Poll Talk

Status
Not open for further replies.
i'd pick the second option, i don't like nostalgia whoring
 
I enjoy seeing old stuff returning, however not when it begins to feel like filler material that's becoming an immediate go-to for new games. I suppose I feel this way about Boom Boom.
 
I picked the second option. As much as I like the old stuff, I still want new stuff there as well. I think that's one of the areas where New Super Mario Bros. 2 went wrong, it was nice seeing Reznor back, but then they only introduced six new enemies, all of which were based off of existing ones, and I think one new power-up, that overall wasn't that interesting.
 
I think I'll go for the second option, while I love seeing some of my favourite enemies and power-ups return, I also think each new Mario game should introduce some new enemies, power-ups and features. Even if the new features of a Mario game doesn't return in a later game, it's still important to have new or different features in a Mario game so each one feels new or exciting (something that the NSMB. series doesn't achieve).
 
A new poll appears!

Will you pay for the Nintendo Switch Online Service?
*Yes, I intend to pay for the online services.
*It will depend on the price and the quality of the offered features.
*No, I am not interested in spending money at all.
*I don't have an opinion on this subject.

I voted no, mainly because I don't have a lot of money to spend at the moment. Online play is great, but I'd rather games focus more on offline multiplayer as well.

Additionally, you don't have to wait for me to post a poll. This one was a little late, sure, but if you see that the new poll hasn't been posted here yet, feel free to post it.
 
I'll go for the second option, it all depends on which games I want that have online multiplayer (all of them, that's if ARMS has online, which it probably will), and how good it is.

Alex95 said:
Additionally, you don't have to wait for me to post a poll. This one was a little late, sure, but if you see that the new poll hasn't been posted here yet, feel free to post it.
Click to expand...

People have already posted polls before you before.
 
Shy Guy on Wheels said:
People have already posted polls before you before.
Click to expand...

Lord Bowser posted one earlier, and Shokora posted the April Fools' Day one (which doesn't really count :P ). The rest have been me.
 
I was tempted to post it, but decided I needed to do other things. Also, I picked the "no" option, I don't really play online that much, so I'm not going to pay for something I don't plan on using too often.
 
Definitely not. I never play online, 99% of my time is spent offline in any game, the only 1% is when I play with friends, and that was years ago.

Online should have been free regardless, no matter what other stuff they do to justify the price. The existence of PC's free online services stamps all over the concept of paid online.
 
What do you think is the biggest flaw of the Mario platformers?
*Level design
*Story
*Art style
*Music
*Difficulty
*Content
*Other

I'm honestly not sure. Perhaps story and how practically nonexistent it is (Bowser captures Peach, Mario saves her, whoopdie-freaking-do)?
 
For 2D Mario platformers, I say its art style, especially from the New Super Mario Bros. games. Its reliance on using both 3D models and 2D tilesets is hideous and jarring. If it was the other way around, with 3D environments with 2D characters, it may have worked far better; I mean, that's exactly how Paper Mario got its unique art style.

This is an example of how gross the art style is

NSMBgroupart.png


A bunch of stock artwork pasted on top of 2D tilesets. Not even orthographic views of 3 dimensions are this flat.

If you want a good representation of how 2D Mario should look like, Galaxy's 2.5d segments are a great start.
 
Overall I believe 2D Mario's biggest flaw is its refusal to be inventive and creative. I know that 3D Mario is typically reserved for the creative role, but 2D Mario could be so much more.
 
The 2D platformers are most susceptible to this, but Nintendo just keeps repeating the formula of go from left to right in a really generic level and save the princess from Bowser because ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ they don't want to take risks for whatever reason.

Prime example: NSMB2.
 
I don't think the cookie-cutter story is that big of a deal. It's just that it stems from the overall problem of being too safe. Super Mario Odyssey has a "Bowser kidnaps Peach story" yet people adore that game's first looks. The dang same environments and sterile, samey level design, and same gameplay mechanics are the ones to blame for how stagnant the New Super Mario Bros. franchise is; mod New Super Mario Bros. Wii into Newer Super Mario Bros. Wii and somehow, many of that game's problems just...vanish.

I swear, if I see another World 2 being a desert level again, I'm going after all of those overgrazers and whatever else is responsible for the continuing desertification of the land.
 
Story, by a long shot. Galaxy is the only mainline Mario so far with a story that stood out to me, and even then the best parts were snuck in behind Miyamoto's back. Sunshine I guess had some cool plot too but that game's other issues prevented me from finishing it. For the most part, if I could change one thing I would make them more plot-driven. Sometimes plot events are so half-assed it almost feels like a parody of itself. (Yay, Kamek's magic revived Bowser into a giant again, I'm sooo shocked! 10/10 plot twist, never been done before!)

Super Mario Odyssey looks promising so hopefully this will get at least somewhat better with that game.
 
Yeah, the 2D Mario games could use some work in just about every aspect. The first four and NSMB1 were great, but got stale after Wii. 3D Mario games are doing pretty good so far, though 3D World isn't anywhere close to my favorite 3D platformer. Depth perception was terrible for one.
 
Story aren't needed in platformers imo. Like if it exists, cool, but docking points because they don't is unfair.

I would have to say content, but ONLY with the more recent Mario platformers. The earlier ones are perfectly fine.
 
For the 2D games originality is definitely needed. Please don't rehash an 8 year old game for the, what, 6th time? That basically means everything in that list.

As for 3D, since everything is practically perfect, story is the only thing that can improve by a decent margin but tbh I don't think I want it to. Super Mario Galaxy's end-game story felt pretty stupid and unfitting imo and Sunshine just didn't do a great job in general. This also applies to Kirby games for example, which try a bit harder with the story but the amount of unexplained and missing info just makes it more of a mess. I would prefer a minimal story over those since it works and doesn't take away from the game. As for Odyssey I wouldn't mind that one having more story because it needs to explain what the heck is going on.

Also improve the bosses. 3D ones ususally have an incredibly lame design and are forgettable and 2D ones are just the same easy fights over and over.
 
I would say level design because I don't know what else to say. As long as the platformer's fun, I like it. That is, for 2Ds.

3Ds better work on story since there's also not really anything else.
 
Landia said:
Story aren't needed in platformers imo. Like if it exists, cool, but docking points because they don't is unfair.

I would have to say content.
Click to expand...
I agree with everything I've quoted. New Super Mario Bros. for DS is one of the better Mario platformers as of late, generally because it had other modes to play with that were quote fun. As far as I'm aware NSMBW and NSMB2 don't do this. New Super Mario Bros. U was a step in the right direction with the additional modes, but I also felt it relied enemy and item-wise (I consider both of these as content), on NSMBW, instead of coming up with new ideas.
 
I voted difficulty. New Super Mario Bros. obsession with handing out 1-Up Mushrooms like they're the weimar mark not only make the concept of a life counter pratically vestigial, it makes many gameplay mechanics pointless: there's no incentive to explore to collect more coins or optimize your paths because you'll get plenty anyway, 1-Up Mushroom houses don't feel special when you can amass 30+ lives in the first world without using them, etc.

I don,t even think they need to radically overhaul the games: having midbosses that aren,t simplistic and pratically immobile, and doing away with handing out the 1-Up as the default reward for every random secret and side-task would already go a long way.
 
Do you read our community newsletter, The 'Shroom?
*Yes, I read all of it.
*Yes, but only some sub-teams (Fake News, Fun Stuff, etc.).
*Yes, but only some sections (Monthly Report, Movie Reviews, etc.).
*I don't read it.
*I don't know what The 'Shroom is.

Considering I write for it, yes, I do read The 'Shroom.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back