Why each (main) Mario game is both the best & worst of the series

A lot of that comes with You Keep Using That Word.

My point exactly.

Played part of Mario 2 and 3 and all of Lost Levels yesterday. I might put some observations here later.

Without looking: Super Mario Bros 2 (Lost Levels)

• Why it's the best: It's Nintendo Hard
• Why it's the worst: It's Nintendo Hard

Amirite?

edited 18th Jan '12 2:18:17 PM by JAF1970

More or less. For the latter, that and it really didn't innovate, as opposed to SMB2.

Its reason for Lost Levels being the best was Nintendo Hard, its reason for Lost Levels being the worst was this:

I think Lost Levels does something great and unusual; we've seen it in ROM-hacks (Super Mario Kart: Pro Edition is my pet example) but not often skillfully done. Lost Levels takes the Super Mario Bros engine and goes in deep. It doesn't push the engine to its limits the way Kaizo does, but it makes you look at the class of challenges the game can include very differently. I'll write more when I can articulate better.

But yeah, I played Mario 3 first last night, finishing it for a friend, then beat all of Lost Levels (no warps) and then beat Mario 2 (start to finish, but with warps). It was 4 in the morning when I was done. I tried to play Mario 2 fast like Lost Levels so I could get to bed but I failed; it's a game that wants you to slow down, pick up every enemy, observe enemy patterns before you go charging....and you can't possibly lose if you play patiently but I couldn't do it until I had gotten like two game overs.

Interesting article...

...

...

...

I still think Galaxy is the best, though.

I couldn't find the ones for Zelda and Final Fantasy.

Here's the one for Zelda:

[1]

Here's the one for FF:

[2]

The Majora's Mask developers were "bizarre" to write another adventure with a reused engine? I'm sorry, isn't that the history of every sequel? And Ocarina of Time is the one that's supposed to hearken to tradition?

This statement only even kinda makes sense in the context of the full Zelda series, where all the recent games are based on Ocarina and Majora's time mechanic stands out. But you can't congratulate the Zelda team for making a game that's only unique because it wasn't imitated.

edited 23rd Jan '12 10:23:59 PM by Longfellow

It think much of what Majora's Mask did doesn't seem that weird when you think about it from the developer's point of view. It's set in an alternate universe so that they could reuse the character models without having to use the same characters; the repeating cycle, emphasis on side quests, and small, dense world map also seem like a way to cut down the amount of work. The three-day-cycle, while creative and interesting, wasn't completely out of nowhere either since Ocarina of Time involved quite a bit of time travel (and introduced the concept of masks, although with a much more minor role) as well.

I'm not saying they were lazy or anything, and they still made a good game with Majora's Mask, but for the most part I don't think it is the way it is because they were deliberately trying to do something incredibly different.

edited 24th Jan '12 10:09:44 AM by Beorc