Author Topic: New Mario lacks 'newness' (Read 16457 times)

Artimus · « **on:** April 12, 2006, 09:31:20 AM »

Just when I was starting to forget why 99% of gaming sites suck, along comes this lovely Joystiq piece.

http://www.joystiq.com/2006/04/12/new-mario-lacks-newness-says-infendo/

It's based on an Infendo article by a guy who has...looked at only screenshots. Never played it. And yet Joystiq is reporting it as news. NEWS.

Oh PGC, how I love you. Why must everyone else suck so bad?

PaLaDiN · « **Reply #1 on:** April 12, 2006, 09:47:31 AM »

A baselessly negative article about an upcoming Nintendo game.

Well I never.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #2 on:** April 12, 2006, 09:48:20 AM »

Ahahahaha, I hate the internet...

Ian Sane · « **Reply #3 on:** April 12, 2006, 10:06:07 AM »

The only time something like this would be news would be if New Super Mario Bros was in fact an enhanced port with reused levels and such and Nintendo wasn't being open about that. In that case it would be good to inform people of that. When Super Mario Advance was first annouced for example it was unclear if it was a new game or a remake of Super Mario Bros 2 and that clarification was newsworthy. Same with Kirby: Nightmare in Dreamland which is a remake of Kirby's Adventure.

But as far as I've heard New Super Mario Bros is in fact a new game in that it has new levels and new content. Even if it is very similar to the older games it is still a "new game". So this isn't news.

vudu · « **Reply #4 on:** April 12, 2006, 10:10:21 AM »

I like how you linked to your comment about the article, and not the article itself. Nice touch.

But I agree, this isn't news about a game. It's news about a rant about a game. It would be like if PGC made a news post about how Ian thinks Saddness might suck because it's in black & white.

Artimus · « **Reply #5 on:** April 12, 2006, 10:42:09 AM »

LOL, I didn't realize I'd done that with my comment. Corrected!

The funniest part is that the DS CHANNEL of Joystiq didn't even post this. How pathetic.

Spak-Spang · « **Reply #6 on:** April 12, 2006, 12:36:41 PM »

You know there are legit complaints to make about New Super Mario Brothers. This isn't one of them.

My biggest complaint, that I will get over when I am playing the game, is the 3D model approach instead of Sprites. If you are creating a new Mario game and wanting to go back to the original source and make a compelling sequel, why not use sprites and capture the unique whimsical artstyle of the game, instead of using 3D graphics to try to get close to said style?

Artimus · « **Reply #7 on:** April 12, 2006, 01:13:13 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
...why not use sprites and capture the unique whimsical artstyle of the game, instead of using 3D graphics to try to get close to said style?

Moves. 3D models interact in ways sprites can't.

hudsonhawk · « **Reply #8 on:** April 12, 2006, 01:21:41 PM »

I'm sure I'll get pigpiled on this, since I know I'm in the minority here - but I'll never understand the sprites over 3d thing. Just like I'll never understand the people who claim the 2d Metroid and Zelda games are inherently better than their 3d countparts.

Personally I think sprites make 2d sidescrollers look stiff and dated. The animation gets redundant (seeing the same frames of animation over and over again with no variation or shading), and there are often collision issues. I don't mind sprites as much in 3/4 or top down games (such as the 2d Zeldas or RPGs) but in games that are heavily movement-based, they just never look right.

I know there are cases where it can look good (like in the Street Fighter or Guilty Gear games) but games like that seem to be the exception and not the rule (which I'm sure is largely budgetary). I'll take 60 frames per second of 3d animation over a few frames per second of sprite animation any day.

KnowsNothing · « **Reply #9 on:** April 12, 2006, 01:24:43 PM »

Really? The only GG game I've ever played was similar to Marvel vs Capcom in that all of the animations had very fews frames and the characters floated around unnatrually. The stills loook good, but in motion it's terrible.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #10 on:** April 12, 2006, 01:26:10 PM »

"Just like I'll never understand the people who claim the 2d Metroid and Zelda games are inherently better than their 3d countparts."

For Zelda, a lot of puzzles just work better in 2D, particularly block puzzles...

As for NSMB, you really have to see it in motion...It looks great, and it makes it easier to apply all of Mario's new moves, so it does have a purpose...

Jensen · « **Reply #11 on:** April 12, 2006, 03:00:12 PM »

The funny thing about Zelda is, the game isn't changed much by adding 3D. It was always drawn in a 3d way (at least in LttP). The switch from digital to analog control is a bigger change. Of course, it is a lot easier to have analog controls with 3D graphics. 3D is vector, much more flexible than bitmaps. We will see some crazy things in this Mario game that just wouldn't work well with bitmaps.

Joystiq is usually quite pro-Nintendo, they are just trying to spark some conversation, but it is quite premature...

Ian Sane · « **Reply #12 on:** April 12, 2006, 03:10:25 PM »

"I'll never understand the sprites over 3d thing. Just like I'll never understand the people who claim the 2d Metroid and Zelda games are inherently better than their 3d countparts."

I find that sprites have more personality. Now polygons have improved considerably since the N64 days but I find them stiff. Many of them have very puppet like movements and though lighting and such works well with them they typically lack facial expressions and subtleties. When you have to draw every frame then it's much easier to add those subtleties because you have to draw the whole character so you might as well do it right. With polygons you can "cheat" and just move the character and in the end he looks like a blowup doll. This isn't always the case. Nintendo is quite good at making 3D characters with personality. EA is not.

One thing I also notice with 3D graphics with 2D gameplay is that it looks weird. I like 3D because it offers a lot of freedom for movement. When the game is 2D the movement isn't there but the game is made of polygons so to me it feels weird. I can't go where I want so why is everything 3D? The whole thing just looks very awkward to me. I can't sidestep an enemy and it's silly that this 3D world is a straight line.

Regarding existing series I prefer Zelda in 3D and Metroid in 2D. Top down view 2D games typically transfer to 3D really well since they were always designed for moving in multiple directions.

Jensen · « **Reply #13 on:** April 12, 2006, 03:33:01 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane

One thing I also notice with 3D graphics with 2D gameplay is that it looks weird. I like 3D because it offers a lot of freedom for movement. When the game is 2D the movement isn't there but the game is made of polygons so to me it feels weird. I can't go where I want so why is everything 3D? The whole thing just looks very awkward to me. I can't sidestep an enemy and it's silly that this 3D world is a straight line.

The aren't using polygons because they are 3d, they are using polygons because they are vector graphics, you can scale them, rotate them. It is aslo easier to add accessories to a character.

RiskyChris · « **Reply #14 on:** April 12, 2006, 06:59:51 PM »

I've been going relatively spoiler/hype free on NSMB, but from the few screens that flew past my eyes, this game looks like the only thing it shares with old mario bros is 2D platforming.

I'm pretty excited for it (DS Lite tomorrow to boot).

Strell · « **Reply #15 on:** April 12, 2006, 07:15:08 PM »

Cell shaded = midway between sprites and polygons.

We need more o' dems.

IceCold · « **Reply #16 on:** April 12, 2006, 07:19:07 PM »

I'm glad this game got pushed back to after E3; it's the only thing that could distract me from the proceedings..

TrueNerd · « **Reply #17 on:** April 12, 2006, 08:35:54 PM »

I really don't care about 3D graphics in 2D worlds, as long as New SMB feels like Mario should feel. However, I really feel sprite-based games have aged much better then early polygonal games. Look at Super Mario World. Then look at Tomb Raider 1. Case closed.

Rancid Planet · « **Reply #18 on:** April 12, 2006, 09:28:39 PM »

You know I have to believe that this article is right. I mean just because I've really enjoyed every non-remake Mario platformer ever made I just HAVE to assume that this one is going to suck.

I mean...c'mon...it's title is so, stupid and stuff...

wandering · « **Reply #19 on:** April 12, 2006, 11:54:21 PM »

Quote
However, I really feel sprite-based games have aged much better then early polygonal games. Look at Super Mario World. Then look at Tomb Raider 1. Case closed.

*cough*SuperMario64*cough*

KDR_11k · « **Reply #20 on:** April 13, 2006, 04:31:00 AM »

Look at Super Mario World, then look at Mario 64. Case closed.

Spak-Spang · « **Reply #21 on:** April 13, 2006, 06:39:23 AM »

I also believe that Sprite based games have aged much better than 3D games...up until this point.

Look at really good 8 Bit era Nintendo games. Yes, look dated, but the good ones still were able to get their visual vision across although it is a bit limited. But jump to the 16Bit era and all of a sudden it seems what developers want to get across visually with sprites they can with hard work and great programing. Some games are still quite stunning and beautifully rendered in 2D sprites are works of pure art. Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island, Chrono Trigger, (That 7 up Spot game), Legend of Zelda: Link the Past, Street Fighter 2...the list can go on.

Now, does that the 3D generation will never be able to age as well as the 2D...not at all. I think with this current generation, and definately next generation we are getting 3D games that will be visually stunning even in the future. But you are using much better technology, and those SNES 2D games are still aging well and still looking great.

Sprites just seem to allow the artist and the art to have more personality and expression within the characters and images...and until recently, 3D animation just never compared.

Hell, look at traditional cell animation to modern 3D animation of Pixar. The Cell animation still has more personality, and artistic expression than the greatest 3D animation of our time.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #22 on:** April 13, 2006, 06:41:27 AM »

Wind Waker says "Hi!"

Spak-Spang · « **Reply #23 on:** April 13, 2006, 06:53:30 AM »

BILL: Yes Wind Waker is on my list of 3D games this generation that actually will look beautiful for all time. That game's visual style is so perfect...I wish others would see it as such.

I still wonder if the entire game was a more traditional Zelda (no Ocean theme) more land to explore, and another Dungeon or two...if people would have overlooked the style more and been engrossed in the overall presentation. I think they would have.

I mean...could you imagine the greatness of OoT in that Cell shading beauty.

RiskyChris · « **Reply #24 on:** April 13, 2006, 09:27:41 AM »

The only fault I can find with WW is ocean exploration. It deviates a bit too much from oldschool zelda games.

Well that, and the rushed content.

News:

Author Topic: New Mario lacks 'newness' (Read 16457 times)