Khuutra said:
The OP, Maelstrom, and you miss th salient point that exploration is not the problem of 3D Mario games, either. "Star Finder" as a label does not fit this discussion, because it attempts to differentiate based on te idea of collecting stars, which isn't the primary separating factor for many stars in 3D Marios and very few at all for Galaxy 2. You can beat Galaxy 2 without getting a single puzzle-oriented star, at least insofar as "puzzle" means something more than figuring out how to move across a series of platforms, in which case s ome levels of NSMBWii are much more puzzle-oriented than anything I've found in Galaxy 2 so far. Maelstrom misses the forest for the trees: The problem with 3D Mario is the relative inaccessibility of 3D movement in a platforming game. Trying to apply identical design paradigms to different genres is not to the benefit of 3D Mario, it's just going to end up highlighting the core of the problem more clearly. |
Exploration is at least one of the problems. Can't speak for the OP, but Malstrom and I do not claim it's the only problem. Also, I don't know what you mean by "star finder", but Malstrom means that the stars have to be collected at all, regardless of whether they are puzzle based, or however you get them.
2D Mario: dozens of areas where you get to the end dodging all the dangers.
3D Mario: around a dozen areas where you have to collect multiple stars from most of them to beat the game.
Inaccessability of 3D movement is something Malstrom discussed, especially in some recent posts. He knows the levels can't be identical, just that they aren't trying to adapt them at all to 3D.
A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.
Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs








