Lemme first start by saying 3D World is an excellent game, but it's not the same as the 3D Mario games before it and that put some people off, which led to heavy forum debates. Fans of the game started defending it religiously, to the point that asking for another Galaxy acted as a triggering mechanism for confrontation.  They will start dissecting the games coming up with reasons why 64, Sunshine and Galaxy were not the same in the first place with the silliest arguments. Passive agressive nit-picking and semantics is their MO.

When it's all so simple and easy with just 1 question. Is 3D World noticeably distinct than the others? Yes. It's not that hard to understand. It doesn't mean 3D World was bad.

I've seen this counter culture with Dark Souls 2 as well. Some people defended that game religiously.

I hate to fall into the group you describe in the OP, but I would argue 64/Sunshine is a different animal than Galaxy is a different animal than 3D Land/3DWorld.

That said, I'd love another interconnected, open-worldish Super Mario game like 64 or Sunshine.

Moving to Nintendo discussion.

3D world wasnt a bad game.... I just dont think its a great one.
Mario 64 for its time, was amasing.
Same thing with the Galaxy games, and mario sunshine.

Its not the graphics, 3D world looks great.
Its about the gameplay.

I just dont enjoy 3D world as much as I did the "more tranditional 3D platformers" as BasilZero refered to them (64,galaxy,sunshine).

I bet people that love 3D world are probably tired of people bitching about not getting what they want.

Same as people are tried of everyone defending 3D world and proclaiming it to be the best mario platformer ever.

There is nothing wrong with Super Mario 3D World...
But I can't blame anyone for feeling that SM64, Sunshine, and the Galaxy titles provide a more robust experience...
They just felt more ambitious...

I think the problem is its "isometric 3d" for most of the game, and the camra is locked.

To mimic the old 2D marios, and the stages are mostly setup to again memic the only 2D games.

Which is why some would say its not a "true 3D mario" game.

Do you not realize that you've completely contradicted yourself with the thread title? It's the term "Not a true 3D Mario" that starts most of the arguments that i've seen since, whether you wanna admit it or not, it is in fact a true 3D Mario game.

You are causing the source of your own problem by using that obnoxious statement about it first, not other people. They just simply respond to that claim.

I just don't want a Mario game that focuses on MP.

I acknowledge it's a 3D Mario game in my first sentence in the OP. How do you want me to phrase it? The term "true" reflects the design philosophy started by 64 and stayed in place for 3 more games. True, traditional, fundamental, original... all mean the same thing. Problem is people getting triggered by semantics, again which I highlighted in the OP.  I edited it out to keep the discussion focused.