Are the latest mario games better than old mario games?

J

jettyb_wba

Goomba
With Mario Galaxy a lot of people were impressed especially after Mario Sunshine which perhaps was a disappointment after Mario 64. However are games such as Mario Galaxy, Mario Kart Wii, New Super Mario Bros are these games better compared to games of yesteryear. (Mario games that existed until the Gamecube)
 
Not necessarily. It all depends on your personal tastes.

Personally, I find Super Mario Sunshine and Super Mario 64 DS to be superior to Super Mario Galaxy and far superior to Super Mario Galaxy 2.

I do agree that Mario Kart Wii was the best Mario Kart, and New Super Mario Bros. Wii was the best 2D platformer.

However, today, you get games like New Super Mario Bros. 2 (CRRRRRAP) and New Super Mario Bros. U (NOTSOCRAP but needs improvement, haven't played it though, but I judged from screenshots and many reviews). Paper Mario Sticker Star sucks because its new system was badly executed. But, Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon looks like an awesome game. It's not out yet, but it hasn't disappointed me yet.

For the Mario Party games, IMO, Mario Party 8 and 9 sucked. Mario Party 6 was the best.

See, all of this is dependent on the game, the genre, and, ultimately, your personal tastes.

Though there is a consensus that New Super Mario Bros. 2 was total crap.
 
For me Double Dash was my favorite Mario Kart. I think it just has superior levels.
As much as I love Luigis mansion and Mario Sunshine, I still find the old Mario platformers enjoyable which considering they are nearly 30 years old is no mean feat by Nintendo.
I cant see Nintendo messing up the new Luigis mansion. It looks like it will be a fantastic game.
As you say it depends on different tastes, but I don't think another game series produces games that splits its fan base....well maybe Resident Evil.
:yoshi:
 
jettyb_wba said:
As you say it depends on different tastes, but I don't think another game series produces games that splits its fan base....well maybe Resident Evil.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure there are plenty of other series with their fan bases split due to games. Sonic (especially), Zelda, Metroid, Spyro, Kirby, well, I think practically any major game series in existence has its fanbase split one way or another.
 
If I could only play Mario games from a single console (not including virtual consoles), I'd still choose SNES, any day. I'd miss quite a few of the more modern games, but things like SMW, YI, the DKC trilogy, SMRPG and the SMAS ports would keep me quite happy.
 
I pretty much prefer the older games, not only do the platformers seem to be more interesting and have better level design.

Not to mention there hasnt been an mario rpg in quite some time(even though the most latest ones are really bleh to me).

So yeah.
 
I think old games are better. That, however, doesn't mean all Mario games nowadays are bad. For example, I prefer Super Mario Galaxy and Super Mario Galaxy 2 over both Super Mario Sunshine and Super Mario 64 any day. I also prefer Mario Kart Wii and Mario Kart: Double Dash!! over Mario Kart 64. Then, we have the Mario Party case, which, in my opinion, were good until 3. 4 onwards just suck. Mario Tennis 64 is way superior to Mario Power Tennis in my opinion as well.

I despise all four New Super Mario Bros. games, so I just won't talk about them.

And well, Paper Mario Sticker Star is painfully bad, especially after being the sequel to the pretty good Super Paper Mario and the masterpieces we call Thousand-Year Door and Paper Mario.

Baby Luigi, could you tell me the exact reasons why you hate Super Mario Galaxy 2? I really want to know!
 
I believe that while the games are becoming more and more visually appealing, it is also growing more family-oriented. Problem is that many video gamers are more solo players, and so Mario games have been rather boring for hardcore players. Even on the solo games it has been easier to play through so that gamers that probably just picked up a video game could beat it.

Now, Mario has always been the more family-friendly series of Nintendo, but I believe that older games are a lot more interesting for more advanced gamers since they find a challenge to try to best instead of simple and 5-seconds to beat.

Stories and plot have been rather symmetrical, almost like a bell-curve, but it has been denying games a respectful plot of recently like they did early on in gamer, but again, it depends on the player's interest of storyline and gameplay.

Basically, older games are more difficult via how complex some stuff are (good and bad) and have a lite more pixilated graphics. On the other hand, newer games usually have a more simple concept but really good graphics.

Note I am talking about Mario games. When it comes to nostalgia, I go for more of the middle ground because I believe that a plot runs the game. I'm not always interested in just playing a game straight through unless there is a hook I can attach to so that I can have a background story to further pull me into the game.

I think Nintendo has done a great job at trying to expand the age range of players, but I think they also have lost some fans' attentions due to a lack of games to those players to dive into.

My personal question is why not moderate it? Based on DKCR, they have the ability to make games more difficult while still being reasonable. Zelda still shows it can have a very dramatic plot as seen in Skyward Sword. They have the potential, but they continue to spread the "family-orientation" style to all areas of Mario - and some really should have quite the opposite.
 
I'm really into the retro games, especially on the Game Boy Color/Advance.
 
Xerneas said:
I believe that while the games are becoming more and more visually appealing, it is also growing more family-oriented. Problem is that many video gamers are more solo players, and so Mario games have been rather boring for hardcore players. Even on the solo games it has been easier to play through so that gamers that probably just picked up a video game could beat it.

Now, Mario has always been the more family-friendly series of Nintendo, but I believe that older games are a lot more interesting for more advanced gamers since they find a challenge to try to best instead of simple and 5-seconds to beat.

Stories and plot have been rather symmetrical, almost like a bell-curve, but it has been denying games a respectful plot of recently like they did early on in gamer, but again, it depends on the player's interest of storyline and gameplay.

Basically, older games are more difficult via how complex some stuff are (good and bad) and have a lite more pixilated graphics. On the other hand, newer games usually have a more simple concept but really good graphics.

Note I am talking about Mario games. When it comes to nostalgia, I go for more of the middle ground because I believe that a plot runs the game. I'm not always interested in just playing a game straight through unless there is a hook I can attach to so that I can have a background story to further pull me into the game.

I think Nintendo has done a great job at trying to expand the age range of players, but I think they also have lost some fans' attentions due to a lack of games to those players to dive into.

My personal question is why not moderate it? Based on DKCR, they have the ability to make games more difficult while still being reasonable. Zelda still shows it can have a very dramatic plot as seen in Skyward Sword. They have the potential, but they continue to spread the "family-orientation" style to all areas of Mario - and some really should have quite the opposite.
Click to expand...

Truer words have never been spoken. Amen to this post.
 
Hella no. NSMBU was better than most of the recent games, but PMSS was not what most people wanted, and NSMB2 sucks.

If I was stranded on an island and could only pick two consoles to go with me, I'd pick SNES and Gamecube.
 
I feel like seeing a similar topic before.

Though there are indeed some negative examples like Sticker Star, in general Mario games are going better, mostly in 3D arts and console hardwares.

To me the main problem is there is a rest on laurels. The staff rely much on the miracles they had and make sequels to each popular series, which makes a feel of lack of creativity or innovation to old fans, while they aren't active in handling shortcomings.
 
Dorayaki said:
Though there are indeed some negative examples like Sticker Star, in general Mario games are going better, mostly in 3D arts and console hardwares.
Click to expand...
But Sticker Star is awesome...
 
The spin offs are doing pretty good(PMSS excluded),but the games in the main series are just to unoriginial now.
 
They were getting worse until after NSMB2, when it's starting to get back on it's feet again.

Sonic got himself in a pickle in past but recovered from it.

Also the Spin offs are doing fine.
 
I don't think so

I like both old and new, ~each one has it's own kind of exclusive content or style that won't be found in the others~ I always respectively consider each game it's own version~

The graphics sure are better these days but that doesn't stop the physics, objectives and the overall feel of the old games from being fun :posh:

.. I really gotta hand it to nintendo for not just focusing on one type of series but keeping 'em all goin~ :3
 
Anser said:
Baby Luigi, could you tell me the exact reasons why you hate Super Mario Galaxy 2? I really want to know!
Click to expand...

DLC at retail price. That's all that game is. I freaking hate that.
 
Baby Luigi said:
Anser said:
Baby Luigi, could you tell me the exact reasons why you hate Super Mario Galaxy 2? I really want to know!
Click to expand...

DLC at retail price. That's all that game is. I freaking hate that.
Click to expand...

I get it, but that doesn't mean the game is bad =/ It's as good as 1 was.
 
Anser said:
Baby Luigi said:
Anser said:
Baby Luigi, could you tell me the exact reasons why you hate Super Mario Galaxy 2? I really want to know!
Click to expand...

DLC at retail price. That's all that game is. I freaking hate that.
Click to expand...

I get it, but that doesn't mean the game is bad =/ It's as good as 1 was.
Click to expand...

SMG was original. It was a new concept for Mario. Not only that, but it bridged concept of SM64 and SMS into it nicely like the main hub and how to enter each place, while still have some new tastes to it. It was familiar, yet completely new at the same time. It was a really nice game, and though pretty easy, it was still one of the best Mario platformer games out there.

SMG2 was not original. It completely took SMG's ideas and reused the gravity stuff, but basically removed everything else. It was inconsistent with what SM64, SMS, and SMG had set up in the first place. The overworld was completely changed, levels became more SMB-like (short and just get to the goal), concepts were good but were not pulled to their complete possible potential they had.

Now, I don't like SMG2 because I felt like it was a waste of a buy when SMG was much better, and was really just a low-grade SMG expansion pack that only really brought us Yoshi. I was just very disappointed about the fact that SMG2 had potential, but that potential was not only not to the fullest potential, but was more of a negative potential than positive potential. What I mean is that it somewhat degraded itself from the series overall, when it had the chance to be much better than all the other 3D platformers out there.

I mean, yeah, I could rant about SMB, SMB2, SMB3 if I lived as a teen in that period when they came out and said that SMB2 was a waste of time and that SMB3 revived the original SMB series, so I mean it's not like we have changed too much. All I know is that Nostalgia is a strong effect on players, and the more people like games, the more they'll desire to play something like it.
 
I already explained why I hate Super Mario Galaxy 2 in full detail a hundred times. I don't feel like retyping all I said why I dislike Super Mario Galaxy 2
 
I personally like both the new and old Mario games. I'm not a hater of the newer games like many people here, and have fun with the newer games just as much as the older ones.
 
Most of the new ones are much worse. Nintendo's forgotten what made the old games good.

As for Super Mario Galaxy 2, BMB lists a lot of the reasons I agree with. Along with that, there wasn't a lot of new music, a good amount of levels were repeated from earlier games, and any good mechanics weren't used often (besides Cloud Flower, which was overused.)
 
I like old Mario games a lot better. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy newer games, but the difference between an enjoyable game and a brilliant game is there, hence why I prefer the Gamecube's game library over the Wii's; the gameplay for Gamecube games was superior to most Wii games IMHO. I still have a few favorites on the Wii though.

However, one of the most annoying and common misconceptions I see about people liking older games better; others think it's PURELY based on nostalgia. Nostalgia is part of the reason to like older games, but people generally prefer the old games based on the gameplay, not the nostalgia. If you like older games solely on nostalgia, well... you need to fix that. =P
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back