Each one has new power-ups, new basic moves, new stage hazards and so on. There are new enemies, old enemies who act differently, level designs that weren't possible before... New SMB introduced wall kicks, triple jumps and Ground Pound to the 2D Mario games for the first time, New SMB Wii had that whole multiplayer thing you may have noticed, not to mention the GIANT, rotating stage hazards which are used increasingly cleverly throughout the game.
Yes, I will admit to being disappointed that the bosses in New SMB Wii were just the same ones from SMB3 done over with minor changes, and that Bowser Jr. was basically Boom-Boom in New SMB. And I would like it if each game took a few more risks with the graphics.
But I don't know what the problem is? Why are the games as a whole being slammed?
I do however agree with Shadrio to some degree. When you rely so heavily on retro platforming game design, are the games worth the maximum retail price? You could make the same argument about a lot of games, when there is the suspicion these games aren't all that hard for Nintendo to put together any more, so you'd think that'd be reflected in the price...
I would also like to make a small observation: Complaining that New SMB Wii is a 4-player game is very strange. I personally find the multiplayer shoehorned in over the top of a very strong 1-Player experience. It's kinda nice to have it there as an option, but the levels aren't designed around having four players. They don't change if you have multiple players at all! They're just a bit easier.
The ice cream analogy only works if you agree with it already, by the way. It's just nonsense from where I'm standing. But could be twisted to my own ends:
SMB tasted like vanilla
SMB3 tasted like vanilla and strawberry
SMW tasted like vanilla, strawberry and mint
NSMB tasted like vanilla, strawberry and mint with sprinkles, and it'd been sooo long since you last had any that it was all delicious!
NSMBWii was like double vanilla, strawberry and mint with chocolate and sprinkles. Quite a lot to digest, but you can share it with your friends.
NSMB2 and NSMBU will again taste like everything that came before with some new flavour.
You're being spoiled with a vast history of gaming development and complaining. Perhaps because you're full and don't want any more for a while.
As for SMB, SMB3 and SMW all being distinct (or at least more distinct than NSMB series), I call bullshit on that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shadrio on Aug 28, 2012 19:06:42 GMT -5
Welp, the latest episode of Game Gramps basically says what I feel about the NSMB series. FUCK, I suck putting things into words, not that they did a better job, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Koopaul on Aug 29, 2012 1:23:48 GMT -5
As for SMB, SMB3 and SMW all being distinct (or at least more distinct than NSMB series), I call bullshit on that. Bullshit?  |
|
|
|
Post by Fryguy64 on Aug 29, 2012 2:11:20 GMT -5
Game Grumps did a much better job of laying it all out. I'm glad they did. It was truly disappointing to see two reviewers, usually so good at expressing their opinions, just go nuts.
And yes, Koopaul. I have never seen a more pathetic attempt at an argument. The very first screen of all three New SMB stages. Not the very first screen of the other three games. Not even the first level of SMW there.
If your big problem is that the castle appears in the background of the first level, then I cannot respect that as an opinion. Because it's dumb.
Listen, I love the Mario series. I also know that the new games are largely put together with a cookie-cutter level design tool. Hell, probably one they developed back in the 16-bit era! But all the main series games are strung together from the same elements. Blocks, breakable blocks, ? blocks, baddies who move in a certain way... And 90% of the elements in all the games could be swapped out for 90% of the elements in any of the other games.
And this is my point. You couldn't build SMW in the SMB engine, but the reverse would be possible. You could build any of the games in the New SMB engine. They are incrementally improving and absorbing everything that came before. That's how the series has always developed.
So when I say "bullshit" it wasn't because I think all the New SMB games are distinct from each other, but because ALL of the Mario games are cookie-cutter design that Nintendo has perfected over the releases.
So wah wah castles. They're all the same fucking game with a few new additions each time. And that's great. What did you expect? It's a series that was only born because a fuckton of people stopped playing other games and mourned the loss of simple 2D side-scrolling games. Nintendo made a ton of money rereleasing SMB on Game Boy Advance and then New SMB was born.
And yes, I'm sad it does better than Super Mario Galaxy 1/2 which are both incredibly designed, original games that have everything you're all asking for. But I guess you don't like those because it's basically the same thing twice, right?
|
|
|
|
Post by Koopaul on Aug 29, 2012 2:37:22 GMT -5
Eh I'm fine with them doing the same thing twice. A third time is just too much.
I still don't feel that all Mario games are cookie-cut like you say. Sure they all follow the same fundamentals, jumping on enemies, grabbing powers and coins and stuff. Yes, if it wasn't that, it wouldn't be Mario.
But in the past they would take those fundamentals and put a unique spin on some of them, or add a new mechanic that wasn't there before. (NSMB added new mechanics, NSMBW added spinning but NSMB2 added nothing)
Look at SMW the blocks functioned differently from the past games, they weren't destructible from jumping beneath them. It's not just the blocks, there was a unique twist to lots of things from the other games.
They did their best to make the same formula seem new.
Also atmosphere may not be important to you but they are pretty important for a well made game. I think every Mario game should have a unique atmosphere from the others. I mean they could ATLEAST do that!
Also sorry I used bad screens. I kinda wanted to have a sceen of SMW that showed those unique blocks. And I wanted to show that SMB3 had an artificial playground theme to the game with those colorful blocks with bolts.
|
|
|
|
Post by kirbychu on Aug 29, 2012 2:47:09 GMT -5
This is, again, an entirely cosmetic argument. The only reason the three games on the left look different from each other is because of changes in technology. The MMC3 chip for SMB3, and the entirely new hardware for SMW. If they could've had SMW's graphics in 1985, there is no way SMB would look the way it does. Those graphics weren't a stylistic choice, they were a technical limitation. If the argument here is that they're lazy for using the same backdrop for the first level of each NSMB, it's extra super dumb. It's not the same backdrop. Each one is a different picture, each one took the same or more time to make. They all contain the same castle (because that's what Peach's Castle looks like), but it isn't the same drawing of the castle each time. Somebody has put a lot of time into making those increasingly detailed pictures, each containing different hills, trees and flowers, but you are dismissing that person as being lazy because you saw a different picture of that castle somewhere else before. It's that kind of over-entitled shit that pisses me off. If the argument is that they're lazy for using grass in general as a concept then holy fuck, I really don't know how to respond to that kind of insanity. Should we also complain when they use the sky or clouds? What about water? Sentient beings? All these things have been done to death! |
|
|
|
Post by Koopaul on Aug 29, 2012 5:47:14 GMT -5
No it doesn't just have to do with technology. Super Mario Bros. 3 had a whole staged play theme. Super Mario World took place in a more natural woodsy world.
They had their own style and overall theme, it wasn't just improved graphics.
Hey SMB3 had Airships, but SMW didn't, instead they created something new like Ghost Houses. That choice to not use Airships didn't have anything to do with technology or graphics.
So its not about what Peach's castle looks like, it's the fact that its always there in the first level. Why not start off some place different?
Jesus man why are you acting so pissed about this?
|
|
|
|
Post by kirbychu on Aug 29, 2012 6:19:29 GMT -5
Hey SMB3 had Airships, but SMW didn't, instead they created something new like Ghost Houses. That choice to not use Airships didn't have anything to do with technology or graphics. And NSMB has bouncy mushroom, poison swamp, erupting volcano and mountain climbing stages. And one that takes place entirely on the back of a giant Wiggler. Those are all new, but they apparently don't count for no reason. I apologise for acting so pissed. It's how I get when something pisses me off. It's largely because, as usual, the arguments against the series mostly just amount to "if you ignore everything that's new, there's nothing new and this evidence to the contrary is wrong because I refuse to see it". You try arguing against that, it's so much fun. |
|
|
|
Post by Arcadenik on Aug 29, 2012 7:25:01 GMT -5
SMW did have an airship level but it's more or less an underwater ghost house.
It seems like the only way to make people stop complaining about NSMB games is if they made worlds with new themes.
Grass Land = replace with Cookie Land (based on Yoshi's Cookie and Cookie Land from Mario Kart: Double Dash)
Desert Land = replace with Virus Land (based on Dr. Mario and science labs seen in Mario RPG games)
Sea Land = replace with Sunshine Land (based on Isle Delfino from Super Mario Sunshine)
Ice Land = replace with Ghost Land (based on Pumpkin Zone from Super Mario Land 2 and ghost houses throughout the series)
Forest Land = replace with Galaxy Land (based on space-themed levels from Super Mario Galaxy games)
Mountain Land = replace with Clock Land (based on Tick Tock Clock from Super Mario 64 and Mario Zone from Super Mario Land 2)
Sky Land = replace with Bee Land (based on bee-themed levels from Super Mario Galaxy games)
Volcano Land = replace with Retro Land (based on the first Super Mario Bros. and Piranha Plant Slide from Mario Kart 7)
|
|
|
|
Post by Fryguy64 on Aug 29, 2012 8:28:13 GMT -5
Kirbychu's summation of the anti-NSMB argument...
...is exactly why we're getting wound up. New SMB Wii had huge rotating platforms. The technology limitations of the earlier games meant these weren't possible. There were loads of new kinds of blocks, some introduced in NSMB and some in NSMBWii. I haven't played NSMB2 yet, so I can't speak for that one.
Of course I understand the frustrations with "We need a grass land, a desert, an ice world, a jungle, etc." I'd love to see Nintendo break away from this and surprise us with some all-new ideas. And because the level designs are cookie cutter, it would be relatively easy to theme around that. If they have ideas specific to those new worlds, then even better!
But would that be enough? What if they did what Arcadenik suggested and based levels off other ideas that exist but haven't been seen in a main Mario platformer? What if they pulled a Super Mario 3D Land, and threw in a level based on Tick Tock Clock? Is that "just taking ideas that came before"? Even if they've never been used in a 2D Mario platformer?
If they stuck in an all-new factory level, would people accuse them of "Running out of ideas and nicking them from Donkey Kong Country now?" Or Yoshi's Island, or Kirby, or Wario Land...
I'm not sure Nintendo could ever win, even if they redoubled their efforts. Especially when they can keep putting them out as they are and end up rolling in wads and wads of cash anyway.
"Oh my God, they're getting desperate, taking ideas from Dr. Mario now!" ...I can already hear it...
|
|
