| Jumpin said:
Another is Mario. While I loved all the 2D games up to SMW, I wasn't a big fan of 64. SM64 was alright, but it felt smaller and more repetitive than world. I despised Super Mario Sunshine, that game was boring, full of gimmickry, and repetitive as all hell. Though Nintendo seemed to back to form with SMG1 and 2, at the time, arguably the two best games Nintendo had ever released. Then it was all NSMB and SM3D Land and World, which were alright, but WAY below the Galaxy bar. Now with Super Mario Odyssey they are saying it is like Super Mario Sunshine when what they SHOULD be doing is making the successor to Super Mario Galaxy with tons of variety and excellent rich level design instead of the shallow and repetitive level design of Sunshine. I hope Nintendo is not serious with this, and rather this is just a case of bad product messaging by some dumbass in the PR department. We need another 9.7 Mario game like Galaxy, not a 7.9 game like Sunshine. |
The thing about Mario games is, that, in my opinion, they suffer a lot when they're more exploration-based than level-based. I think Mario games work better when they are a sucession of colorful, varied levels. So while I still think that SM64 or Sunshine are good games, they're less fun and below my expectations with the franchise. So, I'm with you, and I'm worried about Odyssey. I hope they prove me wrong with some E3 gameplays.
Though I still think that 3DWorld is better than Galaxy 1, but worse than Galaxy 2 XD. But that's just a not-so-common opinion about those games. I think this might be Nintendo fulfilling a fan request. A request I don't really agree with, which is making exploration-based Mario games. I can understand the reasoning behind that. I also hope that this is what Nintendo wants, not what fans want. I don't really think any company must force their creative ouput through their fans requests if they don't feel like it. Another not-so-common opinion.
