Support NeoGAF

[Vinci]

Not to deny that Nintendo's cut off their nose to spite their face before, but when you really are making a concerted an effort to compete with Sony and Microsoft what you can do not to compete with them isn't going to be of much importance.

Seems to have worked monumentally well this generation.

 

[gerg]

Seems to have worked monumentally well this generation.

Well, yes.

It's funny how that coincides with Iwata's decision to undertake a huge change in Nintendo's business strategy.

I'm not saying that Nintendo was right to want to compete with Microsoft and Sony, but if you're looking for reasons as to why they ditched 2D Mario for two generations the buck probably stops there.

I do believe several (2D) Mario games have a Level 4 right nextdoor to a Level 7.

I think the point is that you can't go into Level 7 from Level 4.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

- Starts with story and cutscenes (yes, they're playable cutscenes, yes it's an improvement on SMG1 etc etc), whereas SMB1 puts you in 1-1 immediately, SMB2USA simply lets you choose a character, and SMB3 has an opening title screen that gives you a couple of quick options, and sends you immediately to a very very basic user-friendly map with no tutorials on how to progress every 10 seconds. Seriously, Lubba adds as much hindrance as he does assistance.

In which case, NSMB Wii also fails.

- Has you choosing paths on the hub, on the world map, on the stars you would like to do... too many choices away from pure gameplay.

Stars, sure, but branching level paths has been present since there have BEEN visible level paths in 2D Mario.

 

[BowieZ]

I think the point is that you can't go into Level 7 from Level 4.

Yeah, but, what? Who cares if you could? You basically can. Kill yourself and change levels. I've done that many a times. Why not be able to walk over to a new level if you just hate one level?

In which case, NSMB Wii also fails.

I'm fairly certain a 30 seconds cutscene is not a big deal for general audiences. Even in SMG2, it takes a good 5 minutes to be able to start either Yoshi Star or Sky Station Galaxy... notwithstanding the fact you get to play a level of SSG during the beginning sequence.

 

[Vinci]

In which case, NSMB Wii also fails.

Stars, sure, but branching level paths has been present since there have BEEN visible level paths in 2D Mario.

The only thing left for them to try to make 3D Mario acceptable to the 2D Mario people would be to ground it in the Mushroom Kingdom again as I mentioned earlier. If they're still not jumping in, they aren't going to.

 

[gerg]

Yeah, but, what? Who cares if you could? You basically can. Kill yourself and change levels. I've done that many a times. Why not be able to walk over to a new level if you just hate one level?

Because doesn't that run against everything you've said against exploration being counter-intuitive to the expanded-audience gamer?

 

[BowieZ]

Because doesn't that run against everything you've said against exploration being counter-intuitive to the expanded-audience gamer?

It depends how you execute the idea. For example, if you had incredibly clear demarcations for each level... such as one colored grass for level 1-4, and next door there was a browner colored grass for 1-7... or next to that was a strip of a water level that obviously was separate by its own nature, then a player could just move forward following the obvious path and only needing to change paths if they really struggled. (1-1, 1-2 and 1-3 would probably not permit the player to move about much.)

 

[charlequin]

- Has you choosing paths on the hub, on the world map, on the stars you would like to do...

This is literally a core element of every single 2D Mario game since Super Mario Bros. 3 came out in 1988.

- Has weakly defined "worlds" with no strong sense of progression.

I don't think grass world -> desert world -> ice world -> jungle world etc. really counts as a "strong sense of progression. Nobody keeps playing levels in NSMBW because they want to see what the next world looks like. They keep playing because the game is enjoyable.

I really don't see anything in this list that's significant remotely on the level of the actual problem where controlling platforming characters in 3D requires a lot of advanced gaming skills. Nitpicking that SMG2 only hews like 87% to the level progression template of NSMBW et al instead of 100% is seriously irrelevant to the question of how much penetration the two series have with the public.

Can we keep the discussion above board without the :lol ?

No.

Spherical worlds helped Nintendo to remove the necessity of camera control from the Galaxy games.

And this is a huge thing! But I do think the fact that the camera moves, and therefore there isn't a fixed correspondence between your stick and the display, is still huge.

Crash Bandicoot came up earlier, and I think that's actually a pretty good example in a way. Create a 3D Mario with a camera that's directionally fixed -- an isometric or forced-perspective view of a relatively flat 2D plane that can scroll in four directions -- and I think you'd see the biggest accessibility issue disappear (but then you'd also have a very different game with a very different type of gameplay...)

 

[charlequin]

I just don't buy the whole, "They couldn't have known there would be an impact on the game's audience" excuse. This company does more testing than virtually any other; they never once, not a single time, had a person say that they don't like 3D Mario titles and would prefer Nintendo make new 2D ones? It took nearly two decades for them to finally come to this realization that, hey, maybe there's still a market for a 2D Mario game?

The industry as a whole didn't really have the ability to put into words the degree to which some series had changed over to completely different gameplay as a result of 3D in that period -- it honestly took a while for the "2D vs 3D gameplay" idea to really crystalize for people. Also, I think it's hard to say for certain whether people really did want a new game like NSMB in, say, 1998 -- absence makes the heart grow fonder, after all.

Really, my position is pretty much that other than their profit focus (a necessity given their games-only status) and the introduction of Pokemon, Nintendo basically didn't make a single good decision about anything from around 1995 through to 2004, so I assume this is ultimately just one more item on that stack. :lol

 

[BowieZ]

This is literally a core element of every single 2D Mario game since Super Mario Bros. 3 came out in 1988.

All three? Hub + map + going back to finish earlier missions to help you progress? No. All games from SMB1 to Yoshi's Island, and including NSMB DS and NSMBW have only 1 of these elements max. Short of allowing a player to repeat earlier levels to grind for more lives.

I don't think grass world -> desert world -> ice world -> jungle world etc. really counts as a "strong sense of progression. Nobody keeps playing levels in NSMBW because they want to see what the next world looks like. They keep playing because the game is enjoyable.

I really don't see anything in this list that's significant remotely on the level of the actual problem where controlling platforming characters in 3D requires a lot of advanced gaming skills. Nitpicking that SMG2 only hews like 87% to the level progression template of NSMBW et al instead of 100% is seriously irrelevant to the question of how much penetration the two series have with the public.

Likewise, saying that "87%" is sufficiently similar enough that it is irrelevant is also irrelevant. I think I've made it clear how there are a list of issues put together which put 3D Mario as it currently is at a disadvantage, not that each issue by itself, in a vacuum, is a game-breaker.

The camera is another issue which I forgot to mention, although once again, it is an improvement in SMG2.

No.

Pretty immature.

 

[Vinci]

Pretty immature.

It is immature, but we're on a gaming forum. Really, not only does that come with the territory, it keeps discussions from turning way too serious. Lighten up a bit, man. He means no real harm.

 

[donny2112]

Really, my position is pretty much that other than their profit focus (a necessity given their games-only status) and the introduction of Pokemon, Nintendo basically didn't make a single good decision about anything from around 1995 through to 2004,

Hyperbole is hyperbolic.

 

[charlequin]

All three? Hub + map + going back to finish earlier missions to help you progress? No.

The hub in SMG2 is vestigial at best. You don't need to navigate it to get to different levels like you do in SMG1, so it's not necessary to game progression. Replaying old levels to progress is certainly an element in those games, especially SMW where secret exits are a huge deal.

I think I've made it clear how

you have an axe to grind about Super Mario Galaxy and insist that your complaints are relevant to the mass-market success of the game despite literally no one ever agreeing with you when you bring them up? Yes, that's pretty clear.

I don't have a problem with your complaints about the game, but they really do have no bearing on the success of the game. The "linearity" template of 2D Mario games is fairly flexible and SMG2 is quite close to the style used in, say, SMW, and quite a distance from the extremely sandboxy style epitomized by Super Mario 64. It is extraordinarily doubtful that if you shave off the tiny aspects of SMG2 that don't strictly stick to the way NSMBW handles level progression it would make even a measurable difference in the title's sales.

The issue of 3D control (encompassing both the correspondence between stick and screen and the control of the camera) is huge. Just about any other issue you can stack up next to it is insignificant in comparison; even like thirty of these issues combined are insignificant in comparison.

Hyperbole is hyperbolic.

Intentionally so, I assure you.

 

[Raist]

Absolutely no hardware bump for the Wii despite SMG2?
That's... weird.

 

[BowieZ]

you ... insist that your complaints are relevant to the mass-market success of the game despite literally no one ever agreeing with you when you bring them up? Yes, that's pretty clear.

2D Mario games sell 4-6 million in Japan. 3D Mario games sell around 1 to 1.5 million.

You don't think it's valid or worth looking at all the ways in which those games differ in determining why they sell the way they do?

For the record, I don't really find the "complaints" much of a hindrance to the game. I'm just trying my best to reconcile why 2D Mario is quadruply popular to 3D Mario. Sure it's not just about the games themselves, there are other factors at work.

But you say it's "just the camera" and I disagree. And a few people disagreeing with me in this thread is not "literally no on ever agreeing with me".

 

[Celine]

Really, my position is pretty much that other than their profit focus (a necessity given their games-only status) and the introduction of Pokemon, Nintendo basically didn't make a single good decision about anything from around 1995 through to 2004, so I assume this is ultimately just one more item on that stack. :lol

:lol
The drama.

 

[Vinci]

I agree with charlequin that the shifting camera angles, never mind when you have to control the camera yourself, is the biggest hurdle to 3D Mario games being more accepted by 2D Mario fans. But I also agree with Kilrogg in that 2D Mario feels quicker, more arcade-based, whereas 3D Mario suits a more exploration-oriented style.

A fixed camera could potentially make up the difference, but then I'm sure that would leave many 3D Mario fans wondering why it's a 3D Mario game at all at that point.

 

[gerg]

Absolutely no hardware bump for the Wii despite SMG2?
That's... weird.

Really? I'd say it's pretty standard. I'd say that the groups of people interested in both SMG2 and NSMB Wii and SMG2 but not NSMB Wii have been covered by, well, the releases of NSMB Wii and the first Super Mario Galaxy.

But you say it's "just the camera" and I disagree. And a few people disagreeing with me in this thread is not "literally no on ever agreeing with me".

Sure, but as more and more people do disagree with you the chances of you being an unappreciated genius slip until it's more likely than not that you're wrong. (And this isn't to insult you in any form.)

 

[BowieZ]

I agree with charlequin that the shifting camera angles, never mind when you have to control the camera yourself, is the biggest hurdle to 3D Mario games being more accepted by 2D Mario fans. But I also agree with Kilrogg in that 2D Mario feels quicker, more arcade-based, whereas 3D Mario suits a more exploration-oriented style.

And you also agree however with BowieZ that... oh.

Right. :lol

Again, this is something that would be interesting in its own thread proper, but I don't have the guts to do so.

A fixed camera could potentially make up the difference, but then I'm sure that would leave many 3D Mario fans wondering why it's a 3D Mario game at all at that point.

I guess then it's a philosophical question about whether a third dimension ought to be fully exploited.

 

[onken]

Absolutely no hardware bump for the Wii despite SMG2?
That's... weird.

Yeah I'm sure loads of people were holding out for SMG2 after playing the first one, oh wait

 

[Jokeropia]

DQMJ2 bombed badly

Sarcasm due to what I presume was a typo in Road's post?

I think the point is that you can't go into Level 7 from Level 4.

=P

Note that I completely agree with charlequin and Donny in this discussion, I just found the image funny in the context of the statement.

I guess then it's a philosophical question about whether a third dimension ought to be fully exploited

In the 3D Mario franchise, YES IT SHOULD. Why would you want to change it to be more like 2D Mario when we already have a perfectly fine and active 2D Mario franchise as it is?

 

[Vinci]

I guess then it's a philosophical question about whether a third dimension ought to be fully exploited.

Of course it should. What's the point of it being 3D if you're not going to take full advantage of the added dimension?

 

[BowieZ]

In the 3D Mario franchise, YES IT SHOULD. Why would you want to change it to be more like 2D Mario when we already have a perfectly fine and active 2D Mario franchise as it is?

"Change it to be more like 2D Mario"? Shouldn't the question be, why did they "change 2D Mario to be fully explorable 3D" to begin with?

Of course it should. What's the point of it being 3D if you're not going to take full advantage of the added dimension?

As I've made clear several times, if I were to make a new 3D Mario game (yes I know, I'm not), I would take advantage of the added dimension by allowing players to move to different levels in a large streaming environment; however, I wouldn't make this the "feature" of gameplay, I would use it as a tool to either allow a player to explore if they want to, or give them freedom to choose a different level (without resorting to a map) if they struggled to progress through one linear course.

I don't see why philosophically the introduction of a third dimension is some heaven-above law that you must make it an explorable open world game where you can go anywhere at any time, and also that a very very clear linear route forward is sacrificed. ... or for that matter, why there suddenly needs to be hubs, maps, and a constant reminder that you can do cool crazy things in three dimensions... especially with today's technology.

Anyway, we are only going around in circles, so I shall concede that I am wrong if it aids in ending the debate.

 

[Vinci]

You're suggesting that the problem is the method of forward progression in the game? Am I understanding you correctly?

 

[donny2112]

allowing players to move to different levels in a large streaming environment;

i.e. a mess.

For this screen, I'm using World 1-1. After 30 ft, I change to world 7-2 and backtrack 10 ft. to switch to world 5-3 to unlock a secret there.

I really think you're trying to describe how Super Paper Mario worked where you shift from one 2-D plane (X-Y) to another 2-D plane (Y-Z) to change what layer you would interact with back in the X-Y plane or to find secrets. Maybe something like Metroid: Other M thrown in, too?

 

[Vinci]

i.e. a mess.

For this screen, I'm using World 1-1. After 30 ft, I change to world 7-2 and backtrack 10 ft. to switch to world 5-3 to unlock a secret there.

I really think you're trying to describe how Super Paper Mario worked where you shift from one 2-D plane (X-Y) to another 2-D plane (Y-Z) to change what layer you would interact with back in the X-Y plane or to find secrets. Maybe something like Metroid: Other M thrown in, too?

Or maybe it's like the obstacle course in Wii Fit Plus, how it handles levels?

 

[BowieZ]

You're suggesting that the problem is the method of forward progression in the game? Am I understanding you correctly?

I think that is one of many major differences between 2D and 3D Mario (currently), yes, and that several of these differences (not just the abstract fact of there being an added dimension whereby the camera becomes more of an issue in conceptual/development stage), MAY contribute to the quarter of sales. But if you want to discuss this further, either PM me or start a new thread, because this really goes beyond a pure weekly sales thread.

And I apologize for helping to get the thread off track.

i.e. a mess.

EDIT: nvm. I said I was stopping so I'm stopping :lol

 

[charlequin]

You don't think it's valid or worth looking at all the ways in which those games differ in determining why they sell the way they do?

If two guys walk into a bar, and one politely orders a drink and sits down, and the other says "your mother's a filthy whore" to the bartender, do you think we should look at what shoes they're wearing to figure out why only one of them got punched?

 

[BowieZ]

If two guys walk into a bar, and one politely orders a drink and sits down, and the other says "your mother's a filthy whore" to the bartender, do you think we should look at what shoes they're wearing to figure out why only one of them got punched?

That's a stupid analogy on many levels.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

"Change it to be more like 2D Mario"? Shouldn't the question be, why did they "change 2D Mario to be fully explorable 3D" to begin with?

It was the 90s, man, everyone was doing it!

If two guys walk into a bar, and one politely orders a drink and sits down, and the other says "your mother's a filthy whore" to the bartender, do you think we should look at what shoes they're wearing to figure out why only one of them got punched?

Well, Other's shoes might be three sizes too small.

 

[donny2112]

Or maybe it's like the obstacle course in Wii Fit Plus, how it handles levels?

Not with the switching he's talking about. He's saying you can switch between any level (think SMB1 levels) at any time to bypass a section that's too hard for you. Back-and-forth, at will. Very messy. Basically a playground of levels with no real structure as to how you play any part of any of them. Overhead bars too tough? Head on over to the wooden bridge to get to the next section and then switch to something else. (Or more specific to Mario) Hammer Bros in 8-3 too tough? Switch to a mushroom stalk world for a screen and then switch back.

 

[BowieZ]

Not with the switching he's talking about. He's saying you can switch between any level (think SMB1 levels) at any time to bypass a section that's too hard for you. Back-and-forth, at will. Very messy. Basically a playground of levels with no real structure as to how you play any part of any of them. Overhead bars too tough? Head on over to the wooden bridge to get to the next section and then switch to something else. (Or more specific to Mario) Hammer Bros in 8-3 too tough? Switch to a mushroom stalk world for a screen and then switch back.

Did I say there would be no structure? No. That's my point. 3D doesn't mean there would be no structure to what the player is allowed to do. But do you want me to write paragraph after paragraph outlining what I have in my head for my idea? No you don't. But come on... a little common sense wouldn't go astray.

 

[Stumpokapow]

can i just note that this is a sales thread and the last 31 posts have been about some sort of mario/golf hybrid platformer

who do u liek better, curoud or sephyroth

 

[donny2112]

Did I say there would be no structure?

No, you said it would have different colored grass or a stream between the two "levels" to distinguish them. "Hey, we'd like you to stay in this level to complete it and to reinforce that we've put up these useless indicators of where the "level" is, but if you don't want to follow that, hey, go right ahead and do whatever you want!" That's not structure. That's bad parenting poor level design.

can i just note that this is a sales thread and the last 31 posts have been about some sort of mario/golf hybrid platformer

Have you seen the length of the MC threads lately? It's not like their bloated or something.

 

[gerg]

can i just note that this is a sales thread and the last 31 posts have been about some sort of mario/golf hybrid platformer

who do u liek better, curoud or sephyroth

Oh, like this hasn't happened before. :lol

Spoiler

Sonic's eyes are green, dammit!

 

[BowieZ]

Spoiler

Sonic's eyes are green, dammit!

Since you guys are obviously just egging me on to be banned, I am no longer posting in this thread.

 

[Dalthien]

On the other hand, if Nintendo is fine with the state of 3D Mario from a creative and sales standpoint, more power to them.

Yes, I am sure they are quite fine with the state of 3D Mario. Would they like it to sell even more than it does? Sure. Hell, I'm sure they would like to find a way to make NSMB sell even more than it does.

People keep conflating 2D Mario and 3D Mario. But Nintendo has evolved them into two completely different brands - and they like it that way. 2D Mario sells 20 million, 3D Mario sells 10 million. Both are insanely profitable for Nintendo, and by having two separate brands, they essentially double up on their successful franchises. It's no different than Mario RPGs, or Mario Party games, or Mario sports games, or Mario racing games, or Mario fighting games, etc. They are all completely different brands, with different gameplay styles. They all sell varying amounts, but they are all successful, and Nintendo enjoys having many different Mario brands.

"Change it to be more like 2D Mario"? Shouldn't the question be, why did they "change 2D Mario to be fully explorable 3D" to begin with?

It began because Nintendo wanted to bring Mario's platforming style to showcase their new 3D capable hardware. And it worked brilliantly.

At the end of the day, it was a brilliant move, regardless of the reasons behind it. It established a brand new franchise (3D Mario), which now sits comfortably (and successfully) in their portfolio alongside other Mario franchises, including 2D Mario.

 

[charlequin]

That's a stupid analogy on many levels.

I don't think you are really grasping the degree to which the elements you are focusing on are absolutely miniscule in comparison to anything that is remotely relevant to the sales of the game

can i just note that this is a sales thread

oh sorry I got off-topic there for a bit

*ahem*

BOY THE JAPANESE MARKET SURE IS SHITTY THESE DAYS

sense

I agree 100% with everything you said, even the part about Mario 64 being a brilliant move because I don't actually think Nintendo made literally zero good decisions between 1996 and 2004

 

[Chris1964]

Since you guys are obviously just egging me on to be banned, I am no longer posting in this thread.

Posting gaming ideas isn't a reason to be banned.

 

[gerg]

Posting gaming ideas isn't a reason to be banned.

You say that, but iirc there was a thread in which BowieZ was banned, and I think for repeatedly discussing his ideas about 3D Mario, too.

 

[Chris1964]

You say that, but iirc there was a thread in which BowieZ was banned, and I think for repeatedly discussing his ideas about 3D Mario, too.

I don't know the story behind this but I don't believe this was the only reason.

Are we having predictions for next week?
Xenoblade, GTA and?
Mega Man, Galaxy third week, else?

 

[BowieZ]

You say that, but iirc there was a thread in which BowieZ was banned, and I think for repeatedly discussing his ideas about 3D Mario, too.

The reason I was banned was because I went to -- I admit -- an obsessive length to accumulate a series of quotes from other GAF members about how they disliked various aspects of SMG, in the face of Amir0x and others saying how nobody else thought the way I thought... well, should I say, Amir0x told me to shut up and never speak of it again, but I admittedly couldn't help it.

And that's what I'm trying to do now :lol

 

[donny2112]

Posting gaming ideas isn't a reason to be banned.

Choo-Choo!

 

[Chris1964]

Choo-Choo!

That wasn't a gaming idea but a fanboy dream.

 

[charlequin]

Choo-Choo!

Pretty funny how that one worked out in retrospect, isn't it? :lol

 

[gerg]

Pretty funny how that one worked out in retrospect, isn't it? :lol

Someone care to fill me in on this?

Anyway, how's duckroll's trifecta of predictions for Reginleiv, Xenoblade and the Last Story holding out? Although, I guess we won't be able to see it finished until 2011 with the way things are now...

 

[donny2112]

That wasn't a gaming idea but a fanboy dream.

More specifically, it was a pervasive movement explicitly banned by Dragona without accompanying discussion points. As a side point, the discussion of FFXIII getting ported to 360 ended up happening.

Pretty funny how that one worked out in retrospect, isn't it? :lol

With Japanese publishers abandoning the Wii in droves instead of bringing their top games to the system and canceling the versions on the other consoles?

If so, then, yeah. Exact opposite of the general expectations at the time. :lol

Someone care to fill me in on this?

Back in 2007, some people thought that FFXIII would get shifted from PS3 to Wii due to the sales number gaps between the two systems. Somebody whose name started with 'm' was really pushing this idea, and those who went along with said they were joining the 'm---- train.' That was followed by posts like "Choo-Choo!" and "All aboard!" by others wishing to promote that line of thought. It because pervasive enough that Dragona banned any such posts that didn't have accompanying discussion. FFXIII getting ported to the 360 was a side discussion at that time, that ended up happening.

 

[Chris1964]

''Crystal Bearers will be the next main entry of Final Fantasy and FFXIII will be subtitled and become a side project'' Almost 3 years since then. Time flies...

In case we make predictions: Famitsu comparisons

Monolith Soft (no spin-offs and re-releases)
28/02/02 [PS2] Xenosaga Episode I: Der Wille zur Macht (Namco) - 300.849 / 453.853
24/06/04 [PS2] Xenosaga Episode II: Jenseits von Gut und Bose (Namco) - 183.614 / 256.412
06/07/06 [PS2] Xenosaga Episode III: Also Sprach Zarathustra (Bandai Namco) - 119.172 / 181.297

05/12/03 [GCN] Baten Kaitos: Eternal Wings and the Lost Ocean (Namco) - 47.060 / 108.615
23/02/06 [GCN] Baten Kaitos: Origins (Nintendo) - 12.348 / 44.297

28/02/08 [NDS] Soma Bringer (Nintendo) - 53.939 / 100.117

29/05/08 [NDS] Super Robot Wars OG Saga: Endless Frontier (Bandai Namco) - 90.248 / 120.556

25/09/08 [WII] Disaster: Day of Crisis (Nintendo) - 12.768 / 27.896

29/04/09 [NDS] Dragon Ball Z: Attack of the Saiyans (Bandai Namco) - 101.216 / 192.200

25/02/10 [NDS] Super Robot Wars OG Saga: Endless Frontier Exceed (Bandai Namco) - 78.773 / 91.200


Only GTA main entries for comparison
27/08/98 [PS1] Grand Theft Auto (Syscom) - 13.852 / 27.374
25/09/03 [PS2] Grand Theft Auto III (Capcom) - 122.899 / 358.917
20/05/04 [PS2] Grand Theft Auto: Vice City (Capcom) - 223.933 / 410.165
25/01/07 [PS2] Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas (Capcom) - 209.974 / 412.100
26/07/07 [PSP] Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories (Capcom) - 38.685 / 125.507
06/09/07 [PS2] Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories (Capcom) - 17.344 / 74.286
06/12/07 [PSP] Grand Theft Auto: Vice City Stories (Capcom) - 15.300 / 80.420
06/12/07 [PS2] Grand Theft Auto: Vice City Stories (Capcom) - 13.000 / 31.760
30/10/08 [PS3] Grand Theft Auto IV (Capcom) - 122.058 / 211.240
30/10/08 [360] Grand Theft Auto IV (Capcom) - 38.281 / 62.885
29/10/09 [NDS] Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars (CyberFront) - 10.455 / 15.054
11/03/10 [PSP] Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars (CyberFront) - 5.358 / 5.358


Platform Mega Man only for DS and GBA
26/04/02 [GBA] Mega Man Zero (Capcom) - 66.980 / 231.166
10/08/02 [GBA] Mega Man & Bass (Capcom) - 12.629 / 91.097
02/05/03 [GBA] Mega Man Zero 2 (Capcom) - 53.839 / 158.479
23/04/04 [GBA] Mega Man Zero 3 (Capcom) - 44.330 / 121.847
21/04/05 [GBA] Mega Man Zero 4 (Capcom) - 27.596 / 74.354
06/07/06 [NDS] Mega Man ZX (Capcom) - 37.136 / 94.341
12/07/07 [NDS] Mega Man ZX Advent (Capcom) - 27.634 / 63.977

 

[Kilrogg]

Good posts all around here. Enjoying the discussion .

I think we're going to have to reach a middle ground at some point (like what Vinci said earlier for instance). I agree with a lot of points charlequin made, especially the fixed vs. moving camera part. While I was fully conscious that Crash Bandicoot never sold more than 3D Mario, I now realize why I couldn't help mention it, and that's the camera. If I were to strip down my argument to the core of it, I'd say this: there is no one way to do 3D gameplay in a 3D world. It might be incredibly hard to make it really accessible, but I think that games like Crash Bandicoot managed it quite well... They didn't need analogue controls either if I remember correctly. Once this is taken care of, one has to look at everything else that makes or breaks the game. If anyone has the talent to give a hard look at 3D platforming, how it's done, and attempt to do it differently with a fair chance at making it successful, it's Nintendo. But again, if Nintendo is entirely fine with the success of Mario in 3D, well, good for them, can't argue with that. Either way, I can't wait to see what their new take on 3D Mario is, whether it changes everything or only some things. I actually liked Super Mario Galaxy (as opposed to SM64 and SMS) and played it for more than 60 hours, so...

I still stand by my point that it can't be all about removing barriers. Why? I don't know :lol. Because I'm crazy? Yeah, probably. Let's just call that a hunch which I can't elaborate on at the moment because it's late here and I can't spend my days thinking about it. The least they could do is improve the action in 3D Mario (that's the common ground Vinci and I share, along with the return of the Mushroom Kingdom). It feels too empty, and Mario is too slow.

Spoiler

And the 2D sections suck ass!

 

[BowieZ]

Anyone remember that news about Miyamoto being interested in exploring 3D for NSMB? Did he mean 3D vision or 3D gameplay (or both)?