General Mario Thread

And look at where the two series are now.

Mario doesn't change too much because Nintendo knows what makes Mario games good. They know that Mario games have a certain spirit that other games do not. If they were to change the games too much then they'd stop feeling like a Mario game (of course, even the spin offs manage to capture the spirit of Mario games but the main series platformers have to be more careful due to, well, being the main series platformers).

Exactly. I appreciate this and love it.

While I felt Super Mario 64 was the tip of perfection so far for the 3D platformers(I may change this after I play more of them. I only have Galaxy and Sunshine to much compare to. And Super Paper Mario to a slight degree, but that plays too different), it doesn't mean I think the others were horrid. They were still quite fun. My exact cup of tea? Nah. But they still were great.

To note, my issue with Sunshine is that it had some pretty poorly designed levels, and I felt Mario was a bit more slippery. No pun intended due to the gameplay. For Galaxy, the Wii Remote didn't work that well for me. I didn't feel like I had solid controls, but for the first 3D Mario game to use it, it still did very well.

That's assuming you meant to reply to me and no one else, of course. With a lot of controversial opinions going around, arrows may not be as useful as noting the post or the poster. XD

No, I was replying to you. You seemed to be criticizing the main Mario platformers for not changing a lot. If that's not the case then I apologize.

I wasn't even criticizing that. XD

I actually don't have an issue outside of some of the difficulty they can contain due to the controls feeling less than solid.

I do admit I do not like how linear Sunshine and Galaxy were. They're not severely to the point of the original games, but they're not that bad. You can do more than enough stuff that isn't "follow one line". It's fun and interesting. As I said, once I play some Galaxy 2 and 3D Land(I do not own 3D World, higher priorities, really), I can see how linear they are. Namely the course design more than anything. I know that the special courses in Sunshine and Galaxy(64 was mixed in this. It had tons of unique exploration secret stars and while it had some linear secret stars) were pretty linear at times. I didn't get a chance to see all the Galaxy ones, but Sunshine could be pretty bad at this sometimes. The pachinko level is the one that avoids this, yet is pretty hard as well too. XD

Actually, Sunshine isn't all that linear. It isn't as open as 64, true, but it's a lot more open than the Galaxy games or 3D World.

Case in point for Sunshine, it's entirely possible to play all of the worlds in a reverse order, starting from Pianta Village and ending at Bianco Hills.

Correct. It's more linear than 64, which I found a bit annoying due to how I love the way the stars were designed in 64. Sometimes you needed to choose a specific one, but you could do many out of order.

Galaxy went a bit more linear.

Even then, I didn't find this something horrible or a big deal. Slightly annoying, sure, but they were still highly fun regardless. Controls in general got my goat more often. But to be fair, I'm pretty picky on those sometimes, anyway.

In the past I've criticized 64 for not exactly being much of a Mario game. It's more of a playground where you go to a bunch of worlds and explore and collect do various stuff with platforming only coming sometimes. Galaxy is my favorite, capturing the spirit of Mario as a pure platformer while also providing its own unique spin on the franchise. The linear focus allows for an overall tighter experience, and Galaxy 1 at least still has just enough adventure type levels to spice things up when needed.

Of course, 64 is still a fantastic game, worthy of being called one of the greatest of all time. What truly stands out about it is how fun it is to simply control Mario. Running, jumping, pounding, all of those are simply fun to just do. In that sense I actually think 64 is slightly better than Galaxy. Simply moving is more of a pure joy in 64 than Galaxy. Not enough to surpass Galaxy's superior level design, but still. Both are absolute masterpieces, so it all comes down to preference.

Hm, that actually might be my biggest problem with 3D Land and 3D World. Both games are less imaginative, at least on the surface, and transplanting 2D mechanics into 3D, while novel, isn't something that jumps out and grabs me. But moving around in those two games feels so limited compared to earlier 3D titles. Less options, and the time limit means there's less time to mess around.

edited 1st Dec '14 7:36:56 PM by Sterok

I'd say more along the lines of extremely picky. Galaxy is generally considered ones of the more modern games that controls extremely well.

This is also rather comical seeing as how your favorite is 64 which controls very poorly by modern standards.

EDIT: This is what I like about the Mario fandom. We're not arguing that any given game is bad and that this game is the only truly good one like some other fandoms are wont to do. We're arguing that all of the games are fantastic but this game is just a bit more fantastic than the others.

edited 1st Dec '14 7:38:18 PM by Zelenal

I don't care what it's "considered". I actually care about what I directly played and felt. It's not even nostalgia, I played them all very recently, and they felt very different control-wise to me. Namely in how responsive they were. 64 easily won out. I had little trouble. The DS remake, not so much. Sunshine had me sliding around too easily(which again considering it's based around water is funny in its own right), which I didn't enjoy that much. It didn't feel that solid.

You're getting a little personal there, Zelenal. I'm a little picky because the controls do not feel smooth in Sunshine or Galaxy. They aren't horrible, either. I never could work with the Wii Remote since it does not respond that well to me. The exception so far has been Super Paper Mario(I am not talking about with the Nunchuck, of course) and not much more.

As for the Gamecube Controller, the stick is actually extremely sensitive, a problem I felt that plagues it and some games. Especially OOT, where I could not aim well at all. 64 lacked this issue since the stick was a bit more stiff and responsive.

To note, using the Wii Remote alone almost never worked for me unless I'm using the D-Pad for movement in general. Leaning it in different directions feels very loose and rarely ever worked. I can say, however, that Sonic & the Black Knight is the only game using that exact type of control that I actually liked. I'm more or less not interested in special controls and they just don't work out for me. I want tighter controls. I don't believe the Wii Remote actually gave these, not that the concept was bad, of course. It's just not my preference. I felt the same way with the Zelda DS games' controls. However, they actually were much worse since they weren't very tight at all at times(items aside, I will admit. Normal movements and sword... eh, could be way better).

Sorry for the rant, but I'm a controller man(I've played since the Atari days. I've used tons of different controls). I'm always picky, and it entirely affects my enjoyment of a game. Not that I think a game with somewhat bad controls is terrible or anything, as it needs way more than than that, but yeah.

edited 1st Dec '14 7:58:20 PM by Irene

As someone who're really only played the DS version of 64, I found the controls just fine. Yeah they're not perfect, but they do work perfectly fine, even on the DS's dpad. I would love a remake for the 3DS or Wii U, but it's not required. I had no problem with Galaxy's regular controls, though I will admit to being frustrated with some of the more motion controlled heavy moments.

Yeah, the motion controls were fairly decent, but they still weren't severely refined, which is my point.

The n64 version were a bit easier to work with, though. It'd be neat if they remade it for the New 3DS or whatever the latest one is someday using 8-Directional Movement a bit better. D-Pads only go so far, really.

It also depends how precise you need to be. 2D games aside, a lot of games are so freaking slow, that a D-Pad will work just as well as a Control Stick/Pad. The faster the game is, the more precise control you need. If it has 8-Directional Movement or definitely could work with it(Super Mario 64 is this case), then I'd say it's the better type of control. Now this is coming from experience, but I do feel the original 64 version's controls were more solid. DS did actually improve on other things, of course. More fun characters, new gameplay ideas, some neat course design, the mini-game section, and the graphics of course looked better(even if still blocky, but the system is still not that strong. The DS having super non-blocky and crisp polygons is asking a little much). Especially for a very early game in its lifetime.

It's definitely a great remake, imo. Not without its criticisms, of course.

Fun fact. We're farther away from the release of 64 DS (2004) than 64 DS was from the release of the original (1996). How time flies by. Both sold over 11 million copies. To me it feels like a good luck charm for Nintendo, and I kind of expect another remake of sorts next generation.

edited 1st Dec '14 8:31:59 PM by Sterok

Both 64 and Galaxy control great...that is true facts.

I'll say this tangent: I hope Nintendo decides their next installment of the "NEW" SMB games are on their newest consoles, rather than a quick cash grab. Having a Mario game at launch to show what a new system could do would be helpful, then spend the time to create a game which can show off the limits of the system.

Mind, I don't know what's going on in the heads of the Nintendo dev teams.

Ah NSMB. The poster child of Nintendo's laziness and endless rehashes (should be Pokemon even if that's GF, not Nintendo). Mechanically solid games, but rather uninspired. 2D Mario does need some sort of shake-up, that's for sure.

I have a rather harsh theory. There are many reasons for the Wii U's rather unfortunate situation, but New Super Mario Bros I feel is one of the biggest ones. The Wii U had two big first party titles at launch, Nintendo Land and NSMB U. Compare those to the Wii's big launch games, Wii Sports and Twilight Princess. Wii Sports/Nintendo Land were meant to bring in the masses and show off the new console's features (only one truly succeeded). Zelda/Mario were meant to bring in the Nintendo faithful. Twilight Princess of course was the much lauded "realistic" 3D Zelda people had been clamoring for, so that certainly worked. But Mario U came out only a few months after NSMB 2, and most people weren't heavily interested in another bog standard 2D Mario. So the Nintendo faithful were much slower to flock to the Wii U, and the next big game, Pikmin 3 didn't come out until August, so there was little for them to get excited about.

Basically, NSMB, the series that propelled the DS and Wii to massive heights, is what killed the Wii U with two of them coming out so close to each other. 2 should've been delayed, or something more interesting should've been the big hardcore launch title.

Those are completely subjective, Randomness. Really, games control great depending on what the person feels. It either works for them or it doesn't. There's not exactly a middle ground. Works means they can play it. If you can't play it, it doesn't work. The only question is whether they're decent enough, or unusable.

64 I believe had great controls. This is with extensive play. Controls aren't related to level design, which was hardly perfect, I admit.

Galaxy had fairly good controls, but still not perfect. It wasn't as responsive as it good be. Nowhere near bad, of course. As for level design, fairly good too. Some levels could be better, if only due to the linearity going overboard. Namely the Stars that required you to go on a purely linear path and can't explore anywhere else. Not a ton of Stars did though. So it wasn't a problem even so. Moving levels I feel don't work too well in the Mario series, outside of the 2D games, since they don't concentrate on exploring.

Any control problems Galaxy had...and trust me, I noticed problems just as I did with 64 and Sun Shine...they were fixed in Galaxy 2.

Even then though, Galaxy has some of the tightest control in the Mario series.

You say new NSMB should be on the next console? When was it ever not on a different system...Nintendo doesn't do Mario sequels on the same system. Galaxy 2 is the only exception because it was originally was suppose to be just a DLC type of add on and not a full game.

Well, I wasn't speaking of Galaxy 2 since I never played it. XD

Anyway, for controls tightness among those 3, I'd honestly go 64 > Galaxy > Sunshine. Purely from experience and what I found was easiest to work with. Galaxy is no Secret Rings, after all.(I still found Black Knight the easiest of the 3 to work with, though)

I feel exploring is overrated in a platformer. A little bit is fine of course, and possibly even ideal, but 64's worlds, while certainly fun to traverse, weren't anything to write home about as a platformer. Bob-omb Battlefield essentially had no platforming. Jolly Roger Bay was more about swimming and finding stuff than careful navigation. Big Boos' Haunt Haunt was also exploration focused with almost no platforming. Hazy Maze Cave was well, a maze first and foremost.

Some were more platforming focused of course. Whomp's Fortress, Lethal Lava Land, and Tick Tock Clock are good examples. The Bowser levels are pure platforming, and those are both the most exciting and the most linear levels. This is fine overall of course, but exploration is not what Mario does in general.

I will give 64 the nod in tightness of controls over Galaxy, even the DS version. Haven't played Sunshine so I can't comment on that.

Oh, that is all too true. Super Mario 64 had explorational elements, but not every single stage is about that.

That's closer to what the Sonic Adventures sometimes did, instead. Or even Donkey Kong 64. But the Mario series always had a linear feel for its platformers.

You should try Sunshine. It's a little harder to get into, and Mario literally does feel slippery sometimes. The only other time I felt that was in Shadow the Hedgehog at best(since he ran into enemies often, and went too fast). Mario can't easily turn on a dime like he can in the other two mentioned. However, it's also concentrated on FLUDD, so the gameplay has some unique variation that is kind of hard to describe. It requires a highly different approach at times, just due to the fact you have a direct weapon. It's aimed akin to an FPS without crosshairs, and a few stars can be overly difficult too. I don't mind the special stars, which can be a pain, but some of the regular ones are just plain annoying. There's one where you have to clean a sea snake's teeth. It can be very difficult to do because the ability to aim is not topnotch. It does not help you're using a weapon that does angle-based sprays.

This is sometimes why Sunshine it's as favored. It doesn't feel as polished gameplay-wise as it could be. Ironically the graphics are shiny and look like somebody polished them(even more so in Galaxy).

Anyway, I need to eventually start Galaxy 2. And 3D Land. Since the Wii, I'm losing a bit of interest in the Mario platformers. It may be because I just want something as a spiritual successor to Super Mario 64 without the weird controls or weapons. I never looked much at 3D World. How is it gameplay-wise? Do you play on a 3D plane or a 2D one? It's obvious what the graphics are to me from the name alone, and the fact I saw pictures and a bit of gameplay.

At this point I'm waiting for the inevitable Sunshine remake/HD port. It'll come eventually and I'm sure it will be a superior experience, like Wind Waker HD. Or it'll come out on the Gamecube VC first, but I'm not yet convinced that's coming this decade.

3D Land and World are true 3D platformers. They have essentially no exploration elements to their name, so if you want that you'll be disappointed. In a sense 3D World is the tightest of the 3D games, offering nothing but pure platforming joy. Galaxy may have been linear compared to 64, but here it's even more obvious. Levels are very creative and offer something new almost every level in the later parts of the game. The different characters and their traits allows you to spice things up with some diversity. Picture a 2D Mario and make it a 3D platformer. That's what those two games are like. Even right down to Mario and co's movesets, which is very limited even compared to Galaxy.

I don't know whether I like 64 or 3D World more actually, though if I had to choose I'd probably go with 64. 2D Mario in 3D is an interesting concept, and it's certainly well done, but it doesn't leave a sense of wonder like the others did. And Mario isn't quite as fun to control as in earlier games. Especially on the world map, where you can only run and barely jump. That irked me for some reason.

Ah, sweet. I'll have to pick up 3D World later, then. I'll find it eventually, but the ones I tend to play more of are higher priority. Often Sonic or Mario Party/Kart, etc.

Anyway, should be fun~ I'm going to get the New 3DS XL due to the Control Pad being further apart, which was more comfortable for me than the regular 3DS.

3DWorld has about as much exploration as you can get from the 3 collectables per level thing they're going with.

The further you go in 64, the more the platforming elements start to pick up because all of the Zelda inspired puzzle based elements start to decrease.

Here's a Neogaf debate on Galaxy vs the 3D series if you're interested. Galaxy is easily the favored one, but there are people who take 3D World as their favorite 3D Mario. And of course 64 and Sunshine have their respective fans.