^, except Mario 64 was like Super Mario World to me, and Yoshi's Island was the one I hated.Quote:
Originally Posted by cowboyscowboys
Printable View
^, except Mario 64 was like Super Mario World to me, and Yoshi's Island was the one I hated.Quote:
Originally Posted by cowboyscowboys
The day running and jumping gets bland is the day I stop playing video games.
haha so true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Obviously
I grew up loving Mario 1 and Mario 3! Mario World seemed more bland than M3, less suits, less dramatic worlds! Also World became pastel colors and very cute art, so I was was sick of it back then, and haven't bothered with any Mario games since...
I liked all the 2d SMBs up until 3, and liked Super Mario 64. The rest I can take or leave.
Haha, I find Earthbound to be overrated. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Thunderblaze16
Mario is always awesome. Every Nintendo consoles needs at least one Mario game.
I was actually pretty happy with Nintendo bringing around Super Mario Galaxy 2 and that they were able to focus on more platforming titles. I haven't played Super Mario Galaxy 2, but the first game was a really nice refresher from the average game getting released at the time. Did it completely revolutionize or ressurect the platform genre? Well I don't really know, but it was a damn fine game that I think deserved all the recognition it got.
Perhaps I enjoy the SNES more then the average person on here but I felt that SMW was incredible. The ghost houses were superb. Unlike the general consensus, I disliked Mario 64. If memory serves me correct, the N64 was a giant pile so maybe my animosity towards the system is effecting my opinion. The N64 never fulfilled my gaming needs as much as I wanted it to do so.Quote:
Originally Posted by cowboyscowboys
Lets realize the negative opinions towards Mario (on this board) are in the minority. Games with Mario in the title or on the cover seem to sell and sell quite well. If the demand, interest and fan base weren't there, we wouldn't see Bowser terrorizing Peach for the umpteenth time. Personally, I could do without Mario invading sports games but his clench on the more typical Mario games is solid and rightfully so.
Let's not forget how well crappy franchises sell too though. Let's face it, they can slap Mario or Sonic on anything and it will sell better than any new IP is likely to.
I haven't enjoyed a Mario game since SMB 2 US, I thought SMB 3 was drab looking and had annoying music, I thought World was beset by "same" levels and nursery rhyme music, and Mario 64 couldn't sustain my interest past the first zone. Almost no franchise embodies the "Try and redie" idea better than Mario, between that and jumping through arbitrary hoops I cannot think of classic gaming elements I like less.
I didn't really like Mario 64 either. It's fun for about 30 minutes, then I get bored and go back to playing a 3D Sonic game. I haven't tried any of the other 3D Marios though.
Very true, except Nintendo is a lot less likely to take risks with Mario than Sega is with Sonic. The Mario spin-offs are usually as good (if not better than) the "core" Mario titles. The worst Mario gets is "mediocre" (the sports games, specifically). Sonic, however, has been in some remarkably bad games. I'm sure they sold alright though, although I stopped paying attention after Sonic & Knuckles.Quote:
Originally Posted by sheath
The only truly bad Sonic game I've played was Sonic 2006. And that was more of it being a buggy incomplete mess than Sega taking a risk. I'd rather play Sonic 3D Blast than Yoshi's Island.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMatthews
Fair enough, but your own preferences aside, you have to concede that most of the Internet feels that Yoshi's Island is one of the greatest 16-bit platformers ever. Even Sonic Adventure is being heavily criticized retrospectively. Mario 64, not so much.
I sold my copy of Earthbound so I could get Super Mario RPG and a copy of Mario Tennis for the N64! Plus still have money left over. Man you gotta love those Earthboundnicks!!
I think many modern complaints about Sonic Adventure wouldn't be as pronounced if it weren't for Sonic 2006. Prior to 2006 Adventure, Adventure 2, and Heroes were all praised and considered good games. It's only after Sonic 2006 being so bad that it's been the cool thing for critics to bash Sonic. And most modern complaints with Sonic Adventure seem to be focused more on issues with the most recent port and not the game itself. For example the poor control issues are more unique to the GC, PC, and 360 ports. The original Dreamcast version controls perfectly.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMatthews
I think the issue between Sonic vs Mario is the Sonic fanbase is much more divided and the whiny minority that thinks Sonic 1 was the best game in the series and that Sonic can only work in 2D seems to be the loudest on the internet. There are probably just as many people out there who love Sonic Adventure as there are ones who love Yoshi's Island. They just don't care enough to yell about it on the internet.
If there was something truly wrong and broken about 3D Sonic games, it would have been brought up and addressed when the games first came out. The games would have been met with harsh criticism and most likely wouldn't have done well. Instead though the games were met with praise, any "severe" flaws that do get mentioned in the reviews are written off as only minor annoyances.
That's not necessarily true though. The typical Mario (Galaxy, NSMB, etc..,) sells extremely well but something along the lines of Super Paper Mario and Mario Power Tennis put up lackluster numbers. Can't any newer IP's put up better numbers? Look at some of the combat games like COD and Battlefield 3. How about Uncharted 3?Quote:
Originally Posted by sheath