By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
AshKetchum1992 on 14 June 2013
Edit Thread
DanneSandin said:
RolStoppable said:

 

 

DanneSandin said:

You're right; in the end it comes down to sales. What I was talking about is taking gameplay risks, art style risks and such. Mario Galaxy took a risk with their level design around gravity, Sunshine took yet another risk in level design and game play. 3DWorld's only risk is not taking any risks; it looks and plays like 3DLand - only added 4 player co-op. That's not taking any risks.

And not taking such a risk is bad for what reason exactly? I can guarantee you that a lot of people would sing a different tune, if we got Super Mario Galaxy 3. "Why change a formula that worked?" and the like. The reason why it is a problem here is that we got a game they didn't want.

"And not taking such a risk is bad for what reason exactly?" You're kidding me? You can see and read the risk right in this thread! The back lash is quite big. Not innovating Mario is ALWAYS a big risk. That's why NSMBU isn't doing too well, and why NSMB2 is tracking BEHIND SM3DL - which, as it happens, DID take a risk in game play! Nintendo fans WANTS innovation in their Mario games.

I think quite a few people would be disappointed in Galaxy 3 as well. The thing with a new 3D Mario is that it always introduces something new; SM3DW didn't. And the problem here is that SM3DW is a follow up to a handheld game. You HAVE to see the issue here!?

I just wanna make this clear: I don't think SM3DW is a BAD game - I think it'll be good and all, and I hope they make this a new spin off of Mario, but a new 3D Mario on a new Nintendo console needs to be something else than this.

This