Support NeoGAF

[Bronetta]

3D World provided me with one of the most memorable gaming experience along with a few friends on launch day. 3D Land didn't.

Keep that in mind. Get some friends to enjoy 3D World for what it really is. Its still fun in single player but you have to take into account its a multiplayer game.

They're both excellent games and for single player, I can see why some would lean towards 3D Land. For me 3D World left a bigger impact and I found it more memorable, especially the post-game content.

 

[FunkyDealer]

Hate to break it to you OP, but you're crazy.

3D Land is great, but a bit too scaled down and uninspired (or perhaps, too inspired by previous games). I don't like the simplified world map for one. The levels are like more basic Galaxy 2 ones, and I feel like the circle-pad along with 30FPS makes it competent but not great in terms of feel of control.

3D basically takes what was good about it and improves, changing and adding a few things along the way. It has more of a unique character.

I don't mean to say that 3D Land is a bad game, no it's really good. Great, at times. But 3D World feels more fresh, more precise and it sounds and looks better too.

 

[AgeEighty]

I just mean that the levels are designed with "building blocks" of terrain kind of like SMB3 rather than being organically designed playgrounds like some of the larger areas in the Galaxy series or even SM64.

Seriously, look back at some screenshots. The levels look like little miniature play sets rather than real places.

I think you're exaggerating. Blocks are a common element, as they are in most Mario games, but it's hardly Mario Minecraft. And then there's the fact that Galaxy was really the outlier in the series because of the rounded planetoid theme of the game.

 

[eighty(one)]

So I recently purchased a New 3DS XL from a fellow GAFer (thanks antisoulless) and started my first playthrough of Mario 3D Land. I also own a Wii U and have completed both the normal and post-game content in Mario 3D World. Now, back when 3D World came out was one of those people who felt disappointed with it in comparison to the Galaxy series on the Wii. I thought that the pulled-back camera and wide open stages that were made to accommodate up to four players at a time made single-player 3D World feel like a cakewalk. Sure, the postgame levels were challenging, but on the whole the game just felt underwhelming to me from a design/engagement standpoint. The world that it took place in (Sprixie Kingdom) just felt like a lifeless copy of the Mushroom Kingdom to me too. It was definitely a lot of fun in multiplayer, though.



So all of that out of the way, I have to say that I'm really impressed with 3D Land thus far. I'm only in World 5 at the moment, but playing this game using the New 3DS's head-tracking 3D has been a real treat. While the levels are smaller in scope than those in 3D World, I think that actually works to this game's advantage when directly comparing the two. Since it was only designed for one player, the obstacles courses put in front of Mario hit closer to that sweet spot of 2D Mario tightness and Mario Galaxy-esque spectacle. While 3D World is certainly more visually impressive on the Wii U hardware, there's something about the presentation of 3D Land that reminds me more of Galaxy for some reason. I can't put my finger on it. I will say, though, that both games are pretty uninspired when it comes to their boss fights.

Really, I could very well be biased right now because of how much more immersive it feels to play 3D Mario in actual 3D. It really makes me want to see more stereoscopic 3D Mario games in the future, whether it be on handhelds or consoles. Platformers like these really gain something from that extra depth, especially when it comes to conveying the sensation of jumping or falling long distances.

I feel the same, having played through 3DLand (when it came out and loved it), 3DWorld left me disappointed. Sure 3DWorld looks better - but it felt half baked and sloppy. I do think I'd have liked it more, if it had actual 3D functionality for 3D capable TVs. The 3D effect really works for precise platforming.

I found 3DLand so fresh and inventive, it still remains my favorite Mario - trouncing even - Mario Bros 3!

I wish 3DWorld had been a sequel, on 3DS. I dunno.

 

[Moskibear]

both 3d land and 3d world have their strengths. I only played 3d world as I do not own a 3ds, it is a great game that gets even better with more people playing it.

 

[th4tguy]

I liked 3D land better. I didn't like the camera in World and I felt the multiplayer introduce issues that weren't there in Land.

 

[AgeEighty]

3D World also had the best soundtrack to come out of the Mario franchise in many years. I was humming the main theme for weeks after finishing.

 

[OnPoint]

I didn't play World yet, and I intend to, but everything I've seen looks good. Can't wait to try it with friends.

Land was boring, easy, and tedious to me.

 

[Rezae]

I've played both games extensively, and I would pick Mario 3D Land any day over World.

Both are great games, but 3D Land seemed like a better single-player oriented experience. Of course 3D World is great if you have people to play with, and it's perfectly playable as a single-player experience, but 3D Land just seemed like the better experience.

 

[Tathanen]

Sure, but most of the worlds weren't like that. And anyway, I find it mind-boggling that people are actually arguing the game's degree of level variation is a weakness.

Page through the worlds in that wiki. The vast majority of the worlds ARE like that. Level 1 matches the theme, then in extremely rare cases another level later in the world might be tangentially related to the theme. You'll even have sunny grass levels on the desert map, snow levels on the sky map, etc. It's a total mishmash.

Anyway, as I said before, it's tricky. I appreciate that not focusing on a theme allows for greater creativity. But it trivializes the theme, and makes it not really make sense. I'd rather they just removed the map theme and made it something a bit more generic (ala 3D Land) if they weren't going to make the levels match.

 

[rjc571]

3D Land was a good showcase for stereoscopic 3D, but 3D World's far superior level design and framerate put it well ahead.

 

[entremet]

3DLand was great, so I don't blame you.

3DWorld edges it for me, though.

 

[whyreggielie]

I have beaten everything in 3D Land but I enjoyed World more for the mutiplayer. Eventually, the levels got too difficult for it but it was still nice to be able to play a 3D Mario title with someone else.

For all those saying 3D lands final boss fight was epic then you really need to finish 3D world. The final Bowser fight was the best one I've ever experienced.

 

[Chezzymann]

I feel 3D world was a far better game than 3D land. The amount of ideas and level variety compared to isn't even close. The difficulty curve is much more smooth, too. I agree 3D world could have had tighter level design instead of focusing on coop, but that doesn't make much of a difference to me. Also coop was amazing and easily one of my favorite 3D Mario experiences.

 

[tesqui]

Oh I've been of this opinion for awhile now. I think it has to do with 3D World being developed for Singleplayer and Multiplayer, while 3D Land being solely developed for singleplayer experience causing it to have a more direct design. This is why I felt 3D Land had a better lasting impression on me. This might also have to do with sequel fatigue.

 

[Currygan]

3DW is amazing, but there's something that remains unconvincing to me; maybe I just don't enjoy pocked sized Mario levels on my TV as much as I thought; I feel like the portable nature of 3D Land was pitch perfect, while I expected more from the first full HD Mario game

admittedly, the Galaxy games may have spoiled me, so it felt like 3DW was a small step back compared to them

 

[AgeEighty]

Page through the worlds in that wiki. The vast majority of the worlds ARE like that. Level 1 matches the theme, then in extremely rare cases another level later in the world might be tangentially related to the theme. You'll even have sunny grass levels on the desert map, snow levels on the sky map, etc. It's a total mishmash.

Anyway, as I said before, it's tricky. I appreciate that not focusing on a theme allows for greater creativity. But it trivializes the theme, and makes it not really make sense. I'd rather they just removed the map theme and made it something a bit more generic (ala 3D Land) if they weren't going to make the levels match.

First, I'm intimately familiar with the worlds in the game, and no, the "vast majority" are not like that. You're taking single out-of-context screenshots, often from intermediate, underground or bonus areas in the levels, and using them as examples. But in fact each of those levels contain elements of the world theming, if nowhere else but the warp-in and flagpole areas. They're tied in quite well to the world they're in. And the worlds offer many levels that tie into the world theme not just visually but thematically: the cloud world and the carnival world are great examples of this.

Second, complaining that they didn't adhere enough to the world themes—mind you, the same generic "snow world, lava world, desert world" themes we've seen in a dozen other Mario games—smacks of someone looking for something to complain about.

 

[Vampirolol]

I agree with OP. 3D World is more about powerups while 3D Land was about precise and timed platforming.

 

[Tathanen]

First, I'm intimately familiar with the worlds in the game, and no, the "vast majority" are not like that. You're taking single, out-of-context screenshots, often from intermediate, underground or bonus areas in the levels, and using them as examples, when in fact each of those levels contain elements of the world theming, if nowhere else but the warp-in and flagpole areas. And several of the worlds offer many levels that tie into the world theme not just visually but thematically: the cloud world and the carnival world are great examples of this.

There's not much to debate here, the levels are what they are. I'll stick with my impression.

Second, complaining that they didn't adhere enough to the world themes—mind you, the same generic "snow world, lava world, desert world" themes we've seen in a dozen other Mario games—smacks of someone looking for something to complain about.

By not adhering to the themes there's no sense of progression. You see a new world, oh it's desert, let's see some desert tropes up in here, and then you're playing in a green field with colored blocks identical to the world 1 theme. The point of a world theme is that you can look forward to playing a series of levels that are distinct from those you just finished, it's a change of pace. By limiting the theming largely to the overworld and not to the levels themselves, you lose that anticipation.

Also, theming allows you to explore multiple interpretations of a concept. Mario 3 in the desert had the quicksand, it had the angry sun, big pyramids. Limitation breeds creativity. In 3D World none of the themes are really explored beyond a single level or two, so we never travel super far down the rabbit hole on what those themes could've been. We get the most superficial of renditions, then on to the next thing.

That said, the levels still generally manage to surprise, which is why it's not a huge deal. But it's dissonant. They present a themed world, then put whatever they feel like in it. Either theme it or don't, it's that dissonance that bothers me more than anything.

 

[AgeEighty]

That said, the levels still generally manage to surprise, which is why it's not a huge deal. But it's dissonant. They present a themed world, then put whatever they feel like in it. Either theme it or don't, it's that dissonance that bothers me more than anything.

We'll just have to disagree. All I'll say is that rather than relying on wiki screenshots for context—especially knowing how much variation there can be even within a single level—you should go back and reexplore the game. You'll find that you're overstating this factor of "dissonance".

 

[Mory Dunz]

Is 3D World really that easY for people.

I almost want to see a screen shot of a late save file with the lives lost amount for proof.

 

[Tathanen]

We'll just have to disagree. All I'll say is that rather than relying on wiki screenshots for context—especially knowing how much variation there can be even within a single level—you should go back and reexplore the game. You'll find that you're overstating this factor of "dissonance".

Don't worry, I'm not using the wiki for my benefit, I am also intimately familiar with the levels. But! Agree to disagree.

 

[AgeEighty]

To sum up, so far we've established that:

- 3D World's levels are too bland
- 3D World's levels are too varied

- 3D World's levels are too expansive
- 3D World's levels are too "pocket-sized"

- 3D World is too geared for multiplayer
- 3D Land was better because somebody enjoyed playing it with friends (nope)

In short OP, you're not crazy, but there's a lot of crazy in this thread.

 

[KHlover]

3D World is best played with 3 players IMO. When that condition is fulfilled:
3D World >>>>>>3D Land

With 2 players:
3D World>>>>3D Land

With 4 players:
3D World>>>>>3D Land

Singleplayer:
3D World>3D Land

 

[Choppasmith]

Ehhh, I'm probably "crazier" as I enjoyed NSMB2 more than 3D Land.

 

[JobenNC]

I was actually thinking about this yesterday. 3D Land is one of the tightest, most satisfying single player platforming games I've ever experienced. If they had brought that same inspiration to the soundtrack, aesthetic, and overworld it might be my favorite Mario game of all time.

 

[Solid Samus]

I agree with OP. 3D World is more about powerups while 3D Land was about precise and timed platforming.

3D World's most utilized powerups add to Mario's platforming repertoire meaningfully and well. And 3D Land was hardly a game that demanded precision in most cases, though when it did the 3D screen did great at enabling it.

That power up comment makes about as much sense if I called Super Mario Bros 3 a game about powerups relative to SMB's 'pure platforming'. Or in other words, lol

 

[N.Grim]

Is clear that you didn't liked a lot 3DW because you have compared it with Galaxy (wrong), 3DL can't suffer the same problem so you liked it for what it is.

Without prejudice you would also have liked more 3DW.
(Sorry for my english)

 

[MrBadger]

While I disagree, I can see that point of view. 3D Land has a far better final boss, though. Such a good sequence.

 

[Peltz]

I'm suspicious whether the Land camp have even played 3D World.

Indeed I have. I just preferred Land. Land was tighter with smaller platforms that required better timing. World was more imaginative in comparison, but not quite as fresh and focused as its predecessor.

Plus, this particular style of camera common to both games benefited a ton from stereoscopic 3D.

World was an awesome game but I simply felt like Land edges it out slightly. I loved them both though.

 

[Trigonometrize.]

3D Land is my least favorite Super Mario game ever. There's nothing about that's special. There's a laughable three bosses and none of the power ups were fun. 3D World on the other hand is a masterpiece.

I feel 3D Land is the weakest mainline Mario game. 3D World was definitely a return to form for Tokyo after being disappointed in Galaxy 2 and especially 3D Land. Not a terrible game, just a bland one.

Marry me.

 

[TouchMyBox]

Cats rule, dogs drool and 60 FPS is rad.

 

[Pachinko]

3D world is one of the best MARIO titles period - it expertly combines Mario World with Mario 64 and to top it off , manages to have multiplayer that not only works but manages to be pretty fun at times.

3D land is still pretty good but it's more like the original super mario brothers 1 mixed with mario 64. It makes a great combo but it's not as fleshed out as it could be. The use of 3D was pretty cool though.

 

[Beelzebufo]

I'd say you're crazy. I liked 3D Land for what it was, and wouldn't be aposed to a sequel, but I sold it after I beat it (couldn't make myself get through the L missions).

3D World on the other hand I played through 5 Times and would love to play through again.

 

[DownGrader]

To sum up, so far we've established that:

- 3D World's levels are too bland
- 3D World's levels are too varied

- 3D World's levels are too expansive
- 3D World's levels are too "pocket-sized"

- 3D World is too geared for multiplayer
- 3D Land was better because somebody enjoyed playing it with friends (nope)

In short OP, you're not crazy, but there's a lot of crazy in this thread.

Ha ha, really. Few weeks earlier we were unanimously praising 3D World, now we are bashing it because it does... some... stuff.

 

[TheSpaceBetween]

This can't be true in a world where NSMB DS and NSMB2 exist.

I liked NSMB2 quite a bit actually. To me, 3D Land is the 3D equivalent of NSMB DS, ie as boring an unimaginative as a Mario game can be.

Marry me.

Alrighty

 

[TheSpaceBetween]

3D world is one of the best MARIO titles period - it expertly combines Mario World with Mario 64 and to top it off , manages to have multiplayer that not only works but manages to be pretty fun at times.

3D land is still pretty good but it's more like the original super mario brothers 1 mixed with mario 64. It makes a great combo but it's not as fleshed out as it could be. The use of 3D was pretty cool though.

I feel like 3D World takes aspects of nearly every style of Mario game we've seen... From 2D Mario to Galaxy, as well as introducing many brand new ideas, and combines them into one game. Sure, it's kinda all over the place, even from one level to the next, but I'll be damned if it isn't one of the most fun games I've ever played, and certainly one of the better Mario titles to date.

 

[Neff]

As someone who can't see 3D whatsoever due to being partially-sighted, I can say that for my money, taken solely as a game sans 3D, 3D Land falls way short of 3D World's brilliance, despite being a great game in its own right.

As far as I'm concerned, 3D World is 3D Land, but with ten times the creativity, features, and visual/aural impact. It's no contest.

 

[jufonuk]

3DW needs multiplayer to work,playing this with 4 players is a thing of Joy


3DL is great single player fun, tight level design that ramps up the insanity after you get to a certain stage

both work great/

 

[Firecrest]

God, I loved me the hell out of some 3D Land. It's just so easy to pick up, play, and become hooked.

3D World on the other hand, it's been over a year later and I can't even force myself to beat it. It's a charming platformer don't get me wrong, but the pacing feels sooo slow.

 

[RagnarokX]

I would say they're about equal. 3D Land had tighter level design but shorter and fewer levels. 3D World's level design wasn't as tight but it made up for that in the amount of levels and ideas.

 

[InfiniteCombo]

OP, you're not crazy, but mistaken. 3D World is the better game.

That's not to forget that 3D Land is a damn impressive game on its own, but it's held back a bit by the platform it's on.

 

[Fantastical]

I agree. Loved 3D Land, I didn't think 3D World was really anything too crazy. Good game but overrated. When I got 3D Land for Christmas I pretty much played it all day.

 

[KidB]

I really liked 3D Land, but World is a much better game. The levels are more varied, it has a much beter difficulty curve and MUCH better music. And let's not forget about the multiplayer.
3D Land had aa better final Bowser fight thought.

 

[jufonuk]

held back a bit by the platform it's on.

it suits the 3DS would not work so well on the Wii-U the shortness of the levels work so well, if this was released as on the Wii-U everyone would complain of how quick levels go by.

3DW has more meat but needs it for longer couch playing.

3DL is suited to commute play, and it works.

 

[The12thGripper]

3D Land is very good but 3D World just blows it out of the water. To each his own, I guess.

 

[meppi]

Don't know why, but World never seemed to grab me, even though I love mario platformers.
After playing a couple of levels, I just get bored for some reason which makes me sad.
I've only gotten up to world 5 or 6 and have trouble going back, whether I finished Land in a week or so, including all the bonus worlds.
There's certainly something missing in World. I just don't know what.

I'm not a multiplayer person, so perhaps it's that...

 

[chaosblade]

I definitely can't agree. When it first came out I think I played three or four worlds and the game just bored me. It's the only Mario game that has ever managed to do that. Eventually returned to it and started over after constantly hearing about how it eventually gets good once you get to the special worlds. And it does get better, and the Bowser battle is fantastic (the one thing I think 3D Land does better than 3D World), but the fact the first half the game is basically a boring slog to get the part that's actually good really hurts the overall experience.

 

[Shojx]

I had a blast playing through 3D World via multiplayer, but I also preferred 3D Land. It was closer to the 3D Mario platforming experience I wanted than 3D World was. Both are great, though.

 

[Ikon]

I think you're crazy, but that's just me.

3D Land was just far too easy. I can't really remember much from it since it just blurred past. I don't even know if I died more than maybe a handful of times.