NeoGAF

I've been thinking about this a lot lately, and I think most games can benefit from the metroidvania style of world design. It can offer you a seamless world that can interconnect minute to minute challenge with "open world" exploration. You can have linear sections and open sections. You can have linear progression and non-linear progression. Complete the game in the developer's order or sequence break. This would work wonders for a Mario platformer. You could start out in a small "Toad Town", from which you can clearly see 3 or so paths that you could take to progress. How cute would it be if the Toads put little signs up with stars that dictate how dangerous an area is. 1 star for easy or 5 for hard. Or maybe different pictures of Toads themselves. The sign with the happy Toad is the "first" or easiest path, and the sign with a silly Toad skull and crossbones is the hardest path. Then, when you do choose a path to go to, you get a 3D World-esuqe platforming challenge that you can either get to it's natural end, or you can find the hidden secret and shortcuts within that lead to sequence breaks, etc. Then you get to a Pianta Town near the beach. etc. etc.

It would be an incredibly difficult game to make, but it would be worth it.

Originally Posted by Glass Rebel

Could you say the same about Galaxy 1 + 2 levels though? I think it would be almost impossible to create a world that is both seamless and cohesive out of the various galaxies. There was just too much crazy stuff. You'd need a system similar to the portraits in SM64.

They had the Shiverburn galaxy which is ice and lava. There was just no rhyme or reason in that game. It was all just crazy floating stuff. No need to worry about cohesiveness if there is no theme.

Originally Posted by Net_Wrecker

People hear "open world" and lose their minds, but there's a lot they could do without actually being a sprawling open world and without losing the tight platforming to regain that sense of adventure.

This is an important distinction that people need to make when they disparage the idea of a more open Mario. "Open World" and "Seamless World". There is a difference. "Open World" like Skyrim or GTA, is completely at odds with a platformer and would be practically impossible to make. A "Seamless World" like Super Metroid or Dark Souls would work very well with a platformer.

Originally Posted by Glass Rebel

So basically Prince of Persia 2008 just done right.

POP 08 came to mind as well.

Even though you could choose any path in the game the special abilities were the only things keeping it from being completely open

Originally Posted by Gsnap

This is an important distinction that people need to make when they disparage the idea of a more open Mario. "Open World" and "Seamless World". There is a difference. "Open World" like Skyrim or GTA, is completely at odds with a platformer and would be practically impossible to make. A "Seamless World" like Super Metroid or Dark Souls would work very well with a platformer.

Here's the thing: I STILL think a truly open world 3D Mario platformer could work. You take the philosophy of "platforming playground" and apply it across an entire landmass with distinct themed "zones" that provide the variety, and you got a stew going. If it was any other AAA dev not named "Nintendo" in charge of mario game development, we'd already have an open world Mushroom Kingdom. And with warp pipes, Yoshis, the cape, and other means of fast travel, they could potentially design it so that even people who don't want to explore don't have to. options for everyone. 360 degrees of Mario magic and a big platforming moveset with which the players can carve out their own adventures.

But, y'know, the whole "wide-linear seamless world" idea is a good compromise, and would work really well too.

Originally Posted by Net_Wrecker

Here's the thing: I STILL think a truly open world 3D Mario platformer could work. You take the philosophy of "platforming playground" and apply it across an entire landmass with distinct themed "zones" that provide the variety, and you got a stew going. If it was any other AAA dev not named "Nintendo" in charge of mario game development, we'd already have an open world Mushroom Kingdom. And with warp pipes, Yoshis, the cape, and other means of fast travel, they could potentially design it so that even people who don't want to explore don't have to. options for everyone. 360 degrees of Mario magic and a big platforming moveset with which the players can carve out their own adventures.

But, y'know, the whole "wide-linear seamless world" idea is a good compromise, and would work really well too.

I just don't see it working. I mean, sure you can make an open world Mario game, and you can give Mario plenty of fancy things to jump on. But how could someone design a truly open world with the platforming of the same caliber as 3D Land/World? I feel it would turn more into Banjo-Kazooie/Tooie. Which is cool, I like those games. But they're not platformers. It's mainly semantics, I guess. I think an open world Mario could work because they could go with more adventuring and less platforming. But I don't think an open world Mario could be equally as platformy as 3D world. A Seamless World Mario could, though.

I would LOVE to be proven wrong, though.

Originally Posted by Neiteio

All of this is one possible application of the "mega level" model, but where you say "2D levels," I picture 3D Land/World-style levels -- linear in focus, but still polygonal and taking advantage of height and depth. They would also be integrated into the larger playgrounds in such a way that they feel like part of the whole -- like a canyon packed with platforms, sandwiched between two mountains that encircle the next open area, which itself has valleys you descend via their own platforming gauntlets, or sheer cliffs you scale by negotiating their complex passageways with skillful wall-jumping, diving and sliding.

Well I guess I should have been more clear, when I said "2D" I was thinking along the lines of the levels preceding Bowser fights (Koopa Road) in SM64, kind of like the 3D Land / World levels you mentioned.

Originally Posted by Gartooth

Well I guess I should have been more clear, when I said "2D" I was thinking along the lines of the levels preceding Bowser fights (Koopa Road) in SM64, kind of like the 3D Land / World levels you mentioned.

Main difference between the "Koopa Road" stages in SM64 and the levels of 3D Land/World is how the camera frames the action. Which raises an interesting question about this "mega model" of Mario I'm proposing -- how would the camera be handled? In a game world that branches off in every direction (at least from the "playground"), you have to allow the camera to rotate a full 360 degrees. It could, however, maintain a certain distance for ease of play, and in the stretches connecting playgrounds the camera could assume a more fixed viewpoint like that of 3D Land/World.

Originally Posted by Neiteio

Main difference between the "Koopa Road" stages in SM64 and the levels of 3D Land/World is how the camera frames the action. Which raises an interesting question about this "mega model" of Mario I'm proposing -- how would the camera be handled? In a game world that branches off in every direction (at least from the "playground"), you have to allow the camera to rotate a full 360 degrees. It could, however, maintain a certain distance for ease of play, and in the stretches connecting playgrounds the camera could assume a more fixed viewpoint like that of 3D Land/World.

Sounds easy to me. Just have the camera works exactly how it's supposed to work for the given environment. You'll have the camera button on the gamepad, and if you choose to press it you get all the camera moving joy that you get from any 3rd person game these days. If you don't, the game follows a preset camera just like 3D World. That is, of course, in the sections that play like 3D world. In the open areas that play like 64, the fixed camera works just like 64/Sunshine/Galaxy, but you still have that button you can press to give you free camera control.

Originally Posted by khaaan

Heh, I was just thinking this as well...but was it really "open"? There were smaller worlds but between a lot of them were stupid biking sections or something that prevented you from moving on unless you collect X of item Y. It's in the right direction though, something like that with more exploration (and preferably less collectathon) would be really cool.

Youre right. Jak had less overall gates (and easy to access fast travel between the "hubs"), but that didnt mean they weren't still there

I don't think creating a single cohesive world is worthwhile. Resources would have to be put towards building filler between the gameplay areas. The linear sections would have to be made so that they could be traversed backwards, which would probably result in them being dumbed down. Plus creating a cohesive world puts limitations on what themes can be used.

Originally Posted by Neiteio

1) Warp pipes can fast-travel from one area to the previous area

+ Canons

real-time flying

This thread reminds me that I need to beat Extra Mario Bros someday.

I'm imagining a game with 3D Land's gameplay, but Metroidvania style level design.

I whole heartedly support whatever war needs to be fought in order to make this a reality.

If difficulty is the only thing separating early levels from later ones, there is no way to prevent players from accessing late game content early on. I know that a skilled player can run into late game Dark Souls areas early on, but it's pretty obvious that you should be at a higher level, and the knowledge that stats do increase is enough to let new players know that there's probably an easier area to tackle.

In this idea, however, the player's skills are the only barrier, as no power ups or skills will be unlocked that are necessary to reach later areas. The only way I could imagine this working is if the world is sequentially locked off, allowing the player only to access a handful of areas at the beginning and then unlocking new interconnected areas as the player collects so many stars. The progressions would be like in SM64, where levels are unlocked in batches, but these levels would be interconnected to each other and the previous areas. At the end, we'd have a large, interconnected game world, but in the beginning only a few levels would be accessible.

Why doesn't Nintendo just make another Metroid instead?

Add double the development time to any given mario game and you might start approaching what it would take to craft such a game. Maybe triple it.

Originally Posted by Afrodium

If difficulty is the only thing separating early levels from later ones, there is no way to prevent players from accessing late game content early on. I know that a skilled player can run into late game Dark Souls areas early on, but it's pretty obvious that you should be at a higher level, and the knowledge that stats do increase is enough to let new players know that there's probably an easier area to tackle.

In this idea, however, the player's skills are the only barrier, as no power ups or skills will be unlocked that are necessary to reach later areas. The only way I could imagine this working is if the world is sequentially locked off, allowing the player only to access a handful of areas at the beginning and then unlocking new interconnected areas as the player collects so many stars. The progressions would be like in SM64, where levels are unlocked in batches, but these levels would be interconnected to each other and the previous areas. At the end, we'd have a large, interconnected game world, but in the beginning only a few levels would be accessible.

All you really have to do is tell players which areas are hard and which aren't in a cute Mario way. Toads could leave little signs near paths telling the player how dangerous they are. As if the Toads made those signs for themselves to know where they should and should not tread in the "wild". Players will know the "order" of levels, but will still have the ability to go in whatever direction they please.

I was saying something similar a few days ago in the other "open world" Mario thread.

Originally Posted by FrostuTheNinja

I figure it could work if you had a centralized overworld with "levels" that web out from it. Add shortcuts after certain conditions are met to make traversal easier. I mean hell, Mario games have warp pipes, just use those as fast travel to different regions.

:D

Originally Posted by Gsnap

All you really have to do is tell players which areas are hard and which aren't in a cute Mario way. Toads could leave little signs near paths telling the player how dangerous they are. As if the Toads made those signs for themselves to know where they should and should not tread in the "wild". Players will know the "order" of levels, but will still have the ability to go in whatever direction they please.

True, but then a player is intentionally avoiding certain areas in order to adhere to a perceived order, which kind of defeats the point of letting them explore everything, doesn't it?

Furthermore, Mario games can be so tightly designed because the developers have control over how and when a player is introduced to certain mechanics, and can introduce new spins on these mechanics as the player gets more and more used to them. A player doing levels in whatever order they choose ruins this, and you run into problems such as a player running into an introductory level for a gameplay mechanic they already taught themselves hours ago.

It's a neat idea but sounds really ambitious, I'm not sure if it would even work, much less if it's right for the franchise. Wouldn't backtracking consist of replaying levels? That would run the risk of getting tiring, and I don't even want to imagine a fast travel system in a Mario game. Also there would have to be some point to it all other than platforming, collecting stars would be my guess. At this rate why not just make a follow up to SM64?

Originally Posted by Gsnap

The only part of your post that sounds like a legitimate problem is that stages would indeed have to traversable forwards and backwards. Definitely a difficult design challenge.

However, there wouldn't really be "filler" between gameplay areas. Just 64/Sunshine style open explorable areas. Those would be fun to explore and can have their fair share of secrets and things to platform on. And they would serve an important purpose of allowing the player an area of rest in between challenging 3D World style platforming sections. Similar to a world map, but more interesting. If there were no "filler" areas, that cute and colorful Mario world would be just as imposing as Dark Souls in it's own strange way.

And there are no limitations to the Mushroom Kingdom, even if it would be one world. People wouldn't bat an eye if you seamlessly went from beach area to cake area to wherever else.

It sounds like a very worthwhile experiment to me.

The filler is the land that has to be made just to make the different parts fit together and make sense. Mario 64 doesn't have a cohesive world. It has small open levels floating in voids that you warp to via paintings. But within those levels is often a lot of wasted space and level design compromises. When resources have to be devoted to cohesion the platforming necessarily suffers. It has to come from somewhere. The more platforming focused levels of 64 are either linear or made of linear paths stuck together rather than big open environments. The Bowser roads, Tick Tock Clock, Rainbow Ride.

Metroid and Zelda work with this kind of design because they've always been more adventure-type games and focus on accumulation of gear throughout the game to make backtracking enjoyable as you discover new paths that new gear unlocks. Mario has always been about overcoming challenging level design with Mario's moveset. Unlocking powerups and moves just wouldn't be very Mario. When platforming is the focus reuse of areas wears thin.

If you start talking about just fast traveling after conditions are met on the linear path to solve the back and forth conundrum then what is the point of making things fit together in such a way in the first place? At that point it's just window dressing. It's nice but it's effort better spent on meaningful gameplay and level design. Would you rather have a 10 minute walk between level entrances or 5 more actual levels?

Q: If skilled players can clear difficult stretches early, what's to keep them from skipping entire chunks of the game?

A: It's true they would be free to get deeper into the game, quicker, much like how players in SMB3 could use the warp whistles to skip straight to World 8, and then beat the game in short order if they had the skill to clear the last world.

However, there would still be incentives to visit the "easier" areas. Let's say there are various objectives in the form of stars, much like those in SM64 and Sunshine. Less skilled players can focus on easier areas and collect stars to open up routes bypassing more difficult areas, for a more "balanced" progression to the end. Meanwhile, the skilled players can access the advanced areas earlier, but there would still be benefits to scouring the "easier" areas for stars -- perhaps they're ultimately required for the post-game content, for example.

The real reward, of course, would be the platforming itself -- if done well, even the "easier" areas would have neat themes, gimmicks, etc, which would make them worth visiting.

Q: What is the point of a world where you can go anywhere? And wouldn't fast travel via warp pipes defeat the point?

A: The point is it brings back a sense of adventure, a sense of discovery, a sense of place, a sense of "what's around the next corner," and "which route did you take," and "did you know you can find this if you go this way," and so on. The stuff we gossiped about on the playground back when we were kids in elementary school.

Imagine just surfing around a sprawling SM64-style playground on a koopa shell, colliding into a wall, and realizing you've never been there before. Then you see a gauntlet of spinning wheels stretching toward the horizon in a linear 3D Land/World-style obstacle course. Say you run over to it but get distracted by a cannon along the way -- a cannon that launches you back the way you came, but while flying through the air you notice an entirely different set of obstacle courses just over the mountain summit. You now feel compelled to run off in two directions at once! And wherever you go, there will be tightly designed platforming -- one way from point A to B, and another way from point B to A.

As for the warp pipe shortcuts, they would be unlocked (let's say via ! swiches) and they would allow fast travel to previous areas. These are good if you want to get there quickly to do whatever. But with so much platforming per capita, packed into every nook and cranny branching off from any given playground, you'd rarely want to take shortcuts.

Q: How would the world blend together all of the different settings and level types?

A: Good design! Like I described earlier, you can fit a linear 3D Land/World-style level into a canyon, up the cliffs of a mountain, through the air, along a river, snaking through the woods, etc. -- all matter of geographical bottlenecks can funnel the action in linear fashion coming out of the open areas. The landscape framing those levels would provide the backdrop, and then open up to encircle the larger playgrounds from which the linear levels emerge. And good design could blend those landscapes -- a backdrop of twisted trees in a haunted forest could open up to grasslands surrounded by mountains that plunge into oceans with islands transitioning to glaciers leading to a candy-coated coastline sprawling before a city of clockwork toys. It could absolutely be done. :)