Post by: NWR_pap64 on January 22, 2007, 10:22:56 PM
I've noticed that people have been going crazy over the game, to the point where many gaming publications and websites have gave it Game of the year nods and awards.
While I thought the game was really fun, I don't see it as being GOTY material nor I think its the best 2D Mario game to date.
First of all, the one thing that made the Mario games really addicting, frustrating and fun were the levels themselves. Simply put, they are some of the best, challenging and most inventive stages ever seen in any videogame, with Mario 3 and Mario World showcasing the best of them all. Compared to them, the levels in New Super Mario Bros. feel more like they were made by fans rather than experienced level designers.
Seriously, they feel as if they used a fan made level editor and put the whole thing together. That's another thing, people might say that some of the classic Mario elements, like collecting the red coins and such are tributes to the older games, but IMHO, they feel as if Nintendo relied too much on the past rather than creating new elements for the game. Its a brand new game, Nintendo! Couldn't you have been more creative?
Going back to the level design, simply put, they are too easy and too straightforward. First of all, I KNOW that the game was made to channel the classic gameplay of the original Mario Bros., but even then the game offered a lot of challenge and edge of your seat gameplay. The classic Mario games featured levels that tested your reflexes, your patience and skills. They featured jumps that needed a lot of reflexes to jump over, conveniently placed enemies plagued your way and challenges that either pleased you or frustrated the hell out of you. Again, Mario Bros. 3 and Mario world showcase this the best. So compared to that the levels in NSMB are too easy and too straightforward. They lack the imagination, cleverness and challenge the older games provided.
The game is also very easy and extremely forgiving. It is willing to give you extra lives as if they were running out of style, while in the older games getting an extra life was a blessing, and getting more than that actually required a lot of timing to pull off. It is also too short. You are more than likely to beat all of the levels on your first run. Again, the older games actually required you to look deep into it and discover the hidden levels in clever ways.
As for the extra challenges, getting all 3 gold coins in each level is hard, yes, but compared to trying to find and complete ALL of the secret stages in Mario World, its a JOKE.
Before I get stoned to death, I enjoyed the game for what it was. I know the game was meant to be a fun, easy to get into game and according to the sales, it works greatly. The multiplayer was great, I had a lot of fun playing this with S_B, Cap and other friends and is easily the best part of the game. But what I am saying is that this isn't truly the best game in the 2D Mario games and thus I think doesn't deserve the insane hype it has gotten.
I just hope that with the great sales of the game it encourages Nintendo to go back to the 2D formula and actually experiment further with it.
Nintendo did good, but they could've done BETTER.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 23, 2007, 12:05:40 AM
Post by: Mario on January 23, 2007, 01:12:39 AM
This is still my favourite game on DS, I like it so much that it's actually still the last DS game i've bought, I still play it. The gameplay in this is incredibly smooth and top-notch, it feels heaps better than SMB3 and World to me. I don't know if it's my favourite Mario game over the original SMB but the multiplayer might just push it over the edge, it is a ton of fun and you can just keep playing over and over again.
Post by: Artimus on January 23, 2007, 01:41:50 AM
Post by: NWR_pap64 on January 23, 2007, 03:26:23 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus
It suffers from a lack of personality and originality, but it's a very strong title. View it as a direct sequel to the original SMB and it makes more sense.
I agree about the lack of personality and originality. I'll also agree that its a solid Mario title. It just that I didn't feel the same enthusiasm that some of my friends felt when they first played it. I actually felt unmotivated to finish it and took me a while before I finally did it. I wasn't as hooked as some people were. Right now the game is collecting dust as I never went back to it after I finished it way back in summer. I've replayed all of the original Mario games like crazy, but NSMB failed to do that.
Maybe I had my hopes a bit too high or something...I mean, NSMB was the first 2D Mario title released in nearly a decade. Nintendo could've created a massive 2D game using some new technology and bring new ideas that couldn't have been implemented in the 80s and 90s. This was their chance to shine! But for some reason they wimped out and decided to do a "safe" game.
I may not have liked it as much as some people did, but it was a strong title and a system seller. Like I mentioned, hopefully the success of the game will encourage Nintendo to do NSMB 2 and experiment further with it.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 23, 2007, 04:56:32 AM
Though some of it is the fans' fault. Often when people talk about sequels they want to see they mention all the things they want and most of it is is just the same stuff they've had before. But fans often don't really know what they want. Nintendo should know that when a fan says "I want Yoshi in a game" what they really mean is "I want something as magical as Yoshi was in Super Mario World". They, like Nintendo, are mistaking the actual character for what gave them that great feeling in the past when in reality it is what the character represents that was so magical - a new idea that is so well designed that it instantly fits.
Nintendo is suffering this "nostaligia" design problem with virtually all their titles. Twilight Princess is fantastic but it has WAY too many elements taken straight from Ocarina of Time. You don't have to always have Gorons and Zoras. Prior to Ocarina of Time there was no such thing as Gorons. Stuff like that.
Post by: SixthAngel on January 23, 2007, 05:20:03 AM
Post by: vudu on January 23, 2007, 06:02:09 AM
QuoteI agree; it's not the best 2D Mario game to date. However, it is the best 2D Mario game released in 2006. That's why it's GOTY material.
Originally posted by: pap64
While I thought the game was really fun, I don't see it as being GOTY material nor I think its the best 2D Mario game to date.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 23, 2007, 06:30:28 AM
I see this more as a universal Nintendo problem though. I think if it was called Super Mario 4 it would still be the exact same game. Plus I'd argue that the first Mario sidescroller to come out in over ten years should be a little bit more than just a throwback to another game.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on January 23, 2007, 08:15:47 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"Well the game is called New Super Mario Bros. not Super Mario 4 because it is a throwback to the first Mario Bros. The game is not supposed to be and never was supposed to be anything but revisting the original Mario style with only a few things added."
I see this more as a universal Nintendo problem though. I think if it was called Super Mario 4 it would still be the exact same game. Plus I'd argue that the first Mario sidescroller to come out in over ten years should be a little bit more than just a throwback to another game.
I think you pretty much summed up my feelings of the game, Ian.
It was really fun and like I said, it was a rock solid title that brought back classic Mario gaming to the masses and features great multiplayer modes.
But like you said, they should've done more with the game that is the first 2D game released since Yoshi's island.
Post by: nitsu niflheim on January 23, 2007, 08:23:21 AM
Post by: IceCold on January 23, 2007, 08:32:24 AM
QuoteSeriously - Super Mario Bros 3 and World are two of the best games ever - and while I don't think think NSMB is better than them, it's still a damn good game. It's my favourite DS game by far, and it definitely deserves handheld GOTY.
Originally posted by: vuduQuoteI agree; it's not the best 2D Mario game to date. However, it is the best 2D Mario game released in 2006. That's why it's GOTY material.
Originally posted by: pap64
While I thought the game was really fun, I don't see it as being GOTY material nor I think its the best 2D Mario game to date.
Post by: SixthAngel on January 23, 2007, 08:38:27 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
I see this more as a universal Nintendo problem though. I think if it was called Super Mario 4 it would still be the exact same game.
That is pure speculation. The fact is Nintendo told you exactly what you were getting with this game by calling it New Super Mario Brothers. They didn't call it 4 because it wasn't. This is more of a I want Mario 4 thread. I would even argue that Mario sidescrollers have been gone for so long that a throwback game is LOOONG do and makes far more sense then a 2d sequel to a game that is over 10 years old.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on January 23, 2007, 08:47:46 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
*sigh* Nothing like beating a dead horse..QuoteSeriously - Super Mario Bros 3 and World are two of the best games ever - and while I don't think think NSMB is better than them, it's still a damn good game. It's my favourite DS game by far, and it definitely deserves handheld GOTY.
Originally posted by: vuduQuoteI agree; it's not the best 2D Mario game to date. However, it is the best 2D Mario game released in 2006. That's why it's GOTY material.
Originally posted by: pap64
While I thought the game was really fun, I don't see it as being GOTY material nor I think its the best 2D Mario game to date.
Once again, I never said that the game was bad. The game was indeed very fun, rock solid and with a really fun multiplayer.
Also, forgive me if I sound like I am putting down anyone that greatly enjoyed the game. I ain't. I won't deny that the game has a lot of appeal and fans will not be able to resist. I'm just saying that in my eyes it wasn't enough and I wish they had done something more with it.
Post by: ShyGuy on January 23, 2007, 08:48:52 AM
Post by: TrueNerd on January 23, 2007, 09:15:45 AM
Considering NSMB was, what, the 2nd or 3rd best selling game of the year (somewhere in the top 5), Nintendo will hopefully make another new 2D Mario game and that will be one that brings back the imagination, the magic and the challenge with a fierce holy vengeance.
But while the game pales in comparison to the Marios of yore, it looks rather good when compared to Yoshi's Island DS, aka An Exercise In Frustration.
Post by: vudu on January 23, 2007, 09:16:34 AM
QuoteI hate you for making me laugh so hard.
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
I'm disenchanted with the world. I cut myself just to feel something real.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 23, 2007, 09:39:08 AM
Why would Nintendo do that? If anything the high sales just demonstrates to them that there's enough demand for a new Mario sidescroller that they can heavily rely on nostalgia and re-using themes from the older games and get away with it.
"I would even argue that Mario sidescrollers have been gone for so long that a throwback game is LOOONG do and makes far more sense then a 2d sequel to a game that is over 10 years old."
I don't see that logic at all. If anything I've waited long enough to get something more. New Super Mario Bros is like a band not releasing an album for ten years and then coming back with "Greatest Hits Live". Yeah I'm a big fan of the band and it's still a damn good listen that was worth buying but it isn't really what I was waiting for.
I still like the game and it is my favourite DS game but a little too many Nintendo sequels like that and I'm going to get pretty bored pretty quick.
Post by: hudsonhawk on January 23, 2007, 09:52:09 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
I don't see that logic at all. If anything I've waited long enough to get something more. New Super Mario Bros is like a band not releasing an album for ten years and then coming back with "Greatest Hits Live". Yeah I'm a big fan of the band and it's still a damn good listen that was worth buying but it isn't really what I was waiting for.
That's a great metaphor, and exactly how I felt about it. It's ultimately a forgettable game, and that's not something I can say about any of the other Mario games, Sunshine included (which I neither loved nor hated, but I will definitely remember).
Quote
I still like the game and it is my favourite DS game but a little too many Nintendo sequels like that and I'm going to get pretty bored pretty quick.
See, it's not even in my top 10 DS games. It's not even the best Mario game on the system - I know it's a port, but I'd rather play Mario 64 DS any day of the week.
I will concede though, that Yoshi's Island 2 made this look like a goddamned classic.
Post by: SixthAngel on January 23, 2007, 10:00:02 AM
To claim its mainly for nostalgia purposes is ridiculous because there are well over ten years before the last 2d Mario game means there are A LOT of people who have never tried the simplistic fun of mario 1 style. The DS is all about anyone being able to play. That is exemplified by the extra items being simple bonuses with obvious abilities. There aren't a ton of suits with strange abilities, everything is mainly back to just being mario.
Post by: Smoke39 on January 23, 2007, 10:10:39 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on January 23, 2007, 10:29:07 AM
Okay, how about this? NSMB is like those AC/DC albums released in the mid-80's.
Listenable if you like the style and technically all new songs but very unessential and forgettable.One thing Nintendo kind of has going against them is that Mario has been pretty damn essential. If someone stole my copies of Super Mario Sunshine or NSMB I would be pissed off but wouldn't rush out to replace them. But if they took Super Mario World I would start looking for another copy that day. I guess it's a lot like The Lost Levels or the Super Mario Land games. Those are Mario games and they're fun and are worth playing if you're a fan but they aren't the titles you suddenly get an urge to revisit every once in a while. If you had a hypothetical dessert island scenario those aren't the Mario titles that would get priority.
Post by: Arbok on January 23, 2007, 10:43:54 AM
Post by: Deguello on January 23, 2007, 01:50:40 PM
Post by: Smoke39 on January 23, 2007, 03:45:55 PM
Post by: NWR_pap64 on January 23, 2007, 03:54:25 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Deguello
New Super Mario Bros. is fantastic. End of discussion. Coming in with expectations of dethroning SMB3 or SMW or SM 64 or whatever creates a negative predisposition and a magnification of flaws that the nostalgic games in question bear in higher numbers. In short, you ruined it for yourself and now everybody has to bear the brunt of your silly complaints of it not being new enough or it not being exactly like SMB1 or whatever dichotomous trap is set for a game. This thread gets a thumbs down.
I NEVER expected it to be better than any of the older 2D games. I wanted to play it badly ever since it was first announced at E3 2004, and like many fans, I was excited for it since it was going to be the first 2D Mario game in nearly a decade. The exciting part was that considering the many new tricks the developers at Nintendo have learned since Yoshi's island they could've implemented stuff that couldn't have been made with past technology. So I can't help but feel disappointed that they played it too safely when creating NSMB and felt they could've pushed the envelope a bit more.
As if I didn't state this enough, NSMB isn't a bad game. The sales proof that people loved the game enough to keep buying it week after week and pretty much guarantees future installments of the Mario platforming series. But I am NOT the only one who feels that the game could've been more and are disappointed. Simply because a game has gotten stellar reviews and a lot of fan love it doesn't mean that EVERYONE will see it the same way. In my case, the game was certainly one of the best handheld games of 2006, but that doesn't stop me from believing that the game could've been more and I KNOW Nintendo can do better.
Post by: Kairon on January 24, 2007, 02:19:43 AM
~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: hudsonhawk on January 24, 2007, 03:26:04 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Deguello
New Super Mario Bros. is fantastic. End of discussion. Coming in with expectations of dethroning SMB3 or SMW or SM 64 or whatever creates a negative predisposition and a magnification of flaws that the nostalgic games in question bear in higher numbers. In short, you ruined it for yourself and now everybody has to bear the brunt of your silly complaints of it not being new enough or it not being exactly like SMB1 or whatever dichotomous trap is set for a game. This thread gets a thumbs down.
See, even standing on it's own, NSMB was just boring and phoned in. There were a few brilliant levels here and there, but most of the levels were straightforward to a fault, and unlocking hidden levels was contrived and frustrating. It lacked charm and didn't bring anything new to the table.
You're suggesting that the nostalgia factor works against it, but I think it's the opposite; nostalgia is the only reason this game was so highly rated.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 24, 2007, 06:57:43 AM
I agree. I think someone who is completely unfamiliar with Mario wouldn't "get" NSMB. They wouldn't really see what all the fuss was about. It requires you to already be familiar with Mario. I think the fact that it had been so long since a Mario sidescroller came out helped it too. One thing I really loved when I first played that game was the feeling of "Yes! I'm playing a new Mario!" Had the same game been released ten years ago (assuming the 3D graphics wouldn't have wowed us back then) I don't think it would have been as well received.
It is still a good game and worth buying for any Mario fan. Kairon, if you like Mario you'll still like it.
Post by: Deguello on January 24, 2007, 02:54:55 PM
Quote
See, even standing on it's own, NSMB was just boring and phoned in.
False.
Quote
I agree. I think someone who is completely unfamiliar with Mario wouldn't "get" NSMB.
This is retarded.
Quote
Had the same game been released ten years ago (assuming the 3D graphics wouldn't have wowed us back then) I don't think it would have been as well received.
You have no idea either way. The best claims are the ones that have no possibility of being disproven, right?
Post by: Nick DiMola on January 25, 2007, 01:34:25 AM
Another note, if you played the game to get to the end of every level and not to collect the big coins, you wasted your time. This game was all about solving the various puzzles and traversing levels in non-optimal condition to reach places that housed the big coins.
Sorry guys, but this game was great. I don't care if it starred Barbie and Ken, this game still would've been amazing. Level design considering the big coin placement was great, the production values were very high (Mario's animations are amazing), and the game was just fun to play. Nostalgia does mess with people's heads, the old Mario games were great I agree, but that doesn't discount the efforts in NSMB in the least.
Post by: Ceric on January 25, 2007, 05:09:32 AM
Post by: Smoke39 on January 25, 2007, 05:31:27 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Mr. Jack
Seriously, what do you people want out of a Mario game?
fun kthxbai
Post by: Blue Plant on January 25, 2007, 06:43:29 AM
Post by: Nick DiMola on January 25, 2007, 09:01:01 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smoke39Quote
Originally posted by: Mr. Jack
Seriously, what do you people want out of a Mario game?
fun kthxbai
Guess we weren't playing the same game.
Post by: Smoke39 on January 25, 2007, 09:25:40 AM
Post by: Mario on January 25, 2007, 01:49:24 PM
Post by: IceCold on January 25, 2007, 02:39:07 PM
Post by: ShyGuy on January 25, 2007, 05:18:26 PM
Post by: Guitar Smasher on January 25, 2007, 06:40:34 PM
Like Ian was saying, I wouldn't show Double Dash to a Mario Kart virgin.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 26, 2007, 12:41:25 AM
Post by: Mario on January 26, 2007, 03:41:20 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on January 26, 2007, 04:36:45 AM
Post by: Artimus on January 26, 2007, 05:07:01 AM
Post by: ShyGuy on January 26, 2007, 05:30:43 AM
Post by: IceCold on January 26, 2007, 06:09:21 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on January 26, 2007, 06:45:37 AM
"So does Wario's Colosseum"
I like both those tracks a lot. The problem is that beyond that circuit the track design isn't too hot. I think that's the last circuit. That's pretty much all I play.
Post by: Infernal Monkey on January 26, 2007, 05:55:23 PM
WHERE IS NEW NEW SUPER MARIO BROS. AND SONIC RUSH 2 THEY ARE NOWHERE THAT'S WHERE.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on January 26, 2007, 08:31:17 PM
Level design feels quite basic as well, and I wish they would have put more effort in character designs. I love Nintendo's nostalgia but not to the point of reusing so many character models from previous games (Mainly SM64DS), I want to see some new designs for classic enemies. Finally I found Koopa Kid to be a bore, and nothing to get excited about. What was worse was the final boss fight, which IMO, pales to most of the final battles with bowser in both excitement and creativity.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 26, 2007, 08:53:00 PM
Post by: Ceric on January 27, 2007, 06:56:53 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on January 27, 2007, 07:34:06 AM
Post by: NWR_pap64 on January 27, 2007, 07:58:23 AM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on January 27, 2007, 10:03:03 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
I disagree on the item variety, I like how they didn't add a flight item this time. I also disagree on the bosses, NSMB's bosses are much harder than the koopa kids. The final boss was weak, yes (just get hit and run through) but the rest was much more interesting and often harder than previous SMB bosses (with the exception of YI).
Harder? I probaly died less on the NSMB bosses than SMB3. Personally I think the reason why they didn't add flight items was to limit exploration and to get the level design as simple as possible, it was a way to cover up the limitations of the game.
Post by: Aussie Ben PGC on January 27, 2007, 12:29:34 PM
Nice game though, but it seems that the game was more of a fanservice than a new game with Mario where they could do whatever they wanted.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on January 27, 2007, 05:12:13 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Aussie Ben PGC
NSMB was fun, but it certainly did seem to be riding on the coattails of its predecessors. "Hey! Remember the flags from SMB! They're back!" "Oh hey! Remember Goombas again? And Koopa Troopas? Don't you? Hey! Hey! Whoa! Look at that! Ghost houses! Look! Oh, and remember how you couldn't save until you beat a castle? It's like that here too! Even though it's a portable game! It's just like the old ones! Honest!"
Nice game though, but it seems that the game was more of a fanservice than a new game with Mario where they could do whatever they wanted.
Glad to know I'm not the only one that feels this way.
I think the reason many of us were so excited for NSMB back when it was released and thought it was a fantastic game was because it was the first 2D Mario game in years so even if the game could've been better people ate it up for that reason alone.
Like I said, the game isn't bad. It IS one of the best handheld games released this year. I just think that the extreme praise it got was a bit too much since Nintendo CAN do better.
I know people loved this game, and I hold nothing against them. If people loved it, people loved it. Cap for example loved it because he simply wanted a 2D Mario game and he didn't enjoy the 3D games that much. And that's fine. I already told you that the multiplayer is extremely fun and one of the best things about the game. Again, I simply wish it would've been better.
I played SB's copy last summer, I enjoyed it enough to buy myself a copy. Kept playing it, then found myself not playing it for weeks, then going back to it, stop playing it, then finally went back and finished it.
The older 2D games have me hooked the minute they load up. I couldn't wait till I reached the next level. NSMB simply didn't do it for me.
Post by: MarioAllStar on January 27, 2007, 06:02:46 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: pap64
The older 2D games have me hooked the minute they load up. I couldn't wait till I reached the next level. NSMB simply didn't do it for me.
When I first got the game, it definitely got me excited. After I finished it completely, I have not touched it since. On the other hand, tonight I just spent over an hour beating the Super Mario Bros. (the All-Stars version) from start to finish. I have been playing SMB since I was four or five years old, but I still come back to the classics for a quality gaming fix.
New Super Mario Bros. will never reach that classic status with me. That being said, I really hope they revisit the concept of a Mario sidescroller but leave development open to new ideas that drive the series forward.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on January 27, 2007, 06:23:07 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: MarioAllStarQuote
Originally posted by: pap64
The older 2D games have me hooked the minute they load up. I couldn't wait till I reached the next level. NSMB simply didn't do it for me.
When I first got the game, it definitely got me excited. After I finished it completely, I have not touched it since. On the other hand, tonight I just spent over an hour beating the Super Mario Bros. (the All-Stars version) from start to finish. I have been playing SMB since I was four or five years old, but I still come back to the classics for a quality gaming fix.
New Super Mario Bros. will never reach that classic status with me. That being said, I really hope they revisit the concept of a Mario sidescroller but leave development open to new ideas that drive the series forward.
That happened to me too. I tried getting all of the gold coins, but in the end it simply wasn't worth it.
I remember that as a kid I was dead SET on uncovering all of the secret stages in Super Mario World. And back then, I didn't have a guide or magazine to give me hints and the internet was still a few years off so I had to sit down with all the patience in the world and figure out where were the hidden shortcuts. I kept doing that till I found the secret star stages and truly completed the game. And they weren't easy either. They were a test of skill, patience and endurance. You even had to figure out how to use all of your power ups (such as the feather and helium balloon).
In comparison, collecting all the gold coins in NSMB is a JOKE.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 27, 2007, 06:31:05 PM
Having seen people break SMW to tiny little pieces with different cape abuses (flying through walls, completely avoiding large parts of a level, etc, see here) I think it was more because flight items add just so many potential bugs to the game and break a lot of possible puzzle ideas or threats because you can just fly over them. Allowing two different modes of movement where one can reach significantly more than the other makes it hard to introduce proper puzzles.
I remember that as a kid I was dead SET on uncovering all of the secret stages in Super Mario World.
Me too but what do you do when you can only afford two games a year? Though I did have the guide and made heavy use of it.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on January 27, 2007, 07:00:07 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Personally I think the reason why they didn't add flight items was to limit exploration and to get the level design as simple as possible, it was a way to cover up the limitations of the game.
Having seen people break SMW to tiny little pieces with different cape abuses (flying through walls, completely avoiding large parts of a level, etc, see here) I think it was more because flight items add just so many potential bugs to the game and break a lot of possible puzzle ideas or threats because you can just fly over them. Allowing two different modes of movement where one can reach significantly more than the other makes it hard to introduce proper puzzles.
I remember that as a kid I was dead SET on uncovering all of the secret stages in Super Mario World.
Me too but what do you do when you can only afford two games a year? Though I did have the guide and made heavy use of it.
Well, back when me and my sister first beat it, we thought the game was done and it was time to move onto the next. But then I noticed some baddies in the credits that we didn't see in the actual game, leading me to believe that there were places in the game we didn't visit. So I started searching for secret levels, passageways and keyholes in all of the stages. I used the feather to reach places that I missed on my first run and checked every nook and cranny. The more I uncovered the larger the challenge became. It was then that I found out about the secret star stages. So what started as a hunt for a baddie that I never saw ended with me discovered an amazing chunk of the game.
It was simply magical, especially as a kid.
Post by: Nick DiMola on January 27, 2007, 07:08:16 PM
I see this as a problem. The game was tailored around grabbing those gold coins. Practically all of the fun I had with that game was finding all of the gold coins and the secret exits. Just playing the game to reach the end of the level is pretty boring and I can understand negative bias if that is as far as you went with it.
"Nice game though, but it seems that the game was more of a fanservice than a new game with Mario where they could do whatever they wanted. " ~Aussie Ben
I don't think fanservice is the fitting term. I would say it was a blue ocean title. The game wasn't made for all of us diehards. It was made for the people who loved the NES and haven't played games since then. It was made for kids, so that they develop a love for Mario at a young age, just as many of us did. It was also made for the non-gamer. There was not a significant challenege to complete a level, making it more accessible. Nintendo definitely restricted themselves with the game to tailor it to their target audience. Regardless, they tossed in the big coin challenges and the secret levels and exits to augment the challenge for the lifetime Nintendo fans.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on January 27, 2007, 08:45:12 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Mr. Jack
I don't think fanservice is the fitting term. I would say it was a blue ocean title. The game wasn't made for all of us diehards. It was made for the people who loved the NES and haven't played games since then.
Too bad it was a step back from Super Mario Bros 3.
Post by: vudu on January 28, 2007, 06:49:05 AM
QuoteYou don't think that maybe it's because you're fifteen years older than you were when you first played SMB3?
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
I probaly died less on the NSMB bosses than SMB3.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on January 28, 2007, 09:42:59 AM
Post by: Arbok on January 28, 2007, 09:46:04 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
in NSMB I never died once in a boss fight.
Not even while beating some of the bosses as Tiny Mario to unlock things?
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on January 28, 2007, 11:39:35 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: ArbokQuote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
in NSMB I never died once in a boss fight.
Not even while beating some of the bosses as Tiny Mario to unlock things?
Well maybe a couple of times then! I think I died because I didn't know that I had to hit them with a butt stomp.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 29, 2007, 04:12:40 AM
That probably was part of the design but it makes no sense. I was a kid when the classic Super Mario Bros games came out. Most of us were. And so we developed a love for Mario at a young age. Therefore simplifying level designs or lowering the difficultly is unnecessary. A Mario game for kids should also be a Mario game for videogame diehards because the series has been able to appeal to both audiences since the beginning. Hell it doesn't even make sense to consciously accomodate non-gamers because the 2D Marios were always popular with people that don't play games that regularly. To specifically cater to kids or non-gamers is overkill and is just going to result in a lesser product.
Post by: couchmonkey on January 29, 2007, 04:21:58 AM
Kids: I saw an interesting episode of Game Jew where he took a job teaching kids at schools about cooperation and getting along by having them play multiplayer video games. An interesting thing he found is that kids LOVE to succeed and prefer easy games to hard ones. We put up with Super Mario Bros. because all games had such a high difficulty level.
To be fair, I was disappointed when I found a lot of Super Nintendo games to be easier than NES games, but I got over it pretty quickly, and by the end of the generation I considered Super NES games to be vastly superior to NES overall.
Post by: KDR_11k on January 29, 2007, 05:05:06 AM
I think all humans prefer easy games but at some point it just gets disappointing. The accomplishment that a hard game gives you doesn't come with an easy one so the occassional hard title is a good thing.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 29, 2007, 05:29:18 AM
I noticed a change too. I liked it because I find a lot of NES games have cheap difficulty. The best ones have legitimate challenges but a lot of NES games more or less "cheat" to make the game more difficult. On the SNES I found that developers had more or loss stopped screwing us around and were giving us challenges that were fair. It was like we now got to use a hockey stick to play against Wayne Gretzky instead of a straw. Still challenging but not in a way where they're giving the player an unfair disadvantage.
Gaming isn't black and white. A game can't only be hard or easy. It can be in between where the game is still a challenge but done in a way that one can beat it without practicing 8 hours a day. Super Mario Bros 3 and Super Mario World are not hard games. They're also not easy games. They're easy enough that anyone can play around and beat a few levels but still challenge the player and get hard in later levels. Anyone can beat Super Mario World but can anyone beat every level? No. That's a good difficulty. And because kids can beat the first few levels they get the sense of accomplishment without being spoonfed.
Plus, f*ck it, we shouldn't be teaching kids that completing something that is of no challenge is any sort of accomplishment anyway. That's just going to raise a generation of losers.
I don't even find NSMB too easy anyway but I suck at a lot of games. In NSMB I find that I make the game harder for myself because I can't hold a controller still during an action game. Thus my screen is bouncing all over the place which compromises my vision, thus making the game harder. I do much better at portable games when I play them on a TV (Super Gameboy, Gameboy Player).
Post by: JonLeung on January 29, 2007, 06:53:47 AM
Ian, didn't you find NSMB easy considering there were so many opportunities for 1-Ups? And as a VG Cats comic once pointed out, "fireballs are so cheap!" Bring a Fire Flower into a Bowser Jr. or Bowser fight and it's already over. They should've made them take like a hundred hits with fireballs so that you'd have to at least avoid a couple attacks instead of totally blasting them before they can even run over to you.
At least the bosses that required Tiny Mario (to take an alternate path) were a little better, challenge-wise.
Post by: Ian Sane on January 29, 2007, 07:08:56 AM
Yes. That I did notice. I just mean I haven't breezed through the whole game without dying. But yeah the 1UPs are far too plentiful. I can get an insane amount of lives in Super Mario World too but that's from experience. I know the little tricks in that game to racking up lives. No such knowledge is needed in NSMB.
Oh and....
Gameboy Gameboy Gameboy Gameboy Gameboy Gameboy Gameboy Gameboy Gameboy Gameboy
Post by: KDR_11k on January 29, 2007, 08:32:17 AM
And? It was the same in all previous Mario games with the exception of Super Mario Land.
Post by: Luigi Dude on January 29, 2007, 08:37:53 AM
Of course there's a simple reason for this, I grew up playing Super Mario Bros and Super Mario Bros 3 as a kid, and that was it. Those two games were quite hard when I first played them but over the years as I grew the games got much easier to me. When I got older and was able to find and buy the other Mario games I missed out on as a kid, I was able to easily beat them because playing the original and 3 for so many years had made me a master of Mario Platformers. And because of that I have no nostalgia for most of the Mario games except 1 and 3. All of the other Mario games I easily ripped through them on my first time of play and after playing through all of them including New Super Mario Bros, I find World to be the easiest.
Yet ever since New Super Mario Bros was released all I see is people attacking it for being too easy when World is by far much easier. This proves nostalgia blinds many gamers and because of warm feelings for things they remember, they'll unfairly attack games for a problem that was in one of the so called "Classic" games as well. It's just how people attacked Wind Waker for being too easy even though Ocarina of Time was just as easy.
And dont attack me for hating Mario World because I dont, it's actually one of my favorite Mario titles.
My top 5 Mario list
1. Super Mario Bros 3
2. Super Mario World
3. Super Mario 64
4. New Super Mario Bros
5. Super Mario Land 2
But I have no problem admiting that it was an easy game because I can't stand it when new games get attacked for being too easy when some of the older games in several videogame series where just as easy if not easier. Gamers have to realise that they have gotten better over the years which is why games feel easier now then they did back then.
Post by: ryancoke on January 29, 2007, 09:54:34 AM
1. super mario world
2. super mario 3
3. super mario 2
4. new super mario bros
5. super mario land 2
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on January 29, 2007, 10:09:42 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Plus, f*ck it, we shouldn't be teaching kids that completing something that is of no challenge is any sort of accomplishment anyway. That's just going to raise a generation of losers.
I really don't like statements like that, I figure if I spend money on a game I should be able to beat it.
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on January 29, 2007, 11:25:02 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
And as a VG Cats comic once pointed out, "fireballs are so cheap!" Bring a Fire Flower into a Bowser Jr. or Bowser fight and it's already over. They should've made them take like a hundred hits with fireballs so that you'd have to at least avoid a couple attacks instead of totally blasting them before they can even run over to you.
And? It was the same in all previous Mario games with the exception of Super Mario Land.
Wait, what? Which boss(es) couldn't be killed that way in Super Mario Land (not counting the vehicle stage bosses)? Or did you just say that because it wasn't technically a fireflower, and Mario wasn't technically shooting fireballs?
Post by: KDR_11k on January 30, 2007, 01:29:21 AM
It's just how people attacked Wind Waker for being too easy even though Ocarina of Time was just as easy.
Actually OOT is much harder because you need to really learn the intricacies of the combat system if you wanted to deal with a stalfos. In Wind Waker you just needed to press A at the right time.
I really don't like statements like that, I figure if I spend money on a game I should be able to beat it.
If you try long and hard enough you will beat it.
Post by: JonLeung on January 31, 2007, 06:27:27 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on January 31, 2007, 07:16:48 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on January 31, 2007, 07:40:21 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on January 31, 2007, 06:33:01 PM
Post by: Spike on February 01, 2007, 10:13:58 AM
Post by: Spike on February 01, 2007, 10:17:10 AM
Post by: Khushrenada on February 01, 2007, 03:44:02 PM
If you want to have a really easy time at the boss just bring along a mega mushroom. The first time I had to face the boss of that world (which should be the mole in the tank or at least that's the boss I'm referring to) I happened to have the Mega Mushroom in my reserve. So, I tapped on that item, grew giant and jumped on the tank, end of boss. Hilarious.
Strangely enough, when I was collecting the coins, I was playing that castle and I again had a mega mushroom in reserve. I wonered if I should try to play the boss normally but it was just to much fun to quickly waste him again. I have seince played it normally and the truth is, he's probably one of the more challenging bosses. But I'd have never have known thanks to Mega Mushroom.
Post by: couchmonkey on February 02, 2007, 04:42:00 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Spike
along with what i just said, i would like to get the pokemon ranger ds game. is it any good?
It's good but not great. I hate randomly-generated dungeons..if you don't, then it could be worth a look. (Edit: I haven't played it, this is just what I have read).
New SMB was very free and easy with powerups and 1-Ups, but otherwise I think the challenge level was about on par with older games.
Post by: Spikage on February 05, 2007, 02:08:30 AM
Post by: Spikage on February 05, 2007, 02:10:16 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on February 05, 2007, 03:33:54 AM
Post by: Mysticspike on February 05, 2007, 02:49:29 PM
Post by: Smoke39 on February 05, 2007, 04:04:50 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on February 05, 2007, 06:43:32 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: mysticspike
no, i'm talking about super mario 64 DS. probably not any different. what r u talking about then?
Then try to imagine there's a "DS" right after Mario 64 in my post if that's not too hard on you.
Post by: Mysticspike on February 06, 2007, 09:56:58 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smoke39
New Super Mario Bros. LIKE THE THREAD TITLE SAYS.
i know, i realized that already before you posted. no need to get all perturbed.
Post by: Hostile Creation on February 06, 2007, 07:09:02 PM
(seriously though, it didn't revolutionize something but it's a great platformer, tons of fun to play. Also, best way to fight bosses is in tiny mushroom form. Hells yes)
