Print

Author Topic: Next 3-D Mario Game?  (Read 23407 times)

silverstarman

  • Chock full of misinformation
« Reply #105 on: December 11, 2007, 04:03:38 PM »
PaperLuigi go

Good for him, because you've been talking like an idiot.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2007, 04:49:38 PM by Suffix »

CrossEyed7

  • i can make this whatever i want; you're not my dad
« Reply #106 on: December 11, 2007, 04:27:14 PM »
Getting back to the topic again, I'm very hesitant about having SM64DS-style unlockable characters. At least 70% of the fun of SM64 came from the complete freedom it offered, and for me, SM64DS completely took that away by splitting up abilities among 4 characters that have to be switched between. Even when all the levels have hats, you still can't just go around as Yoshi the whole time - what if you want to do a wall kick in the castle? Then you have to walk over to the Secret Slide room, walk through the character door, and walk back to where you were. No spontaneity.

If it was like Galaxy, where the optional unlockable character gives a different playing experience but can still do everything, I'd be all for that. Although I might want a more different playing experience if I had to get 120 stars again for each character.
"Oh man, I wish being a part of a Mario fan community was the most embarrassing thing about my life." - Super-Jesse

MEGAߥTE

  • In flames
« Reply #107 on: December 11, 2007, 04:35:01 PM »
Actually, that's a good point.  Galaxy still had the same problem though, where you had several levels designed around specific power-ups.

« Reply #108 on: December 11, 2007, 04:46:03 PM »
Getting back to the topic again, I'm very hesitant about having SM64DS-style unlockable characters. At least 70% of the fun of SM64 came from the complete freedom it offered, and for me, SM64DS completely took that away by splitting up abilities among 4 characters that have to be switched between. Even when all the levels have hats, you still can't just go around as Yoshi the whole time - what if you want to do a wall kick in the castle? Then you have to walk over to the Secret Slide room, walk through the character door, and walk back to where you were. No spontaneity.

If it was like Galaxy, where the optional unlockable character gives a different playing experience but can still do everything, I'd be all for that. Although I might want a more different playing experience if I had to get 120 stars again for each character.
Then what's the point of unlockable characters?
KOOLO LIMPA!!!

MEGAߥTE

  • In flames
« Reply #109 on: December 11, 2007, 04:53:04 PM »
The point is to have characters who have minor differences-- different enough to make strategy slightly different, yet similar enough that you don't need a special character's abilities to get through the game (though they might make it easier).
See: Super Mario Bros. 2 JPN and USA, Super Mario Galaxy

« Reply #110 on: December 11, 2007, 04:57:00 PM »
I like the idea. I guess everyone should have their own physical traits, but the same moves.

I'd like to see the return of Luigi and (maybe) Wario, but I think there shouldn't be a required character for some missions.
KOOLO LIMPA!!!

ShadowBrain

  • Ridiculously relevant
« Reply #111 on: December 11, 2007, 06:54:44 PM »
Graphics come before gameplay? WTD. Okay then. Considering your logic, I'd play one of those boring PS3 racer games, and beacause it has good graphics, yet crappy game play, it's a succesful game. NO. If graphics are so importatnt, why not watch a movie. Go watch Transformers. If the graphics are good, but the gameplay is boring/unoriginal/erratic, then graphics are not more important. Inless the entire screen is blurry, and unintelligilble, then, and only then, are graphics more important. Besides, the Wii's graphics are GOOD ENOUGH. Half of the stuff that PS3 fans boast about are not even noticable. And who cares if it plays DVDs? Why, are they so cheap, they don't even have a DVD player? They wasted all thier money on a PS3?
Totally. Frankly, the PS3 and Wii have just about the same amount of games worth buying, but I figure I'd rather spend $250 on crud than $500 on better-looking crud.
"Mario is your oyster." ~The Chef

« Reply #112 on: December 11, 2007, 06:57:28 PM »
Actually, looking at the context of the rest of Presidente's sentence, his "graphics before gameplay" looks like a typo, and that he mixed his words up.
"Be yourself. Everyone else is taken."

BP

  • Beside Pacific
« Reply #113 on: December 11, 2007, 07:59:35 PM »
Actually, that's a good point.  Galaxy still had the same problem though, where you had several levels designed around specific power-ups.
Ah, yes... we all miss the days when power-ups were there for the sole purpose of powering you up, don't we?

Calm it down, Nintendoobsessed. Presidente is right about the game's impression being more important for the buying process. That's why Nintendo lost last round. The Wii is winning this round because the gameplay is very apparent and appealing even before you play it. Last round, all the games were controlled the same way, so graphics and price were the big factors for what system one would buy.

Of course, this applies more to confused moms than kids, teenagers or college students who know what they're buying--to those who know more than the outside, graphics aren't (or at least shouldn't be) the deciding factor. Even then you have Xbox Live and things like that to put the GameCube behind... I'm not saying the GC is any better or worse than the PS2 or Xbox, having not played enough of the latter two to judge them.
All your dreeeeeeams begiiin to shatterrrrrr~
It's YOUR problem!

« Reply #114 on: December 12, 2007, 10:47:51 AM »
I think graphics matter, but I have an issue with the idea that graphic quality is in how technologically advanced a game is. SMW2 has great graphics and is beautiful today...same with Nights on the Saturn and a million other games that used great artwork and creativity as opposed to an advanced polygon rate or the like. Those are tools...you use them to make games look good, but it doesn't look good just BECAUSE. That's why so many PS1 games look ugly now, there wasn't any sense of artistic vision and the frame rates are horrible.

Chupperson Weird

  • Not interested.
« Reply #115 on: December 12, 2007, 11:00:03 AM »
I agree; style is infinitely more important than that nebulous thing called "graphics".
That was a joke.

ShadowBrain

  • Ridiculously relevant
« Reply #116 on: December 12, 2007, 06:31:53 PM »
Same here. In some ways, Wind Waker's graphics are better than TP's!
"Mario is your oyster." ~The Chef

Shyguy92

  • Ridicules
« Reply #117 on: December 15, 2007, 08:46:22 PM »
Ok, I got an idea. Online co-op. Then there's no (overly-despised) split screen. This game will be for people who hate split screen*****. Make some kind of mode where the player's race to the finish/star, or something. I dunno.


*****(Chupperson Wierd, other's. I still don't see what's wrong with it.)*****
« Last Edit: December 16, 2007, 02:55:59 PM by Shyguy92 »
"it's always the present"

ShadowBrain

  • Ridiculously relevant
« Reply #118 on: December 15, 2007, 11:34:48 PM »
^ ...You've lost me there.
"Mario is your oyster." ~The Chef

Chupperson Weird

  • Not interested.
« Reply #119 on: December 16, 2007, 02:29:22 AM »
Well I stated my reasons for hating splitscreen and what's wrong with it.
That was a joke.

Print