Would you like more/better world-building in (Super) Mario games?

[Electric-Gecko]

Would you like more/better world-building in (Super) Mario games?

At this point I feel like the Mario franchise is in too much of a mess regarding this. Every Mario game for awhile seems to be in its own universe, with little connection to other games. While most characters were introduced in the Super Mario series, it seems like many of them are not allowed to ever reappear in another Super Mario. Some characters only ever reappear in spin-off games (Daisy, Wario, Shy-guys, Birdo). I feel like these things have been more of a problem since the Wii.

I understand that having a well-developed shared universe isn't as important for Mario as it is for Zelda or Metroid. But I would like Mario to put more effort on world-building than they have. I still think that gameplay should take top priority, and I'm fine with them trying new gameplay concepts even when it breaks the connection to other games. With Super Mario Galaxy, it was worth-it to make a separate universe, but Galaxy 2 should have been a continuation of Galaxy, not another separate universe.

Shigeru Miyamoto has stated that Mario characters are like a group of actors, who can have different roles in different games. Mario, Luigi, Bowser, & Peach at-least have a clear identity, even if it gets excused in the sports games. Daisy, Wario, and Waluigi however, don't have a clear identity as they only appear in the party & sports spinoffs. Daisy & Wario were introduced in a Super Mario game long ago, but the identity of many characters (Koopalings) have changed since then, so it isn't clear who they are anymore. Waluigi never even had an identity in the first place.

One big problem that the 3D Super Mario (and NSMB series) games have is not having the right combination of new and old elements. We can always expect Bowser to kidnap Peach once again. But then there's a big landfill of characters and locations that have only appeared once (regardless of popularity). They should also try having a main villain other than Bowser sometimes. These things weren't issues in the old 2D Super Mario games.

I was hoping that Super Mario Odyssey would improve this. I was happy to see Pauline in the trailer, and I was hoping for more old characters (Daisy, Donkey Kong, Wario) to appear in the final game. But this didn't happen. As for the new elements, the new "kingdoms" introduced felt undeveloped, and most of the character interactions were less interesting than the ones in Galaxy & Sunshine. But at-least having Pauline was a step in the right direction.

The world-building is surprisingly good in Mario Kart, for what it is. They might be trying to compensate for the lack of world-building from the Super Mario developers. If I were new to Mario, I would assume that the tracks are all based on Super Mario locations, and would want to see how they appeared in Super Mario. But they're actually original.

There's probably much that I don't know as I haven't played any Paper Mario or Mario & Luigi, and there are many other Mario games that I haven't played. But for those, I'm going by what I've read and heard.

What do you feel? Would you like the Mario franchise, especially the Super Mario Series to have more & better world-building? Would you like to see more existing characters (Daisy, Wario, DK, Shy-guys, Wart, Tatanga) appear in Super Mario games? How about returning to old locations (Sarasaland, Dinosaur Land) and locations introduced in spin-offs (DK Island, various Mario-Kart tracks) to flesh-out the universe?

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

I personally prefer if they reuse older and more familiar worlds rather than their constant creation of new worlds and characters that end up being trash binned. Tons of new enemies being introduced in the platformers, especially the 3D ones and Galaxy, end up being tossed aside. There are some select enemies that do make a comeback like Conkdors, Biddybuddies, but the vast majority simply don't return and become forgotten. Cluckboom. Penguru. Spooky Speedster. Mandibug. Electro-Koopas. And probably the majority of the enemies introduced in Super Mario Odyssey. I do suppose variety is needed from time to time and the one-offs are meant to keep the world fresh, but yeah, I'd certainly like to see some classic enemies from the older games back again, and perhaps it would be nice if we saw those enemies again as well.

I agree that it's weird to keep the Mario platforming world separate from the spinoff world when I think the platforming world benefits from the likes of Daisy, Wario, Donkey Kong, Waluigi, and others, as well as having Mario's world combine with DK's jungle and Wario's Diamond City. I wasn't expecting Odyssey to be any different, but I wish my expectations weren't low like that.

So anyway, I'd like world-building, because why not, but I don't support continuity or canon or discussion about what's Donkey Kong Universe (like in DKVine, oof) or Mario Universe as I think those debates are pointless and exhausting. I also don't want much of a coherent world as much as I just want to see Mario in the jungle or Mario signing 9-Volt's autograph or King K. Rool slugging Bowser in the shins.

 

[Koops]

There is one question Nintendo.

If you keep creating new worlds, in like loterally every new Mario game, where are they gonna fit on the whole Mushroom kingdom?

It would be great if they actually reused old worlds, and introduced new subworlds inside these worlds.

Have the Beach levels be a subworld of the grassy area, as in, the grassy area has some levels located on the shore, which is the Beach subworld. For the Mountain Area, they can put a giant fortress to act as a subworld either on top (which makes the most sense.) or somewhere in the middle. These levels have a theme that is close to the world in which they are, so Beach levels will add Beach gimmicks over the grassy aesthetics and elements. The Fortress levels are still on the mountain, except there are huge walls around you, and enemy armies try to kill you.

Other ideas here are:

Desert + Ruins (There's never been true ruins in NSMB)
Ice + Cave
Jungle + Sky
Volcano + Factory

I mean, seems better than the actual NSMB roster, right?

Are we even talking about NSMB tho?

 

[winstein]

Certainly, Mario Kart is too big of a property to ignore, which is why it's already got references in the Super Mario games (3D World's Mount Must Dash and Odyssey's RC Car level), but I feel that there should have been more cross references between the spin-off games and the Super Mario games. Things like Mario Party, Mario RPGs and even the Donkey Kong Country games should not be off limits in a Mario game.

I feel that the main cast limitation is worst in the RPGs, where only Mario, Luigi, Peach and Bowser are only allowed to appear in other games, notwithstanding the usual species like Toads, Yoshis, Koopa Troopas and so on. I get that they want to create a new world but I am interested to see how the other regulars like THE Donkey Kong, Diddy Kong or even Daisy fit wholeheartedly into those games. Birdo appearing in them is a nice breath of fresh air, and I would like to see more of that (though in bigger roles).

I especially would love to see Waluigi to have a major role in the Super Mario games because despite his origins in a more minor spin-off game (compared to Toadette, who started in a major spin-off Mario Kart), he managed to become popular because developers had added a lot to Waluigi's character that made people like him, like the unsportsmanlike attitude in Mario Strikers and always carrying the rose starting from Mario Party 8. There will certainly be some people who objected to Waluigi's inclusion but I think there's no harm in the end.

I know at least a few people who will disagree on replacing Bowser as the main villain, but I am in favour of this, as long as they are not clearly a derivative of the King Koopa (King K. Rool is an example of a derivative).

Thank you for reading.

 

[Mcmadness]

The only reason why Mario has managed to remain as fresh as it has been over the years (certain repetitive games aside) is due to largely ignoring that stuff.

Try to do more than that and the series will be dead and need to be "rebooted" within a decade.

So no, I don't. If I wanted a big developed world, I wouldn't be playing Mario.

 

[Moldomré]

...sort of? Let me elaborate.

Recycling enemies while not introducing new ones is a no-no for me. I'd rather keep the core cast of enemies, (Goombas, Koopas, Bullet Bills, Piranhas, Cheep Cheeps) plus new interesting enemies unique to the game they appear in. I don't need them in another game unless they're executed well. A 2D game that features locations from the 3D games would be great too, allowing for a better interconnected Mario Universe - if you want one that's connected. Which brings me to my next point...

I really think that a big fat lore about the Mushroom World, and a whole thing of interconnected games belongs with Zelda. Don't try it with Mario. Zelda is about action-adventure, slaying hideous monsters, learning more about the land you live in (or sometimes the land you don't) along the way, finding out how this big-bad has returned or how he came about, etc. Mario is about "Yahoo! Time to-a save the princess!", and generally bright colors, sometimes-harmless enemies, and not knowing nor caring about how Bowser is alive after falling in the lava for the billionth time, or how his body doesn't rip in half when growing huge.

It's not an ancient prophesy about some random plumber from a far-away land saving a princess over and over for eternity.

It's just Mario.

And that's all I need.

 

[Fawfulthegreat64]

My favorite Mario games are already the ones that do this, so yes I'd like that kind of thing to be in the games that actually get seen by mainstream audiences. I'd appreciate hearing less casual folk generalizing my favorite series as storyless nonsense.

 

[Mcmadness]

It is storyless nonsense. And it will (and should) stay that way.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

I want it to remain storyless nonsense but I like if there's more fanservice and references to earlier games. Last thing I want is lore.

 

[Mcmadness]

What, you mean that stuff they already do? Mario games are always full of fan-service and past references.

Hell just look at ALL of Odyssey.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

Mario Odyssey has mostly just name drops and references to the original Donkey Kong in their worlds. Mushroom Kingdom overall was really, really bland despite having neato references here and there. The fan-service costumes were great, however. But as for the worlds themselves, they're mostly original.

 

[Mcmadness]

And thats all fanservice should be. When fanservice gets in the drivers seat things generally go to shit and I'd rather avoid that.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

I want the fan service to be along the lines of Hyrule Warriors, but maybe that's for another game.

Still, Mushroom Kingdom is bland as hell. They had the opportunity for more, but as it is right now, it's empty, emptier than Sand Kingdom it feels.

 

[BBQ Turtle]

I think I'd personally like a few more references to earlier games scattered throughout, but I wouldn't want it to take over the whole game. I think it mainly needs to happen with locations as opposed to characters, which fairly regularly reappear for something or the other. It'd be nice to maybe have one or two levels in a game which are either based on that of another, or share a similar area/theme, though with the same name- for example, a level that takes place in the same area as a Mario Kart course, or a Mario Party board, or an RPG area, etc. I wouldn't like it to be overdone, but locations rarely seem to be revisited, whereas enemies and characters seem to more frequently (Though I like a few to return here and there), but it definitely has to be in moderation with new stuff.

 

[Electric-Gecko]

Remember that world-building doesn't only mean connections to other games. It's also how new elements is presented within a game. Making new locations & characters well-developed contributes to world-building. Including familiar locations & characters just adds to the development seen previously. It's partially my fault that the topic has went in this direction, as I mostly talked about inter-game connections in my first post. But let's keep this thread about world-building which is both intra-game and inter-game.

For example, Super Mario Sunshine has better world-building than any 3D Super Mario since despite not having any locations or even many characters from other games, as the locations within the game are well developed. Even if they don't go the full extent of Sunshine, I would like future Super Mario games to be more like this, and also apply it to familiar locations/kingdoms. This does not include the story presented through cutscenes in that game.

If you keep creating new worlds, in like loterally every new Mario game, where are they gonna fit on the whole Mushroom kingdom?

It would be great if they actually reused old worlds, and introduced new subworlds inside these worlds.

Have the Beach levels be a subworld of the grassy [world], ...

This is the kind of thing I want in the next 3D Mario game. In my vision, there would be fewer "Kingdoms"/"Worlds" than in Odyssey, but there would be more levels/areas in each one. I would go for 2-4 key areas in each one, but possibly more if you include some "trails" between them. This would make the worlds better developed, and give new life to returning worlds (especially the Mushroom Kingdom).

Not everywhere that Mario goes is in the Mushroom Kingdom. All those Galaxies in Galaxy 1&2 and the other Kingdoms in Odyssey are presumably not part of the Mushroom Kingdom, and Isle Delfino & Dinosaur Land are probably not either. However, there are many locations that we don't know whether they're part of the Mushroom Kingdom, due to the lack of world-building. The [urlhttps://www.mariowiki.com/Beanbean_Kingdom]Beanbean Kingdom[/url] is said to border the Mushroom Kingdom at it's Northeastern border. The fact that we know this is an example of the world-building that I want to see more of.

Are we even talking about NSMB tho?

This thread technically includes all Mario games, but it's mostly about the Super Mario games.

I've never owned any of the NSMB series, but from what I've played of the DS & Wii entries, they appear to be doing it worse than the 3D Super Mario's. While the 3D Mario games have been obsessed with constantly going to new places, the NSMB appears to be the opposite extreme; staying within the same small pool of past characters/locations.
But personally, I don't want this series to continue. Instead, I think they should make a new generation of 2D Mario.

Mario Odyssey has mostly just name drops and references to the original Donkey Kong in their worlds. Mushroom Kingdom overall was really, really bland despite having neato references here and there. The fan-service costumes were great, however. But as for the worlds themselves, they're mostly original.

Yeah. Aside from Pauline and the original Donkey Kong, the references in Super Mario Odyssey are just fanservice that don't contribute to world-building. Personally, I felt like none of the Kingdoms had very well-developed environment, aside from the Seaside Kingdom.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

I have to disagree about "developed" worlds in Odyssey because the game was intended to treat each location like tourist stops, such as through the brochures and the currencies. I disagree, I think all worlds are filled with their own personality. I do suppose you'd like to see maybe worlds that transition between each other more smoothly. Like in New Super Mario Bros. DS, it would work much better if World 6 was World 7, so Mario looks like he's crossing from bright cheery mountain to desolate mountain wasteland of the first half of World 8 and eventually to volcanic wasteland of the second half of World 8. I actually like that kind of cohesion. It was disappointing to see this absent in New Super Mario Bros. U world building, as we've seen that potential in New Super Mario Bros. DS. Is this what you're talking about? It doesn't seem you touched upon that component of world building. I'd imagine this would make New Super Mario Bros. better than either Super Mario 64 or Super Mario Odyssey, at least when it comes to cohesive worlds.

I need to specify that I still don't really want a 100% meta world of Mario that takes major pains to link separate games together because it can be restricting and kind of goes against Mario's nature of being spontaneous and lack of canon.

 

[Electric-Gecko]

Try to do more than that and the series will be dead and need to be "rebooted" within a decade.

For awhile now, it seems that every Mario game is a reboot. Even Galaxy 2 was in a separate universe from Galaxy.
Despite there being some continuity issues, they've managed to keep Zelda going without making it "dead", and Zelda has gone way further than what we're suggesting with Mario.

I have to disagree about "developed" worlds in Odyssey because the game was intended to treat each location like tourist stops, such as through the brochures and the currencies. I disagree, I think all worlds are filled with their own personality.

Alright, that's fine. I suppose it was fine just doing it once. This is also how I feel about the highly varied art-style; It was fine to do it once, but not again.
One issue I have with the kingdoms in Odyssey is the way most of them are on a plateau, with backgrounds which often look ridiculously far away. This made them feel lifeless, as it makes it hard to imagine there being a world outside those borders. The kingdom that did a good job was the Seaside Kingdom, which instead had an ocean on one side, and the face of a cliff on the other to enclose you.
But Isle Delfino felt more developed to me. I liked it that you can see the Island outside the level that you can access, and you can imagine the space in-between the levels. Another thing that gave Isle Delfino more life is the character interactions. I wonder if this contributed to the long development time.

I do suppose you'd like to see maybe worlds that transition between each other more smoothly. ... Is this what you're talking about? It doesn't seem you touched upon that component of world building.

While the transition isn't necessarily what I was talking about, I suppose it would help. It would give a sense of proximity between places. But if they were doing any places as "extreme" as the Luncheon Kingdom or even the Lost Kingdom (with the purple ocean), then they should definitely have some transition if they care about world-building.

If it helps, I'll further explain some details of my dream 3D Super Mario: There would be a few Kingdoms, and each one would have multiple "districts", which are major nonlinear "sandbox" levels. For example, the Mushroom Kingdom may include Toad Town, Dry Dry Desert, Mushroom City, and Twilight Town. There would also be some more linear rural levels called "trails" which branch out from them, or go between them.

I need to specify that I still don't really want a 100% meta world of Mario that takes major pains to link separate games together because it can be restricting and kind of goes against Mario's nature of being spontaneous and lack of canon.

Yes, I agree. I don't think they should go through massive effort to do this; just a little bit of linking is fine. I think they can make Mario 15-20% closer to Zelda in intergame world-building, and 25-30% closer in intragame world-building. Perhaps sometimes they can make a true story sequel to another game (like Super Mario Land 2), but only when it works.