What next for 3D Mario? Odyssey 2, Galaxthree, Sunshine HD, 3D World 3, Retirement?

Tomous wrote:
Errkal wrote:Because motion controls suck, they are stupid, they are annoying, and they are gooseberry fool. Nintendo need to get the strawberry float over them.

This is rubbish. Motion control in Splatoon allows quicker and more precise aiming than analogue would.

They can be annoying where they’re pointlessly forced into a game for the sake of it, but Nintendo are using them more to compliment the main control scheme (for example, aiming your bow in BOTW).

Motion tweaking like it BOTW is fine, it enhances, ONLY motion is gooseberry fool. See all motion shrines in BOTW for details.

As I said before, I think some of the problems are with how vaguely the controls are explained or demonstrated. It's easy to say "press the A button" for an action as there's only really one way to press that button.

But saying, "shake the Wii remote" or "slash it in a diagonal direction" for something is more imprecise. A "shake" is less definitive an action that pressing the A button.

I think the problem was with the feedback to the user, especially in stuff like Skyward Sword. I maintain that the controls in that game just flat out worked, but I don't think players who were doing incorrect inputs got the feedback they needed to correct this and stopped getting frustrated. I watched a video today actually, about SS, that seemed to suggest a lot of players were unaware that the sensor bar, how it was positioned and how you were pointing at it, affected the controls. I didn't know this, so it might have just been how I was naturally sitting in front of my console that led to the motion controls being accurate. But any inaccuracy wasn't really relied to the player well.

But I maintain that motion controls work. Especially in SS, but also in Splatoon and the gyro aiming (played Starfox Zero over the summer and liked the aiming in that too).

I also don't mean to be too abrasive, but I do think that there's a certain luddite way ot thinking behind it too. It's new and it goes against what we have learned and people had already made their minds up about how it was unneeded.

Again, I've never understood the criticise for Galaxy's spin. In Donkey Kong Country Returns the rolling being mapped to motion wasn't a great idea for a number of reasons, but in Galaxy it worked fine.

I just hate full on motion control, it feels stupid and childish. I don’t mind having it there a bit as is ya for tuning aim and a bit of looking about, but as the main way to play it’s horrid.

But it "feeling stupid and childish" is a subjective opinion you have about motion controls rather than objective flaw with the controls themselves. It's almost like you preconditioned yourself to hate them from the off.

The thing is, stuff like the Galaxy wiggle and the Skyward Sword controls didn't involve grand gestures or extravagant role playing - you weren't Larping or anything - even the sword slashes just required a flick through of the wrist in a certain direction. No more or less childish than playing a game about a fairy boy in green tights but pressing the A button.

No different to VR and sticking that headset on and turning and flailing about like a loon either.

I think motion control, when done well, adds an awful lot to gameplay. VR wouldn't be anything like the experience it is without motion control and I think aspects of Skyward Sword worked really well with motion controls, the sword combat was so much more tactical than just smashing the 'A' button. Likewise, gyro aiming in games like Splatoon and Breath of the Wild works brilliantly and improves the gameplay by removing some of the inaccuracy of analogue stick aiming. It's when it is used unnecessarily, in scenarios where analogue controls would work just as well, that it becomes frustrating. Aspects of Skyward Sword like swimming and flying gained nothing from the motion controls and shrine puzzles in BOTW would have been more enjoyable to me with the analogue stick.

As far as Mario goes, I never found the motion controls in Galaxy to be detrimental to the experience but I also don't think anything would be lost by taking them away. A Galaxy HD collection could easily adapt itself to remove the need for any motion/pointer controls. It wouldn't be top of my list though, I've recently been playing Mario Galaxy 2 on Wii U and it still looks and plays well enough that I'd rather seem them revisit an older game first. I think a full Mario 64 remake, using the Odyssey engine would be absolutely incredible. The original game is still fun but definitely shows its age, if it also incorporated some of the ideas from the DS version but expanded on them then it could easily become the definitive way to play Mario 64.

I'd still prefer something entirely new though - A Mario Sunshine sequel that crosses over with Splatoon would be brilliant!

What ever happends they need to bring back the capturing mechanic

I am utterly amazed at the two people voting for a 3D World sequel, and would be keen on reading why they voted that way. I suspect it’s an overlap with the last option.

I would prefer a 3D World sequel to an Odyssey sequel personally.

Also, if you played through 3D World in 4 player, it's a huge amount of fun and a better experience than single player. I know that's not what the majority of people want from 3D Mario (and totally understand why) but if that's what you enjoyed about it, wanting a sequel makes sense.

I had completely forgotten about the four-player aspect, I’ll grant you that. I still maintain that this:

Tomous wrote:I would prefer a 3D World sequel to an Odyssey sequel personally.

is a high level of nonsense though, if considering the one-player experience only (IMO). The things wrong with Odyssey (too many easy Moons, empty space in levels) are fixable in a sequel. The things wrong with SM3DW (overly linear, time limits) are fundamental to its gameplay, with the possible exception of the blocky non-organic course structures.

Balladeer wrote:I had completely forgotten about the four-player aspect, I’ll grant you that. I still maintain that this:

Tomous wrote:I would prefer a 3D World sequel to an Odyssey sequel personally.

is a high level of nonsense though, if considering the one-player experience only (IMO). The things wrong with Odyssey (too many easy Moons, empty space in levels) are fixable in a sequel. The things wrong with SM3DW (overly linear, time limits) are fundamental to its gameplay, with the possible exception of the blocky non-organic course structures.

I had more fun playing 3D World than Odyssey. It was constantly throwing new and inventive ideas at you, and while the levels could be short there was a great pace to it that kept momentum going. I was rarely bored by it and if I didn't like a level, I was quickly onto the next anyway. Whereas Odyssey was much more up and down for me. When it was good it was really good but there were too many dull, repetitive moments. And linear isn't a criticism if you enjoy that style of Mario. The time limits weren't really necessary though I'll grant you.

Saying that, I would go for an Odyssey sequel if they went for a quality over quantity approach with the Moons and the levels were more consistently of the Sand Kingdom/Metro Kingdom standard.

Your description of what you loved about 3D World is exactly what I loved about Odyssey - it was constantly throwing new and inventive ideas at you. I just loved how each Kingdom added new enemies to capture and clever new ways to use the movesets of those enemies to solve challenges, building on what has come before etc. Just brilliant stuff.

I still don't really get the problem with the moons in Odyssey, there are comfortably enough exceptionally well designed moons in the game to complete it - you don't need to do anywhere near all of them to finish the game. Anything that drew me back into the game for more was a bonus in my book and I loved the post game content.

Jenuall wrote:I still don't really get the problem with the moons in Odyssey, there are comfortably enough exceptionally well designed moons in the game to complete it - you don't need to do anywhere near all of them to finish the game. Anything that drew me back into the game for more was a bonus in my book and I loved the post game content.

For the same reason that if you could get an Olympic Gold Medal by sitting on your bottom for thirty minutes it would devalue the medals overall. Getting the same reward for a well-designed obstacle course and for ground pounding a glowing patch that’s out in the open makes the obstacle course Moon feel lesser.

I obviously agree more with you than Toumous in the majority of your post (3D World’s levels often felt a bit samey because of that oblong geometry, and for someone who grew up on SM64 linearity in a 3D Mario is definitely a criticism); but I do feel like Moons either needed to be rarer, or there needed to be (say) Blue Moons which were awarded for only the tougher tasks.

I accept playing it through to 100% diluted the overall experience for me, but it's still a valid criticism of the game in my opinion. You shouldn't have to ignore the duller content and the padding. The completionist in me wanted to get all the moons-and to get to the Darker Side of the Moon you need 500 of them and there definitely aren't anywhere near that amount of great power moons in the game. But while it's all well and good saying you don't need to get all of them, if you don't, how do you know you're not missing out on the more well designed ones? And there are certainly some really well designed moons in the game-it didn't need that padding or repetition.

Yeah I've said in the past that a tiered approach to the moons would probably have been better, but that doesn't discount the point - you don't need to do any "filler" moons if you don't want to, they aren't on the critical path.

The medal analogy doesn't fit - you can't complete the game just by finding moons in glowing patches (or other similar things that meet people's description of "filler"). The first run through the game has very few of those kinds of moons - the vast majority of the goals set and that players will experience on their run to the end of the game are well designed, inventive and challenging. It's only if you are a completionist that you will discover that yes there is a fair amount of repitition that crops up later - but even then you also get a whole bunch of extra challenges that aren't so trite.

I can appreciate that it is an area that is worthy of some criticism and one they could improve in a sequel, but it's almost all end game bonus content so it's hard to really be down on it. If the main game were 50 good challenges versus 200 gooseberry fool ones then I would be on board with criticising it more!

Mmm, I disagree. I didn’t find the postgame too bad because it was just that: postgame. I did however find a lot of the earlier Moons (not all of them, but definitely enough of them, sitting on your bum and the 100m Snooze nestled in amongst running and hurdles) felt trite, easy, or obvious in a way that the Stars didn’t in SM64.

That said, Odyssey is my second-favourite game ever. They got a lot more right than wrong!

Lots of criticism of empty space in Odyssey's levels but also a lot of citing of the Sand Kingdom as one of the best? IDGI

You know what had a great post game? 3D World :shifty:

The Sand Kingdom is one of the best. It also has a lot of pointless boring empty space.

Dannie Lennox wrote:Lots of criticism of empty space in Odyssey's levels but also a lot of citing of the Sand Kingdom as one of the best? IDGI

Sand Kingdom is a great level to explore, plenty to discover, plenty of interesting things to see and do, with a lovely aesthetic to boot. The empty spaces aid the exploration and discovery rather than detract from the level, especially as it's great fun zooming round it when you get the sphynx taxi.

I think you need 124 moons to complete the game, there are easily 124 excellent moons in the game!

There have always been some trite or repetitive stars/shines/whatever it was in Galaxy in these games. Stuff in 64 like finding the 8 red coins in each level, touching 4/5 things that make a number appear, collect 100 coins etc. wasn't exactly thrilling 100% of the time - hell even some stars are just sat there in "!" boxes or just given to you for talking to toad! :lol:

What next for 3D Mario? Odyssey 2, Galaxthree, Sunshine HD, 3D World 3, Retirement?

What would you most like to see?

Who is online

Affiliates