You absolutly hate Nintendo, don't you?
Printable View
You absolutly hate Nintendo, don't you?
Good question... I'm actually really excited about Rayman 3 myself, I'd say we'll just have to wait and see though. I kind of doubt that any platformer due out anytime soon is going to be able to match up to Mario Sunshine. Personally I'm a big fan of the 3d platformer genre, although I will admit that as of yet it hasn't achieved the perfection of the 2d platformer genre.Quote:
Originally posted by Frogacuda
bbobb: Aside from the fact that I find the 3D platformer genre so oft defined by Mario 64 to be a fundamentally weak genre, will we all still care about Mario Sunshine when Tork or Blinx or Rayman 3 come out?
I also anxiously await Rayman 3, as Rayman is the best series developed outside of Japan in any non-sports genre.
I didn't like what I played of Rayman 3 at E3. The controls were poorly setup and some guy from Ubi Soft couldn't speak english and tried explaining the controls to me in french.
Not at all. I love alot of their games, especially their older ones. They aren't my favorite developer, but they're probably about 4 or 5. I like them alot, but I'm not crazy about Mario 64 or OoT, or any of the blockbuster sequels on N64 that just seemed to fall short. I do like nintendo, which is why I'm complaining that they ditched a wonderful series that I loved in favor of Mario 64. If I didn't like them to begin with I wouldn't care.Quote:
Originally posted by Jimmy Carter
You absolutly hate Nintendo, don't you?
And it doesn't bother me that people like or are excited by Sunshine. I just wonder why I'm the only one that feels like the new games don't live up to the old. Someone else has gotta be able to see this.
I can understand where you are coming from Frogacuda. While I thoroughly enjoyed Mario 64 and am currently enjoying Sunshine, I thought several of Nintendo's recent efforts have fallen short of their legacy. For instance, Zelda's OoT and MM are not up to the level of quality of LttP. F-Zero X and Star Fox 64 are also not as good as their SNES breathren. Further troubling me is Nintendo's willingness to let Rare develop some of their key titles, like Donkey Kong 64 and Star Fox Adventures. Rare is no EAD, and I don't think anyone would argue that.
Well Donkey Kong 64 is based off of Rare's 16-bit incarnations so I don't see the problem there. As long as Nintendo is making Donkey Kong Plus on GBA I'm a happy camper. I'm not too happy about letting flagship make Zelda games either... I hope Nintendo takes this opportunity to build some new franchises at least.
No, Mario 64 and TOoT are not 2D games, they are 3D *representations* of the original 8 and 16-bit incarnations. If you don't think the 3D Mario and Zelda games aren't representative of how they should be in 3D, what are some ways YOU would make them better in 3D? Give some examples. I think Mario 64 DOES feel like SMB in 3D. Jumping on Goombas in Mario 64 is just as tight as it is in the originals (except for chain jumping).
Besides, this is the first Mario game to have all the core elements of Super Mario World (riding Yoshi) outside of being 2D. You should be glad you can do cool stuff like ride on Yoshi in the action levels and be relieved that Miyamoto didn't do something lame like make Yoshi a cameo or bonus character again (which I was frothing at the mouth in anger over months ago, predicting that's what he would do, glad he proved me wrong).
But don't get me wrong, it boils my blood just as much as you that they haven't made a 2D console Mario game in years. I can't remember the source, but in an interview months ago, Miyamoto was asked if they would make any 2D GC games, and Miyamoto replied "Well, I guess you could say Luigi's Mansion is a 2D game." :rolleyes: Riggghhht.
But I think Mario 64, Sunshine and TOoT are very well crafted, fun 3D games.
They really aren't anything like the old games. You have a lifebar, enemies are retarded and there's no reason to kill them since you can just go around them and there are hardly any to begin with, and even less intimidating because you have a lifebar and a steady supply of refills. Lots of wide open spaces (Even barring the 2D plane mario levels were very linear). Levels are based primarily on exploartion and collection.Quote:
Originally posted by Kosh_H
No, Mario and TOoT are not 2D games, they are 3D *representaions* of the original 8 and 16-bit incarnations. If you don't think the 3D Mario and Zelda games aren't representative of how they should be in 3D, what are some ways YOU would make them better in 3D? Give some examples. I think Mario 64 DOES feel like SMB in 3D. Jumping on Goombas in Mario 64 is just as tight as it is in the originals (except for chain jumping).
I would have kept the action focused, kept the super/regular mario mechanism, kept the game focused on action and level design, cut back on the filler crap, etc. If you really think that 64 is a continuation of the gameplay of the original's then I don't think you really "got" the original games to begin with.
It's still FUN to kill them.Quote:
Originally posted by Frogacuda They really aren't anything like the old games. You have a lifebar, enemies are retarded and there's no reason to kill them...
DK 64 and JFG are games where the collection is so rediculous that I can't bring myself to play them (the most I played of DK 64 was an in store demo). The exploration in Mario 64 is simple and never over the top.Quote:
Levels are based primarily on exploartion and collection.
I would add tougher enemies and more of them but that's about it. I'd also like to see levels that mimic the 2D levels more but Sunshine's level design is much better and vaster than Mario 64's.Quote:
I would have kept the action focused, kept the super/regular mario mechanism, kept the game focused on action and level design, cut back on the filler crap, etc.
Alright, this is where I draw the line. Don't put words in my mouth and cut the "true fan" BS. You're starting to get annoying. Just because I like Mario 64 and Sunshine somehow means I don't appreciate the 2D games. :rolleyes: Yes, I like the 2D games better but Mario 64 isn't SUPPOSED to directly ape the original. Miyamoto's vision of Mario was always a character exploring a VAST world, which was his intention back in the orginal games, so when he finally got to use a 3D engine, he showed what he meant by that. Hey, I'd rather he made the levels more "2D'ish" or make an all new 2D game but Miyamoto has said in interviews that when he was a kid he would wander and explore outdoors and imagine what it would be like if there were "hidden treasure boxes in the sky above you" so it should come as no surprise that Mario 64 turned out the way it did, wandering in big fields looking for hidden stars, ect. As others said, when you make a 3D game, things change. If you want a 2D game with 3D graphics then play Klonoa. I think a balance could be struck somehow between a Klonoa engine and Mario 64, but that's not the way Miyamoto wants it so I'll just enjoy Sunshine for what it is, a game where you're supposed to explore giant areas which is fine by me as long as it doesn't feel like DK 64 or Jet Force Gemini...which it doesn't.Quote:
If you really think that 64 is a continuation of the gameplay of the original's then I don't think you really "got" the original games to begin with.