Sources: Nintendo Switch 2020 line-up dominated by Mario games old and new

[The Deadman]

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2020-03-30-sources-nintendo-switch-2020-line-up-dominated-by-mario-games-old-and-new

Nintendo Switch's first-party line-up for the rest of 2020 will be dominated by Mario games old and new, to coincide with the original Super Mario Bros.' 35th anniversary.

That's according to Eurogamer sources with knowledge of Nintendo's upcoming plans, who have corroborated a report posted by VGC.

First, the report states Nintendo will release "most of Super Mario's 35-year back catalogue this year, remastered for Nintendo Switch".

There's no detail on which games this includes, but the article includes a banner image of Mario Galaxy, perhaps intended to suggest the Wii classic as one of these games.

Eurogamer sources have indicated that Mario Galaxy is indeed one of the games being readied for a remaster, alongside a couple of other 3D Mario favourites. [UPDATE: Gematsu has now confirmed these as Mario 64 and Mario Sunshine, which Eurogamer can corroborate.]

Many earlier Mario games are already available on Switch via the console's Switch Online NES and SNES apps.

Second, the report states "several other Mario titles" will release in 2020, including a new Paper Mario.

Eurogamer sources have confirmed a new Paper Mario is in the works, along with a Deluxe version of Super Mario 3D World, which will include an array of new levels. This long-rumoured Wii U port is one of a couple of first-party games from Nintendo's previous console currently due for a new lease of life in 2020.

When contacted for this story, Nintendo gave Eurogamer its traditional response that it did not comment on rumour or speculation.

[The Deadman]

If this is legit, Im gonna need a bigger SD card....

[oldmanwinters]

Hmm, I never really saw 35th as a big enough anniversary to celebrate. Once you pass 25th, seems like you're only supposed to commemorate the anniversaries that end in 0.

Of course, I'm not complaining about more Mario. :tlol:

[Galactus]

If true I'd be a complete sucker for this.

[neatoman]

Mario collection? One that includes most games? Let me guess:

Donkey Kong
Mario Bros
Super Mario Bros
SMB2/Lost Levels
SM USA/SMB2
SMB3
Land
Land 2
World
64
Sunshine
New Super Mario Bros
NSMB2
NSMBU
Galaxy
Galaxy 2
3D Land
3D world

[Andrew NDB]

I'd love to see a Mario Sunshine HD.

[The Deadman]

Mario collection? One that includes most games? Let me guess:

Donkey Kong
Mario Bros
Super Mario Bros
SMB2/Lost Levels
SM USA/SMB2
SMB3
Land
Land 2
World
64
Sunshine
New Super Mario Bros
NSMB2
NSMBU
Galaxy
Galaxy 2
3D Land
3D world


Half of these games are on the Switch already, with the NES/SNES games on the online service and New Super Mario Bros U having a Wii U port. Theyre saying Mario 64, Sunshine, the first Galaxy and 3D World are the ones being re-released.

[Galactus]

^^^

People would shell out for a physical copy of the nes/snes games as a compilation.

Also at least for the 3D games they'll be given HD remasters if not a graphical overhaul and even some minor changes to the gameplay.

[The Deadman]

TFbES4ultTA

[Vegita-San]

SM64 at LEAST needs a graphical overhaul.

the controls and gameplay have not aged well.

[CyberCubed]

Mario 64 is actually one of the oldest 3D games that still looks good to this day, must be because of how cartoony it looks.

[Galactus]

OMG, OMG, OMG

Although I kinda wish 3D All Stars did a graphical overhaul of 64 and Sunshine. Seems likely the former will still have the clunky camera and the latter will have the same problems that keep it from being a 10/10 game.

It's good to see 3D World getting a lot of love these days for a while it seemed that it's reputation was that of a lesser Mario game but it's been one of my favourites since it was first released. Looking forward to the new mode whatever it is.

[neatoman]

Mario 64 is actually one of the oldest 3D games that still looks good to this day, must be because of how cartoony it looks.

Eeeeeeehhhh....

... Let's be honest here, even at the time SM64 was a weird looking game. I'm not sure why you think it still looks good when a good chunk of it looks really strange. Like what the hell is wet-dry world even meant to be? A sunken city or a bunker?

[Galactus]

Mario 64 is actually one of the oldest 3D games that still looks good to this day, must be because of how cartoony it looks.

Games with cartoon-like aesthetics generally age better than games who strive for realism. That being said the blocky-ness of Super Mario 64 is still jarring.

A graphical upgrade similar to Ocarina of Time 3D wouldn't have been too difficult.

Eeeeeeehhhh....

... Let's be honest here, even at the time SM64 was a weird looking game. I'm not sure why you think it still looks good when a good chunk of it looks really strange. Like what the hell is wet-dry world even meant to be? A sunken city or a bunker?

It looks like a Mario level. Plus it had the cool background city which I always tried to get to when I was a kid.

[sdp]

Nintendo's out of touchness is both their greatest weakness and strength. Here we have a barebones collection, not even Galaxy 2? jeeze. Just a few more bells and whistles would've made it better, and maybe it has them but show them.

[Galactus]

Some places are getting 3D All Stars in less than two weeks so if there was any new surprises they'd have shown us.

Yeah it's disappointing. A graphical upgrade would have been in keeping with the original All Stars which gave the NES games a 16 bit makeover. I know for me when I think of the original Super Mario Bros games I always think of the All Stars version.

While I appreciate that the original basic Sprite work for Super Mario Bros sprites have a certain retro charm I don't think many people feel the same about the polygons of Super Mario 64. They really should have done something with the graphics if nothing else.

[Turo602]

From what they showed, Mario Sunshine and Mario Galaxy both look great in HD. Especially Galaxy, which was already a good looking game on the Wii but just needed an HD resolution to really show off what it was selling, and well, now we got it.

The lack of Galaxy 2 is quite strange though. I always thought it was the better of the two and the fact that they even deliberately snubbed it from their Mario montage is very shady. Like they didn't want to remind anyone about it so they wouldn't question its absence in the collection.

They honestly could have gotten away with selling both Galaxy games in a separate collection, but I really can't see them trying to release Galaxy 2 by itself at full price or even at a discounted one. At this point, the only way they could implement it is through DLC. I doubt this game will be limited forever, so I can definitely see something along the lines of "we brought the game back due to popular demand and also, Galaxy 2 is now available as DLC" just to score them bonus points with us later and give the game that second wind.

[CyberCubed]

The reason this is a limited run is they're probably going to sell all the games seperately later. Galaxy 2 will probably come out later.

Mario 3D Land is still a 3DS exclusive though, it's probably not going to have its levels brought over to 3D World.

[sdp]

The reason this is a limited run is they're probably going to sell all the games seperately later. Galaxy 2 will probably come out later.

Mario 3D Land is still a 3DS exclusive though, it's probably not going to have its levels brought over to 3D World.

That's what I'm thinking, N64 Switch Online will include Mario 64 and they'll sell Wii and Gamecube games for $30 a pop. There's no other reason to not include it in the collection or make this limited time. Also explains why they didn't do much of anything to make it special


While I appreciate that the original basic Sprite work for Super Mario Bros sprites have a certain retro charm I don't think many people feel the same about the polygons of Super Mario 64. They really should have done something with the graphics if nothing else.
I think they should've done something with the graphics, look at what the PC port of Mario 64 has done as a fan project or even Mario 64 DS. But I do love the blocky N64 graphics, they have a certain charm as well but I can play those in an emulator for a release like this I would want a better version even if in the end it's "inferior" to the original.

[CyberCubed]

Yeah, no way are they going to not HD all past mario games.

[CyberCubed]

https://i.redd.it/92qe5r90xyk51.png

Some comparisons already, left is the Switch remaster and right is the N64 original. They're definitely improving the graphics a little while keeping the same general look of the original.

Sunshine and Galaxy should also look great in HD.

[neatoman]

https://i.redd.it/92qe5r90xyk51.png

Some comparisons already, left is the Switch remaster and right is the N64 original. They're definitely improving the graphics a little while keeping the same general look of the original.

Sunshine and Galaxy should also look great in HD.

I guess you're right about it looking better? At least in a technical sense. Though low-poly is still low poly. SM64 isn't some indie title that uses low poly as a stylistic choice and/or cost saver, it's low poly because it's one of the earliest 3D games ever made.

[CyberCubed]

Super Mario 64's graphics still look fine though. It doesn't need to be re-done in Odyssey style graphics because it'd lose all the charm and identity of the original. I'm glad it's not getting a full blown remake, the art style is what I associate with Mario 64 and it would take away all the nostalgia of the original.

[neatoman]

Well, there is one thing to look forward to with this rerelease and that's the camerea. The Wii U rerelease just mapped the C-buttons to the right stick and it was frustrating to move the camera as such. If this one actually lets you have analogue camera control, then that would be golden.

[Wildcat]

Since SM64 has been rereleased before it definitely should have gotten a true graphics upgrade to match the others. That was part of the point of the old All Stars. Cleaner edges and higher resolution is not enough anymore.

The Game and Watch is cute but $50 is too expensive for 2 NES games that are available everywhere. The Classic/Mini was $60 (assuming you bought it at the retail price) and has 30 games.

I’m only interested in 3D World +. Always wanted it for WiiU but this is the obvious choice now. I would like Galaxy but as mentioned already they’re probably gonna release them individually. Maybe part 2 also.

[Andrew NDB]

Since SM64 has been rereleased before it definitely should have gotten a true graphics upgrade to match the others. That was part of the point of the old All Stars. Cleaner edges and higher resolution is not enough anymore.

Agreed. This is bullsh** on Mario 64. "The graphics had a charm," blah blah... no, they could have taken it up a few notches. Just sharpening up old, blocky polygons without actually improving them/the polygon count just makes things look worse, I've seen. Like with the FF VIII and IX remaster.

Mostly I'll just buy this for Mario Sunshine.

[Galactus]

The N64 is one of my favourite consoles ever but frankly compared to what was being put out on the PlayStation you could see the graphics were not even impressive for the time. Sure Mario being very cartoon-like it was less of an issue than it was in say Zelda which at the time was supposed to look 'real' but it's still jarring.

If they could update the aesthetics for the release on the DS to look like a then modern game they could have done it here.

[Turo602]

Since SM64 has been rereleased before it definitely should have gotten a true graphics upgrade to match the others. That was part of the point of the old All Stars. Cleaner edges and higher resolution is not enough anymore.

If they were gonna go through all that effort, they would sell it by itself at full price.

[Galactus]

If they were gonna go through all that effort, they would sell it by itself at full price.

They did it with the NES games when they did the original Super Mario All Stars bringing the graphics and audio to 16 Bit standard. I don't think it was unrealistic to expect something similar.

I've seen some people speculate they do have 'proper' remasters of 64 on the way to explain why this is only getting a limited release but I don't really see that as plausible myself.

Nintendo's whole business strategy with the Switch, NES and SNES minis and now this is basically what people thought Cartman inadvertently hit on when he ran his theme park.

DAuG7_acmdA

[CyberCubed]

If they were all getting full remakes each of them would be sold separately for $60. Obviously this is just an HD upgrade.

[LeotheLateBloomer]

Super Mario 64's graphics still look fine though. It doesn't need to be re-done in Odyssey style graphics because it'd lose all the charm and identity of the original. I'm glad it's not getting a full blown remake, the art style is what I associate with Mario 64 and it would take away all the nostalgia of the original.

Yeah, I agree with you. Even to this day, I still think 64 looks good.

[Turo602]

They did it with the NES games when they did the original Super Mario All Stars bringing the graphics and audio to 16 Bit standard. I don't think it was unrealistic to expect something similar.

I've seen some people speculate they do have 'proper' remasters of 64 on the way to explain why this is only getting a limited release but I don't really see that as plausible myself.

Nintendo's whole business strategy with the Switch, NES and SNES minis and now this is basically what people thought Cartman inadvertently hit on when he ran his theme park.

DAuG7_acmdA

Nintendo was competing with Sega at the time. Nintendo currently has a niche in the market which is why they never drop their prices. If you're buying a Switch, it's not as a substitute to Playstation or Xbox, and Nintendo knows this. This is why they can afford to keep their prices up and treat their games as premium products. You can't really expect them to remake or extensively remaster Mario 64 and sell it as part of a compilation. It sucks, but if anyone can get away with it, it's Nintendo, because what else are you gonna do? Not play their games? As disappointing as it may be, I still think you're getting a fair value with the collection. 20 bucks a game. Can't really complain about that.

[CyberCubed]

Also remaking 2D games like Mario 1-3 in All-stars graphics is obviously not the same as remaking graphics for huge 20+ hour games like all the 3D Mario games are.

It takes roughly 20 or more hours to get all the stars in each 3D Mario, so it's a huge undertaking to remake all the worlds completely in modern graphics. Sunshine and Galaxy should look good in HD, I still remember how Galaxy look impressive on the Wii back in 2007 compared to PS3/360 games at the time.

[frank_one]

Mario 64 graphics is considered iconic, it doesn't need to be remade. Back in the 90s retrogaming and pixelart were not a thing and this is why they decided to remake the graphics of mario bros 1-3 for the all-stars collection. Now it's different, you can sell old games as they are, as an important piece of hystory.

[turtle1237]

I think the graphics should be the same. Now that I am playing the Link's awakening remake, I think the graphics look kinda of "off" compare to the gameboy.

[Galactus]

The Link's Awakening remake was praised for it's visual aesthetic. Ocarina of Time 3D was seen as a near perfect realisation of what the game should have looked if it. I don't think the polygons and wonky camera of the original are so iconic that it couldn't be be updated to a modern standard.

I get Nintendo's business reasons for not doing it but I'm just saying they should have done it.

[Wildcat]

Super Mario 64 has been ported digitally with enhancements and on DS with extras. By now this SHOULD have been updated with modernized graphics. Especially in the context of an anniversary compilation.

It has nothing to do with nostalgia or the N64 graphics being iconic. Those versions are widely available. Its about giving people a significant reason to play the game again.

It would not have been too difficult either. It’s been done to other fully 3D games. All 3 original Spyro games did it.

[Leo656]

The fact that Super Mario 64 is a ton of fun no matter what it looks like is a good enough "reason for people to play it again." Also the reason why the original N64 cartridge version is the only one I own or have ever played.

"Waaaaaah, I can only play old games if they're pretty!" You people make me sick!

[Wildcat]

Again, Anniversary and has already been rereleased in N64 format.

New graphics are a totally reasonable expectation given its been done so well by others.

[Andrew NDB]

I mean, nothing crazy was needed. Up the resolution, obviously (which they did)... but when you do that, you need to also up the polygon count or it's going to look sh**.

Kind of like when you watch one of these old 4:3 TV shows from the 80s and 90s that you used to watch on your old tube TV come to 1080p blu-ray (or Netflix, or whatever) and suddenly all of the little mistakes and dirty spots and this and that all come to the forefront with crystal clarity on your 65" 4K screen. It's distracting.

[Leo656]

"Expectations are nothing more than Step One towards Disappointment."
- Every Reputable Therapist

[Turo602]

Nobody had any reason to expect a full on graphical upgrade from Mario 64 or any of the other games. It was pretty clear what we were getting, especially for the price. Nintendo's games have far outsold any other exclusive without ever dropping their prices like Playstation and Xbox do all the time. If anyone honestly thought they were gonna get a borderline remake tossed in with a couple of other big games, they're not living in reality.

[Wildcat]

This was just a big missed opportunity for SM64. They can always upgrade it later but this was the perfect time.

If this was the first time being ported it might have been fine but cleaner textures is nothing to get excited about.

Just talking about SM64. The others obviously dont need that much of upgrading.

[Turo602]

I'm pretty sure the selling point is that it's in a compilation for the Switch. I don't get why they need to do anything else to warrant excitement. It's on the Switch, along with 2 more Mario games. I'm pretty damn excited about that. I get it would have been nice if they updated the visuals, but for what we're getting, I don't see any need to complain about the lack of a graphical upgrade for Mario 64. If they sold this separately at full retail price, then the complaint would definitely be warranted.

[Galactus]

Yes, we should have all seen this coming with it being Nintendo and all but I don't think it was unfair to expect they'd so something more. Other companies do it, Nintendo itself has done it before. Even releasing a collection is something they haven't done in a while

Sure Mario 64 is still a ton of fun but there are flaws that were always there that you dismissed at the time both you were a kid and because it was the first of its kind so you can't help people for wanting a definitive version of the game that game now.

Yeah I pre-ordered this like the sucker I am and I'll appreciate playing these games without having to set up old consoles but they should have done more.

[Leo656]

Entitlement, thy name is "Video Game Fan".

[Wildcat]

Ya having a compilation is nice, although it probably should have included Galaxy 2 also to make it the complete 3D era.

I dont like complaining this much so Ill just drop it. Never had 3D World so Im glad its getting a bonus edition.

[Leo656]

I know, this is like the absolute whiniest you've ever been in all the time I've known you. :lol: "Where's the REAL guy at?"

Given some of the things I've seen you give a pass to, this deal must REALLY be buggin' you out. :trazz:

[Wildcat]

I know, this is like the absolute whiniest you've ever been in all the time I've known you. :lol: "Where's the REAL guy at?"

Given some of the things I've seen you give a pass to, this deal must REALLY be buggin' you out. :trazz::lol:

I definitely think they could have made a better compilation but I’m not that mad about it. More like...thats the big announcement? I told you I can complain about stuff though. It really depends what its about.

Next year is Sonics 30th Anniversary. Pretty much a given theres a brand new game since Forces and Mania came out in 2017.

They have already said theyre purposely taking more time with future Sonic games and that something IS in the works.

[Leo656]

That'd be neat. I liked both of those games just fine, even Forces which everyone seems to hate. Had some neat ideas, I had a fun week with it. Keep meaning to go back to it but I've honestly not played too many games since March, only a bit here and there. For whatever reason the whole pandemic ordeal has me spending a lot more time with some of my many other hobbies.

But yeah, 30th anniversary one would think they'd do something. Although if it were anything huge it stands to reason we might've heard by now. Guess we'll see.

[Wildcat]

Theyve actually confirmed stuff is in the works but cant say it yet.

Ya like I said Forces was good just pretty short. I really do not know what people are talking about. I read complaints and stuff but I do not understand what exactly was so awful about it.

[Leo656]

Oh, alright then. You'd probably pay much closer attention than I do, to be perfectly honest. :lol: But good to hear.

Yeah, I'unno, I thought it was perfectly fine. Not like amazing but I definitely had fun with it and it was one of the least frustrating Sonic games I ever played. Maybe a bit short and kinda easy, but I don't hear those complaints too much. Mostly just "Arrrrgh no more 3D sonic WTF" and all'a that. Which I always dismiss out of hand because it's juvenile.

[Wildcat]

https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2020/05/sega_cant_wait_to_share_exciting_news_about_sonics _30th_anniversary

Some think a Sonic Adventure remake is also in the works. Nothing concrete but I can see it being true. Could be cool.

[Galactus]

If Crash and Spyro can get collected remasters then it can be done for the biggest video game franchise of all time. There's only really 64 that would have even needed that much work.

[Turo602]

Sonic Forces was extremely mediocre. The problem isn't even that the game is short, it's the content. Levels end way too soon, so they're not even fun or worth replaying. So much of the game is automated and plays itself. Classic Sonic controls much worse than he did in Generations and has terrible flat level designs which misses the point of Classic Sonic. The story was extremely underwhelming for what they were trying to do and promote. The original character idea was neat, though also pretty cringe, and the gameplay was pretty terrible as platforming in 3D in that Sonic Engine is incredibly stiff feeling, and the emphasis on combat was also not a good idea as it's incredibly flawed and doesn't even feel good. Not to mention, the bosses were trash. It's not an awful Sonic game, but it's just extremely mediocre and at this point, people are really tired of boost formula Sonic as he's run his course.

I can't imagine how anyone can complain about 4 big Mario games coming to Switch, a new live Mario Kart game, a bunch of crossover event celebrations, new Mario products including a massive Lego set, and other goodies like the Game and Watch and Mario Bros. 35 not being enough for Mario's Anniversary, yet being okay with Sonic Forces of all games for what was supposed to be an anniversary game.

Sonic Forces is proof that Sega has given up on Sonic. First mainline Sonic game to sell at a budget price and was made incredibly easy for kids and has a character creator for all the 7 year olds who want to place themselves in Sonic's world and "fist bump" him.

[CyberCubed]

The games are remastered with new textures and better graphics, this video compares the N64/gamecube/wii versions with this one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=50&v=ml0_yM9XvtA&feature=emb_logo

So it's not just simple ports, Nintendo generally fails to communicate these things for some reason. Fans hype their products better than the company itself.

[Leo656]

Why pay people to do something that others will gladly do for free?

They're well aware that they have a passionate fanbase who will gladly give them all the "grassroots marketing" they'd ever need, free of charge.

[CyberCubed]

Hopefully Galaxy 2 gets a release later on. That way everything besides Mario 3D Land on 3DS will be on Switch.

Come to think of it, it's hard to believe that since 1996...there have only been 7 3D Mario games. If this was any other company they'd probably flood endless 3D Mario platformers over the years.

But 1996 was nearly 25 years ago, and there's only been 7 3D Mario's:

1996: Mario 64
2002: Mario Sunshine
2007: Mario Galaxy
2010: Mario Galaxy 2
2011: Mario 3D Land (3DS)
2013: Mario 3D World
2017: Mario Odyssey

Only 7 games in the span of nearly 25 years, only time it was almost annualized was between Galaxy 2, 3D Land and 3D World.

[Leo656]

They wouldn't be "event" games if they came out constantly. Same with Zelda.

Look at Assassin's Creed. One (or two) games every single year for the longest time, and they all sell in big numbers, but that doesn't mean people actually care. Most people buy them out of habit, play them for a weekend or a few days and never finish or go back to them. Sure, they're successful, but they all bleed together in most peoples' minds and individually they make no real impact.

Meanwhile, every single Mario or Zelda game that comes out is Big News. They know what they're doin'.

[LeotheLateBloomer]

This was just a big missed opportunity for SM64. They can always upgrade it later but this was the perfect time.

If this was the first time being ported it might have been fine but cleaner textures is nothing to get excited.

I mean the DS version exists and went a bit beyond just being a remake so.....

[sdp]

You can argue 3D World is the evolution of Galaxy 2 level design since Galaxy 2 had less open worlds than Galaxy 1 and 3D world just expanded on being restrictive. Didn't play much of either of them much but Galaxy 2 still felt like Galaxy and 3D world just felt like a nicer 3D Land, and I don't consider 3D Land a 3D Mario game.

That's why Odyssey felt so fresh, it had been a decade since the last real 3D Mario, even more if you don't consider Galaxy 2 a 3D Mario. 3D Land is a nice game but it feels like a handheld Mario game, not quite the console experience but fun. I know people say 3D World gets really good near the end but those first few levels didn't make me feel the need to play again.

[Galactus]

I can't imagine how anyone can complain about 4 big Mario games coming to Switch, a new live Mario Kart game, a bunch of crossover event celebrations, new Mario products including a massive Lego set, and other goodies like the Game and Watch and Mario Bros. 35 not being enough for Mario's Anniversary, yet being okay with Sonic Forces of all games for what was supposed to be an anniversary game.

Because Sonic hasn't been a big deal since the 90s. No one really expects much for his anniversary.

Yes, in terms of quantity Nintendo are giving us a lot. In terms of quality...well it's still pretty darn good however you can't fault people for wanting to get the treatment that lesser franchises have gotten with their collections or what Mario himself got with the original All Stars.

The games are remastered with new textures and better graphics, this video compares the N64/gamecube/wii versions with this one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=50&v=ml0_yM9XvtA&feature=emb_logo

So it's not just simple ports, Nintendo generally fails to communicate these things for some reason. Fans hype their products better than the company itself.

It's a minimal effort. They've still kept the blocky polygon look and that's not a deliberate aesthetic choice

They wouldn't be "event" games if they came out constantly. Same with Zelda.

Look at Assassin's Creed. One (or two) games every single year for the longest time, and they all sell in big numbers, but that doesn't mean people actually care. Most people buy them out of habit, play them for a weekend or a few days and never finish or go back to them. Sure, they're successful, but they all bleed together in most peoples' minds and individually they make no real impact.

Meanwhile, every single Mario or Zelda game that comes out is Big News. They know what they're doin'.

I dunno for a while Nintendo really did over saturate the market with those New Super Mario Bros game. We got like four of them in the space of six years in among the Galaxy games.

I tend to think that why the 3D Land and World were slept on (the latter being on the Wii U didn't help) even though they were different they still seemed too much like the New games that it took a complete break with Odyssey to get people hooked on Mario again.

[CyberCubed]

I tend to think that why the 3D Land and World were slept on (the latter being on the Wii U didn't help) even though they were different they still seemed too much like the New games that it took a complete break with Odyssey to get people hooked on Mario again.

Mario 3D Land is one of the best selling 3DS games, remember it came out in 2011 the same year it launched only in the Fall. Mario 3D World sold well for a Wii-U game, but well, it was on Wii-U...and most people didn't have a Wii-U.

Like most of Nintendo's other Wii-U ports to Switch, I expect Mario 3D World to sell very well when it comes out in February. The additional content will even get people like me to double dip on it who already had the original since 2013

[sdp]

I like the blocky Mario 64 look, but I can always replay the N64 version in many ways, I would indeed have liked a little more effort especially when a few hackers can do so much more with the PC port of Mario 64. And yes Nintendo can do a lot more with all the money they have, they have no excuse to cut corners. But even with this lazy release they could've included Galaxy 2, it literally would've cost them next to nothing to include it.Even the packaging is disappointing, there is no manual or anything of the like, they could've at least had an instruction booklet, an anniversary badge, I don't know stickers.

Because Sonic hasn't been a big deal since the 90s. No one really expects much for his anniversary.



Sega might be a shadow of its former self and the quality of Sonic games as well depending on your views but Sonic is a sales juggernaut with kids and is as big now as he's ever been. Perhaps not as big as he was in the 90s but he's up there.

[Turo602]

Yes, in terms of quantity Nintendo are giving us a lot. In terms of quality...well it's still pretty darn good however you can't fault people for wanting to get the treatment that lesser franchises have gotten with their collections or what Mario himself got with the original All Stars.

I understand the disappointment, and I get the comparisons, but they're honestly not comparable. People have set the wrong expectations, and it's absurd for people to still be upset to the extent that I've seen given what they are charging for it. I guarantee not a single person would have been upset if they remade Super Mario 64 and sold it for 60 by itself, yet they're selling you 3 games for the price of one and it's not enough?

Not to mention, Nintendo has never really remade games outside of handheld conversions that were meant to showcase what powerhouses they were. Like Metroid: Zero Mission on the GBA, Mario 64 on DS, Ocarina of Time on 3DS, and one of the most recent examples being Luigi's Mansion, a Gamecube game remade (demade?) for the 3DS. Even when they remastered Wind Waker and Twilight Princess on the Wii U, they didn't do anything too spectacular to the visuals that they aren't doing with this collection. They couldn't even justify remaking A Link to the Past that they made an entirely brand new game out of it with A Link Between Worlds. The only remake I can think of they've done on a console is Link's Awakening, and that's a remake of a Gameboy game, which they also charged 60 dollars for. Bullsh*t, but again, Nintendo can get away with it.

Expecting Nintendo to remake Super Mario 64 is like expecting them to remake the original Super Smash Bros. or Mario Kart. It's obsolete. It's why you'll never see Rockstar Games go back and remake titles like GTA III, Vice City, and San Andreas when they could just keep focusing their efforts on new games that serve virtually the same purpose like GTA IV and GTA V. I'm sure Nintendo is hard at work on the next Mario for them to see any point in remaking, reskinning, and tweaking an old one to feel new when they could just give us Odyssey 2 or something. Especially at this time since they really have nothing to showcase with such a remake that Odyssey already didn't show us. That's why they remade Mario 64 on the DS and not the Gamecube.

[AquaParade]

This collection is a disappointment because:

A. These games should have been on the virtual console a while ago. The small upgrades are cool, but not worth the wait.

B. Nintendo hasn't shown off a lot for this Holiday season to keep hardcore gamers busy.

C. People want to see Mario 64 remade not re-sold once again.

D. Galaxy 2's exclusion feels cruel.

[Wildcat]

Sonic Forces was extremely mediocre. The problem isn't even that the game is short, it's the content. Levels end way too soon, so they're not even fun or worth replaying. So much of the game is automated and plays itself. Classic Sonic controls much worse than he did in Generations and has terrible flat level designs which misses the point of Classic Sonic. The story was extremely underwhelming for what they were trying to do and promote. The original character idea was neat, though also pretty cringe, and the gameplay was pretty terrible as platforming in 3D in that Sonic Engine is incredibly stiff feeling, and the emphasis on combat was also not a good idea as it's incredibly flawed and doesn't even feel good. Not to mention, the bosses were trash. It's not an awful Sonic game, but it's just extremely mediocre and at this point, people are really tired of boost formula Sonic as he's run his course.

I can't imagine how anyone can complain about 4 big Mario games coming to Switch, a new live Mario Kart game, a bunch of crossover event celebrations, new Mario products including a massive Lego set, and other goodies like the Game and Watch and Mario Bros. 35 not being enough for Mario's Anniversary, yet being okay with Sonic Forces of all games for what was supposed to be an anniversary game.

Sonic Forces is proof that Sega has given up on Sonic. First mainline Sonic game to sell at a budget price and was made incredibly easy for kids and has a character creator for all the 7 year olds who want to place themselves in Sonic's world and "fist bump" him.I was not complaining about all the Mario offerings. Just the All Stars compilation. Oh and I said the Game and Watch was too expensive. (Classic/Mini retailed for only $10 more)

I said I’m glad about 3D World Plus because I never played it the first time around and the Live Mario Kart does look pretty cool. Id like to see other games use that format.

I do not think Sonic Forces was meant to be an Anniversary game. It was announced at an anniversary event but was released in 2017. But ya, I thought Forces was fine. Not amazing but fine. It is too short, quite easy in later stages and Ill agree has a lot of boost segments.

The notion that Sega does not care about Sonic or keeps making bad games is just old. Forces does not prove anything when Mania released the same year and most people loved it.

Coincidentally this was posted today after I just linked the old one last night. https://www.sonicstadium.org/2020/09/sonics-30th-anniversary-under-way-with-new-games-european-licensing-magazine-confirms/

Anyone thinking Sonic has fallen to the wayside must not follow along. Sonic is just as big as any other franchise. Not Mario status obviously but theyre easily the 2 biggest thanks to the whole 90s rivalry.

[CyberCubed]

This collection is a disappointment because:

A. These games should have been on the virtual console a while ago. The small upgrades are cool, but not worth the wait.

B. Nintendo hasn't shown off a lot for this Holiday season to keep hardcore gamers busy.

C. People want to see Mario 64 remade not re-sold once again.

D. Galaxy 2's exclusion feels cruel.

Mario Sunshine has never been re-released. This is the first time the game is available since the 2002 Gamecube release. Considering that was 18 years ago, millions of people and kids have never played the game since it was stuck on the Gamecube for two decades.

[Galactus]

I understand the disappointment, and I get the comparisons, but they're honestly not comparable. People have set the wrong expectations, and it's absurd for people to still be upset to the extent that I've seen given what they are charging for it. I guarantee not a single person would have been upset if they remade Super Mario 64 and sold it for 60 by itself, yet they're selling you 3 games for the price of one and it's not enough?

Not to mention, Nintendo has never really remade games outside of handheld conversions that were meant to showcase what powerhouses they were. Like Metroid: Zero Mission on the GBA, Mario 64 on DS, Ocarina of Time on 3DS, and one of the most recent examples being Luigi's Mansion, a Gamecube game remade (demade?) for the 3DS. Even when they remastered Wind Waker and Twilight Princess on the Wii U, they didn't do anything too spectacular to the visuals that they aren't doing with this collection. They couldn't even justify remaking A Link to the Past that they made an entirely brand new game out of it with A Link Between Worlds. The only remake I can think of they've done on a console is Link's Awakening, and that's a remake of a Gameboy game, which they also charged 60 dollars for. Bullsh*t, but again, Nintendo can get away with it.

Expecting Nintendo to remake Super Mario 64 is like expecting them to remake the original Super Smash Bros. or Mario Kart. It's obsolete. It's why you'll never see Rockstar Games go back and remake titles like GTA III, Vice City, and San Andreas when they could just keep focusing their efforts on new games that serve virtually the same purpose like GTA IV and GTA V. I'm sure Nintendo is hard at work on the next Mario for them to see any point in remaking, reskinning, and tweaking an old one to feel new when they could just give us Odyssey 2 or something. Especially at this time since they really have nothing to showcase with such a remake that Odyssey already didn't show us. That's why they remade Mario 64 on the DS and not the Gamecube.

If they just released Super Mario 64 on its own with only the barest of changes and charged full price for it I'm certain people would be pissed and rightly so.

They remade 64 on the DS to showcase the power of that system. To showcase that their handheld could run 3D games that is all that was necessary to impress consumers but they went all out with new graphics, playable characters and mini games etc. No one was asking for that level of change with this simply that it be given better graphics and camera. They couldn't even put it in widescreen.

You're right that when they brought over Wind Waker and Twlight Princess thet didn't do much with the visuals but they didn't need to, they simply brought them up to modern standards. They made a bigger effort with the ports of Ocarina of Time so they are capable of it. Plus with Wind Waker HD and Ocarina 3D they didn't just upscale the graphics but also fixed perceived problems with gameplay vsuch as sailing the ocean and equipping iron boots so Nintendo are cognoscent of giving fans the 'definitive' experience when porting their games to new systems. If they ever released Ocarina of Time to the Switch they wouldn't just it the same treatment as 64 here. After what they did with the 3DS version they would not be seen as going backwards so people are naturally going to wonder why they'd do that with Mario.

Also Nintendo are always working on new main line Mario games. It's never stopped them from putting their all my into other Mario related games.

[Turo602]

If they just released Super Mario 64 on its own with only the barest of changes and charged full price for it I'm certain people would be pissed and rightly so.

They remade 64 on the DS to showcase the power of that system. To showcase that their handheld could run 3D games that is all that was necessary to impress consumers but they went all out with new graphics, playable characters and mini games etc. No one was asking for that level of change with this simply that it be given better graphics and camera. They couldn't even put it in widescreen.

You're right that when they brought over Wind Waker and Twlight Princess thet didn't do much with the visuals but they didn't need to, they simply brought them up to modern standards. They made a bigger effort with the ports of Ocarina of Time so they are capable of it. Plus with Wind Waker HD and Ocarina 3D they didn't just upscale the graphics but also fixed perceived problems with gameplay vsuch as sailing the ocean and equipping iron boots so Nintendo are cognoscent of giving fans the 'definitive' experience when porting their games to new systems. If they ever released Ocarina of Time to the Switch they wouldn't just it the same treatment as 64 here. After what they did with the 3DS version they would not be seen as going backwards so people are naturally going to wonder why they'd do that with Mario.

Also Nintendo are always working on new main line Mario games. It's never stopped them from putting their all my into other Mario related games.

Which is exactly why they're not releasing it at 60 dollars with bare minimum changes, yet people are still upset. It's absurd.

And that's my point exactly. Nintendo doesn't do things without reason. They don't just remake games because they know it'll make a quick buck. They do it with the purpose of exploiting their hardware. This has always been how they operate. If they're making a Mario game to take advantage of the Switch's hardware, they're not gonna achieve that by remaking an older title.

Nintendo has always been about moving forward, even when they go backwards. Which is why they tend to go backwards a lot with their handhelds because it makes their handheld look good when it's running better versions of console games. This is why we got Sunshine on Gamecube while the DS got Mario 64. It's why we got Skyward Sword on the Wii and Ocarina of Time on the 3DS.

Also, if they do bring Ocarina of Time to the Switch, which is currently rumored, and it's just the N64 version, then I could understand the backlash. They already remade the game and they could just port that version because it is widely accepted as the better of the two. What they won't do is completely remake it again for the Switch. And while Super Mario 64 was remade on DS, I'm pretty sure Nintendo would have just gotten backlash that it wasn't the original anyway.

Which is why I think what people were expecting and asking for is totally unreasonable. What was reported was that we were getting a compilation of 3 games and that's exactly what we got and for a fair price. This isn't Mario 64 as is for 60 dollars, it's 3 games. And suddenly it's a problem or a rip-off that one game wasn't entirely remade when that was never the deal? Are people really upset or do they just want Mario 64 remade? Because if that's what they really want, then they need to be willing to pay full price for it rather than complaining about its 20 dollar value in a 60 dollar compilation.

People keep drawing false comparisons and coming to false conclusions that serve to disappoint them for absolutely no reason. Crash and Spyro for example, 2 dead franchises that desperately needed the comeback they had because they couldn't do what Mario has been doing for 35 years. Moving forward and succeeding. Those trilogies, were and are so much smaller than the amount of value and content you're getting from one Mario game let alone 3, and both franchises desperately needed an enticing revival.

Whenever the next Mario game comes around, I guarentee you the conversation will no longer be about give us Mario 64 remake. It's a nice thing to dream about, but it's not needed and honestly, I'd rather have an Odyssey 2 any day. I completely understand where people are coming from and I sympathize with it because who doesn't want more? But I also feel like it's coming from an uninformed and misguided place.

I do not think Sonic Forces was meant to be an Anniversary game. It was announced at an anniversary event but was released in 2017. But ya, I thought Forces was fine. Not amazing but fine. It is too short, quite easy in later stages and Ill agree has a lot of boost segments.

The notion that Sega does not care about Sonic or keeps making bad games is just old. Forces does not prove anything when Mania released the same year and most people loved it.

Coincidentally this was posted today after I just linked the old one last night. https://www.sonicstadium.org/2020/09/sonics-30th-anniversary-under-way-with-new-games-european-licensing-magazine-confirms/

Anyone thinking Sonic has fallen to the wayside must not follow along. Sonic is just as big as any other franchise. Not Mario status obviously but theyre easily the 2 biggest thanks to the whole 90s rivalry.

Sonic Mania's popularity proves exactly why Sega is clueless. On one hand, you have the makers of Sonic Mania saying Sonic isn't all about speed, meanwhile Sonic Team thinks people just want Sonic to go fast. Ever since Colors, it became obvious they've been trying to cater towards children more with the cringy writing, simplistic stories, smaller scale, and lower budget, but never has that been more reflective on the gameplay than Sonic Forces, which they themselves stated was meant to feel more accessible. If that doesn't say they gave up on a major portion of their audience, then what will?

Sure, we got Sonic Mania, but now what? Forget about ever enjoying a 3D Sonic game again? I loved Colors, Generations, and Lost World, so much that I replayed the latter 2 to 100% them, which isn't typical for me with Sonic games, but Forces? I haven't had the urge to ever revisit that game because it was just so bland. I tried to have fun with it, I was hyped for it, but I could just tell I was no longer in the demographic to get the most out of it. If this is how Sega views the future of Sonic, then I gotta say, it's hard to be excited for what they have in store.

Sonic Mania reminded everyone why we loved Sonic The Hedgehog by highlighting what he offered the platforming genre in the 90s that made him stand out from Mario and his wannabes, but Forces quickly reminded us why Sonic became a joke.

All I could really hope for as a Sonic fan, aside from more games like Mania, is a Switch port of Lost World, and Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 remakes, so they could possibly influence the direction the series goes in moving forward because they really need to rethink that at the moment. I just really want to see everything I loved about Mania translated into a 3D game.

[Wildcat]

Sonic Mania's popularity proves exactly why Sega is clueless. On one hand, you have the makers of Sonic Mania saying Sonic isn't all about speed, meanwhile Sonic Team thinks people just want Sonic to go fast. Ever since Colors, it became obvious they've been trying to cater towards children more with the cringy writing, simplistic stories, smaller scale, and lower budget, but never has that been more reflective on the gameplay than Sonic Forces, which they themselves stated was meant to feel more accessible. If that doesn't say they gave up on a major portion of their audience, then what will?

Sure, we got Sonic Mania, but now what? Forget about ever enjoying a 3D Sonic game again? I loved Colors, Generations, and Lost World, so much that I replayed the latter 2 to 100% them, which isn't typical for me with Sonic games, but Forces? I haven't had the urge to ever revisit that game because it was just so bland. I tried to have fun with it, I was hyped for it, but I could just tell I was no longer in the demographic to get the most out of it. If this is how Sega views the future of Sonic, then I gotta say, it's hard to be excited for what they have in store.

Sonic Mania reminded everyone why we loved Sonic The Hedgehog by highlighting what he offered the platforming genre in the 90s that made him stand out from Mario and his wannabes, but Forces quickly reminded us why Sonic became a joke.

All I could really hope for as a Sonic fan, aside from more games like Mania, is a Switch port of Lost World, and Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 remakes, so they could possibly influence the direction the series goes in moving forward because they really need to rethink that at the moment. I just really want to see everything I loved about Mania translated into a 3D game.So youre just basing this on Forces? You say you loved the previous three 3D games.

I agree the writing gets corny in recent games but except for Forces I do not see things being scaled down. I do not know what the development process was like but maybe Mania got more attention and Forces was more rushed. Just a guess.

The gameplay is still the same even if you dont like boosting. They just needed to increase the difficulty and story mode. Would have liked more options for the create-a-character but thats a separate thing.

[Leo656]

I completely understand where people are coming from and I sympathize with it because who doesn't want more? But I also feel like it's coming from an uninformed and misguided place.


Don't forget "entitled". That's a huge one.
----------------

Re: "Forces" - Eh, I'unno. I had no expectations at all and had fun with it. I definitely noticed how short and easy it was, but I also had fun going back and re-playing all the levels to find the different paths and whatnot, mostly BECAUSE it was short and easy and I knew it wasn't going to be much of an investment. I don't often do that with Sonic games because in some cases the levels are a chore to get through even once, let alone multiple times.

I'm getting older, my standards are shifting a bit. More and more, I just need stuff that I can play for either ten minutes or several hours and still feel like I made progress either way, that's not going to have me cursing at the TV or raising my blood pressure. So I'm becoming a lot more forgiving in general. "Did this game make me want to tie one of the developers to a chair and poke them with a cattle prod? No, alright, then it's fine." :lol:

I'unno. They could've aimed a little higher, maybe. But I know I'd rather replay that one a hundred times than ever play Sonic Adventure 2 or Sonic Unleashed again even once. Trying to replay SA2 last year or whenever it was, I was amazed and infuriated at just how awful it was, especially near the end. I'm amazed they were even able to keep making games in the series after THAT one. I think that's forever going to be my personal bar for Worst Sonic Game. I haven't played all of 'em, but out of all the ones I have played that one easily takes the Sh*t Sandwich.

[Turo602]

So youre just basing this on Forces? You say you loved the previous three 3D games.

I agree the writing gets corny in recent games but except for Forces I do not see things being scaled down. I do not know what the development process was like but maybe Mania got more attention and Forces was more rushed. Just a guess.

The gameplay is still the same even if you dont like boosting. They just needed to increase the difficulty and story mode. Would have liked more options for the create-a-character but thats a separate thing.

I'm basing it on the direction the series has gone in over the last decade. As terrible as they were, Sonic 06 and Unleashed were really the last triple A Sonic games. After that, Sonic games were significantly scaled back for better and for worse.

Gone were the overly self-serious convoluted plots and abundance of characters and playstyles in favor for simple and straightforward stories and emphasis on Sonic the Hedgehog. After Unleashed, the games felt more focused, consistent, and polished. But they were also much shorter and weren't really pushing visuals the way 06 and Unleashed did, aside from Colors which looked great for a Wii game.

While the smaller scale improved the quality of the games, it also showed that Sega no longer considered Sonic a top player like they kept pretending he was. Their perception of the franchise took a shift and they started making Sonic a kid's franchise. This was evident in all the corny jokes and simplistic writing. But the gameplay was still solid and felt like it could be enjoyed by all ages, despite being more on the easier side.

Sonic Forces on the other hand went full force into the children's game category that they felt the need to streamline and automate the already rather simple gameplay so that it was even more accessible to children. It was bad enough that levels were so short, but they literally take control away from the player on numerous occasions. You're barely even playing it.

There's kid friendly and then there's straight up for kids and Sonic Forces leans heavily towards the latter with its lack of polish, laughable OC-centric story, incredibly easy difficulty, and short length. Even Sega knew it would be a rip-off to charge 60 dollars for that thing that they came out the gate at 40 dollars. There's definitely been a decline here somewhere despite how lucky they got with Sonic Mania which wasn't even made by Sonic Team. It was a game by the fans for the fans.

The boost gameplay is a whole other thing for me. It was a nice novelty at first. We've never seen Sonic move that fast in game before and that was pretty much the appeal of Sonic Unleashed in the beginning, but aside from a few levels, that gameplay started to show its cracks due to poor level design which did get better in later games. But it also heavily relied on 2D segments because all the 3D boost segments just started feeling the same. Hold boost button and see Sonic run through a track. It hardly feels like a 3D experience the way the Adventure games did and it's like Sega pretty much gave up on 3D Sonic which is why they've heavily relied on awkward 2D platforming and Classic Sonic's inclusion.

I honestly think Sega just can't develop a large quantity of good levels in that formula, maybe even ever given the numerous playstyles the Adventure games gave us. That was part of the reason they included the Werehog in Unleashed because they didn't think the game would be long enough with nothing but day time stages, which also explains the short length in the later games, which still tried relying on other gimmicks to avoid just pure boosting gameplay.

It just seems flawed to me and its "popularity" has gotten Sega complacent, but it just doesn't feel that good anymore, especially when they have Sonic slow down for a bit to attack enemies and his movement in the 3D environment just feels so stiff and awkward because he's mostly meant to just be running on a track and moving in 2D.

Which is why I found Lost World to be so refreshing. Sonic actually controlled well in 3D and they tried something different that was genuinely good. It wasn't perfect, but it felt like the first step towards a better 3D Sonic game and then Forces happened. More tired boosting that was somehow done a lot worse than before.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't like 2 people work on the stages for Forces or something? And I think they were inexperienced with that sort of stuff too. Which really says a lot.

Don't forget "entitled". That's a huge one.
----------------

Re: "Forces" - Eh, I'unno. I had no expectations at all and had fun with it. I definitely noticed how short and easy it was, but I also had fun going back and re-playing all the levels to find the different paths and whatnot, mostly BECAUSE it was short and easy and I knew it wasn't going to be much of an investment. I don't often do that with Sonic games because in some cases the levels are a chore to get through even once, let alone multiple times.

I'm getting older, my standards are shifting a bit. More and more, I just need stuff that I can play for either ten minutes or several hours and still feel like I made progress either way, that's not going to have me cursing at the TV or raising my blood pressure. So I'm becoming a lot more forgiving in general. "Did this game make me want to tie one of the developers to a chair and poke them with a cattle prod? No, alright, then it's fine." :lol:

I'unno. They could've aimed a little higher, maybe. But I know I'd rather replay that one a hundred times than ever play Sonic Adventure 2 or Sonic Unleashed again even once. Trying to replay SA2 last year or whenever it was, I was amazed and infuriated at just how awful it was, especially near the end. I'm amazed they were even able to keep making games in the series after THAT one. I think that's forever going to be my personal bar for Worst Sonic Game. I haven't played all of 'em, but out of all the ones I have played that one easily takes the Sh*t Sandwich.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think Forces is a bad game, it's just not necessarily good either. Which is why I call it mediocre, and the timing of it couldn't have been worse with the way Sega has been constantly touting that they're prioritizing development time to ensure quality products and we were just coming off the highs of Sonic Mania too, which only reinforced why "Sonic doesn't work in 3D." It's a bad look.

Also, I know you're not talking sh*t about Sonic Adventure 2, man. You must have that game mixed up with something else or we're gonna have problems. :P

But nah, Sonic Adventure 2 is not nearly the worst in terms of 3D Sonic games, but I do agree that it gets pretty messy towards the end, which is true for a lot of Sonic games unfortunately. I usually look back fondly on Sonic Adventure 2 because every time I do revisit it, I usually just stick to playing some of the Sonic and Shadow levels, and I can't honestly say it ever got better than that for 3D Sonic.

The Adventure games are pretty janky, but it's a shame that they gave up on that kind of gameplay after Sonic 06, which was terrible for a lot of reasons, but all they really needed to do was refine the gameplay and make more levels like Sonic Adventure 2. The other playstyles were always unnecessary, especially when the Genesis games already did multiple characters a whole lot better.

Adventure 1 was definitely the easier game but I honestly never liked it as much as Adventure 2 because Adventure 2 just has more going for it. The Sonic levels were much better, the playstyles were reduced to only 3, and the tedious hub world was gone. Not to mention, that kick ass final boss with Live and Learn playing in the background. That sh*t has still never been topped.

[Leo656]

I played SA 1 and 2 back-to-back not all that long ago, and was pleasantly surprised by how much I still enjoyed SA1. I hadn't played 2 in ages, so I expected to have at least as much fun, but I did not.

There are some beautiful levels and good ideas in the second one, but way, way, way, WAY too many cheap and annoying deaths. Especially the spots where they throw you 80 miles in the air and you need to land perfectly on a narrow rail, and if you miss it by a pussy hair you die. Holy SH*T, way too much of that. In later games they at least had the good sense to "magnetize" you to the rail as long as you were close enough. And the final stage where you have to play through each character for a bit SEEMS like it should be fun, but again, not fun. I get that it's the end of the game but the insane amount of cheap deaths and unfair difficulty just makes it not even worth the effort to finish it. I've beaten it once, forever ago, but after the last time I played it I gave up after playing the last level for like an hour after constantly dying before even reaching the Boss. I ended up wanting to do pretty much anything else, and I'm quite certain I'm never going to play it again. WAY too much frustration involved. The nicest things I can say about it are, 1. It's very pretty, and 2. It's not as bad as "Battle Nexus". I don't know how I ever even beat this thing to begin with, other than I must have had a lot more patience 20 years ago.

Every good idea in SA2 was later executed much, much better in later games in the series. Just about anyone would be better served by playing those same levels in "Sonic Generations" instead of actually playing SA2, that's honestly how I feel about it. Sorry, can't help it. Honestly glad you had a better experience. For me, that game almost ruined a weekend and I've only got so many left.

Sonic '06 is probably much worse, now that I think about it, but I forget about that one often since I kinda don't even consider that one to be a complete and finished game. But it's definitely terrible regardless.

[Wildcat]

Turo602,

So you liked it better when the games portrayed a more grand story of sorts and involved others besides Sonic. Nothing wrong with that. I do not think Sega has abandoned that though. I think they just moved away from it because people complained it was too much and just wanted Sonic.

I agree the more recent games feel shorter overall. Again probably because they focus on Sonic. Even Mania is short. Its Genesis-length anyway. Save files make it feel shorter. Not counting the extra modes.

Have not read up on Forces development so I dont know about the stages.

If they do remaster both Adventures I hope they do more than just technical upgrades. They already did that with SADX. The original Dreamcast graphics are not as out of place as N64 but rebuilding them would be cool. Also reworking some gameplay like the emerald hunting and fishing. Plus bonus material.

[LeotheLateBloomer]

I was concerned The Origami King was going to be the only Mario game releasing this year thinking "really?" Thankfully, that isn't the case. I remember the first rumor about this saying all of Mario's games were getting remastered but I found that rumor hard to believe because why do the classics over again (All Stars 1 already did this) and there was nothing wrong with how they look or played. That was a reason why I was skeptical of this rumor besides the fact Nintendo doesn't release compilations like this. As months passed by, I believed in this rumor less and less to the point where I no longer believed this was a thing. Until they started announcing promotions for Mario like the new shoes. Even then, I was thinking they were just going to rerelease the 3D games in a package as opposed to remastering them. Low and behold the rumors were somewhat true. The anniversary compilation is real but it's not a collection of remakes nor does it include any of the 2D games vanilla or remakes. Sometimes you have to take rumors with a grain of salt, otherwise you set yourselves up for disappointment.

[Turo602]

Turo602,

So you liked it better when the games portrayed a more grand story of sorts and involved others besides Sonic. Nothing wrong with that. I do not think Sega has abandoned that though. I think they just moved away from it because people complained it was too much and just wanted Sonic.

I agree the more recent games feel shorter overall. Again probably because they focus on Sonic. Even Mania is short. Its Genesis-length anyway. Save files make it feel shorter. Not counting the extra modes.

Have not read up on Forces development so I dont know about the stages.

If they do remaster both Adventures I hope they do more than just technical upgrades. They already did that with SADX. The original Dreamcast graphics are not as out of place as N64 but rebuilding them would be cool. Also reworking some gameplay like the emerald hunting and fishing. Plus bonus material.

Kind of but not really. What I really want, is for them to just focus on pure Sonic gameplay. They need to do away with gimmicky playstyles, but that also doesn't mean I don't want multiple playable characters.

The way the Genesis games and even Mania handled multiple playable characters was amazing because the gameplay remained consistent and all that really changed was the character's abilities. I want to see them return to that, but in 3D. Like what they did with Sonic and Shadow in Adventure 2, except I also want to play as Knuckles, but not in some treasure hunting game.

The stories themselves and game length don't really bother me so long as the game is fun and replayable, but I would definitely appreciate something more fleshed out, but in the way something like Sonic 3 and Knuckles was more fleshed out or even Sonic Unleashed. They really don't need to take Sonic as seriously as they did back with the Adventure games and Sonic 06, because Sega was still foolishly under the impression that Sonic was edgy and cool in a time when mature games started coming around. They really didn't know how to evolve Sonic with the times.

Sonic Forces had a lot of potential, but they got completely lazy and it's hard to tell whether Sega even cares anymore so long as kids still eat it up. Which is why I honestly wouldn't mind Sonic Adventure remakes. They're beloved and nostalgic enough like the Crash and Spyro games, and they would serve as the perfect starting point for rethinking the series once they iron out the issues and make tons of improvements that could prove to Sega that this format is still viable. It wouldn't be exactly what I want from Sonic, but I'll take the hit with the playstyles if it means good 3D Sonic levels again.

[Wildcat]

I find it interesting when people say they want other characters but with pure Sonic style gameplay because like you said...in Genesis era/Mania the other characters are consistent with just their individual abilities being different.

Is that great handling of multiple characters though? They all basically play like Sonic except for times the ability comes in handy. Same difference with Shadow. His stages play exactly like Sonic in SA2 and 06.

Dont get wrong. Im fine with that. I enjoy having other characters but isnt that more like reskins with a secondary function. Flying, climbing, digging etc.

I prefer the SA format where everyones gameplay reflected their ability or gimmick. Its just the actual stages were not very fun. Im sure they could make those gimmicks fun to use though if they changed what you were doing.

Like in Forces, how well the avatar stages played depended on the type of weapon you equipped. Or at least which one you liked best.

[Leo656]

Oh, GOD, until you mentioned it Turo I completely forgot to mention the horrid Knuckles levels in SA2. THAT SH*T is another reason I'm never touching that game again. Those levels are WAY too big, wretchedly designed, and the radar is useless. I'll take a "too-short" Forces style level which I can easily go back to any time any day, forever, over a godddamn 30-minute "needle-in-a-haystack" f*ck-fest. Those levels were absolute TRASH. Whatever word most aptly describes "The Complete And Total Opposite of Fun", that's what the Knuckles levels in SA2 were.

I was really committed to finishing the game at one point, so I suffered through them, but at one point in one of those space-themed Knuckles levels my wife was practically BEGGING me to play just about anything else because it was so f*cking stupid. Then of course just as I was about to rage-quit I'd accidentally find the last Emerald piece, and thus "have to" keep going. But oh, man, thanks for reminding me of yet another reason why I should never play that f*cking game again. There's NO upside to it!

I have her to thank for finally giving up on it, sincerely. I tend to get kind of "tunnel vision" and am something of a masochist, so oftentimes once I'm committed I'll stick with something to the end. But after those horrible Knuckles levels, once I kept dying on the last level she woke me up with a few choice words: "This is the dumbest game I've ever seen. You've been playing it for two days and everything after the first level looks like absolute garbage. You don't look like you've had any fun at all since then. Are you?" I had to concede, "No, I'm not, this is the least fun I've had with a game in as long as I can remember," and that was that. Dead serious, before playing "Battle Nexus" again, SA2 was easily the worst (or at least most irritating) game I can remember playing in almost 20 years. ('06 notwithstanding, but I swear I only even played that for an hour or two as I recall, because that's more than it deserved).

If those cheap death sections didn't kill it for me, those F*CKING Knuckles levels sure did. Thanks for reminding me. They weren't too bad in SA1, but oh LORD were they awful in SA2. Those are probably the worst experience I've ever had with any video game in my entire life. Nothing but irritation and frustration with no redeeming factors at all. Horrible. Anyone who can find ANY fun with THOSE f*cking levels is made of sterner stuff than I. I've had more fun with food poisoning.

[CyberCubed]

Sonic Generations is the only really good 3D Sonic.

[CyberCubed]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7D8jI-bnOA&feature=emb_title

Another Mario 64 comparison, basically the game isn't blurry as hell anymore. Ironically enough the Switch remaster is how we all remember it looking in our minds but that's not how it actually was. :lol:

[Galactus]

No one was expecting a grand remaster like the unreal engine video. Something like this would have been great...

R59PsQ6qSgM

Preserves the look and feel of the original perfectly while also making it look like how the box art and manual wanted it to look and also fixes the games biggest flaw.

[CyberCubed]

I got the game for $39 because ebay gave me a $25 coupon for being with them for 25 years. So I bought it off a store on ebay.

For only $39 I get 3 Mario games in HD. And now I can sell off my old Gamecube and Wii copies of Sunshine and Galaxy because I don't need them anymore and get some more money back.

So for me, it's not even $60. It's $39...and maybe even less depending how much I get for old games. I love being, "El Cheapo."

[Andrew NDB]

So I bought Super Mario 3D All Stars (for $59 at Best Buy) and fired it up. I sort of stared at the title screen a little, played a little of Sunshine and Galaxy after the opening FMVs... let the soundtracks (you can play the soundtrack of each of the 3 games from the main menu) play while cleaning... then turned it off.

Dunno. Just wasn't feeling it. I'll come back and play Sunshine at least, eventually.