By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - So, was 3D World better than Odyssey? S-P-O-I-L-E-R-S

 

So...

3D World 14 14.89%
 
Odyssey 49 52.13%
 
Galaxy 28 29.79%
 
Crash is better 3 3.19%
 
Total:94

No idea, never played either, never will.



Around the Network

On a side note. Super Mario Odyssey was probably the easiest Mario game ever made. I recall that almost all of my deaths came as a result of impatience. It can't be that I am just now becoming an expert at 3D Mario games because I still found the Galaxy games, which I played in the last few months, to be considerably more challenging.

 

I do recall a few popular Nintendo youtube sites praising the game for being easy though - although they dressed it up by saying, it's easier to control; when the ease of control in 3D Mario haven't really improved in its entire history (although camera issues from 64 are obviously not there anymore; again, long gone).

Last edited by Jumpin - on 27 January 2018

I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Jumpin said:
GameOverture said:
To me, 3d world was a pretty well designed game with boring and predictable aesthetics and rigid movement. Odyssey is the polar opposite in some ways. My big complaint about it would be too many moons. i find it a bit scary how nintendo is trying to crank up numbers for their big games. Odyssey didnt need 880 moons, just like BotW didnt need 120 shrines, as evidenced by moons that are just lying there in an open field and repeting the test of strength shrines 21 times. That aside, I think both BotW and Odyssey are worthy contenders for the best game in their respective series

You don't need to do all the Shrines or get all the Moons. Just like at a buffet you don't need to eat ALL the food.

Sure you don't NEED to, but considering moons and shrines are the goal of the game, you can't blame people for wanting to see all the game has to offer and being disapointed after stumbling upon subpar content. Besides, there's no way of knowing beforehand which shrines/moons are "worth" getting.

I understand when people say you dont have to get all 900 korok seeds, because they are side content and you can unlock everything they do with a third of that number, but shrines and moons are not like that at all



I make game analyses on youtube:

FFVI: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSO6n8kNCwk
Shadow of the Colossus: https://youtu.be/9kDBFGw6SXQ
Silent Hill 2: https://youtu.be/BwISCik3Njc
BotW: https://youtu.be/4auqRSAWYKU

GameOverture said:
Jumpin said:

You don't need to do all the Shrines or get all the Moons. Just like at a buffet you don't need to eat ALL the food.

Sure you don't NEED to, but considering moons and shrines are the goal of the game, you can't blame people for wanting to see all the game has to offer and being disapointed after stumbling upon subpar content. Besides, there's no way of knowing beforehand which shrines/moons are "worth" getting.

I understand when people say you dont have to get all 900 korok seeds, because they are side content and you can unlock everything they do with a third of that number, but shrines and moons are not like that at all

That’s on them. It’s not a fault of the game design that people want to be completionists and then complain that there’s too much content to complete.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

I think that 3D World was more consistently enjoyable. But, the better parts of Odyssey were way better than the best parts of 3D World.



Around the Network

Well.. considering user acclaim on VGC I would say it's consensus that Oddisey is better.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Jumpin said:
GameOverture said:

Sure you don't NEED to, but considering moons and shrines are the goal of the game, you can't blame people for wanting to see all the game has to offer and being disapointed after stumbling upon subpar content. Besides, there's no way of knowing beforehand which shrines/moons are "worth" getting.

I understand when people say you dont have to get all 900 korok seeds, because they are side content and you can unlock everything they do with a third of that number, but shrines and moons are not like that at all

That’s on them. It’s not a fault of the game design that people want to be completionists and then complain that there’s too much content to complete.

Sorry man, but you need to balance... several gamers are completionists, but if you make it a shore or repetitive than you failed on the design just to make largers numbers.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Odyssey easily.

3D World was just boring. I still have no idea what that game added to the series.



Jumpin said:
GameOverture said:

Sure you don't NEED to, but considering moons and shrines are the goal of the game, you can't blame people for wanting to see all the game has to offer and being disapointed after stumbling upon subpar content. Besides, there's no way of knowing beforehand which shrines/moons are "worth" getting.

I understand when people say you dont have to get all 900 korok seeds, because they are side content and you can unlock everything they do with a third of that number, but shrines and moons are not like that at all

That’s on them. It’s not a fault of the game design that people want to be completionists and then complain that there’s too much content to complete.

It is absolutely the fault of the game when part of it is not that good.

it’s not that there’s too much content to complete, it’s that some of the content feels like padding the game out for the sake of boasting about the number of activities.



I make game analyses on youtube:

FFVI: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSO6n8kNCwk
Shadow of the Colossus: https://youtu.be/9kDBFGw6SXQ
Silent Hill 2: https://youtu.be/BwISCik3Njc
BotW: https://youtu.be/4auqRSAWYKU

I love 3D World. I played through it twice. Once by myself, and once with a friend. The co-op aspect really brings a lot to the Mario experience. It was also one of the more difficult Mario games, which is a plus for me. I haven't played Odyssey for too many hours because I don't find it very engaging. It seems much easier than previous 3D Mario games. There isn't much challenge, and I don't feel as much accomplishment for completing goals. Maybe if I play it some more, it will grow on me, but so far I like it less than any other 3D Mario.

On the flip side, BOTW has sucked me in like no other Zelda game has done in the past, and it is by far my favorite Zelda ever. I know this thread has nothing to do with Zelda, but in the past, Mario always had my heart, and Zelda was just meh. This generation, the tables have turned.



Add me on Xbox Live: TopCat8