27 replies to this topic

[Auzzie Wingman]

Super Mario Galaxy is perhaps, in terms of game play, not the greatest, but I reckon out of any Mario game so far, it had this undeniable draw that made the player feel like they could explore space without having to be in deep science fiction. That's what made it so great atmospherically.

 

The direction of Mario feels limited to be honest. They have to keep themes G Rated which means everything is a careful treading ground.

 

I think they could make a new Mario RPG like Seven Stars (no paper, no Mario and Luigi). They can use the effects they've crafted from 3D World to create a rather good looking Mario game. Of course, a good RPG needs good plot to bother with.

 

I just think the next Mario needs to not feel so segmented. You look at NSMBU and SM3DW, and you've got segmented worlds (World 1-1 stuff). Larger areas to explore with on the fly transitioning between places would be nice.

 

Back to topic: Handhelds are easier to hide the fact you are playing Trapped in a Room with a Girl 3D and Monster Monpiece.

Edited by Auzzie Wingman, 29 November 2013 - 03:49 AM.

[3Dude]

But very much overrated.
 
Which is now why Nintendo seems to be stuck thinking that somehow Mario platformers can only fit into three categories: New Super Mario Bros., Super Mario 3D ..., and Super Mario Galaxy.
 
It's very sad that Nintendo thinks that those who aren't satisfied with Super Mario 3D World are wanting Galaxy 3 instead. No, the next Mario platformer needs to have an original theme, at the very least! No more sequels! Because Mario sequels just feel like rehashes most of the time (at least, recent Mario sequels do).

This is all 100% your own projection. Nintendo has never said, nor demonstrated any of the things you are accusing them of. They HAVE stated that the reason they made galaxy 2 was because they had an entire games worth of content left on the cutting room floor they couldnt get into the first galaxy, and they HAVE said they WONT be doing a galaxy 3, as they got everything they wanted in galaxy 2, and have no good reason, or material to make a 3rd.

[Nollog]

they HAVE said they WONT be doing a galaxy 3, as they got everything they wanted in galaxy 2, and have no good reason, or material to make a 3rd.

http://gamerant.com/...igeru-miyamoto/

I'd like a super mario sunshine with more focus on platforming large open world areas than shooting water and very simple platform jumping.

[Envy]

This is all 100% your own projection. Nintendo has never said, nor demonstrated any of the things you are accusing them of. They HAVE stated that the reason they made galaxy 2 was because they had an entire games worth of content left on the cutting room floor they couldnt get into the first galaxy, and they HAVE said they WONT be doing a galaxy 3, as they got everything they wanted in galaxy 2, and have no good reason, or material to make a 3rd.

Not necessarily 100%. But do notice I did use the word "seems", so as to avoid acting like I was really speaking for Nintendo.

 

However, what I am saying is based on what Nintendo representatives have said. They really do have the notion in their heads that those who didn't want Super Mario 3D World wanted Super Mario Galaxy 3 instead.

[grahamf]

I loved the physics engine in Mario Galaxy. I'd quite often go to the beach planet and orbit around it's balloon moon.

[3Dude]

Nollog, on 29 Nov 2013 - 10:07 AM, said:
http://gamerant.com/...igeru-miyamoto/

I'd like a super mario sunshine with more focus on platforming large open world areas than shooting water and very simple platform jumping.

Hooray for gamz girnaliz taking snippets out of context and completely changing their meaning.

Yes, saying mario galaxy 3 isnt completely impossible, is the exact same thing as saying mario galaxy 3 is frothing at the bit to be made.

http://www.gamesrada...-future/?page=4

Its not.

GR: Galaxy 2 began development with ideas that couldn’t fit in Galaxy 1. After finishing the second game, were you left with any ideas that could appear in a possible third game?

KH: When we worked on Galaxy 1 we came up with a mountain of ideas. Of course, the ideas that made it in to the final product were the ones at the very top. Those ideas that were most compelling or could be implemented most easily and effectively. The other ideas were a little bit rougher. Ideas we weren’t positive that’d be as effective, or might have been much more difficult to include.

When you think about trying to make a game like Galaxy 2 from that large group of ideas that we had already decided were on the rough side, that becomes a very difficult project. The only way that we got through the development of Mario Galaxy 2 was by coming up with entirely new ideas. I think of that as a very challenging project when I look back on it.

From that perspective, to say we’d make another game using the ideas left over from Galaxy 2, it’s very difficult for me to imagine. I feel like we really did research the field very well for possible ideas and we used everything that was reasonably easy to implement.


Koichi Hayashida- Director of Mario Galaxy 2.

If you actually, READ the iwata asks that article was raping, http://iwataasks.nin...io-3d-world/0/0 you would find out the part taken out of context was the final part, of a 7 part subject.

The first several parts, talk about how the 3d land/world series is a departure from the 64/sunshine/galaxy style 3d marios, as its the 2d style mario game mechanics brought into 3d properly for the first time.

The entirety of the subject revolves around how 3d mrio aka 64/sunshine/galaxy is too intimidating for the large majority of players. The entire interview is praising the new 2d mario in 3d mechanics of the land/world series, and damning the 64/sunshine/galaxy style to a niche.

Thats why miyamoto says, Just so there is no misunderstanding, I should point out that this doesn’t mean we’ll never make another Super Mario Galaxy game', as they basically spent the past 6 chapters talking about a mountain of reasons why they shouldnt be making anymore 64 style 3d marios, how they had solved the 'missing link' between 3d mario and 2d mario miyamoto had been dealing with since the necessary departure in play style he had to devise to make mario 64 work:

http://iwataasks.nin...rio-3d-land/0/1

COme to think of it, this reminds me.... Yeah, Im pretty sure I remember some little terd burglar crapping his pants and disembowling himself, making psychotic frothing episodes, HOWLING over how this wasnt a thing, how mario 64 was EXACTLY the same as 2d mario in 3d. Yeah, suck it terd burglar, whoever you are, straight from the 'mouth of god', everything I brought up

ANYWAYS...

By the time you get to chapter 7, this interview introduced in chapter 6 is the reference point for the discussion about galaxy.

They arent just talking about galaxy, when they talk about galaxy in the last chapter of the seven page discourse, they are talking about the entirety of traditional 3d mario, as opposed to the new style of the properly translated 2d mario into 3d that is the world/land series. A sequel to galaxy is not 'mario galaxy 3'.

The context makes it extremely obvious.

'That's right. When we first started making Super Mario 3D World, Miyamoto-san asked me if this was going to be more like Super Mario Galaxy or more like Super Mario 3D Land.'

It is very obvious with this statement galaxy is being used to reference its series its the latest entry in, not its specific 'galaxy' franchise. Miyamoto wasnt asking if they were going to make the game take place with a space theme, but if the game was going to have the core mechanics of the 3d land series, 2d mario translated properly into 3d, or the mario 64/sunshine/galaxy series, a 3d adventure style game.

This isnt talking about Mario galaxy 3, its talking about another entry in the traditional 3d mario series started by mario 64, with the last entry being mario galaxy 2.

ANd on that front, he is specifically talking to fans of the mario 64 series as a whole, be it galaxy or sunshine. As they are very very different experiences to 2d mario, or the 3dland/world style, as described in chapter 1, they are 'polar opposites'.

And to those fans they say... 'There is a very slight chance we arent forever done with the 64 style 3d mario.'

[Envy]

It is very obvious with this statement galaxy is being used to reference its series its the latest entry in, not its specific 'galaxy' franchise. Miyamoto wasnt asking if they were going to make the game take place with a space theme, but if the game was going to have the core mechanics of the 3d land series, 2d mario translated properly into 3d, or the mario 64/sunshine/galaxy series, a 3d adventure style game.

This isnt talking about Mario galaxy 3, its talking about another entry in the traditional 3d mario series started by mario 64, with the last entry being mario galaxy 2.

ANd on that front, he is specifically talking to fans of the mario 64 series as a whole, be it galaxy or sunshine. As they are very very different experiences to 2d mario, or the 3dland/world style, as described in chapter 1, they are 'polar opposites'.

And to those fans they say... 'There is a very slight chance we arent forever done with the 64 style 3d mario.'

 

I don't know, because the Galaxy series isn't actually the "polar opposite" of Super Mario 3D Land/World. The level designs of Super Mario Galaxy 1 & 2 were much more linear than that of 64/Sunshine. I'd sooner pair Galaxy 1 & 2 with Super Mario 3D Land and World than I would with 64 and Sunshine.

[3Dude]

I don't know, because the Galaxy series isn't actually the "polar opposite" of Super Mario 3D Land/World. The level designs of Super Mario Galaxy 1 & 2 were much more linear than that of 64/Sunshine. I'd sooner pair Galaxy 1 & 2 with Super Mario 3D Land and World than I would with 64 and Sunshine.

Well, shiguru miyamoto says its the polar opposite, satoru iwata says its the polar opposite, Koichi Hayashida, the director of both galaxy and 3dland/world says they are the polar opposites.

Im inclined to agree with them, over someone who not only completely misses the point, (probably because they never bothered to read thematerial) but grabs on to an unrelated irrelevant one instead, trying to make it the new focus, on top of that point being factually flawed, and erroneous.