Galaxy 1 and 2 are too linear...

I need huge worlds and searching stars inside a world. I dont want a goal or finish pole isnide each world...
I just need a new adventure based on Mario 64!!! And better inside mushroom kingdom...

I dont want outer space anymore.
I want mushrooms, I want pipes, I want ghost house, and I want course 6 of MARIO 64....

Anyone agrees with me?? =)

So you're saying that Nintendo should stop making new Zelda, Metroid, Star Fox, Kirby, Pikmin, F-Zero, Wave Race, 1080, Wario, Yoshi, Luigi's Mansion, Rhythm, Mario Sports, Mario Party, Paper Mario, Kid Icarus, Golden Sun, etc games? After all, all of what I just listed sell poorly compared with 3D Mario, so if you're going to reject 3D Mario on the basis of sales, all of these need to go, too.

Alternatively, you can recognise that, if Nintendo released a new 2D Mario game every single year on a console, 2D Mario would end up selling very poorly after a few iterations. Nintendo needs a broad variety of games in a broad variety of genres, including a variety of experiences within the same franchises in some cases. 3D Mario appeals to some people to whom 2D Mario doesn't appeal. More generally, Mario 64 and Mario Galaxy both broke the 10 million unit mark - a mark that has only been broken by 46 games ever.

And Super Mario 3D Land, which is a 3D Mario game (of course), is following the sales pattern seen with Super Mario Galaxy - released in November, over 4 million in its first holiday season (4.2 million for Galaxy, 4.6 million for 3D Land). Galaxy sold 2.9 million in 2008, and 3D Land is currently at 1.5 million in 2012 (factoring in the holiday boost, a 2012 total of 3.5 million isn't impossible). Based on sales patterns, an eventual total of 15 million or more isn't out of the realm of possibility.

It simply doesn't make sense for Nintendo to stop making 3D Mario games, no matter how much you may dislike it.

I'd prefer Super Mario Universe (Galaxy 3 on Wii U in HD, how can that be anything but amazing? Plus it would complete a Trilogy like the first three Mario game :D) Although another Super Mario 3D Land would be great, that was amazing. Also, another Sunshine-style game is something I'd prefer to another Super Mario 64.

I like seeing this praise to "exploration mario", since i loved mario sunshine but everyone seems to diss it.

Sunshine and 64 were the only mario games i ever got. 3D land looks interesting though.

I do think the design of Galaxy served many purposes but I think one of them was to mask the technical limitations of the Wii, relatively small spheres being the order of the day in many stages. My favourite levels in Galaxy however were the ones that did allow some more exploration.

The Wii U should have no such issues so I would love to see some more expansive stages. I don't think the 'Universe' theme, which seems highly likely to me, necessarily precludes settings in the Mushroom Kingdom as 'Universe' doesn't mean it has to be set in Space. You could have a sort of mash up of all the greatest locations in the Mushroom Kingdom fleshed out into fully explorable stages.

Remind me why Super Mario Sunshine would be such a brilliant idea? ...And lots of those sales are bundled.

Sure, the game was fun, but from a business perspective it would make no sense at all, and be too risky.

Second this.  That being said I still want another exploration Mario, but in the Galaxys style.

You're ignoring the fact that the GC userbase was smaller than all those other systems. Its the sell through percentage against the userbase we should be looking at.

edit:

Given GC's userbase of 21.5 million (should have been less by the time the game released) you're looking at a sell through rate of 29.3% for sunshine. Thats not bad a t all.

Wii's 95.9 million userbase versus new super mario bros wii 25.52 million sales gives a sell through rate of 26.6%.

In theory sunshine sold better than Super mario bros wii.

Objectively, Sunshine got some stuff right. It's worlds were larger and your options for exploration were grander than in Mario 64, the problems were aesthetic (the game was too "realistic" as far as Mario games went) and that it restricted you to only being able to get the Shine you were assigned, outside of one or two bonus shines, whereas being limited to the assigned star was the exception rather than the rule in Mario 64, part of what made that game so great.

Check my original post again. i have updated it with the sell through rates.