The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Mario Sunshine- Your views good or bad?
What do you think of it?
What do you think of it?
Page:
I concur.
It rules - its large, varied and not short - got all 120 shines yet? Freak.
Its improved in its difficulty - SM64 was a bit easy in places, and its utterly superb.......and it does feel exactly like Mario - Blinkin' brilliant.
It rules - its large, varied and not short - got all 120 shines yet? Freak.
Its improved in its difficulty - SM64 was a bit easy in places, and its utterly superb.......and it does feel exactly like Mario - Blinkin' brilliant.
Id say 8 and 3 wuarters outta of ten. Sunshine is a very good game, i should know i did only buy the game a few days ago, but asw ith every game , it is not possible for them to be made perfectly and through this mario has some faults that many other games has aswell.
First, duff camera angles, this has been plaging 3D games since the year dot and i dont think any game series has got it quite right yet and platfromere ssuch as mario seem to be affected by this greatly, seen as platfrom games mainly involving running along thin ledgeds and jumping onto high obstacles etc. Some times ill be playing when bang, camera changes too a differnet direction and the jump i was hoping too acicve goes right out the window as dopey mario will dive straight off a bloddy cliff! but as i said before games do this , alltho in ome cases, not as badly.
Another bady thing is the fact of marios combat skills and i know that people say that the whole issue with the fLuDD system makes this game different and chalnnging whereas if ya where doing martial art attcks etc it would make the game a lot easier, I dont think thats correct. I reckon they should take a leaf out of Smash Bros melle book and give mario some of the moves he used in that and add that too the new mario game ( hopefully ) It would be intresting too see if mor epeople buy this great game then, i bet youll even get some PS2 zeolets getting it.
And the final thing is the way the game is shaped a bit like a novelt addition. Meaning how ya have too do a task such as pull legs of off a squid and then next episode do the same thing but in a different level and seen as too clean up the bay all ya have ta do is clean a eels teeth is is a bit well, stupid allthogh at the same time original in its own way and cool but ,come on Ninty if ya want to attrract new people into buying Mario ya gonna have ta at some point grow up a bit and not just answer too the fans, however die hard they might be, i know for a fact that if the gameplay was a left and with a new improved camera system with a few grownup features here and there this game would be lapped up by all....
Conclusion time. Perfect gameplay, perfect seting for the game ( an island with sunshines and things that many people only experinec once a year if at all and ya can experience this on ya gc! every day! colllio )
far from perfect camera and a stupid , stupid plot ( its soo stupid that even the annouces in the game stat that " Peach has been kidnapped,again..... and that goes too show that even inty relise the plot sa bit wiffy, but overal a great game and i recomend it too any Gc fan wether you be a fan of the series of not. This is platfrom perfection. Just imagin what mario would be like if Sqaresoft wrote the plot synopis for it............10/10?
First, duff camera angles, this has been plaging 3D games since the year dot and i dont think any game series has got it quite right yet and platfromere ssuch as mario seem to be affected by this greatly, seen as platfrom games mainly involving running along thin ledgeds and jumping onto high obstacles etc. Some times ill be playing when bang, camera changes too a differnet direction and the jump i was hoping too acicve goes right out the window as dopey mario will dive straight off a bloddy cliff! but as i said before games do this , alltho in ome cases, not as badly.
Another bady thing is the fact of marios combat skills and i know that people say that the whole issue with the fLuDD system makes this game different and chalnnging whereas if ya where doing martial art attcks etc it would make the game a lot easier, I dont think thats correct. I reckon they should take a leaf out of Smash Bros melle book and give mario some of the moves he used in that and add that too the new mario game ( hopefully ) It would be intresting too see if mor epeople buy this great game then, i bet youll even get some PS2 zeolets getting it.
And the final thing is the way the game is shaped a bit like a novelt addition. Meaning how ya have too do a task such as pull legs of off a squid and then next episode do the same thing but in a different level and seen as too clean up the bay all ya have ta do is clean a eels teeth is is a bit well, stupid allthogh at the same time original in its own way and cool but ,come on Ninty if ya want to attrract new people into buying Mario ya gonna have ta at some point grow up a bit and not just answer too the fans, however die hard they might be, i know for a fact that if the gameplay was a left and with a new improved camera system with a few grownup features here and there this game would be lapped up by all....
Conclusion time. Perfect gameplay, perfect seting for the game ( an island with sunshines and things that many people only experinec once a year if at all and ya can experience this on ya gc! every day! colllio )
far from perfect camera and a stupid , stupid plot ( its soo stupid that even the annouces in the game stat that " Peach has been kidnapped,again..... and that goes too show that even inty relise the plot sa bit wiffy, but overal a great game and i recomend it too any Gc fan wether you be a fan of the series of not. This is platfrom perfection. Just imagin what mario would be like if Sqaresoft wrote the plot synopis for it............10/10?
I thinks it's good but not perfect. Ceck out my review I just posted for more of my views.
Cyclone wrote:
> I concur.
>
> It rules - its large, varied and not short - got all 120 shines yet?
> Freak.
>
> Its improved in its difficulty - SM64 was a bit easy in places, and
> its utterly superb.......and it does feel exactly like Mario -
> Blinkin' brilliant.
This game has been out about ..... 3 weeks now in England and for your information I have got all 120 shines
And I have done everything extra such as get all the spare blue coins, the sunglasses and the hawian shirt.
> I concur.
>
> It rules - its large, varied and not short - got all 120 shines yet?
> Freak.
>
> Its improved in its difficulty - SM64 was a bit easy in places, and
> its utterly superb.......and it does feel exactly like Mario -
> Blinkin' brilliant.
This game has been out about ..... 3 weeks now in England and for your information I have got all 120 shines
And I have done everything extra such as get all the spare blue coins, the sunglasses and the hawian shirt.
Dringo wrote:
>
> You idiot Super Mario World took ages to complete but no longer than
> Super Mario Sunshine, each level in Super Mario World could take 3
> minutes whilst it would take up to 10 - 15 for one episode in
> Sunshine.
>
I wasn't half way though Super Mario World in just over a weekend. I presume from your use of the poorly estimated times of 3 minutes for World levels and 10-15 minutes for Sunshine that you've never played either game. The term 'time flies when you're having fun' leaps to mind.
There are short levels in both games and there are long levels in both games (even though 'long' in Sunshine generally comes from trying to find red coins). What I'm saying is that the short and long levels in Sunshine are significantly shorter than the short and long levels in World respectively.
Cyclone wrote:
> I concur.
>
> It rules - its large, varied and not short - got all 120 shines yet?
> Freak.
>
I'd got over 60 in less than 4 days and seen almost all of the levels. I haven't played it much since because I'm sick of revisiting the same levels over and over to do more or less the same thing I've done on the other levels. Even though Mario 64 opted for a very similar level system the tasks involved each time were significantly different to the last - and the bosses differed each time you fought one. 'Short' and 'small' are very different terms but I'm afraid both of them apply here.
If my opinion makes me an 'idiot' and a 'freak' then I'll happily call myself either of them if that's what it takes to realise how much below the reasonably expected quality level this game falls.
>
> You idiot Super Mario World took ages to complete but no longer than
> Super Mario Sunshine, each level in Super Mario World could take 3
> minutes whilst it would take up to 10 - 15 for one episode in
> Sunshine.
>
I wasn't half way though Super Mario World in just over a weekend. I presume from your use of the poorly estimated times of 3 minutes for World levels and 10-15 minutes for Sunshine that you've never played either game. The term 'time flies when you're having fun' leaps to mind.
There are short levels in both games and there are long levels in both games (even though 'long' in Sunshine generally comes from trying to find red coins). What I'm saying is that the short and long levels in Sunshine are significantly shorter than the short and long levels in World respectively.
Cyclone wrote:
> I concur.
>
> It rules - its large, varied and not short - got all 120 shines yet?
> Freak.
>
I'd got over 60 in less than 4 days and seen almost all of the levels. I haven't played it much since because I'm sick of revisiting the same levels over and over to do more or less the same thing I've done on the other levels. Even though Mario 64 opted for a very similar level system the tasks involved each time were significantly different to the last - and the bosses differed each time you fought one. 'Short' and 'small' are very different terms but I'm afraid both of them apply here.
If my opinion makes me an 'idiot' and a 'freak' then I'll happily call myself either of them if that's what it takes to realise how much below the reasonably expected quality level this game falls.
SmokedKipper wrote:
that's what it takes to realise how much
> below the reasonably expected quality level this game falls.
To you maybe, but 95% of other people who have played it love it and have called it one of the best games ever.
There's plenty of variety in the game, maybe every level has a 'find the red coins' star and a 'find the 100 coins' star but it was the same with Mario 64. The game's superb IMO and is the perfect evolutionary step from Mario 64, there may be less levels but the shear size of them makes up for that. There's plenty of variety in the tasks you have to do, one minute you could be fighting Mecha Bowser on a rollercoaster, the next ypou could be cleaning the decay of a ginat eels teeth. The Flood is an ingenious addition to Mario games and adds a lot more variety to the game than you'll ever find in Mario 64.
If you really like Mario games like you say you do, then I really question what you where epxecting from the game? it takes all that made Mario 64 good and then times it by 10.
that's what it takes to realise how much
> below the reasonably expected quality level this game falls.
To you maybe, but 95% of other people who have played it love it and have called it one of the best games ever.
There's plenty of variety in the game, maybe every level has a 'find the red coins' star and a 'find the 100 coins' star but it was the same with Mario 64. The game's superb IMO and is the perfect evolutionary step from Mario 64, there may be less levels but the shear size of them makes up for that. There's plenty of variety in the tasks you have to do, one minute you could be fighting Mecha Bowser on a rollercoaster, the next ypou could be cleaning the decay of a ginat eels teeth. The Flood is an ingenious addition to Mario games and adds a lot more variety to the game than you'll ever find in Mario 64.
If you really like Mario games like you say you do, then I really question what you where epxecting from the game? it takes all that made Mario 64 good and then times it by 10.
Tiltawhirl wrote:
> If you really like Mario games like you say you do, then I really
> question what you where epxecting from the game? it takes all that
> made Mario 64 good and then times it by 10.
Less squirting and more jumping would be nice for a start. To me, Mario Sunshine is to the Mario series what Sonic Adventure was to the Sonic series - a step in the wrong direction. A step in another direction was required to progress the Mario format but Sunshine steps into a pubble that should have been avoided (and maybe push Luigi into). Not once have I sat back in my chair and been amazed by a piece of inventive gameplay that I though came as standard with a Mario game. Maybe Mario 64 was just too fantastic for it's own good.
Jumpman certainly isn't living up to his original name.
> If you really like Mario games like you say you do, then I really
> question what you where epxecting from the game? it takes all that
> made Mario 64 good and then times it by 10.
Less squirting and more jumping would be nice for a start. To me, Mario Sunshine is to the Mario series what Sonic Adventure was to the Sonic series - a step in the wrong direction. A step in another direction was required to progress the Mario format but Sunshine steps into a pubble that should have been avoided (and maybe push Luigi into). Not once have I sat back in my chair and been amazed by a piece of inventive gameplay that I though came as standard with a Mario game. Maybe Mario 64 was just too fantastic for it's own good.
Jumpman certainly isn't living up to his original name.
It was never gonna have the same impact as Mario 64, never in a million years. Weren't the obstacle courses enough old school jumping for you? have to admit I'm probably one of the few who loved those jumping sections, annoying yes, but they where so addictive.
There was tons of jumping and platform sections in the games but of course you have the aid of FLUDD. That's one of the reasons I enjoyed it s much, FLUDD brough a whole new area of gaming to Mario.
There was tons of jumping and platform sections in the games but of course you have the aid of FLUDD. That's one of the reasons I enjoyed it s much, FLUDD brough a whole new area of gaming to Mario.
Wouldn't you agree that, aside from the levels without it, FLUDD completely removes any requirement for even vaguely accurate jumping in the game?
The levels without it are the only parts of the game I have thoroughly enjoyed. I'm not saying the inclusion of FLUDD is the sole cause of my lack of enthusiasm for the game but it is certainly a factor.
The levels without it are the only parts of the game I have thoroughly enjoyed. I'm not saying the inclusion of FLUDD is the sole cause of my lack of enthusiasm for the game but it is certainly a factor.
SmokedKipper wrote:
> Wouldn't you agree that, aside from the levels without it, FLUDD
> completely removes any requirement for even vaguely accurate jumping
> in the game?
>
True most of the time, except when you have the rocket nozzle attached, you need to do pinpoint jumping then.
> Wouldn't you agree that, aside from the levels without it, FLUDD
> completely removes any requirement for even vaguely accurate jumping
> in the game?
>
True most of the time, except when you have the rocket nozzle attached, you need to do pinpoint jumping then.
Page: