Is the star really any different from the flag? It simply defines the end of the path.

if you talkin about that you want the 3d mario to be as linear as the 2ds then thats just stupid
I prefer 2ds to 3ds but that would never work

I hope not. I prefer the 3D games.

Khuutra has already nailed everything I had to say on this topic. Particularly this:

"The problem with 3D Mario is the relative inaccessibility of 3D movement in a platforming game."

Super Mario Galaxy has already successfully removed most of the exploration elements out of 3D Mario. Yet, it is still not nearly as popular as 2D Mario. Why? You just can't beat the accessibility of a game that requires only two buttons and holding left or right in the direction you want to go.

Well, you can't beat that accessibility when it comes to 3D Mario anyway. Nintendo has already proven that you can make a game more accessible than 2D Mario. It requires no buttons most of the time and is called Wii Sports.

3d mario and 2d mario are separate games, let them stay that way. Don't try to muck it up by combining things.

If Nintendo is smart, they will continue making 2d mario games along 3d mario games instead of creating a 3d mario that sells like a 2d mario (it's never gonna happen!).

They should. Indeed they are aimed to different audiences ne one is more Mainstream (2D) and the other more niche/core (3D). It ads diversity and everybody is pleased.

It depends. In 64 and Sunshine, you did have to find them. That turned the mainstream off, since those were not the direct forms they liked about Mario. So even if Galaxy was direct in where to get most of the stars, the fact that they were stars is an image problem. If they looked like level goas, that might be a big way to get around this perception.

They already had one.

In Super Mario Sunshine you collected shines. This was a failure and they will never try this again.

The star/flag pole thing is misdirection. This is what is actually different about 2D versus 3D Mario:

In 3D Mario - especially with all of Galaxy's refinements - the path to the goal involves solving many physical puzzles and using Mario power-ups as tools required to navigate scenarios designed around the use of those power-ups and gadgets.

In 2D Mario, the entire course to the goal can be navigated with multiple strategies. The player can make it to the end as Tiny Mario if he chooses (or is forced to). Power-ups become tools that change how the player can attack the level. Because of this, there are different levels of skill that can be displayed - players can invent many strategies. Stark runs as tiny Mario, fireball runs, helicopter suit (in NSMBWii), riding Yoshi, etc etc.

3D Mario is designed as it is "because it's there". It's inviting to use the 3D space and mechanics to invent complex platforming and a variety of puzzles, and to create power-ups and tools that are worked into the level in ways that are more complex than 2D Mario.

The comparison is to look at the transformation blocks in Yoshi's Island. These are not regular power-ups. They're puzzle components that exist only to be used in specific places. This is what the power-ups / gadgets in 3D Mario are like. And because of this, Yoshi's Island is somewhat more limited in how it can be played than 2D Mario. There is one "optimal" way to play through a stage. (Yoshi however, adds replayability due to its scoring and collectable system that grades players on how well they did in the stage.)

This remains the biggest flaw of 3D Mario. The 2D games can be replayed with more of a hook - "what can I do this time? What do I feel like trying today?"

Actually, that is I think Malstrom's main point. And it's actually why I like the early parts of Mario 64, since they didn't railroad you as much. The Clock and Rainbow Road were especially tedious, since you had to go basically one way for each star, and there was the waiting for the right time or waiting for the carpet to reach the destination. Sunshine was even worse in railing most of the star paths.