Eddage Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 Even the general control is a little more digital, it's exactly the same as 3D Land, so it locks in 8 directions, with a little additional movement around that. Galaxy was so good because of the level of control... Nintendo may have just taken that away to make things a little simpler... I thought 3D Land controlled superbly, it wasn't until a read on here that I knew about the 8 way control thing so with that in mind I have no problems with it being the same for 3D World. Like I've said before I'd much rather have this than a new Galaxy at the moment!
Serebii Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 I thought 3D Land controlled superbly, it wasn't until a read on here that I knew about the 8 way control thing so with that in mind I have no problems with it being the same for 3D World. Like I've said before I'd much rather have this than a new Galaxy at the moment! Yeah, I never noticed it here either. On playing it again, it makes it actually a tighter platformer as it snaps you into a direction which makes precision platforming much easier Besides, it's 16 not 8
Ronnie Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 Personally I prefer having a run button in 3D Mario, I thought it worked well in 3D Land.
Retro_Link Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 I'd prefer not having a finger constantly taken up by a button.
Phube Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 Wow, It's not missing anything out has it. EVERYTHING's IN!
Mr_Master_X2 Posted July 11, 2013 Posted July 11, 2013 I find a run button annoying however. I'm sure I heard your character runs just as fast as Mario in previous Mario 3D games (Galaxy etc.). The run button is extra basically just makes you dash/super-speed for speed runs/certain tricks etc.
Fierce_LiNk Posted July 11, 2013 Posted July 11, 2013 Fantastic analysis video here, you can't watch this video and not get excited about this game, looks amazing fun with so many nice little touches: Unfortunately as they mention in the clip, the Bowser logo at the end seems to point to him being the baddie Fantastic video! The more I see of this, the more excited about it I get. It looks wonderful, imo.
Ashley Posted July 11, 2013 Posted July 11, 2013 Not so much that, I just find he has a very dull voice :p The bane of my life. Trying to watch YouTube videos for tutorials are hit and miss as some sound like watching paint dry would be too exciting for them. I quite liked that bit, and the narrator, I just wish he'd slow down a tad. What, 3000 words a minute are too much for you?
Rummy Posted July 11, 2013 Posted July 11, 2013 Fantastic analysis video here, you can't watch this video and not get excited about this game, looks amazing fun with so many nice little touches: Unfortunately as they mention in the clip, the Bowser logo at the end seems to point to him being the baddie Very good video, nice to see someone looking really hard at what info we've got and coming up with some ideas from it. I'd been feeling indifferent towards this title and still largely so, but this video makes me a bit more curious about it. I enjoyed the quick pace cramming in a lot of info, the 'weeeeeee' and just generally all of it. His voice got to me a bit into it, then I stopped noticing til the end. Bubbling is interesting in the more 3D environment, especially with self-popping ability, I'd wonder how well it plays with people of differing levels(the few times I played NSMBWii we had a prolific bubbler).
flameboy Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 It's local only. When you look at how others have attempted online platformers, nobody has managed to perfect it yet. Nintendo decided not to risk it and to focus on the local aspect Ok going to attempt to counter point this without the repercussions we've had recently Why does it have to be a case of either or? Why not offer both? Online unless they significantly shift resources does not impact on the core experience? I mean in the FPS world multiplayer can sometimes be outsourced or have a different team work on it? I mean granted that's different as they are making seperate maps not the same gameplay but why can't as each level be finished it's passed on to a web team to work on refining them for online. FPS games aren't completely perfect as they have for the most part abandoned split screen local multiplayer for the sake of online. I just don't see it as a risk it's value added. However like you say though few platformers have done it successfully the online Rachet game was terrible, Little Big Planet was good online but I think that was more as a fun social game than an outstanding platformer (never liked that floaty jump). I wonder if it comes down to a lack of motivation it will sell regardless. If they can't manage all out co-op what about some kind of ghost competitive mode? Rather than the usual ghost is see through have them as a tangible character and the cleverness that would arise from that...Racing against a ghost that you could screw other by jumping on it's head etc...then next time someone logged on they got to watch a video of how their ghost was screwed over. Then do the same to the current version of the other players ghost. It downloads and updates this data just like any ghost data so lag is a non-issue.
Serebii Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 Ok going to attempt to counter point this without the repercussions we've had recently Why does it have to be a case of either or? Why not offer both? Online unless they significantly shift resources does not impact on the core experience? I mean in the FPS world multiplayer can sometimes be outsourced or have a different team work on it? I mean granted that's different as they are making seperate maps not the same gameplay but why can't as each level be finished it's passed on to a web team to work on refining them for online. FPS games aren't completely perfect as they have for the most part abandoned split screen local multiplayer for the sake of online. I just don't see it as a risk it's value added. However like you say though few platformers have done it successfully the online Rachet game was terrible, Little Big Planet was good online but I think that was more as a fun social game than an outstanding platformer (never liked that floaty jump). I wonder if it comes down to a lack of motivation it will sell regardless. If they can't manage all out co-op what about some kind of ghost competitive mode? Rather than the usual ghost is see through have them as a tangible character and the cleverness that would arise from that...Racing against a ghost that you could screw other by jumping on it's head etc...then next time someone logged on they got to watch a video of how their ghost was screwed over. Then do the same to the current version of the other players ghost. It downloads and updates this data just like any ghost data so lag is a non-issue. Ghost data could work, but then people would complain about that and not co-op. The thing is, Nintendo wants it to be perfect and latency would cause issues with this. Prediction algorithms can only go so far. Plus, it'd elongate the development cycle and make the game have to be delayed if they were to attempt it and for it to be good. Don't get me wrong, I'd love both, but I find local far more fun. Nintendo have always been about the local play and they're never going to sacrifice local for online. It'll always be them choosing local.
Blade Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 Don't get me wrong, I'd love both, but I find local far more fun. Nintendo have always been about the local play and they're never going to sacrifice local for online. It'll always be them choosing local. It would be good if nintendo just let go of their 90s heyday and embraced online play. Its just local play is on the decrease whilst online play is on the increase. Other businesses have understood this and catered for their customers by focusing on online play. Of course nothing beats having 3 of your mates round playing in person. Infact not the other weekend I was playing mario kart wii local with two others. The experience I feel cannot be beaten. Unfortunately it is not very often I get to play locally. I play online much more and I imagine it is like that for an increasingly amount of people.
flameboy Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 Ghost data could work, but then people would complain about that and not co-op. The thing is, Nintendo wants it to be perfect and latency would cause issues with this. Prediction algorithms can only go so far. Plus, it'd elongate the development cycle and make the game have to be delayed if they were to attempt it and for it to be good. Don't get me wrong, I'd love both, but I find local far more fun. Nintendo have always been about the local play and they're never going to sacrifice local for online. It'll always be them choosing local. I just think local gameplay is on the decline and yes that might be as much a result of the abandoning of split screen as much as the rise of online. I just think Nintendo should pursue it as an option. However they need to do it right...have proper voice chat etc...effective ways to communicate and you can easily have just as much fun online as on the sofa. Ask the likes of @Cookyman @Daft @ReZourceman @Cube etc... (not tagging them to draw them into the debate just want them to know I'm thinking of them, good times guys ) of the fun times we've had playing the likes of Burnout Paradise, Killzone, Uncharted, NFS Most Wanted and countless other games I'm sure I've forgotten, all games that have good party systems and effective social hooks. It's lazy (not on your behalf on Nintendo's) to dismiss online for not being able to offer as much fun as local co-op. I think that's something Blade's quote below does show, Nintendo aren't up to it when it comes to implementing online. Look at some of Animal Crossing' New Leaf's problems as a prime example. No chat log for local chat is laughable in this day and age it's so simple and been around since forever. Having all said all this with Nintendo (I'm not sure who Iwata/Miyamoto) coming out and saying how they didn't anticipate the workload for entering the HD era and that they are struggling with it, your perhaps right in that it would elongate development time too much to make it worth while. I for one know if the likes of Nintendo Land, Mario 3D World etc... had some sort of online mode (I don't think people would complain about ghost data it's something at least) I would be considering a Wii U purchase much more than now because that core Nintendo experience is still so much fun just I don't have all that many people nearby to share it on a regular basis with. It would be good if nintendo just let go of their 90s heyday and embraced online play. Its just local play is on the decrease whilst online play is on the increase. Other businesses have understood this and catered for their customers by focusing on online play. Of course nothing beats having 3 of your mates round playing in person. In fact not the other weekend I was playing mario kart wii local with two others. The experience I feel cannot be beaten. Unfortunately it is not very often I get to play locally. I play online much more and I imagine it is like that for an increasingly amount of people.
Ville Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 Maybe they just overestimated the impact of the Wii U's tablet? I mean Wii Sports was all about local play, but the motion control innovation was so great that it got even non-gamers very excited all over the world. Not so with the Wii U though, so the fact that the main launch game Nintendoland was a local multiplayer title probably just hurt sales. I mean I have no doubt it's a cool local game, but how many people would buy a system based on that nowadays, especially if there's no online option? Just look at the sales.
Cube Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 Is latency even all that important in this? Unless I'm mistaken, the co-op levels and singleplayer levels are no different. Group timing seems much less important in 3D World than it is in a game where people have to work together so solve puzzles or hit switches (like Portal or 'Splosion Man), or competitive games like FPS games and especially fighting games.
Daft Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 However they need to do it right...have proper voice chat etc...effective ways to communicate and you can easily have just as much fun online as on the sofa. Ask the likes of @Cookyman @Daft @ReZourceman @Cube etc... (not tagging them to draw them into the debate just want them to know I'm thinking of them, good times guys ) of the fun times we've had playing the likes of Burnout Paradise, Killzone, Uncharted, NFS Most Wanted and countless other games I'm sure I've forgotten, all games that have good party systems and effective social hooks. It's lazy (not on your behalf on Nintendo's) to dismiss online for not being able to offer as much fun as local co-op. Yeah, in theory I don't play online. I really dislike the anonymity mixed with the competitiveness but I have had no end of fun with everyone on here. And actually a million times more than in local multiplayer because these guys play games whereas I'll usually have to explain how to play a game with someone I play local co-op with, I'll have to slow down for them and bleeergh, yeah, no thanks. ....I think I just convinced myself I love playing online...weird.
Rummy Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 I'll go with flameboy on this; I'd prefer they at least attempted online in addition to offline rather than left it out altogether. Hell, it'd actually help it sell, too. I find it hard to believe this is really all that impossible. I keep seeing prediction algorithms quoted but I played Brawl online a number of times which literally no problems - that's not exactly the sort of game with obvious prediction algorithms nor slow pacing - so why can't they build on it to make this work? Or, god forbid, even try? Who's supposed to lead the charge, if not Nintendo?
Serebii Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 I'll go with flameboy on this; I'd prefer they at least attempted online in addition to offline rather than left it out altogether. Hell, it'd actually help it sell, too. I find it hard to believe this is really all that impossible. I keep seeing prediction algorithms quoted but I played Brawl online a number of times which literally no problems - that's not exactly the sort of game with obvious prediction algorithms nor slow pacing - so why can't they build on it to make this work? Or, god forbid, even try? Who's supposed to lead the charge, if not Nintendo? Have you played Brawl online? It really shouldn't be used as an example of how to do online.. I just think local gameplay is on the decline and yes that might be as much a result of the abandoning of split screen as much as the rise of online. I just think Nintendo should pursue it as an option. However they need to do it right...have proper voice chat etc...effective ways to communicate and you can easily have just as much fun online as on the sofa. Ask the likes of @Cookyman @Daft @ReZourceman @Cube etc... (not tagging them to draw them into the debate just want them to know I'm thinking of them, good times guys ) of the fun times we've had playing the likes of Burnout Paradise, Killzone, Uncharted, NFS Most Wanted and countless other games I'm sure I've forgotten, all games that have good party systems and effective social hooks. It's lazy (not on your behalf on Nintendo's) to dismiss online for not being able to offer as much fun as local co-op. I think that's something Blade's quote below does show, Nintendo aren't up to it when it comes to implementing online. Look at some of Animal Crossing' New Leaf's problems as a prime example. No chat log for local chat is laughable in this day and age it's so simple and been around since forever. Having all said all this with Nintendo (I'm not sure who Iwata/Miyamoto) coming out and saying how they didn't anticipate the workload for entering the HD era and that they are struggling with it, your perhaps right in that it would elongate development time too much to make it worth while. I for one know if the likes of Nintendo Land, Mario 3D World etc... had some sort of online mode (I don't think people would complain about ghost data it's something at least) I would be considering a Wii U purchase much more than now because that core Nintendo experience is still so much fun just I don't have all that many people nearby to share it on a regular basis with. It would be good if nintendo just let go of their 90s heyday and embraced online play. Its just local play is on the decrease whilst online play is on the increase. Other businesses have understood this and catered for their customers by focusing on online play. Of course nothing beats having 3 of your mates round playing in person. Infact not the other weekend I was playing mario kart wii local with two others. The experience I feel cannot be beaten. Unfortunately it is not very often I get to play locally. I play online much more and I imagine it is like that for an increasingly amount of people. Just because online has taken over local doesn't mean local should be ignored/ditched. It's ridiculous that it is and I think it's part of what keeps killing games for me. I'm all for adding online, but not at the expense of any other part. I don't care if that's where "gaming is going", it shouldn't be. It's like how so many developers are aiming for the "cinematic experience". It's just going to bite them in the ass down the line. Is latency even all that important in this? Unless I'm mistaken, the co-op levels and singleplayer levels are no different. Group timing seems much less important in 3D World than it is in a game where people have to work together so solve puzzles or hit switches (like Portal or 'Splosion Man), or competitive games like FPS games and especially fighting games. Considering the level of interactivity required in the platforming, it really is...
Blade Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 Im not saying that local should be ignored. It ought to never be. All im saying is that online should be added aswell. It is where multiplayer is at and will only get more popular.
Serebii Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 (edited) Im not saying that local should be ignored. It ought to never be. All im saying is that online should be added aswell. It is where multiplayer is at and will only get more popular. I do agree that it should be added, don't get me wrong. However, I'm maintaining that it shouldn't be if it's a gimped experience, which latency would cause if all players didn't have a top notch connection since prediction algorithms for 3D platformers have never been perfected. Edited July 12, 2013 by Serebii
-Dem0- Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 I do agree that it should be added, don't get me wrong. However, I'm maintaining that it shouldn't be if it's a gimped experience, which latency would cause if all players didn't have a top notch connection. I completely agree with that view, and I'm sure that Nintendo can bring us a local multiplayer quality experience online. Why haven't we seen it in abundance? I'm guessing that's more to do with their philosophy.
Rummy Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 (edited) Have you played Brawl online? I keep seeing prediction algorithms quoted but I played Brawl online a number of times which literally no problems - that's not exactly the sort of game with obvious prediction algorithms nor slow pacing - so why can't they build on it to make this work? Or, god forbid, even try? Who's supposed to lead the charge, if not Nintendo? Really not doing your journalistic integrity many favours here. I should, of course, correct my which to say *with. Just because online has taken over local doesn't mean local should be ignored/ditched. Did anybody even really say that it should? Again, putting words in mouths and arguing to extremes. Unless I'm mistaken, nobody here ever said that it should. Edited July 12, 2013 by Rummy Automerged Doublepost
Hero-of-Time Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 I do agree that it should be added, don't get me wrong. However, I'm maintaining that it shouldn't be if it's a gimped experience, which latency would cause if all players didn't have a top notch connection since prediction algorithms for 3D platformers have never been perfected. Whats the excuse for the lack of online in the NSMB series then? There are plenty of 2D platformers that have online co-op kicking about now. I completely agree with that view, and I'm sure that Nintendo can bring us a local multiplayer quality experience online. Why haven't we seen it in abundance? I'm guessing that's more to do with their philosophy. I think this is pretty much what it boils down to. They can, they just don't want to. Nintendo has never embraced online gaming, for whatever reason, which is one of the biggest reasons why their home consoles aren't received very well by western gamers. I like Capcoms attitude. In order for Monster Hunter to suceed in the west they knew it needed online play, despite it being mainly a local thing in Japan. They added it for the western gamer and everyone was happy.
Daft Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 The last time I had issues with 'gimped' connections, my ISP was AOL.
Recommended Posts