Super Mario 3D World (Nov 29th)

[Serebii]

But it may do. In my mind it's been massively overshadowed by Rayman Legends. Not really sure why people are being tetchy and/or defensive, though. It's a great game. I've said that more than three times now.

 

It's unsurprising that on this board I have to defend my own opinion about a game that I've actually played, against people who have only read reviews and seen videos. Especially when I've said it's a great fucking game. It's just not perfect.

 

You want a few of my reasons?

• This doesn't even need to be a Wii U game. It could be done on the 3DS. And by that I mean where is this 'Wii U's potential' I keep hearing about? (This isn't necessarily a knock at the game - I can take it or leave it but I can't help but feel if it had used the Wii U in some amazing way I wouldn't have heard the end of how amazing that feature was. Swings and roundabouts.)
  
• The camera in multiplayer, is more often than it should be, infuriating.
  
• The levels feel really short at times.
  
• The boss fights are repetitive. Seriously. Hit the boss three times. Then watch that boss pop up with the slightest of changes as you play through the game.
  
• This is literally a Mario World game with a Z-axis added - which, while making it look pretty, makes the game a hell of a lot easier. (tl;dr - Plus points for aesthetics, negative points for challenge)
  
• If you fail a level enough times (and by 'enough', the number seems to vary to the point where I think dying a second time made this happen) you get an automatic power-up that makes you invincible. Common, offer an 'easy' mode that incorporates this or something.
  
• When it tries to mix things up (like that top-down Zelda-perspective level and the on-rails-camera bit with Bowser) it doesn't quite pull it off - unlike Rayman which break dances through multiple game-types with utter finesse.
  

 

And I still think it's a great game.

 

You (certain) people...are exhausting.

Hang on, you're complaining about the Super Guide? Something that even existed in Mario Galaxy 2? Ok.. Funnily enough, as well, you don't have to use it...

 

Other things are subjective I guess. Though I've played through Rayman and it's always clearly a 2D platformer...it doesn't jump from different game types at all...

Edited November 20, 2013 by Serebii

[liger05]

But it may do. In my mind it's been massively overshadowed by Rayman Legends. Not really sure why people are being tetchy and/or defensive, though. It's a great game. I've said that more than three times now.

 

It's unsurprising that on this board I have to defend my own opinion about a game that I've actually played, against people who have only read reviews and seen videos. Especially when I've said it's a great fucking game. It's just not perfect.

 

You want a few of my reasons?

• This doesn't even need to be a Wii U game. It could be done on the 3DS. And by that I mean where is this 'Wii U's potential' I keep hearing about? (This isn't necessarily a knock at the game - I can take it or leave it but I can't help but feel if it had used the Wii U in some amazing way I wouldn't have heard the end of how amazing that feature was. Swings and roundabouts.)
  
• The camera in multiplayer, is more often than it should be, infuriating.
  
• The levels feel really short at times.
  
• The boss fights are repetitive. Seriously. Hit the boss three times. Then watch that boss pop up with the slightest of changes as you play through the game.
  
• This is literally a Mario World game with a Z-axis added - which, while making it look pretty, makes the game a hell of a lot easier. (tl;dr - Plus points for aesthetics, negative points for challenge)
  
• If you fail a level enough times (and by 'enough', the number seems to vary to the point where I think dying a second time made this happen) you get an automatic power-up that makes you invincible. Common, offer an 'easy' mode that incorporates this or something.
  
• When it tries to mix things up (like that top-down Zelda-perspective level and the on-rails-camera bit with Bowser) it doesn't quite pull it off - unlike Rayman which break dances through multiple game-types with utter finesse.
  

 

And I still think it's a great game.

 

You (certain) people...are exhausting.

 

There is nothing wrong with you having that opinion. However what I dont like is the game scores really well hitting 9 or 10's and we see comments like 'they are only giving them the game that score because its Mario' 'or reviewers dont want to upset Nintendo'.

 

Its nothing but stupidity that people think this yet at the same time when the same reviewers score a game they actually like a 9 or 10 they will be happy and wont question the reviewers motives. Thats nothing but hypocrisy.

[Ashley]

(I knew I should have taken this week off)

 

Reading all the different reviews makes me think @Ashley has lost his soul. :p

 

I sold it to Millhouse.

 

As for the N-E review score, it was predictably lower than the rest. Personally I thought Ahley's review seemed rather bitter and read completely differently to other reviews. This however doesn't surprise me as I knew it was coming.

 

I find N-E's reviews to be all over the place. When Wind Waker and SM3DW score 8, lower than all the big sites and over a point beneath the average score on aggregator sites, but Sonic Lost World scores 9, well above most sites many of whom gave it as low as 4 citing it being broken in places, I personally think it's all a bit odd.

 

It is however the reviews and their scores are the opinion of the author - which is fine. But I do feel (and have stated this before) that there is a certain undercurrent on N-E where liking Nintendo is almost frowned upon.

 

As you said, its different authors with different opinions, as it should well be. Perhaps I'm more critical and expect better than some of my colleagues, but reviews are personal opinions.

 

Look at Knack and Beyond as recent examples - reviews were all over the place. Why is that? Is it because some people are bitter and soulless and hate the studios that made them? No, its because people are people, each with their own interpretation, expectations and enjoyment.

 

You're also doing what you often do - fixating far too much on scores, which should be secondary to the review.

 

I think this is the problem - people can't play it right now so its being talked to death. Same thing happened with Pikmin 3. Perhaps we should close threads two weeks before a game is launched...

 

But to seriously address your point, I don't think Nintendo get free passes from the press. The press has savaged Nintendo in many respects and poured scorn on certain titles they have focused on. I think if one thing can be seen from these reviews (excluding obviously the one you influenced ) is that people love Nintendo when Nintendo do what the do best: creating classic games - Pikmin 3, Wind Waker HD and Mario prove this.

 

Excuse me but please do not say that Daft has in any way influenced my review, that is extremely disrespectful. It was written by me based on my interpretations. Trust me, his review would have read very differently. He probably helped increase the score. Having him and various friends round at some point helped us to play through the multiplayer - the best aspect of the game. Had it not been for that I'd had to have focused on the single player as there's no online. He helped me play through the game, yes, but he didn't influence the review one iota. I would appreciate if you don't try and suggest otherwise.

 

I think Ashley put far too much time and effort into discussing whether the game was really 2D or really 3D. As if the fact that it wasn't a 'true 3D' game, whatever that is, was a huge black mark. IMO, why care about such pointless distinctions, just take the game for what it is.

 

I base my reviews, largely, on the discussions that go on in this place to try and help people further understand the game. Look at the pages of this thread, the notion of whether it is "2D" or "3D" has been discussed ad nauseam, which is why I mentioned it in detail. Furthermore, the title is 3D World. It kind of invites discussion in that regard.

 

I think my overall conclusion does do exactly what you say - it ultimately says "its not quite a 2D game, nor a 3D game, but something new that sits inbetween them and does it well."

 

Seriously what more do you people want? It got an 8. AN EIGHT. That's in the top 20 percentile and yet we're acting like I gave it a 4. Perhaps I should write the DKCRTF, Mario Kart and Smash Bros reviews now and just give them a 10 now. Apparently its what they should get by virtue of people expecting that.

 

And furthermore in this thread I've been called bitter, soulless and probably other insults that I've missed. I know doing this kind of role puts you in the 'public' eye and invites some degree of criticism, but the amount of personal insults I've had levied at me because I gave a game a great-but-not-perfect score is unnecessary, immature and frankly fanboyism at its worse.

 

I am happy to discuss the points I made about what works/doesn't work, but I shouldn't have to justify my personal opinion just because it doesn't gel with yours.

[Daft]

Hang on, you're complaining about the Super Guide? Something that even existed in Mario Galaxy 2? Ok.. Funnily enough, as well, you don't have to use it...

 

Other things are subjective I guess. Though I've played through Rayman and it's always clearly a 2D platformer...it doesn't jump from different game types at all...

 

The white Tanooki suit that makes you invisible is called the Super Guide? I haven't played Mario Galaxy 2. If it's in that too, it's stupid there as well.

 

In Rayman Legends, the power-up glove that turns it into a shooter and by virtue of some of the speedier levels, in multiplayer, definitely turns into a race to the finish. The soccer/football mode. The music levels are clearly rhythm games. If you don't realise those clearly cross genre, you are insufferable.

 

There is nothing wrong with you having that opinion. However what I dont like is the game scores really well hitting 9 or 10's and we see comments like 'they are only giving them the game that score because its Mario' 'or reviewers dont want to upset Nintendo'.

 

Its nothing but stupidity that people think this yet at the same time when the same reviewers score a game they actually like a 9 or 10 they will be happy and wont question the reviewers motives. Thats nothing but hypocrisy.

 

I question why Heavy Rain got anything above a 7. I actually really enjoyed it but the game was not good. Several aspects were even abysmal. I think just like Mario World 3D, Heavy Rain got given a lot of leeway because of the emphasis placed behind it by its respective platform holder. I get the vibe exactly the same thing is going to happen with Forza 5, too. Since I think it doesn't look up to scratch at all.

 

This Nintendo persecution complex is getting tired. The assumption that this was a criticism I solely levelled at Nintendo is pretty telling. This happens across the board.

Edited November 20, 2013 by Daft

[Serebii]

The white Tanooki suit that makes you invisible is called the Super Guide? I haven't played Mario Galaxy 2. If it's in that too, it's stupid there as well.

 

In Rayman Legends, the power-up glove that turns it into a shooter and by virtue of some of the speedier levels, in multiplayer, definitely turns into a race to the finish. The soccer/football mode. The music levels are clearly rhythm games. If you don't realise those clearly cross genre, you are insufferable.

 

 

 

I question why Heavy Rain got anything above a 7. I actually really enjoyed it but the game was not good. Several aspects were even abysmal. I think just like Mario World 3D, Heavy Rain got given a lot of leeway because of the emphasis placed behind it by its respective platform holder. I get the vibe exactly the same thing is going to happen with Forza 5, too. Since I think it doesn't look up to scratch at all.

 

This Nintendo persecution complex is getting tired.

No, Mario Galaxy 2 had something even "worse". It completes the level for you. This system has been in many Nintendo games since 2009, including Mario Galaxy, Mario & Donkey Kong, Donkey Kong Country etc.

 

Those levels are still clearly 2D platformer, especially the "rhythm" levels...The football mode was pretty meh that I only played it once though, forgot about it until you reminded me.

[Daft]

So the levels where you are floating in the air, or on the back of a mosquito, shooting bullets...at waves of bad guys...are still a platformer?

 

You're hilarious. In that your not.

[Serebii]

So the levels where you are floating in the air, or on the back of a mosquito, shooting bullets...at waves of bad guys...are still a platformer?

 

You're hilarious. In that your not.

The mosquito shooting levels are the closest to not being it, but the others...yes, very much so.

[Daft]

If Donkey Konga is a rhythm game - which it is. The music levels in Legends are quite clearly too.

[Ashley]

RL's music levels are definitely more of a rhythm game than a platformer, its just the way you move through is different. It is all about rhythmic button pressing, but rather than having a line that travels across the score and a marker to hit, you have a character to run and jump.

 

We spent ages trying to complete one of the levels the other day because it was a rhythm level (but not one of the music ones introduced in Legends). You had to learn the rhythm of the level and time the jumps perfectly. The fact you were doing this on platforms was incidental.

[Sheikah]

The mosquito shooting levels are the closest to not being it, but the others...yes, very much so.

 

Sorry but what the frak does a standard 3D Mario have? A couple of stars where you're sliding along on a penguin?

 

The music levels at the end of each Rayman Legend world are nothing short of genius.

[Serebii]

Sorry but what the frak does a standard 3D Mario have? A couple of stars where you're sliding along on a penguin?

 

The music levels at the end of each Rayman Legend world are nothing short of genius.

I liked them too, and they got tricky with the extra ones with the view shifts, but they are still 2D platformers

[Aneres11]

I have an idea. In future please give all Nintendo reviews to S.C.G.

This is all I ask. Many thanks bye.

[Zechs Merquise]

Excuse me but please do not say that Daft has in any way influenced my review, that is extremely disrespectful. It was written by me based on my interpretations. Trust me, his review would have read very differently. He probably helped increase the score. Having him and various friends round at some point helped us to play through the multiplayer - the best aspect of the game. Had it not been for that I'd had to have focused on the single player as there's no online. He helped me play through the game, yes, but he didn't influence the review one iota. I would appreciate if you don't try and suggest otherwise.

 

I base my reviews, largely, on the discussions that go on in this place to try and help people further understand the game. Look at the pages of this thread, the notion of whether it is "2D" or "3D" has been discussed ad nauseam, which is why I mentioned it in detail. Furthermore, the title is 3D World. It kind of invites discussion in that regard.

 

I in no way meant that he influenced you in the sense that he sat there telling what to write. However when I read the review it came over as if it was written for the anti-Nintendo audience on the site, rather than the pro-Nintendo audience on the site.

 

I find there's an awful lot of negativity on this forum toward everything Nintendo does - be it good or bad. Just take this game for instance, it has been highly critically acclaimed from some of the biggest and most respected sites on the internet, yet there are still people in this thread almost trying to kill the buzz for the game.

 

I also felt your review focused more on the negative aspects of the game and from the outset it felt like you were tired of Mario and it almost a chore for you to play it. Again it's your opinion and you're more than entitled to that.

 

I certainly didn't mean for you to take offence and definitely didn't mean any disrespect. I think there's slightly crossed wires there. However I still feel that the general bad attitude toward anything that Nintendo does seemed to have coloured your vision on this title.

[Daft]

I liked them too, and they got tricky with the extra ones with the view shifts, but they are still 2D platformers

 

You're definitely a troll. After the constant 'ehrm ehr jernerlerst' rubbish, the CISCO certified engineer sub-reality you dragged us all into, the ability to take a unanimously positive reception to this game and still find something to argue about and now this comment...you have to be a troll. I honestly cannot believe you aren't.

[Ashley]

I have an idea. In future please give all Nintendo reviews to S.C.G.

This is all I ask. Many thanks bye.

 

I assume that this was mostly a joke (I hope for Sam's sake as he'd never rest ) but do you really just want to read reviews from someone who agrees with you and gives a score that you expect?

 

I tend to read TV reviews after an episode airs and I actually enjoy ones that don't gel with what I thought, it makes me look at things from a different angle. I'm genuinely perplexed that some people seem to just want a bunch of yes men.

[Serebii]

You're definitely a troll. After the constant 'ehrm ehr jernerlerst' rubbish, the CISCO certified engineer sub-reality you dragged us all into, the ability to take a unanimously positive reception to this game and still find something to argue about and now this comment...you have to be a troll. I honestly cannot believe you aren't.

Excuse me? I'm not the one who is starting arguments here... Just because I don't agree with the "zomg Nintendo sucks" sentiment that has become so rampant on this forum does not make me a troll.

[Aneres11]

I assume that this was mostly a joke (I hope for Sam's sake as he'd never rest ) but do you really just want to read reviews from someone who agrees with you and gives a score that you expect?

 

I tend to read TV reviews after an episode airs and I actually enjoy ones that don't gel with what I thought, it makes me look at things from a different angle. I'm genuinely perplexed that some people seem to just want a bunch of yes men.

 

It was a half joke.

 

I have always enjoyed reading all the N-E reviews, Ashley - and your stuff too, particularly the 2ds overview which after having a hands on with one myself was pretty spot on.

 

Having said that, I did find that your review of this game wasn't as enthusiastic as other reviews. And I'm not talking about the score either as I don't use scores to decide if the game is good or not. That's for me to do when I play it.

 

This just felt like you were reviewing it because you had to. Whereas I honestly think some like S.C.G for example would have relished it! And I think that would have come across in the review. And again, I don't mean the scoring.

 

That's just how it felt to me. But as I say I think generally the N-E reviews are great and always look forward to them.

[Ashley]

I chose to review it because I was optimistic for it and I wanted to see if it lived up to that. If you read a lack of enthusiasm it is because of how I felt about the game - it could have been so much more.

[Daft]

Excuse me? I'm not the one who is starting arguments here... Just because I don't agree with the "zomg Nintendo sucks" sentiment that has become so rampant on this forum does not make me a troll.

 

I didn't start an argument. I said this game is great. I never levelled anything specifically at Nintendo (I even made it clear that this has happened to both Sony and I believe it happens to Microsoft, too). You're a farce. They way you laud your 'authority' as a 'journalist' makes me want to vomit.

 

Mods, is that enough to get me banned from the Nintendo forum?

[Sheikah]

I have an idea. In future please give all Nintendo reviews to S.C.G.

This is all I ask. Many thanks bye.

 

Joke or nay, you realise how rude that sounds given Ashley has spent time/effort playing and reviewing this?

 

Do people not see how they are coming across as jerks here?

[Ashley]

And on that note (although less toward Aneres as I know he's a kind tennis-guy-loving soul at heart), I'm out of here for a few days. This is meant to be my week off and I just can't be bothered to deal with this, nor should I really have to.

[Aneres11]

Joke or nay, you realise how rude that sounds given Ashley has spent time/effort playing and reviewing this?

 

Do people not see how they are coming across as jerks here?

 

It was a joke. As for the last statement. Pot kettle.

[Ike]

OK. I've temporarily closed the thread.

 

Whilst there's nothing wrong with discussing reviews and their scores, things have started to get a bit too heated in here.

 

I'll reopen the thread in a day or two* and give people a chance to cool off.

 

 

*Unless I forget.

[Mokong]

Wow such a backlash over a score of 8, really?

 

This thread reads like it was given a much lower score.

 

As has been said a review is the reviewers opinion just cause it doesn't gell with yours (saying "yours" in general, not refering to any one person) is no need to jump down the reviewers throat.

 

 

It's like every year there is at least one game we review that gets given a lot of stick for being either too high or too low from public expectation.

 

I see Ash is being called too biased against Nintendo for giving this game an 8, yet pretty sure when he gave Skyward Sword a 10 two years ago was called too biased towards Nintendo.

 

I read Ash's review before he published it and before he decided on the score and thought to myself "it reads like he'll give it an 8" which seems a fair score.

 

I also don't get where this "anti-nintendo bias" opinion Ash's review has been accused of, in both how it reads and how it was scored.

As I said I read his review and I found it a good read and positive, it does discuss some negetive aspects but of course it would if the reviewer found some negetives, would you prefer he sugar coat it and review the game based on what he thinks public opinion expects? Overall I found the review more positive than negetive.

 

 

 

Ash's main con to the game (reading the review) seems to be that it doesn't feel "fresh" like we have come to expect from new 3D Console Marios. And this is something many here said when the game was first revealed and some might still think (like myself).

 

A persons opinion can also be coloured by past experience of which we've had a fair amount of recent Mario platform releases. Ash as he said wanted to review this game because he was looking forward to it but for him it was a little too similar to past and recent games which is how the last paragraph reads to me.

 

But then he ends the review with this.

 

Super Mario 3D World is a great local multiplayer game. It's not without its faults' date=' [u']but at its core it is still a wonderful game that really captures the Nintendo magic we all grew up with.[/u]

 

The review end on a fairly good positive note for me.

 

 

Nintendo have built a history of having the 1st 3D Mario games on a home console really push and show off a console. I don't think 3D World does this. I still can't shake my opinion that this game was originally intended as a 3DS sequel to 3D Land but was switched to the Wii U to add a Mario platformer to the consoles Christmas line-up in the absence of Mario Kart. Again many here also did comment on the games first reveal that they thought it was a 3DS game..... didn't we have one person in the 3DS Thread saying they were planning on getting (or recently got) a 3DS and listed 3D World among 3DS games he was looking forward to play (can't remember who?)

 

Opinions of many have changed over time as Nintendo showed off more and more videos of the game and people have become more positive towards it and it just feels like for someone to (in the opinion of the masses) underscore the game people seem to get offended for some reason.

 

 

 

Here's my own personal opinion having not yet played the game on where I stand on it. When it was first revealed I was disappointed, what they showed initially didn't seem appealing for what I was hoping to experience in the next home console Mario. As I said it looked like it was originally intended to be a 3DS game, had it been a 3DS game I probably would have been more interested in it. As new videos have come out my opinion has somewhat changed, newer vids after the initial reveal made the game look much more appealing but for me personally it still seemed to fall short of being a must have Mario title in much the same way the NSMB series doesn't feel "must have" to me.

 

After reading Ash's review has actually made me consider even more that maybe I should pick this game up for Xmas for myself (won't be able to afford it day one) which is again why I don't get where all this negetivity aimed at him is coming from

[Ike]

New thread has been created so we can start fresh without any bickering over arbitrary numbers, file sizes or conspiracy theories. So leave your pitchforks and tinfoil hats at the door and head over to the new (and improved if I do say so myself :p) thread.

 

Video games are meant to be fun, remember? The game is out in roughly in a week so look forward to it!

 

The new Super Mario 3D World Thread