Mario 128 on Revolution...

[1CCOSA]

Zelda is not all about the combat, and even then, the lock on does not take all the challenge out of fighting.

However, Mario is all about precise jumping. That' the entire reason Mario exists.

Who is talking about challenge? We're talking about direct control of the character not getting out of hand which is what lock-on in Zelda accomplishes.

Your point that the lock on in Zelda doesn't diminish the challenge in fighting just goes to show that a lock-on mechanic in a Mario game would not defeat the challenge of shell chaining. ie: after you lock on, you would still have to aim the analog stick smoothly to keep your jump-chain going. Just supplementary like Zelda. Or 2D hotspots like I said. Or they could just make a fully 2D on-rails game again but that aint gonna happen.

I guess that's why he's not a game designer.

If you have what you think is a better idea then post away.

[sethsez]

Who is talking about challenge? We're talking about direct control of the character not getting out of hand which is what lock-on in Zelda accomplishes. Your point that the lock on in Zelda doesn't diminish the challenge in fighting just goes to show a lock on mechanic in a Mario game would not defeat the challenge of shell chaining. ie: after you lock on, you would still have to aim the analog stick smoothly to keep your jump-chain going.

Except this isn't what Mario is about, which is why Nintendo wisely decided to focus on platforming above all else with Mario 64, rather than watering it down to accommodate frivolous things like shell chaining and whatnot. You're focusing on the details at the expence of the game's core.

[1CCOSA]

Except this isn't what Mario is about, which is why Nintendo wisely decided to focus on platforming above all else with Mario 64, rather than watering it down to accommodate frivolous things like shell chaining and whatnot. You're focusing on the details at the expence of the game's core.

Enemy chaining and stomping in general are major parts of the old school Mario games. They are an essential part IMHO of a cohesive whole. Heck, even in Mario 64 you can stomp 2-3 goombas in a row if you time your jump well enough, it's not hard at all if they're just a bit close together. Then again maybe I just defeated my lock on idea right there, if i can stomp two-three goombas in Mario 64 with no need for lock on then they should put enemy chaining in the next game, extra mechanic or not.

Edit: Forgot, you can "chain"-stomp the little, orange clown-goomba guys in Sunshine.

[avatar]

I agree. They should make separate games with 3D and 2D gameplay. And to hell with Mario games. Mascots are for children. Clinging to the old characters is like clinging to the old games and it's stifling Nintendo's creativity. Just make games. Taking out Mario and all his baggage would help.

How would that help? You make a new character and that does what? People wouldn't care and it wouldn't help nintendo. Just leave platformers to mario and I'm okay with that.

[1CCOSA]

How would that help? You make a new character and that does what? People wouldn't care and it wouldn't help nintendo. Just leave platformers to mario and I'm okay with that.

Yeah Mikey, your "replace Mario" campaign is getting as old as he is.

[Drewbacca]

If you have what you think is a better idea then post away.

My idea of not taking your idea already is.

Mario would be worse off with a lock-on feature. It's like having an auto-target in every PC shooter. It ruins the challenge and point of aiming altogether.

[1CCOSA]

My idea of not taking your idea already is.

Nice cop out.

The hot point idea itself is a neat thought IMHO, would allow for 2D platforms in a fully explorable 3D world.

[Drewbacca]

It's not a cop out. Knowing what not to do is just as important as knowing what to do. If someone brought up your point in Nintendo Miyamoto or whoever would tell them it's a bad idea. Nobody wants to waste time on an idea that has no real value.

So my idea was better than your idea.

[1CCOSA]

It's not a cop out. Knowing what not to do is just as important as knowing what to do. If someone brought up your point in Nintendo Miyamoto or whoever would tell them it's a bad idea. Nobody wants to waste time on an idea that has no real value.

Depends on the situation. No, Miyamoto probably wouldn't accept my ideas but only probably because he no longer seems to want the games to be all that comparable to the 8 and 16-bit series. My ideas of hotspot platforms and chaining lock on are at least from my own personal imagination. Whether or not they have any "value" is purely your opinion based on what you feel isn't a good idea for a speculative game mechanic.

People here are saying "Lock on is too much like Zelda or FPS" yet the same people still seem to want a fully 3D game with tightly aimed enemy killing like the old games. The old games were in a fixed environment, the new games are 3D, so there has to be some sort of midddle ground introduced to balance it out is all I am saying.

Maybe just writing a physics engine so that say, when Mario jumps in the air over an enemy, the game's programming allows the analog to have a tighter, more fixed control arc while he is stomping a goomba, koopa, ect. In short, making the game smarter so it controls better.

So my idea was better than your idea.

What idea? You presented an opinion on why you disagree, it's not an idea. It's just using your own logic to disagree. I can see your logic when stepping into your shoes though, it was a well written reply.

[Drewbacca]

Depends on the situation. No, Miyamoto probably wouldn't accept my ideas but only probably because he no longer seems to want the games to be all that comparable to the 8 and 16-bit series. My ideas of hotspot platforms and chaining lock on are at least from my own personal imagination. Whether or not they have any "value" is purely your opinion based on what you feel isn't a good idea for a speculative game mechanic.

He wouldn't accept your ideas because they're not good. I think it's fair to say that any and everything I say is my opinion. I'm not speaking for my slaves here.

What idea? You presented an opinion on why you disagree, it's not an idea. It's just using your own logic to disagree. I can see your logic when stepping into your shoes though, it was a well written reply.

My idea is not to use your idea. This is a better idea.