Topic: 2D Platformers: Now or 20 Years Ago?

[NWR_insanolord]

The early to mid '90s are often remembered as the glory days of 2D platformers. From first party titles like Mario, Sonic and Kirby, to a variety of third party efforts, often carrying movie or TV licenses, that era was home to a ton of great platformers.


After that, though, the genre seemed to disappear, with developers focusing on the 3D abilities of newer consoles. This trend would continue until the middle of the last decade. Suddenly, indie developers began pumping out great new 2D platformers, and even Nintendo themselves began to revisit the genre, first with the New Super Mario Bros. games and then continuing into newer Kirby and Donkey Kong Country games.


So which of these eras would you say is best? How do today's indie developers and Nintendo's 2D resurgence compare to the original 2D platformer boom?

[Adrock]

It's difficult to compare. Besides attempting to ignore rose colored glasses, I admit my sensibilities are different now. They've evolved or changed entirely. Additionally, without any proper documentation of my feelings when playing those old games, I'm strictly going by memory. I wonder how many people remember 20 year old events, the sights and sounds of it all, accurately.

For me, the fairest assessment of older titles is whether they still hold up. Most Mario platformers do. Yoshi's Island doesn't. Not that it's a bad game, but I remember borrowing it from my neighbor and beating it. Maybe 10 to 12 years later, I went on a retro gaming binge and tried to find a copy. When I finally ended up playing the game again through the 3DS Ambassador Program, I didn't really know what I saw in the game. The graphics were still charming, but the gameplay didn't grab me.

Donkey Kong Country didn't hold up well. At all. Every time I've played the game years removed from its original release, it felt generic, almost boring. I feel like I was more enamored by the graphics which were Holy-****-Snacks in 1994, but they're not amazing anymore. They don't even have that old school charm. Pixel sprite graphics hold up better than the rendered sprites do in a retro-chic kind of way. With so many gaming years under my belt, I just can't be taken in by graphics anymore. I still appreciate them, but I need more to justify the time spent with a game. Donkey Kong Country Returns mops the floor with Donkey Kong Country. It's far more inventive and polished. The graphics are nice albeit not groundbreaking, but I feel like they'll hold up better because Retro Studio's art design is so far ahead of Rare's.

I feel as if the entire New Super Mario Bros. series will follow Yoshi's Island's lead: a game I enjoyed at the time of release and while they may never be bad games per se, they lack the timelessness of the original Bros. series and World.

I think modern 2D platformers have the potential to be better so long as developers use the past to make their games better. That's what makes something like Donkey Kong Country Returns great and other games merely great at the time. I know this isn't exclusively about Nintendo's 2D platformers, but they're really the only ones I've been exposed to. Besides a Game Gear I rarely used, I only had Nintendo hardware until the PS One in 2000 so I played very few non-Nintendo 2D platformers for an extended period of time.

My hope for future first-party non-Retro Studios Nintendo platformers is that they learn from the past and apply it to new games. The New Super Mario Bros. games lack charm and innovation. They feel like they're made using a stage editor. Such games can still be fun even if they feel derivative. What made certain old games so memorable and legendary? That's how to make a game better than the old ones. It's not about copying the successes of those games or pulling on the strings of nostalgia. It's about getting in that mindset and coming up with inventive gameplay mechanics. Super Mario 3D Land isn't a 2D platformer (though it has the same feel of one), but it's memorable for the same reasons why the New Super Mario Bros. series will not be. It effectively uses past games to create a fun experience.

[NWR_insanolord]

I disagree with your blanket judgment of the New Super Mario Bros. series. I think there's a lot more variation among those games than most people give them credit. I would agree with your argument in regard to the original DS NSMB game, but I think the series has seen a lot of improvement, to the point that I'd argue New Super Mario Bros. U is on the same level as Mario 3 and Mario World in terms of creativity and quality.

I will agree with you that it's hard to do this comparison fairly. We're looking at things through different lenses, and that can cloud our judgments. The newer games also have the benefit of being able to learn from those older titles, and have fewer technical limitations to deal with. Still, I don't think the genre has changed enough to invalidate these comparisons.

I personally think the new era is easily better than the previous "golden age." Maybe that's a reflection of my never having owned a Super Nintendo and not having an NES until much later, but to me I think there are a lot of great platformers in recent years that easily surpass those old games. Maybe that's because I played those games 10-15 years later, without context or nostalgia. On the other hand, maybe that puts me in the best position to make this comparison, looking at both with fresh eyes around the same time.

I'd say NSMBU is as good as any 2D Mario game. I'd say Donkey Kong Country Returns is far better than any of its SNES predecessors. Good Feel's entries in the Wario Land and Kirby series are my favorites in those franchises. And that's not to mention the mountains of great indie content in this area, with games like Super Meat Boy and Cloudberry Kingdom offering great experiences on download platforms. Not only do I think the new era is the better one, I really don't think it's close.

[Khushrenada]

Well, looks like you were able to answer your own question. This thread's mission is now complete.

[NWR_insanolord]

It wasn't a question that has an answer, I was trying to spur a discussion. I expressed my opinion, and I hope others will as well. Something tells me my stance isn't going to be that popular.

[Khushrenada]

Ha ha. I know what the real purpose of this thread is. I'm just thought the way your worded your second post made it sound so definitive and I just wanted to comment on it. Khushrenada out.

[Adrock]

I disagree on the New Super Mario Bros. series, but it's all good. For me, it peaked on the Wii. Overall, it lacks just about everything that made the old ones classics. The art style lacks distinction (even the original on DS seemed vanilla) and I cannot for the life of me remember any of the music. The new powerups don't affect the gameplay nearly as much as the old ones like the leaf and feather did. I don't feel the same urge to play them again like I do with the older games. Maybe in a few years just to revisit the game (I replayed most of the DS one, I think, last year), but I don't feel they're nearly as memorable. I hope Nintendo abandons the series. Four games is more than enough.

I couldn't bring myself to beat Wario Land: Shake It! The most memorable thing about the game was its Youtube trailer where the entire screen collapsed. Still, I couldn't bring myself to replay Wario Land II and I loved that game when it first came out. I didn't buy the third or fourth entry until years later and I just didn't feel compelled to play through them. I presume that it's simply fallout from my evolving gaming habits.

[Luigi Dude]

I'd say NSMBU is as good as any 2D Mario game. I'd say Donkey Kong Country Returns is far better than any of its SNES predecessors. Good Feel's entries in the Wario Land and Kirby series are my favorites in those franchises. And that's not to mention the mountains of great indie content in this area, with games like Super Meat Boy and Cloudberry Kingdom offering great experiences on download platforms. Not only do I think the new era is the better one, I really don't think it's close.

For Nintendo they took the best of what worked back in the 16-bit era, and improved upon it with more powerful hardware.  For indie games, they were inspired by the best games from that era, and so made games based around these best idea's as well.


So yeah, I'd agree that the overall quality of 2D platformers is better now then it was 20 years ago.  Unlike other genre's that have had major gameplay shifts over the last 20 years, 2D platformers have remained the same since it was always the simplest type of gameplay with lots of appeal.  As a result, designers can keep improving on what people already love about the games while still appealing to newer fans since the core gameplay will always be run right and jumping, while other more complicated genre's like RPG's have had problems trying to appeal to longtime fans, while still appealing to newer fans.

[ShyGuy]

Remember Shatter Hand? I liked Shatter Hand.

[nickmitch]

The best part about now is that I can play both.

[ShyGuy]

Mr. Mitch wins.

[broodwars]

Well, I'd rather play a modern platformer like Rayman Legends; DKCR; or Puppeteer than some of the platformers I played back on the NES with all the cheap **** they used to pull. Hell, just recently I played the Castle of Illusion remake and IMO it's a FAR better game than the original Genesis game.  In general I think gaming is far better today than it was back in my childhood, mostly due to technological advancements and refinements in game design over the past 20 years.

[Adrock]

I don't have the same sense of wonder that I had 20 years ago. Videogames were not only new-ish as an industry, but new to me. Trying to be as objective as possible, games in general, not just 2D platformers, are probably better today. That doesn't mean I like them more today if that makes sense. I feel like I now have more games yet somehow play less, both due to being an adult, thus I tend to appreciate them less. The time of my life when I played certain games affects so much about how I feel about them. Super Mario World was the best game I owned for like two entire years and two years when I was a kid felt like an eternity compared to two years in my 20s.

[Ian Sane]

In the early to mid 90's 2D platformers were ambitious titles.  That was cutting edge stuff and developers were trying to push the genre and the hardware forward.  Yoshi's Island wasn't aiming to be merely a well made platformer but rather one of the greatest games ever made or least that's how it came across at the time.

Today's 2D platformers are intentionally trying to adhere to a formula established 20 years ago.  They're not trying to making cutting edge games but rather make something that appeals to nostalgia.  Or at least that's what Nintendo is doing as I'm not so familiar with the indies.  You can do a damn good job on a retro themed game but it still feels very calculated and conventional.  Nintendo making 2D platformers today is like an old band making new albums in the style of their work from 20 years ago.  It just seems too by-the-numbers and unessential.  Artists are always better when they're challenging themselves.

The Metroidvania template is very popular with indie devs.  But Super Metroid, a 19 year old game, is still the golden standard for the genre.  It's the game everyone still talks about.  The reason why is that today's devs working in the same genre are trying to make another Super Metroid.  Super Metroid didn't try to adhere to any standard beyond pushing the limits on the genre the Metroid series had invented.  It's almost as if it had no influences.  It's the same with the 2D platform genre.  The NSMB series is trying to make SMB3/SMW but Nintendo already did that decades ago.  Instead of delving into the unknown, Nintendo is trying to ahere to a template that's already been done.  Do you prefer a game that covers new ground or one that does a really good job of what's already been done?  I prefer the former.

Plus Wii plaftormers have shitty shake controls while SNES platformers control like a dream.  How can you consider DKC Returns to be better than DKC when it controls like balls and DKC does not?  I would rather play platformers where there is never a moment where I run into control issues.  How can I tolerate a spin jump going off my mistake in NSMB Wii even ONCE when that never ever happens in SMW and SMB3?

[Adrock]

I completed every level in the Wii version of Donkey Kong Country Returns and I am notoriously terrible at videogames. Controls like balls? Ehh, I didn't have that much trouble with them. Also, there's the 3DS version which looks great on the XL if you can't be bothered with motion controls. Returns is a much better game than the original Donkey Kong Country because it's actually fun and inventive. By the end of the game, I was actually glad there were no swimming levels. I never realized how much I merely tolerate underwater stages in games before playing a platformer that completely did away with them. I'm a little apprehensive about Tropical Freeze reintroducing them to the series.

[Ian Sane]

DKC isn't "actually fun"?  That's harsh.

If you didn't have control problems with DKC Returns you're either lucky, a liar, or have considerably loosier standards of control responsiveness than I do.  I found the tacked on motion controls a huge chore.  And again, the standard I compare to the controls too is near perfection so being okay or mostly good is unacceptable.  This is my general dislike of motion control.  For almost 30 years videogames used buttons that, unless the game's programmers were embarassingly incompetent, worked pretty much 100% of the time.  Then I'm asked to switch to motion control which only works most of the time to do the same thing that I used to do with buttons.  **** that.  Why would I ever put up with making something WORSE?  What does DKC Returns or NSMB Wii do that DKC and SMW doesn't that justifies inferior controls?

I figure 20 years from now people will still be playing the golden age platformers while the current retro ones will be regarded like The Brian Setzer Orchestra.  I would rather play a current NSMB over the original SMB but I just don't see how the new ones improve on the polished platformers of the 16-bit era.

[Adrock]

DKC isn't "actually fun"?  That's harsh.

Donkey Kong Country didn't hold up well. At all. Every time I've played the game years removed from its original release, it felt generic, almost boring. I feel like I was more enamored by the graphics which were Holy-****-Snacks in 1994, but they're not amazing anymore. They don't even have that old school charm. Pixel sprite graphics hold up better than the rendered sprites do in a retro-chic kind of way. With so many gaming years under my belt, I just can't be taken in by graphics anymore. I still appreciate them, but I need more to justify the time spent with a game. Donkey Kong Country Returns mops the floor with Donkey Kong Country. It's far more inventive and polished. The graphics are nice albeit not groundbreaking, but I feel like they'll hold up better because Retro Studio's art design is so far ahead of Rare's.

I absolutely loved the game back then, but every time I've revisited it, I don't know why I liked it. Donkey Kong Country isn't the only game I've felt this way about.

If you didn't have control problems with DKC Returns you're either lucky, a liar, or have considerably loosier standards of control responsiveness than I do.

Goodness, you are so condescending. I love how you insist that it must have been something I did or that I'm weird for thinking this way even when I completed every level in Donkey Kong Country Returns. That means I collected all the Kong letters, the puzzle pieces, and the secret orbs. I contend that the controls couldn't have been that bad if I was able to do all that and by myself to boot. Maybe YOU, sir, are unlucky, a liar, or have unbelievably ridiculous standards. Since I completed the game with said controls and you, presumably, did not, I don't think it's really fair to put that on me.

[Mop it up]

If it weren't for nostalgia then I think that New Super Mario Brothers Wii would be my favourite Mario game (note: have yet to play NSMBU). It takes a lot of ideas used in previous Mario games and expands on them in clever ways, as well as adding in some of its own ideas. The problem is that nostalgia is always a force no matter what one does, so there's no way I can accurately compare even if I try to be objective. I can't just wipe memories of playing games as a young'un and play those old games as if they were new.

Now, that's the case with Mario, but not Donkey Kong. When Donkey Kong Country Returns was announced, I had never played a DKC game before. I'd seen someone else play a bit of 1 and 2, but never myself. So I took that opportunity to buy and play the three DKC games for SNES before DKCR came out, so I played all those games in 2010 and early 2011 (I might have played 3 after DKCR, it's kind of blending together now). Even without nostalgia, I enjoyed them all, and aside from a crappy save system they still hold up. I think I would rank DKCR above DKC1 and 3, but DKC2 is amazing and my fave of the four. All are great games though, even today.

Do you prefer a game that covers new ground or one that does a really good job of what's already been done?

A good game is a good game is a good game, it doesn't matter if it's "new" or not!

[Ian Sane]

Perhaps I should have added "has a very steady wrist" to my conditions for having no issues with DKC Returns' controls (or NSMB Wii's for that matter).  There are no platformers for any console prior to the Wii where slightly changing the position you're sitting in inadvertingly causes your character to suddenly do a spin jump down a pit.  There was never any ambiguity in regards to whether or not the player sent input to the game.  Now there is so the controls aren't as tight and I think that matters a lot in genre where one mistimed jump can be game over.

A good game is a good game is a good game, it doesn't matter if it's "new" or not!

I would consider novelty an important part of entertainment.  A joke isn't as funny if you've already heard it.  As I become familiar with the tropes of a genre I can start guessing what's going to happen ahead of time and so a game that is technically brand new can feel old and stale if it stays too close to a formula.  For me it affects my enjoyment and since every Zelda thread seems to turn into a "what can Nintendo do to shake up Zelda" discussion, I'm not the only one.

And we're constantly talking Nintendo here.  What about all the third party platformers of the Golden Age?  How many 2D platformers are we seeing these days from Sega, Capcom, Konami or Hudson Soft?  Back then we routinely got GOOD Sonic games and Disney platformers from Capcom (and if you consider Mega Man or Castlevania a platformer you can throw those in too).  Today can't compete with the sheer variety of titles from the past.  Platformer used to be the default game template.

[NWR_insanolord]

I don't think these new games are playing it as closely to the old ones as you do. Sure, the NSMB games and DKCR include a lot of nods to their predecessors, but they definitely do a lot of new things as well. You mentioned that you haven't played most of the indie games we're talking about, but most of the really good ones bring a lot of new stuff to the table

Really, though, to me platformers don't need to be revolutionary. New twists and interesting combinations of old mechanics are enough to bring me in. For me, platformers are about level design and mechanics, and if those are good enough I don't really care about much else. Maybe that's part of why I like these new games, because I'm not wanting or expecting them to be brand new experiences.

[Phil]

I think nostalgia in part makes me prefer Super Mario World to New Super Mario Bros. Wii, which I think is one of the best 2D platformers released in a long time. However, I really do like a lot of the creations that are being made now and in the recent past. DKCR is my second favorite in the series, next to DKC2. I prefer Kirby's Return to Dream Land over Kirby Super Star, I love Wario Land: Shake It! over past games in that series, and I enjoy Rayman Legends and Origins much more than the original. A big component as to why I like these is that because they have much more impressive presentations to them, feel meatier, and still possess a healthy challenge. Still, nothing beats Super Mario World and Mega Man X, in my book!


On a side note, I didn't have many problems with the waggle (I hate the term, but it's apropos for this game) controls of DKCR, and especially not New Super Mario Bros. Wii and U.

[azeke]

NEWS flash: if you can manage new control methods, you're a dirty liar.

Don't have much to contribute, because i only started really playing on consoles just a few years ago. But as i person completely free of nostalgia i definitely prefer NSMB series (any of the four, really) over SMB3 which i didn't enjoy at all because ironically i think it controls poorly.

And if you disagree with me -- you are a dirty, nasty liar, pants on fire.

Didn't played SMW aside from one first level.

[Luigi Dude]

I would consider novelty an important part of entertainment.  A joke isn't as funny if you've already heard it.  As I become familiar with the tropes of a genre I can start guessing what's going to happen ahead of time and so a game that is technically brand new can feel old and stale if it stays too close to a formula.  For me it affects my enjoyment and since every Zelda thread seems to turn into a "what can Nintendo do to shake up Zelda" discussion, I'm not the only one.

So by this logic, the first car you drove is the best car because it was you're first time driving even if you're newest car has better brakes, acceleration and much safer in case of a crash.  See, this is the problem I have when people use the whole first time playing something as reasons for saying it's better.  If something is better, it shouldn't matter if it's not a new experience or not.

Just like how with cars, it's nice to celebrate older models have have nostalgia for the first ones you drove, but the most of the newer models are better then what came out over 20 years ago because of all the improvements that have been made.  Just like how many types of videogames including 2D platformers have been made better by improvements made to them.

[Mop it up]

Although I think Ian Sane is exaggerating the waggle controls on DKCR and especially NSMBWii in his usual condescending way, he does have some semblance of a point. I never had a problem with NSMBWii's shake-spin myself, but DKCR has more that uses shaking and it's a bit much. Though I do think it's manageable, shaking is in no way equal to or better than if it were a button.

I would consider novelty an important part of entertainment. A joke isn't as funny if you've already heard it.

I think you're painting in too broad of strokes with a statement like that, as "entertainment" covers a wide range of things. With your joke example, I agree with that specifically, but very few games are trying to be funny. I also agree with Insanolord that recent platformers aren't just carbon copies of old games as you're making them out to be. Though I know you're not the only one, I don't think yours is the majority opinion, as sequels are always the best-selling games, especially these days.

I don't think I've played a game that was truly new since the N64/PSX era, so instead of frustrating myself trying to chase novelty I just enjoy good games.

[pokepal148]

For me, the newer stuff usually wins out. NSMBU has finally matched, if not topped SMW for me and I also think SMB3 has aged pretty poorly.

Kirby Super Star similarly met it's match with Amazing Mirror in my opinion although I have yet to play Return to Dreamland. from what little experience I've had with the donkey kong county series the SNES games come across as very bland compared to Returns.

However I do think Yoshi's Island has yet to meet it's match within its own series.