sixteen-bit
Member
3DL is the Mario game I like the most.
Woah, really? I'll have to check next time I get a chance to play 3D Land. I thought both games used the soft-lock in eight directions.
Better music
moving goalposts much? The first game was even marketed as the "return" of the original Mario back in the day.
Just divide them into 2D and 3D Mario instead. Easier to differentiate..
No it isn't. How this myth still exists is beyond me.No, World is 8 directional, and Land is not.
In that case, entire NSMB series does not worth to belong to the same line as Yoshi's Island. Only NSMBU plays like a worthy successor of Super Mario 3 and both Worlds.
And, yes, I still consider NSMB series as a spin-off one. The games just aren't or weren't made with as much effort as 3D Marios and pre-NSMB 2D ones.
Honestly I forget the exact details for Land, but World only locks on fixed-camera-angle levels. On free-roam stages you have full analog directional control. Lots of people seem to miss this.
I don't think you're crazy. Mario 3d world just didn't do anything for me. I loved 3d land.
..and the complete lack of theming between levels in a specific world. The latter point in particular surprised me with how much it bothered me.
I prefer 3D Land too, but I think it may come from a state of different expectations. Namely, I compared 3D World to Galaxy 1 and 2 and it comes up lacking, and I compared 3D Land to New Super Mario Bros., which it obliterates.
This I'll agree with, but it actually bothered me more in 3D World, because you basically just got one themed level, the first one in a world, then the rest had nothing to do with the world's theme whatsoever. If you're going to create world themes, use them. They felt like a huge waste in World.
I'm not sure where you get this. 3D World had some stand-alone levels for surethe dojo for example, or the shadow levelbut otherwise the world theming was consistent. It's certainly not true that the cloud world had only one cloud level, or the ice world had only one ice level, or the final world had only one lava level, and so on.
Yes, this was the same point I made. If you actually compare them side by side with no preconceptions, World is a better game: bigger and more varied levels, better music, co-op, etc. World never ceased to impress me with the way every level had something clever that wasn't in any of the others. But the limited camera movement and the timer make it feel more limited to some people (not me) than a game like Galaxy.
3D Land just felt more impressive because it was on a handheld and carried handheld expectations.
The world that immediately jumps to mind is world 3:
http://www.mariowiki.com/World_3_(Super_Mario_3D_World)
Before this thread spirals wildly out of control: no, you aren't crazy. 3D Land's focus on tight levels built around a single character, and camera angles that the stereo-3D really helps make usable, puts it ahead.
Best final Bowser "fight" in any Mario, too.
If your enjoying it this much now OP, just wait until the bonus levels where the game really shines.
No, the games controls function exactly like I described in my last post. Both are 16 way, 3D World just has much more rigid soft locks on the cardinal directions, whereas 3D Lands locks only become noticible on certain maps.No, World is 8 directional, and Land is not.
That's basically how I'm rationalizing the preference myself in some cases. I personally really don't think 3D Land holds up under direct comparison, although its got a few levels that deserve mention for being really memorable and fun to play and which do demonstrate tighter design than most of 3D Worlds levels (like the level which has you platforming downhill 'into the screen', enabled by 3D screens, or the snowy one with the tightropes in world 3 I think)Yes, this was the same point I made. If you actually compare them side by side with no preconceptions, World is a better game: bigger and more varied levels, better music, co-op, etc. World never ceased to impress me with the way every level had something clever that wasn't in any of the others. But the limited camera movement and the timer make it feel more limited to some people (not me) than a game like Galaxy.
3D Land just felt more impressive because it was on a handheld and carried handheld expectations.
The problem is now even Mario games without the "New" moniker are using those same uninspired aesthetics. I think that the distinction between "New" Mario games and the mainline series has almost completely blurred at this point.
now this guy is crazy.
No, the games controls function exactly like I described in my last post. Both are 16 way, 3D World just has much more rigid soft locks on the cardinal directions, whereas 3D Lands locks only become noticible on certain maps.
3D Land is not 'analog', its digital directional.
Its as competent solo as it is multiplayer, I don't buy this 'catered 100 percent' business one bit. (Nor do I understand the frankly bullshit way you framed that statement... You might as well have said "After 25 years of Mario games better played solo, one comes out that's MP oriented... HOW DARE THEY FORGET ABOUT US, THE PEOPLE WHO GAME ALONE AND DONT PLAY WITH FAMILY OR FRIENDS, SUCH BETRAYAL) I will never understand the multiplayer complaints. The maps are a little wider but the way people talk about it you'd assume there's no meaningful platforming AT ALL to accommodate for 4 players.no he isn't, 3dworld is probably the only main entry on wii u i simply cannot defend.
I adore pikmin3,dktf,mario kart,w101 and smash but 3d world was a poor effort that was catered 100% to multiplayer and forgot that people also like to play mario games solo.
Absolute pinnacle of nintendo's lazy assed 'new' series.
The world that immediately jumps to mind is world 3:
http://www.mariowiki.com/World_3_(Super_Mario_3D_World)
But to me the bigger levels were less enjoyable than the more tightly designed ones in 3D Land. They were designed to accommodate up to four players, and it shows in every level. There's just so much open space but in these bland, blocky environments. It's not like in the Galaxy games where the medium-to-large levels actually had some visual diversity to make them interesting to explore.
no he isn't, 3dworld is probably the only main entry on wii u i simply cannot defend.
I adore pikmin3,dktf,mario kart,w101 and smash but 3d world was a poor effort that was catered 100% to multiplayer and forgot that people also like to play mario games solo.
Absolute pinnacle of nintendo's lazy assed 'new' series.
no he isn't, 3dworld is probably the only main entry on wii u i simply cannot defend.
I adore pikmin3,dktf,mario kart,w101 and smash but 3d world was a poor effort that was catered 100% to multiplayer and forgot that people also like to play mario games solo.
Absolute pinnacle of nintendo's lazy assed 'new' series.
Galaxy is the only Mario game with cookie cutter levels :3Ridiculous post. 3D World has its flaws, but laziness is not one of them. There's not a single cookie-cutter level in the bunch. And I have never played a minute of it in multiplayer.
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."Bland and blocky"? Come on. There is nothing bland about the levels in 3D World. There's barely a one that doesn't show you something none of the others do.
Legitimately shocked at the amount of preference for 3D Land over 3D World.
I'm suspicious whether the Land camp have even played 3D World.