blah blah continuous complaining about decent games and nsmb2

there, I've summed up the last few posts

also feel free to explain to me how the following games contributed anything:
super mario land
super mario land 2
super mario sunshine
super mario 64 ds

you can't expect very high standards from mobile systems, but notice how i added sms on there since it's literally sm64 with a gimmick and no long jump

it did nothing special, it gave you a jetpack but other than that it's sm64 on an island

Posted by GreenThunder1337

3D Land DID introduce a new style of gameplay (more or less) that probably will continue for a game or two more.

>SMG2

i'm finished

Now I'd like to thank the people who decided to hijack the thread because they like to tell me I'm a dickhead.

GreenThunder1337 was also passive-agressively insulting good games though?

You were saying that they didn't "define" a generation constantly as if it was a bad thing.

Which is odd because I haven't seen anyone talk about the GameCube age that way - the GBA had a total of four remakes and the GameCube had Sunshine, neither of which really "defined" a generation. I'm not sure why it's so much worse now when it wasn't a huge deal then.

Posted by Silver

Hey MercuryPenny, mind telling me what makes Super Mario 3D Land, New Super Mario Bros. 2, etc. so interesting?

SM3DL was them trying something new. I haven't played it but I gotta say it was definitely something creative, since 2D gameplay in 3D works surprisingly well.

Posted by Silver

Sunshine defined a generation in which 3D Mario would take an unexpected twist on a tropical island with a strange new water pack device. A definite shift from Super Mario 64.

But by how much? It did nothing special compared by SM64, they just gave you a jetpack, gave it an island theme and some ridiculous cutscenes that are extremely out of place. There is nothing that makes it special. It's SM64 with a jetpack.

Posted by Silver

Super Mario 3D Land...defines a generation of.....linearity? Tanooki Suits? I have no idea. The game doesn't have it's own identity. It's just a standard linear 3D Mario platformer.

You're completely ignoring that they were taking an idea and running with it. But yes, I can't really support it any further because it's a portable game and by experience with portable games is not...favorable, to say the least.

Posted by Silver

The same can be said for 3D World, what did it add that was new? Cat suits? Multiplayer? Umm sorry, but I prefer the dramatic gameplay twists of Galaxy to this boring stuff. Multiplayer IMO flopped ever since NSMBW, it's nearly impossible to complete a course with four people without somebody getting screwed over and dropping their controller.

What made SMG2 so special? NSMBW? They were building on an idea they introduced in the past. The game is just as creative and interesting as SMG1/2 but people continue to blind themselves with shots in the dark about how it's "unoriginal" "not unique" and stuff like that.

At least MarioFanatic didn't deliberately say it's all boring, generic and not unique at all - he outright said they're good games. But everyone else who argues against this seems to outright deride the games for a lack of originality, which the game is bursting at the seams with.

It doesn't need to "define" a generation - SMS didn't. If you want something that "defines" a generation go look at Mario Kart or something, because everything that series has done has pretty much distinguished one generation of games from another since the SNES.

Posted by Silver

And for NSMB2...uhh...it defined a generation of coins...? But then again, coins were in the original SMB game, so...back to square one....

Haven't played NSMB2 but all I know is that it's just coin spam.