By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
curl-6 on 14 June 2013
Edit Thread
RolStoppable said:
curl-6 said:

It's the resemblence to the early levels to 3D Land that makes it a good chance the rest will play out the same way.

This approach isn't a risk, it's the same approach as NSMB, NSMBW, NSMBU, and 3D Land; 4 of the last 6 Mario platformers. A risk would have been something NEW.

In that case the problem is more that you simply don't like the approach of Super Mario 3D Land at all. You are basically saying that such a game doesn't require effort and cannot be creative.

I don't agree on the risk issue, especially because you are contradicting yourself. You said that a risk would be something new, but SM3DL was something new. Yet you did put it into the same category as NSMBW, NSMB2 (which you meant) and NSMBU. This leads me to believe that the real issue here is that Nintendo didn't show Super Mario Galaxy 3. I don't see much coherence in the arguments that have been presented by you and others in this thread, but "SM3DW isn't SMG3, so I want this game to fail" ties things together perfectly.

3D Land is great by handheld standards, but that doesn't cut it as console 3D Mario material.

3D Land was new in 2011, the same approach in 2013 on a home console is no longer new. I lumped Land in with the NSMB games because it's essenially NSMB in 3D; it tries to apply 2D Mario's trappings and structure to a 3D game. This works for a handheld, but for World it is an inherently limited approach as it's not taking advantage of the possibilities a 3D Mario on a console like the Wii U offers.

It's not going to fall short because it's not Galaxy, it's going to fall short because based on what we've seen so far it seems generic, cheap, unambitious and lazy.