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.
I think the biggest risk Nintendo took with SM3DW is sales wise; in every other respect it's a very safe game.
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.
Mensrea said: I don't understand the love for 3D land. That was a shitty excuse for a 3D mario game. It was so linear, bland, and easy. There seemed to be really no ideas going for it, and it was based on the 3D gimmick. To make a sequel to that game which was designed for a short sessions on a handheld that could display 3D, and was also terrible is really really disappointing.
Did we play the same game, or shall I post YouTube videos of my favorite 3D Land levels?
We played the same game, the second I beat it I sold it. Post away. I liked a couple levels, but the majority of the game to me sucked hard.
I have the ability to say nice things about nearly every level in the game, but I don't have the time.
My favorite level of World 1. The level is basically set up like a downward slope, which becomes more precarious the closer Mario gets to the flagpole. Also one of the first levels in the game to really put the Tanooki suit to good use. Objectively good design, because the player can tell how far he is from the flagpole, and can literally see the level's own difficulty curve.
It's harder to pick my favorite level from world 2 (world 2-3 in particular is cleverly presented and very nostalgic), but there can never be enough reversible platforms. These add a nice puzzle element to the usual gameplay, where the player needs to plan his jumps. This is also another example of how difficulty ramps up over the course of the level, going from a single platform to incrementally increasing amounts.
World 3-1 is very nonlinear. The training wheels are off, and now it's up to the player to decide how to reach the top of the stucture. There an obvious path, but it's not necessarily the safest, either. A little exploration will reward the player with the Propeller Block, which with some skill, can let the player bypass the level. Several levels, in fact, have shortcuts that can be utilized with a combination of items and skill. One water level is almost entirely skippable if the player has a Tanooki suit. These are signs that the game was built with speedrunning in mind.
World 4-2 is a very unusual underground level, because it's vertical in nature. The focus is on finding the proper path upwards, which often entails hitting a "!" block first. It's also not heavy on platforming, but instead encourages players to take advantage of the angle through squashing goomba towers and using bouncy platforms to grab floating coins. In some ways, this is like a "fun house" level where the focus is on screwing around, unless the player is speedrunning. Then it becomes a matter of using the layout to your advantage in very different ways.
I don't have all night, and though I haven't mentioned my favorite level in the entire game, the Beat Blocks levels deserve more recognition. Obstensively combining rhythm and platformer game design, these levels are about timing above all else. They also contribute one of the soundtrack's gems - the mininalistic tune one must jump in accordance with. For me personally, this is a point where I began to really appreciate the level design and its creativity. The levels are short to the point where I miss experiencing the driving concept behind them, and be pleased when a later level builds upon it even more.
Then there's the Special Worlds, where the bulk of the challenge lies (in getting all the Star Coins). Many of them are remixed versions of normal world levels, which alleviates some of the difficulty. Then there's the secret level of pain and frustration. And the Ghost Houses, which are typically mind-bending. The forced-scrolling airship levels were well done, too.
That first world is a pretty neat idea, and it was one of my favorite levels, but it:
A: Is extremely easy
B: is bland to look at
C: has bland music
These three complaints can be used for almost all of the levels you posted, as well as the majority of the game.
Now there are a few gems in there, 3D land had a few levels that made me smile, but lets talk about why the structure of 3D land is damming.
Mario 64, Sunshine, and the galaxy games are structured pretty similairly. You are thrown into a level that changes on each mission you do. Each mission contains an objective that upon completion rewards you with a star. The objectives are wide ranging, and are not just "get from point a to point b". 3D land has one type of level "finish the level" the levels are almost always linear, there is no misison variety, no huge levels to explore, no time to just mess around and be mario. In sunshine, one of my favorite things was just roaming around the amusment park. I found all sorts of cool things. On occassion, you can even find secret stars. It gives you a sense of freedom that 3D land discourages. That's fine for 2D mario, but it's not at all what I want in 3D mario.
3D land is also bland as hell to look at. I mean, I didn't know so little imagination in asethetics passed for a Mario game these days. All the while making my ears hurt with it's boring soundtrack.
I'm getting it. Why? It looks fun and previews suggest the same. There's a lot of good ideas and making your judgement from one short video is a bit pre-emptive. The designers say they want the best bits from previous games and are listening to fan feedback, so give it a chance.
As such, it will sell more than Galaxy 2 (which is arguably lazier) and Sunshine.
Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.
And about the risk regarding critical reception, SM3DW is without a doubt the riskiest 3D Mario game that Nintendo could have realistically made.
The cat suit is cheated and will make the level even more easy. It's also a look designed for little girls. It's even more cheated than Tanooki in 3DLand.
It isn't risked, it will get 75-80% in reviews, which is what Nintendo is targeting with this low budget game. It's a basic game, with basic levels, basic assets.... Next step is to create a programm at Nintendo which will make such games itselfs, without devleopper input.
I think the biggest risk Nintendo took with SM3DW is sales wise; in every other respect it's a very safe game.
What other than sales could risk refer to?
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.
Conegamer said: I'm getting it. Why? It looks fun and previews suggest the same. There's a lot of good ideas and making your judgement from one short video is a bit pre-emptive. The designers say they want the best bits from previous games and are listening to fan feedback, so give it a chance.
As such, it will sell more than Galaxy 2 (which is arguably lazier) and Sunshine.
