Jump to content

IPBoard Styles©Fisana

Photo

New Super Mario Bros. Wii


  • Please log in to reply
115 replies to this topic

#31 DarkJuno

DarkJuno

    Lord of the Foys

  • Members
  • 8,966 posts
  • Location:The News Desk with the rest of the NRR Crew
  • Gender:Male
  • Philippines

Posted 10 November 2009 - 09:02 PM

Spoiler : click to show/hide
Firstly, the ubiquitous car example: Ford invented cars. This doesn't mean Ford still makes the best cars (Ha. I should know, I've owned two of them...). Likewise, just because Nintendo popularized the side-scroller doesn't mean it's impossible for them to recognize that someone did it better than they did, which appears to be the case here.

Let's look here - Media Molecule began announced LittleBigPlanet in March 2007. That's well over 2.5 years ago. The game itself launched, completed, in October 2008. Again, as I stated before, this is from a development studio of 30 people working for a worldwide launch. When the game launched, it came with a full story mode (over 50 unique stages), hundreds of customizable costumes and items for the level editor which were unlockable, and a fully detailed physics engine to operate this with this game, alongside online multiplayer capabilities. And this was over a year ago.

Nintendo announces this game in E3 2009 - that was early June. They claim the technology is now right for this sort of game (Looking to me like LBP proved this). Then the game is rushed to ship in November from the game company on top of the market right now... without online multiplayer, without even the slightest indication of a gimped-out level editor like in Super Smash Bros Brawl... I do understand that this needs to be a Mario game, and for that to work, some adherence to the brand title need to follow: no different outfits, no messing the Mushroom Kingdom too much... But really, if the only innovation they can claim in churning this game out is a whopping THREE new items and a gimped multiplayer, how is this supposed to look like anything BUT a cash-out attempt? There's not even the option to play Peach here, for probably the most bullshitted reason I've ever read: Princess Peach will not be a playable character because of her dress, since it would require "special processing and programming to handle how her skirt is handled within the gameplay." "Miyamoto-san, 1988 called and wants to know if you'd like to borrow its copy of Super Mario Bros. 2 for the NES." I can't agree more.

It has "New" in the title. I expect innovation with that "newness". I shouldn't have to look elsewhere to find it, Nintendo - I've grown accustomed to finding it from you guys. And yet it appears that while the rest of the world passes you by with technology over two years old that you're just discovering... you're still sadly content with hap-hazardly throwing another game out there with "Mario" in the title for an extra buck, handicapping an untapped potential for WiFi to make sure your already fat wallets are even more full by Christmastime. It appears Mario is now no more than a new-age prostitute.

Besides, it's not like Nintendo is a stranger to delaying anything.


First of all, Karl Benz would like to have a word with you. :P

Anyway, I don't know if I'm jsut misreading your line from earlier, but...

While it will probably be fun, all I see from this game is another Nintendo cash-cow with "Mario" slapped in the title


...to me, would be like my saying that Square-Enix is just slapping "Final Fantasy" onto that RPG they have coming out in Spring 2010, or Microsoft just slapped "Halo" onto that FPS they released in 2007. It's not like making a (good) kart racer or a (mediocre to fun) -insert random sport here- game and tossing in Mario, he already is a platformer. For better or for worse, this is his core series - it'd be like Mega Man X as opposed to regular old Mega Man, though that's a terrible metaphor.

That said, so what? Masa already pointed out the gist of what I wanted to say, but from a completely cynical money making standpoint, you don't break what works. Sure, you add to it as time goes on, but you don't go screwing around with what made it do so well in the first place. NSMB Wii is essentially just taking an extremely popular winning formula on the DS and throwing it on their ridiculously popular console in hopes of gaining the same kind of sales the handheld version got, while throwing in something extra to give those casual gamers more incentive to play. As it is, you really can't make an out and out bad Mario game - a little cookie cutter and safe, but hell, I could say the same about certain other franchises by other companies on other consoles.

Actually, I could say that about almost all of them at this point.

And that's not necessarily a bad thing. Not every game has to be Shadow of the Colossus - if every game was, the gaming world would be a worse place for it, because then we really wouldn't appreciate it for what it is, and instead just be picking at its little niggling flaws (and yes, it has them) that we overlook because it's such a tremendous experience. Besides, Super Mario Galaxy was more then an adequete step forward for Mario games, NSMB was them caving in to the demand for a sidescroller, and by golly, they gave a sidescroller with all the little additions the 3-D games incorporated. It's comfort food, and in a way, it's also there to make money plaina nd simple since it's a guaranteed system seller. You can make all the artsy, creative games you want, but if none of'em sell, hell, you didn't help anyway. You need the blockbusters to keep yourself alive, and given the current financial situation, I can't blame them for trying to give themselves a little bit of security.





Oh, and before anyone brings it up, I absolutely love Shadow of the Colossus, long before it became the cool thing for "smart" gamers to like. Hell, I loved Ico to death long before that, and will do terrible, evil things to people to get to play The Last Guardian. Similarly, No More Heroes and Killer 7 are extremely flawed, but incredibly awesome games, and I loved Grim Fandango since I first got it when I was in 7th grade on my family's crappy old Celeron PC. I'm sure there aren't any in here, just wanted to scare the "I love this highly pretentious game because it's cool to despite never having played it" crowd. :prime:

#32 Toan

Toan

    feeesh

  • Admin
  • 7,858 posts
  • Location:in teh tank.
  • Gender:Male
  • Mars

Posted 11 November 2009 - 06:24 PM

Points all taken, I suppose, but it looks like I'm arguing a misunderstood cause here. I still stand by the point I made of "New" being completely misleading in the title. After all, there's nothing wrong with calling it "Super Mario Bros. Wii" or even "Mario Bros. Wii" - the naming structure worked for their earlier games/consoles (this is to say, take "Mario" and add Super, or 64, etc, etc).

I had more to say, but I'm simply going to take the stance of not saying it - I'm only going to open up a can of fanboy worms. (not directed to anyone in particular here - promise).

#33 DarkJuno

DarkJuno

    Lord of the Foys

  • Members
  • 8,966 posts
  • Location:The News Desk with the rest of the NRR Crew
  • Gender:Male
  • Philippines

Posted 11 November 2009 - 11:11 PM

Fair enough.

Though in this case, I'm sure "New" is like "Super" or "64." It's misleading, but eh, it is what it is.

#34 spunky-monkey

spunky-monkey

    False hope of boobs

  • Banned
  • 1,922 posts

Posted 12 November 2009 - 01:39 PM

I can only justify getting it if I always had three other people round who are competent at platforming titles, however everyone I know is into racing, so that is a bit of problem for me at the moment.

I do understand that this needs to be a Mario game, and for that to work, some adherence to the brand title need to follow: no different outfits, no messing the Mushroom Kingdom too much... But really, if the only innovation they can claim in churning this game out is a whopping THREE new items and a gimped multiplayer, how is this supposed to look like anything BUT a cash-out attempt? There's not even the option to play Peach here, for probably the most bullshitted reason I've ever read: Princess Peach will not be a playable character because of her dress, since it would require "special processing and programming to handle how her skirt is handled within the gameplay." "Miyamoto-san, 1988 called and wants to know if you'd like to borrow its copy of Super Mario Bros. 2 for the NES." I can't agree more.

Now that you mention it, that probably is a half-arsed excuse from Mr Miyamoto. If I were in his shoes I would've at least made a more valid argument along the lines of "If Princess Peach was one of the playable characters who'd there be to save from Bowser?" or anything that doesn't involve singling out a lack of effort on your own development team's part, that would be awkward.

#35 Raien

Raien

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 4,833 posts
  • Location:Luton
  • Gender:Male
  • United Kingdom

Posted 12 November 2009 - 02:12 PM

Is it at all possible that Miyamoto was joking when he talked about Princess Peach's skirt? It sounds like the exact sort of thing someone would say as a joke, and honestly, it isn't like translators don't have a history of taking Nintendo statements out of context.

#36 Green Goblin

Green Goblin

    The voices in my head tell me to burn things...

  • Members
  • 2,977 posts
  • Location:The Capital Wasteland
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 November 2009 - 05:21 PM

Or maybe Princess Peach is associated with being able to float, ala Super Mario Bros 2 (aka Doki Doki Panic), Super Princess Peach, Melee and Brawl. And Nintendo wanted all 4 characters to control the same.

#37 Masamune

Masamune

    not here but you never know

  • Members
  • 4,348 posts
  • Location::noitacoL
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 November 2009 - 05:32 PM

Which is exactly the point, yeah.

#38 SL the Pyro

SL the Pyro

    ANGELSANGELSANGELSANGELSANGELS...

  • Members
  • 6,426 posts
  • Location:My workshop, making fanfiction, sprites and miniature weapons of mass destruction.
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 November 2009 - 06:45 PM

Though it does make you wonder what kind of unlockables will be implemented into the game, considering Luigi is clearly playable from the start (whereas in the DS game you had to beat it with Mario to find out how to play as Luigi). Personally, I'm hoping for some kind of poison mushroom-Toad, but that's just me.

#39 Stew

Stew

    Legendary

  • Members
  • 2,861 posts
  • Location:Awesometown
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 November 2009 - 04:12 AM

Though it does make you wonder what kind of unlockables will be implemented into the game, considering Luigi is clearly playable from the start (whereas in the DS game you had to beat it with Mario to find out how to play as Luigi). Personally, I'm hoping for some kind of poison mushroom-Toad, but that's just me.


So. You spend the whole thread cursing the name of Nintendo, only to plan on purchasing the game anyway?

...

Nintendo's branding power and market pull are awe-inspiring. Rivaling that of cigarette companies.

Also, Toan, if you say a single positive word about Halo Wars, I'm bringing this up so fast your head will spin. =P

#40 Toan

Toan

    feeesh

  • Admin
  • 7,858 posts
  • Location:in teh tank.
  • Gender:Male
  • Mars

Posted 13 November 2009 - 10:56 AM

...to me, would be like my saying that Square-Enix is just slapping "Final Fantasy" onto that RPG they have coming out in Spring 2010, or Microsoft just slapped "Halo" onto that FPS they released in 2007. It's not like making a (good) kart racer or a (mediocre to fun) -insert random sport here- game and tossing in Mario, he already is a platformer. For better or for worse, this is his core series - it'd be like Mega Man X as opposed to regular old Mega Man, though that's a terrible metaphor.

I guess I'll bite. I wasn't going to ask, but I guess I'm curious: Why do you think Square-Enix isn't just slapping Final Fantasy on it? Granted, I'm not intimately familiar with the FF series, but from what I understand, each game has no similar characters, plots, continuity - they don't even take place in the same universe. As far as I can tell, each game has only one unifying factor - Chocobos. So how are these games "Final Fantasy" games? As far as it appears, each merely sports the title to sell more, when they're all just fancy RPGs that could go by any other name.

.....I really swear I'm not coming into this thread to shit on what everyone loves. o.x Chances are I'll play New Super Mario Bos. Wii - just probably not purchase. Hell, if I play it right (with friends, that is) I'll likely enjoy it immensely. I can't justify it, mostly for the reasons that SL said, but also the money. :( I just feel that a game like this should have more bang for the buck - such as online multi.

Also, Toan, if you say a single positive word about Halo Wars, I'm bringing this up so fast your head will spin. =P

Go for it. I have and enjoy(ed) Halo Wars. But I attribute that to the fact that I never played an RTS before, aside from Command and Conquer 64, which was clunky and... more clunky. XD Yeah, no Starcraft or Warcraft for me. The only computer I had in the prime of those games had 56K and it was generally frowned upon by my parents when I put any games on that thing, slowing it down more than it already was. However, I will say that Halo Wars really nailed the RTS controls on a console - at least compared to C&C64. From the reviews I had read before I took the leap and bought the game, I wasn't alone in that sentiment. :P

#41 Raien

Raien

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 4,833 posts
  • Location:Luton
  • Gender:Male
  • United Kingdom

Posted 13 November 2009 - 04:21 PM

Hell, if I play it right (with friends, that is) I'll likely enjoy it immensely.


Looking at IGN's videos, I can't see anything that suggests the levels will be any more enjoyable in multiplayer. Aside from the first levels (which, let's face it, have always been barren in their design. Particularly Super Mario World), it looks like just another classic single-player Mario platformer. There's one section of moving platforms in a dungeon that looks almost impossible to get multiple people through.

Also, Kotaku has a review up and makes note of the new difficulty. It really looks like what all the reviewers have been saying; it's a single-player game with a multiplayer component, rather than a multiplayer game with a single-player option.

#42 Toan

Toan

    feeesh

  • Admin
  • 7,858 posts
  • Location:in teh tank.
  • Gender:Male
  • Mars

Posted 13 November 2009 - 05:06 PM

It really looks like what all the reviewers have been saying; it's a single-player game with a multiplayer component, rather than a multiplayer game with a single-player option.

Oh.

OH. Ok that's a bit of a bummer, and probably where my misunderstanding came into play. I really did think it was going to be the latter.

Alright, makes much more sense now. >.>

XD

#43 Raien

Raien

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 4,833 posts
  • Location:Luton
  • Gender:Male
  • United Kingdom

Posted 13 November 2009 - 05:37 PM

I've just realised that the zoomed-out perspective of this game is messing with how the levels look. If the camera was brought in closer to Mario, I think the game would look much more traditional.

Btw,

Spoiler : click to show/hide
HOLY FUCK! STAR WORLD IS BACK!


#44 DarkJuno

DarkJuno

    Lord of the Foys

  • Members
  • 8,966 posts
  • Location:The News Desk with the rest of the NRR Crew
  • Gender:Male
  • Philippines

Posted 13 November 2009 - 08:45 PM

I guess I'll bite. I wasn't going to ask, but I guess I'm curious: Why do you think Square-Enix isn't just slapping Final Fantasy on it? Granted, I'm not intimately familiar with the FF series, but from what I understand, each game has no similar characters, plots, continuity - they don't even take place in the same universe. As far as I can tell, each game has only one unifying factor - Chocobos. So how are these games "Final Fantasy" games? As far as it appears, each merely sports the title to sell more, when they're all just fancy RPGs that could go by any other name.


Sure, when you boil it down, FF is a traditional RPG (I refuse to add "J" in front of that), but Final Fantasy - and Dragon Quest - are pretty much why all the cliches and conventions those games contain are labeled as being a traditional, normal RPG. The link in the main line Final Fantasies are the "normaL" RPG trappings, plus all the little eccentricities (Magic names, Chocobos, item names, etc.) and plot points ("I'm the big bad guy - except not, because the real main bad guy will overthrow me halfway through the game!" and "Nothing you see now is as it seems, but you knew that because I do a terrible job at hiding that." are the two that come to mind). Why not ride on the popularity of the game that single handedly saved your company from bankruptcy by making a sequel? Oh, yeah, we wrapped up the story in the last one, but let's just use the same names and general idea and make another game instead. When they did make an RPG that wasn't necessarily in line with the mold they made for Final Fantasy, then they started putting different names on those, like Chrono Trigger, the SaGa series, and Mana and so on.

To clarify because I didn't use a great example, it was originally just slapped on, but by now each of the mainline games does keep using enough of the same things to keep up appearances - hell, it's the actual literal sequels to games that are now considered side games to the main series, so it's just a backwards franchise. Final Fantasy is their "safe" series they hang onto as a guaranteed money maker, while they go and pump out the other series for anything that may be different.

Probably my biggest reason that I can think of is because Square Enix DOES happily slap the name on other games it - much as I like Crystal Chronicles, they really shouldn't be called Final Fantasy, and those most definitely have a different feel from any of the other 12, even XI and its MMORPG weirdness.

I guess that's really it. All 12 feel the same, as does XIII (thus far) from demos and trailers and overly dramatic cutscenes. Sure, it's not exactly factual, but through all the highs and very,v ery, very lows of the first 10 games, they all have the same feel and atmosphere, here and there, from the use of the names for items/magic and the re-used conventions and creatures, plus all the random references to each other and Star Wars.

Edited by DarkJuno, 13 November 2009 - 08:49 PM.


#45 SL the Pyro

SL the Pyro

    ANGELSANGELSANGELSANGELSANGELS...

  • Members
  • 6,426 posts
  • Location:My workshop, making fanfiction, sprites and miniature weapons of mass destruction.
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 November 2009 - 08:06 PM

Apparently it's out today.

Did anyone manage to get it when it was launched? I know I didn't...

#46 DarkJuno

DarkJuno

    Lord of the Foys

  • Members
  • 8,966 posts
  • Location:The News Desk with the rest of the NRR Crew
  • Gender:Male
  • Philippines

Posted 15 November 2009 - 08:19 PM

This game is awesome. Yeah, it's kind of a step backwards from Super Mario Galaxy, and it's the same basic Mario platformer formula with the 3-D elements integrated (very well, might I add), but it's fun and just....awesome.

F*ck multiplayer. Single player is pure unadultured fun.

#47 D~N

D~N

    just a humble polymath

  • Members
  • 3,200 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 November 2009 - 08:37 PM

Pure fun is what this game is. It's an absolute blast. Get some friends and play this game asap.

#48 SL the Pyro

SL the Pyro

    ANGELSANGELSANGELSANGELSANGELS...

  • Members
  • 6,426 posts
  • Location:My workshop, making fanfiction, sprites and miniature weapons of mass destruction.
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 November 2009 - 08:44 PM

I'd buy the game if I could... being in somewhat of a a home-college transition period, I'm not sure if my Mom would permit it.

I suggest that someone record some multiplayer gameplay and post it on YouTube while it's popular.

#49 Green Goblin

Green Goblin

    The voices in my head tell me to burn things...

  • Members
  • 2,977 posts
  • Location:The Capital Wasteland
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 November 2009 - 10:00 PM

Dude, this game is kicking my ass more than I thought it would :lol:

I'm in the 3rd world. Maybe it's because I'm so anal about those damn coins.

#50 Ikiosho

Ikiosho

    FINN YOU BUTTCHICKEN

  • Members
  • 1,002,488 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Macedonia

Posted 15 November 2009 - 10:43 PM

AH! I can't wait to get this. I can't buy it because my birthday's on Thursday, and I had asked for it. And even if I don't get it, I'm buying it then. I don't want to wait 4 more days!

#51 TheAvengerLever

TheAvengerLever

    The Crispin Glover of LA

  • Members
  • 4,105 posts
  • Location:On Youtube.
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 November 2009 - 01:39 AM

Sorry DJ, Super Mario Galaxy sucked.

Edited by TheAvengerButton, 16 November 2009 - 01:40 AM.


#52 DarkJuno

DarkJuno

    Lord of the Foys

  • Members
  • 8,966 posts
  • Location:The News Desk with the rest of the NRR Crew
  • Gender:Male
  • Philippines

Posted 16 November 2009 - 01:52 AM

Opinion. Which you're free to have.

#53 Masamune

Masamune

    not here but you never know

  • Members
  • 4,348 posts
  • Location::noitacoL
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 November 2009 - 02:05 AM

Sorry DJ, Super Mario Galaxy sucked.


To be fair, it's only because Super Mario Sunshine existed first.

#54 Mad Scrub

Mad Scrub

    Master

  • Members
  • 958 posts
  • Location:South Australia
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 November 2009 - 02:58 AM

I bought it last Thursday and I'm up to World 7. I haven't unlocked all the secret levels/worlds, collected the coins, and rescued Toad in all of them though.

#55 Raien

Raien

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 4,833 posts
  • Location:Luton
  • Gender:Male
  • United Kingdom

Posted 16 November 2009 - 02:00 PM

Sorry DJ, Super Mario Galaxy sucked.


Still suffering jetlag from your trip to Backwards Land, I presume?

#56 Mad Scrub

Mad Scrub

    Master

  • Members
  • 958 posts
  • Location:South Australia
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 November 2009 - 05:17 PM

Can you elaborate on why Super Mario Galaxy sucked? Sure you couldn't collect stars in whichever order you wanted like in Super Mario 64 but other than that.

#57 vodkamaru

vodkamaru

    Master

  • Members
  • 919 posts
  • Location:Cape Girardeau, MO
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 November 2009 - 08:45 PM

I really enjoy the game minus the obvious flaws (no online play, 2 toads instead of Peach/Daisy or Wario/Waluigi). I was hoping for more of a challenge, but searching out star coins adds to that a bit. It would have been nice to have the minigames that Mario 64 DS and New Mario Bros DS had too. Oh well, I have my platforming fix now.
Spoiler : click to show/hide
Mario runs around hatless when he has 99 lives.


#58 TheAvengerLever

TheAvengerLever

    The Crispin Glover of LA

  • Members
  • 4,105 posts
  • Location:On Youtube.
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 November 2009 - 09:31 PM

I thought SMG was a step backward. Maybe a step above the travesty that was Sunshine. The gameplay is delicious and familiar, but in terms of a Mario game it just feels, for lack of a better pun, alien. It just doesn't feel like a Mario game. Now, having played a little bit of NSMBW, I can already tell I'm going to like this one better. If Galaxy were something other than a Mario game, maybe I'd enjoy it more.

It would be awesome, if in a Mario game, we could actually explore the whole of the Mushroom Kingdom in 3D. Not blast off to far away planetoids where for some strange reason, these floating rocks in outer space have blue, cloudy skies and breathable atmosphere o.o

I didn't like Super Paper Mario either, though it had a good story, and prominent Luigi gameplay.

#59 Raien

Raien

    Famicom

  • Members
  • 4,833 posts
  • Location:Luton
  • Gender:Male
  • United Kingdom

Posted 17 November 2009 - 09:54 PM

I thought SMG was a step backward. Maybe a step above the travesty that was Sunshine. The gameplay is delicious and familiar, but in terms of a Mario game it just feels, for lack of a better pun, alien. It just doesn't feel like a Mario game. Now, having played a little bit of NSMBW, I can already tell I'm going to like this one better. If Galaxy were something other than a Mario game, maybe I'd enjoy it more.

It would be awesome, if in a Mario game, we could actually explore the whole of the Mushroom Kingdom in 3D. Not blast off to far away planetoids where for some strange reason, these floating rocks in outer space have blue, cloudy skies and breathable atmosphere o.o


For a series so completely random as Mario, I fail to see how space-themed randomness is enough to say the entire game "sucked". You're telling me that breathable water is fine, but breathable space just fails to suspend disbelief?

#60 Masamune

Masamune

    not here but you never know

  • Members
  • 4,348 posts
  • Location::noitacoL
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 November 2009 - 09:55 PM

I liked Super Mario Galaxy, but I personally found it a step down from Super Mario Sunshine. I got my enjoyment out of it, but after I got finished with the main game and beat Bowser, I didn't feel as compelled to keep exploring like I did in Sunshine. Except for the possibility of unlocking Luigi, it didn't really matter to me.




Copyright © 2025 Zelda Legends