| LordTheNightKnight said: 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. |
3D Mario's worlds ar not "about a dozen areas", etc. Leastways they are not in Mario Galaxy, and less so in Galaxy 2, where dozens of levels have branching (but linear) paths utterly unlike other paths within the same levels. Perspective is important, here, and perspective requires the experience of playing something.
The fact tat stars hav to be collected might be part of it, but "star finder" is different from "star collector" and Maelstrom is awar ofthe differences when he uses the phrase.
Adapting 2D levels to 3D would not be playing to thhe strengths of 3D movement.
