oh renzor, what have they done to you?

#51RazumPosted 8/22/2012 8:06:06 PM
I suspect my posts at the top of the previous page were overlooked.

In addition to those, I'd like to add 1 more question.


Hypothetical Situation

New Super Mario Bros 2 now came out in 1990 just as it is now (outside of the obvious swapping of graphics).

Super Mario Bros 3 was released last Sunday, 8/19/2012. The graphics are now the same as NSMB2.

Which one is a better game and why?
---
UMvC 3 Team:
Hagger/P.Wright/Spencer
#52ShinobishyguyPosted 8/22/2012 8:13:17 PM
It's funny how people always try to deny that they're pulling the nostalgia card when it's obvious that they are.

Go back and play SMB3. Most of the levels are just as short or even shorter than NSMB2.
Hell the difficulty curve doesn't even come in full swing till world 7.
Not gonna argue that SMB3 was the better game for it's time but still
#53VyersPosted 8/22/2012 8:25:17 PM
Shinobishyguy posted...
It's funny how people always try to deny that they're pulling the nostalgia card when it's obvious that they are.

Go back and play SMB3. Most of the levels are just as short or even shorter than NSMB2.
Hell the difficulty curve doesn't even come in full swing till world 7.
Not gonna argue that SMB3 was the better game for it's time but still


Michaelnonono.gif.

There is no nostalgia card at play. The nostalgia card is so far removed from here. Nostalgia card has more to do with New SMB 2's fanbase than SMB3's fanbase.

SMB3's levels are designed to be as long or as short as players want them to be - or, more accurately, can make them be. That's called good level design. The ability to speed through a level or stroll through a level is a conscious thing for developers to undertake when they want to make high-quality levels.

New SMB 2 barely HAS a difficulty curve to speak of. There's a problem when people, upon being given the game, can go through it in a handful of hours as a matter of obligation rather than challenging themselves. This is especially so because everyone knows what to expect in New SMB 2, level design aside. The abilities are the same. The enemies are the same. Even the themes are the same. It's predictable. In SMB3, the second enemy you see is something you've never seen before. A Piranha Plant that can shoot fireballs. Then we have the Paragoomba. and the Pile Driver Micro-Goomba, a Goomba that could hide under blocks and try to crush you. And then we have a new mini-boss, new bosses, Dry Bones, Boo, Thwomp, giant enemies, a sun that people still talk about despite being in only two levels, a fish that introduced a life loss opportunity that has never existed in Mario (and is quite alarming for a lot of Mario players that I've observed when they were younger), the Chain Chomps, etc. It introduced new themes, mechanics, enemies, ideas than New SMB 2 did, so it wasn't nearly as predictable. It doesn't need to be NES Hard to be a challenging game, whereas in New SMB, for my example, I practically breezed through it, and only broke a sweat - a slight one - with big coins.
---
Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/Negative_Hippie
Blog: http://www.1up.com/do/my1Up?publicUserId=6123776
#54ShinobishyguyPosted 8/22/2012 8:31:01 PM
Vyers posted...
Shinobishyguy posted...
It's funny how people always try to deny that they're pulling the nostalgia card when it's obvious that they are.

Go back and play SMB3. Most of the levels are just as short or even shorter than NSMB2.
Hell the difficulty curve doesn't even come in full swing till world 7.
Not gonna argue that SMB3 was the better game for it's time but still


Michaelnonono.gif.

There is no nostalgia card at play. The nostalgia card is so far removed from here. Nostalgia card has more to do with New SMB 2's fanbase than SMB3's fanbase.

SMB3's levels are designed to be as long or as short as players want them to be - or, more accurately, can make them be. .

NSMB2's stages fit that exact description. Sure you could breeze through them easily, but you'd also be missing out on star coins/secret exits
#55RazumPosted 8/22/2012 8:32:40 PM
Total of 3 completely ignored posts.
---
UMvC 3 Team:
Hagger/P.Wright/Spencer
#56VyersPosted 8/22/2012 8:39:54 PM
Shinobishyguy posted...
Vyers posted...
Shinobishyguy posted...
It's funny how people always try to deny that they're pulling the nostalgia card when it's obvious that they are.

Go back and play SMB3. Most of the levels are just as short or even shorter than NSMB2.
Hell the difficulty curve doesn't even come in full swing till world 7.
Not gonna argue that SMB3 was the better game for it's time but still


Michaelnonono.gif.

There is no nostalgia card at play. The nostalgia card is so far removed from here. Nostalgia card has more to do with New SMB 2's fanbase than SMB3's fanbase.

SMB3's levels are designed to be as long or as short as players want them to be - or, more accurately, can make them be. .

NSMB2's stages fit that exact description. Sure you could breeze through them easily, but you'd also be missing out on star coins/secret exits


I never mentioned anything about New SMB 2's levels being poor. What I did mention was that New SMB 2's levels weren't SO good that it put it among the greats considering the flaws of the game. So both of them have levels that can be breezed through - so they're equal in breezability. What makes SMB3 based around nostalgia, again?

And I ain't ignoring you bro, I'm just busy.
---
Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/Negative_Hippie
Blog: http://www.1up.com/do/my1Up?publicUserId=6123776
#57mudelledgePosted 8/22/2012 8:45:48 PM
Razum posted...
I suspect my posts at the top of the previous page were overlooked.

In addition to those, I'd like to add 1 more question.


Hypothetical Situation

New Super Mario Bros 2 now came out in 1990 just as it is now (outside of the obvious swapping of graphics).

Super Mario Bros 3 was released Ilast Sunday, 8/19/2012. The graphics are now the same as NSMB2.

Which one is a better game and why?


The first sounds appealing because this game may be easier for the certain movement we have at our side(wall jump
ground pound) which sm3 could've used

But I dont care about graphics considering all I'm playing is metroid 1 and SMB while also playing Zelda1.

But I'd rather more weapons power ups and level design...

Nsmb2 had the same as 3 in my defense.....but it didn't have new maneuvers....which made 3 more difficult to safe your ass

All in all...this is a good game with certain difficulty and a tad of nostalgia

Can we all STFU now? That seems reasonable
---
I don't like anything in the mainstream and they don't like me.~ Bill Hicks
#58VyersPosted 8/22/2012 8:48:49 PM
Razum posted...
I suspect my posts at the top of the previous page were overlooked.

In addition to those, I'd like to add 1 more question.


Hypothetical Situation

New Super Mario Bros 2 now came out in 1990 just as it is now (outside of the obvious swapping of graphics).

Super Mario Bros 3 was released last Sunday, 8/19/2012. The graphics are now the same as NSMB2.

Which one is a better game and why?


Super Mario Bros. 3 is better. It's a longer game, it's a more challenging game, its composition is superior (unless you're suggesting that the music has to be uninspired as well).

This, however, is an argument that seeks to remove a flaw of New SMB 2 from the discussion, that it could cease to exist and not affect its genre in its absence. Mario games have never been about JUST level design, you know.

SMB was about revolutionizing an entire genre. It brought scrolling gameplay to the platform genre, whereas before it was all about screen transitions. It brought solid mechanics, smart design, variety, and a value that games before it rarely had.

SMB3 reinvented the wheel in every way. It had great level design, great mechanics, AND it did tons of new stuff, as I've explained earlier.

SMW reinvented the wheel again. Added a "vehicle", added tons of gameplay enhancements thanks to the Super NES' improved graphical capabilities (spinning platforms, super fast gameplay, etc.). The spin jump added a subtle layer to SMW's gameplay depth, and the map is still considered the best world map in the series' history, bar none.

SM64 brought the game to a new dimension, added physical attacks, wall jumping, adventure-style gameplay, 3D flight, etc.

SMS added FLUDD, NES hard-style platform segments. A ton of emphasis on 3D aerial areas, and others. It wasn't everyone's cup of tea, but it did new things.

SMG added a huge emphasis on gravity, that made it unlike any other Mario game in a lot of ways.

Most Mario games do some pretty spectacular things to prove themselves. It isn't fair to these games to have people say "well what if New SMB 2 was released before a lot of the things it took were introduced. SMB isn't just regarded for being a great game, but for having great standards in its main series, at least in its heyday. SMB3 did all of what it did without any competition in its genre, a huge feat considering.
---
Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/Negative_Hippie
Blog: http://www.1up.com/do/my1Up?publicUserId=6123776
#59Iggy_KoopaPosted 8/22/2012 9:17:30 PM
Emperor4DemiGod posted...
you used to have cooler music and you used to be a lot harder :(


You HAVE to be kidding...I could understand you having different opinions about the music (I like the remix better) but thinking Reznor was that much more challenging in SMW is PURE nostalgia distilled about 7 times.
#60RazumPosted 8/22/2012 9:22:52 PM
Not quite what I meant. I meant that NSMB2 came out when SMB3 did. SMB3 didn't happen until last week.

So all those things that happened first in SMB3 now happened first in NSMB2, and where then reused in SMB3.

If I misunderstood and assume that your answer was this.

-Super Mario Bros. 3 is better. It's a longer game, it's a more challenging game, its composition is superior (unless you're suggesting that the music has to be uninspired as well).

As I already stated, it's at best the same length. I'd argue SMB3 is shorter due to hidden exits and star coins, but for arguments sake, the number of levels and the length of each level is roughly equal in both games.

Challenging is far from the truth. You not being challenged now doesn't make NSMB2 easier. It makes you a better player. SMB3 isn't exactly difficult now ether, despite how much trouble you likely had as a child. Put both games in the hands of someone who's never played either, they will tell you they are about the same difficultywise.

SMB3 absolutely had better music. That's the one thing NSMB series in general is struggling in.


-Mario games have never been about JUST level design, you know. Most Mario games do some pretty spectacular things to prove themselves. It isn't fair to these games to have people say "well what if New SMB 2 was released before a lot of the things it took were introduced. SMB isn't just regarded for being a great game, but for having great standards in its main series, at least in its heyday. SMB3 did all of what it did without any competition in its genre, a huge feat considering.

Correct. Every flagship Mario title reinvents on itself in some major way. Those titles are the ones you listed. The purpose of those games was to reinvent Mario in some new way.

That isn't the purpose of NSMB. The purpose of these titles is to provide a 2d Mario experience that we haven't had since SNES. A purpose they fill very well. It's kind of like Megaman 9 and 10 (although Megaman games as a whole are much shorter). If they went in with the premise of giving us a new Megaman game in the same vein of those from days past, and then added a whole bunch of stuff from Megaman X and that he couldn't do, fans would flip out because they failed to deliver what they were going for. It's the same reason so many people hated Sonic 4 Episode 1 and like Episode 2.

I'm not trying to say the NSMB2 brought more new concepts to the series or that it's a more important Mario title. I'm saying gameplaywise, it's just as good and just as fun as SMB3 and SMW.
---
UMvC 3 Team:
Hagger/P.Wright/Spencer