Original four? You mean SMB1, SMB2jp, SMB Arcade and SMB Special?
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Rumor: New Super Mario Bros. U is headed to Nintendo Switch, possibly this year.
- Thread starter Phendrift
- Start date
Hmm... I'm glad for those that are a fan of the game but I'd have much preferred a port of 3D world. I may give this a shot, but for whatever reason I've not been a fan of NSMB.
I've already bought Rayman legends for my switch, does anyone know how this would stack up against it? Personally, I've preferred the new Rayman games to NSMB in the past. But I've only really played NSMB Wii any significant amount.
I've already bought Rayman legends for my switch, does anyone know how this would stack up against it? Personally, I've preferred the new Rayman games to NSMB in the past. But I've only really played NSMB Wii any significant amount.
Yes.
Fourth remake of the same game, looks incredibly bland, and the creator told us to basically wait for the real game.
Once the real game releases, this game will be forgotten.
Everyone here is like "yeah, not buying it, but I bet tons of ignorant casuals will flock to buy this", but this is a collective series, if the fan base is not interested, then who is?
Pokefans on Era represent such a tiny fraction of the fanbase. Do you really think that kids will be bothered because there is no breeding in the game ? The last remake was 10 years ago, a good portion of the audience never went to Kanto before !
Game will more likely sell more than 10m in November, let alone lifetime. Sincerely, the game has a fucking Pikachu in big on the boxart. It'll sell a lot on the brand alone.
Just pointing out NSMB isn't the first time Nintendo heavily iterated on a Mario artstyle. SMB1-2 are actually closer visually than any of the NSMB games.
I don't know what point you're trying to make showing how the 4 NSMB look different from each other.
This look for the Mushroom Kingdom was essentially cemented with the SNES games.
Someone really liked those pill-shaped mountains.
The SMB games have always had a linear progression in how they developed.
SMB2 was very similar to SMB1 with some small new mechanics like wind and different graphics.
SMB3 was the biggest change the series had. Screens could scroll left and right or up and and down instead of just 1 direction, so you could backtrack. Lots of new powerups including flight. World themes like desert, ice, etc. World maps. The p meter. Can now hold items like shells.
SMW started out using SMB3 as a base, but they tweaked the air physics to make the game easier because they wanted it to be more friendly. Regressed back to SMB1 and 2 themes. Added spin jump. Made the P meter invisible. Levels can now be 2 screens tall and n screens wide or n screens tall and 2 screens wide. More open map style. Yoshi.
NSMB added wall jumping and ground pounding. Physics are a cross between SMB3 and SMW. Screens no longer have restrictions on scrolling and can be as tall and wide as they want. Added lots of new mechanics they couldn't do be fore like warping terrain and rotating stuff. Introduced Star Coins. No flying powerup but there were level specific flight moments.
NSMBWii added multiplayer for the first time. Introduced the mid-air twirl. Ice Mario and Penguin are great additions.
NSMB2: Heavy focus on collecting coins. Was made by young blood getting their feet wet.
NSMBU: Brought back SMW style map. 5 players. Challenge mode.
The thing is, Mario essentially fully realized its identity with the 3rd game, and everything since has been building on that. Games have gotten to the point where it's easier to make your game look like the concept art and changes from game to game are more subtle than they were when generational leaps in power had a bigger impact on how games looked.
It's disingenuous to basically point at this:
And go "Yeah, they are different, but not as noticeably different as the older games!" That's a substatial visual upgrade.
And at this point the gameplay is essentially perfect, so innovation is more on the level design and mechanics side, which the NSMB games deliver on in spades.
Ah, yeah. The Pokémon fan base on ResetEra. That hates every Pokémon games but gen 2 and 5. Yes of course. Def the true Pokémon fan base.
You were responding to a post talking about how the old sequels had more differences than just visuals, and not just about 1 and 2. With two disengenuous examples.
It was partially a joke but Mario's look didn't change drastically for 3 years. Longer if you want to bring in Mario Bros. and Donkey Kong, whose sprites aren't worlds different either. NSMB lasted 6 years and with more stark visual differences despite the shared style.
It makes every sense for Nintendo as a company to port a 2D Mario for the Switch audience possibly on the holiday. Has everything to sell more than 5 million LTD
How funny
Makes even more sense to make a new one in the past 6 years but here we are
Yeah, maybe because this team is made mario maker in 2015 and now mario maker 2
I
It's disingenuous to basically point at this:
And go "Yeah, they are different, but not as noticeably different as the older games!" That's a substatial visual upgrade.
It's an upgrade to what is a practically identical visual style, which is why it's boring. The original games explored different looks each time with only a basic "Mario" aesthetic linking them:
The games were all unmistakably Mario but they showed you new things every time, which was a lot of fun. With NSMB, you know exactly what the game is going to look and sound like before you've played it. Hardware differences were the only thing that really lent any variation to the look of the four games. The game design itself is great and arguably better than the old games, but the presentation is really lackluster. It's like Nintendo just stopped bothering.
I hope that if they do port NSMBU, they give it a really substantial visual overhaul that goes beyond what Smash Ultimate is getting. NSMBU was a launch game and clearly wasn't pushing the Wii U very hard based on how much better games like 3D World and MK8 looked; I feel like they have a lot of power for enhancement on Switch. Unfortunately, the soundtrack also needs a total replacement and they'll never go that far. I expect an identical game for $60 again.
As someone who owned the game for the Wii U but didn't get to play it much I'm super excited to gave this game on Switch! I've tried to Play TF but just can't get into it as much as I could NSMB. I prefer the Mario style platformers vs DKC. Though that's probably a result of growing up with Super Mario Bros as one of the only games I had till I got my GameCube.
I'd much rather a 3D World port than NSMB U. I just can't stand the generic nature of the NEW titles as much as I want to. At least 3D Land/World are new takes on the series.
Heres to hoping for a completely new take on Mario's 2D sidescrolling that's brave. Hopefully in the hand drawn aesthetic of Mario's classic box arts.
Heres to hoping for a completely new take on Mario's 2D sidescrolling that's brave. Hopefully in the hand drawn aesthetic of Mario's classic box arts.
Posting super Mario Bros 2 us edition and yoshis island is a bit disingenuous. Neither are super Mario Bros games, one being a reskin of an entirely different franchise and the other having very different design to a typical super Mario Bros game.
If that's the direction one takes the argument, then we might as well post pictures of Super Paper Mario and yoshis wooly world as counterclaims to the current super Mario artstyle being stale.
Super Paper Mario actually looks and sounds really good, the 2D series with that style would be amazing.
It's an upgrade to what is a practically identical visual style, which is why it's boring. The original games explored different looks each time with only a basic "Mario" aesthetic linking them:
The games were all unmistakably Mario but they showed you new things every time, which was a lot of fun. With NSMB, you know exactly what the game is going to look and sound like before you've played it. Hardware differences were the only thing that really lent any variation to the look of the four games. The game design itself is great and arguably better than the old games, but the presentation is really lackluster. It's like Nintendo just stopped bothering.
I hope that if they do port NSMBU, they give it a really substantial visual overhaul that goes beyond what Smash Ultimate is getting. NSMBU was a launch game and clearly wasn't pushing the Wii U very hard based on how much better games like 3D World and MK8 looked; I feel like they have a lot of power for enhancement on Switch. Unfortunately, the soundtrack also needs a total replacement and they'll never go that far. I expect an identical game for $60 again.
Well your Mario 2 is actually Doki Doki Panic. If you wanna know what SMB2 looks like just look at your first screenshot again. Super Mario Bros 3 came out 5 years later with significantly upgraded cartridges. Mario World is on a new console and Yoshi's Island is a spinoff. Also the series keeps a lot of the same stuff. For example, blue and black being the dominant color scheme. The games were made during a period where games were rapidly becoming more and more complicated and the visual improvements were significant. That was also around the time that Mario's official look in art started to become uniform across multiple games.
IMO Nintendo is in problem managing releases of 2D and 3D Mario games on Switch, I suspect we will have this game, port of SM3DW, Mario Maker 2, new 3D Mario game, probably new 2D game, Mario Galaxy 1/2 HD, add to that existing Odyssey and have too much 2D/3D Mario games for one platform.
...
...
Nintendo released both games as main entries, numbered as direct sequels, in the US. I think it's fair game to include them, but even without them the distinctions are still pretty clear.
There's no point in getting bogged down in whether something is officially a real/main/cannon game. The point is that there are a lot of ways Mario could look today and Nintendo isn't really exploring them. There are a lot of games out there demonstrating how far 2D games have come on modern hardware and the NSMB series has essentially ignored that potential. They've found a generic but functional look and have gotten stuck on it.
Not sure why the platforms being different would matter, since (unless I misread it) you were posting a beta using NSMB Wii's visual style vs the final NSMBU as an example of how the visuals changed between games. I'd like to think the jump from DS to Wii U was massive, obviously far greater than the difference between early NES and late life NES, so I'm also not sure why you're downplaying Mario 3's differences with that cartridge argument. Every NSMB released on a different platform, with wildly different specs between them, and managed to all look about the same.
This level was a breath of fresh air because it actually pushed the creativity a little:
I think that's what people want more of from modern 2D Mario. Does anyone actually think having a totally consistent, established look for every game is important? The Zelda games get a unique art style with every new game, and it's far more interesting that way. I'd be very happy if the next 2D entry looked nothing like NSMB.
This is probably the best 2-D Mario game. It's hamstrung by the New aesthetic unfortunately, which has overstayed its welcome.
If Nintendo would've gone a different art style and new soundtrack, this game would be getting more love.
If Nintendo would've gone a different art style and new soundtrack, this game would be getting more love.
I don't think that's the case really. For many people, all Mario Maker proved is how terrible the levels designed by average people really are when compared to Nintendo made levels.
If Nintendo handmakes a new game with new levels, even one new powerup or a new artstyle, that's all they need for a new game.
Well Legends trumps it massively on art and music, conceptually it's also more creative with its scenarios.
Where NSMB has its trumping capability is very much more in the nitty gritty of obstacle course level design and the greater freedom Mario gets to express himself you could say via his more involved jumping options/powerups.
NSMBU also feels like a much fuller game, while Rayman Legends sorta ends a bit prematurely.
It's really a preference thing, I can easily see cases for Rayman or for Mario, I guess if you preferred say Origins to NSMBwii you'd probably still rate Legends over NSMBU.
From a straight level design standpoint NSMBU is one of the absolute best in the genre, but a game is more than just that as odd as it can be to say.
Every single Nintendo insider went quiet. Man what happened to them? Did Nintendo go after them all lol. We used to get rumors like this or hints from them all the time.
This was already an old rumor.
This was already an old rumor.
Disappointing if true. My three favorite Nintendo franchises are 2D Mario, Mario Kart and Zelda, and it would be ridiculous if the Switch only has ports of each.
...
...
Nintendo released both games as main entries, numbered as direct sequels, in the US. I think it's fair game to include them, but even without them the distinctions are still pretty clear.
There's no point in getting bogged down in whether something is officially a real/main/cannon game. The point is that there are a lot of ways Mario could look today and Nintendo isn't really exploring them. There are a lot of games out there demonstrating how far 2D games have come on modern hardware and the NSMB series has essentially ignored that potential. They've found a generic but functional look and have gotten stuck on it.
Not sure why the platforms being different would matter, since (unless I misread it) you were posting a beta using NSMB Wii's visual style vs the final NSMBU as an example of how the visuals changed between games. I'd like to think the jump from DS to Wii U was massive, obviously far greater than the difference between early NES and late life NES, so I'm also not sure why you're downplaying Mario 3's differences with that cartridge argument. Every NSMB released on a different platform, with wildly different specs between them, and managed to all look about the same.
This level was a breath of fresh air because it actually pushed the creativity a little:
I think that's what people want more of from modern 2D Mario. Does anyone actually think having a totally consistent, established look for every game is important? The Zelda games get a unique art style with every new game, and it's far more interesting that way. I'd be very happy if the next 2D entry looked nothing like NSMB.
Yoshi's Island is a spinoff. I don't care how it was localized, it is clearly not a Super Mario World 2. I am not arguing whether or not Yoshi's Island is real or canon. Why would anyone argue about Mario canon? You are discussing the visual distinctions between Mario games and trying to use Yoshi's Island as a technicality. That doesn't work. Yoshi's Island is the start of the Yoshi series. Video games in the late 80s and mid 00's were very different. Like I said, games were rapidly changing, tech was rapidly expanding. Of course Super Mario Bros 1/3/World would look extremely different. But NSMB Wii to NSBMU is also a pretty big difference. It is just not a drastic change in art style, and I'd argue that the previous games aren't really just about a huge change in art style as it is about being able to have more detail. Mario's look was not solidified. Mario games in general have looked pretty similar for a long time now with a handful of exceptions.
"I think that's what people want more of from modern 2D Mario."
Well, NSBM sold 30 million, NSMB Wii sold 30 million, NSMB 2 sold 12 million, NSMB U sold 5 million. I think they're doing okay. If you want a completely different art style there is a Yoshi switch game (part of a long line of Mario World sequels apparently) that looks like yarn. There you go.
I don't know, but you're doing it. :)
Why is it off limits or foul to reference a Mario series game branded Super Mario World 2 an example of how Mario games used to look? Forget the arbitrary distinctions you're making between the games, the point is that Nintendo, for any number of reasons we could argue about, used to try different styles in a way that they no longer do. It's a fair criticism from a fan who wants the games to be better.
That it's not a change in art style is the entire point. They don't get credit for an HD system making the visuals sharper than an SD system; that's a given. The problem was that the game had the same tired presentation as the previous 3, just in higher fidelity than before. And hardware alone doesn't account for the differences between the old games; it was a creative decision to have Mario 3 look like a play, with the levels looking like sets.
High sales don't mean that a game is a masterpiece beyond all reproach and criticism. By far the biggest complaint I saw about NSMBU at release was that it was very bland to look at and listen to, and the game failed to drive the Wii U's launch in part because people were burned out on NSMB by that point. It just didn't capture people's interest the way NSMB Wii had been able to.
Putting all that aside, why defend this art style being used over and over to this extent? Are you completely satisfied with 2D Mario looking and sounding like this forever? You're right that Mario has settled into a core "look" at this point, but that doesn't mean they're powerless to come up with any creative variations on it. The painted swamp level above is a perfect example of that. The 3D games also have a fairly consistent look, but I think they've done a much better job of being able to surprise the player with really creative world designs:
Galaxy had an emphasis on planets and space, 3D World harkened back to smaller 2D-like stages, and Odyssey was almost specifically about going to new, diverse places. The games manage to look very, very different in a lot of ways but without necessarily having a dramatic change in the overall style. I think it's fair to say the 2D teams haven't been knocking it out of the park in this regard the way the 3D teams have.
No. It isn't.
The sequels to Yoshi's island look nothing like nsmb. Either Yoshi's island doesn't count (as was my point you took umbrage with) or Wooly world and the upcoming Yoshi switch do, and therefore they haven't been sticking with he single art style like you're claiming. Take your pick.
They wanted NSMB's art to be simple and functional so it could remain readable with 4 players. That's all.This level was a breath of fresh air because it actually pushed the creativity a little:
I think that's what people want more of from modern 2D Mario. Does anyone actually think having a totally consistent, established look for every game is important? The Zelda games get a unique art style with every new game, and it's far more interesting that way. I'd be very happy if the next 2D entry looked nothing like NSMB.
I agree they should experiment with different art styles but NSMB's has a gameplay purpose.
This, and ww, and TP. NSMB is great, but we have had a lot of cutesy platformers this year.
The least essential first party Wii U game.
Wind Waker/Twilight Princess HD deserve to be on Switch.
Wind Waker/Twilight Princess HD deserve to be on Switch.
Disappointed if this gets the deluxe moniker. Would love another Mario all stars, the nostalgia would be off the charts and it would be a very appealing product.
Well I'll most defiantly buy it!
Still want 3D World and Galaxy series as well.
Looking at some of these posts makes me realize how gorgeous the art is for these games, especially Yoshi's Island!
Wowzers, still such a looker.
Nintendo's art directions is something else!
Still want 3D World and Galaxy series as well.
Looking at some of these posts makes me realize how gorgeous the art is for these games, especially Yoshi's Island!
Wowzers, still such a looker.
Nintendo's art directions is something else!