Why am I wrong if I say that Mario 3 isn't a fun game because I don't like the physics?
What's wrong with them?
It's not a fun game because running from the left to the right and jumping sometimes is fucking boring.
It's your opinion. You're not wrong; anyone that tells you otherwise is butthurt.
I myself disagree and in fact find it to be my favourite 2D Mario platformer ever (even above World), but I'm not going to argue that nostalgia is a heavy factor.
>>321267607
Mainly I find him to be too slippery when he lands.
>>321267535
Yes. If you said
>Mario 3 isn't fun for me
instead of
>Mario 3 isn't a fun game
implying that your opinion equates to the value everyone else does or doesn't place in the game
>>321268807
Fun is subjective so it implies opinion either way you say it.
>>321268318
lol just move the opposite way you were going before you land lol
>>321269148
No. One is speaking for everyone and the other is speaking for an individual. The general opinion of Mario 3 is that it is one of the best of Nes games and a classic Mario. No individual has the authority to speak for everyone.
>>321269579
If you find SMB3 fun, you wouldn't say "SMB3 is a fun game to me," you'd just say "SMB3 is a fun game."
>>321270315
Because the question posed in the op is
>Why am I wrong if I say that Mario 3 isn't a fun game because I don't like the physics?
Not
>Am I wrong if I don't find Mario 3 fun because of the physics
If you can't tell the difference between the two I can't help you.
>>321267535
I disagree as I really enjoy the game and its physics, it you are entitled to state your opinion, especially since you don't try yo word it as a fact.
Have a great day today amd tomorrow OP
>>321267626
what kind of games do you like? ones where you go south to north and shoot sometimes?
>>321272019
Games where you hold S and click on things (i.e. serious sam)obviously I'm just being facetious but idk Mario-style platformers seem kinda shallow to me, I don't really get them
>>321272352
I guess you're part of a different generation. Of course there are people who can enjoy both platformers and FPSs, but I'm on the side that prefers platformers and could never get FPSs after Doom.
>>321267535
Because you're a stupid prick faggot.
Post Peach.
>>321272681
Not that guy, but I grew up with platformers and don't much care for 'pure' hop 'n bop platformers like Super Mario Bros. or Donkey Kong Country. They seem real basic and boring to me, except when there's a really interesting stage gimmick or whatever.
The platformers I enjoy have either a large action focus like Ghouls 'n Ghosts or Rocket Knight Adventures, or have some unique hook or gimmick, like Sonic's rolling and physics, or Umihara Kawase's fishing line grappling hook thing.
>>321268318
Well it's not like you loose all horizontal momentum when you land, faggot
>>321273684
I personally really like wall kicks and double jumps. For AGDG I was making some garbage where you had two characters. One double jumped and one wall kicked, and both could push shit, and you had to Lost Vikings around together. Then I got a job. Rip.
>>321273684
Well, Mario has its own gimmicks as far as platforming goes, running while pressing B which greatly changes the way you handle you rmomentum, and the powerups, moreso in 3 and World than in the original.
I mean, it's still basic and not gimmick-heavy as, say, Dynamite Headdy for example, but Sonic is still pretty basic too.
DKC also has a roll mechanic, and double-jump (roll and then press jump while on mid-air), as well as the whole barrel blast thing.
A more pure platformer without too many gimmicks would be Adventure Island (which by the way is an amazing series, one of my favorites that sadly got kind of forgotten over time)
>>321274349
I think wall jumps are cool if there's some nuance to using them like in Batman for the NES.
I personally think double jumps are almost always shit, and would prefer virtually any other form of mid-air control (air dash, flying, etc.).
I've never been able to put my finger on why exactly I feel that way.
>>321273684
I like Umihara too but Mario is still pretty fun. I like how the games feel. Running and jumping in Mario 3 just seems natural to me for some reason. Jumping at max speed and bouncing off enemies just has a factor of visceral enjoyment to it.
>>321275607
What about "explained" double jumps, like a gun with tremendous recoil.
>>321275607
Double jumps allow the player to have a "get out of jail free card" so to speak. They encourage the player to be less certain in their jumps so it breaks up the flow of the game. That's why I prefer playing as Ebisumaru in Goemon's Great Adventure rather than Goemon himself.
>>321275879
boku no kokujin
>>321275521
The rolling in DKC is just an attack where you move forward, as far as I can see.
And I didn't mean that Sonic rolling into a ball was by itself a gimmick, anyway. It's the interaction with the heavy focus on physics that makes the rolling interesting.
>>321275736
Don't really care if it's explained, I don't enjoy it on a mechanical level.
There are some little exceptions here and there, like doing what is effectively a double jump by throwing a grabbed enemy downward in Klonoa or Mischief Makers, or...
Well, it's not 2D, but I enjoy Jumping Flash's triple jump a lot for some reason.
Also seems perfectly fine to me in other genres like fighting games and whatever the fuck Gotcha Force is.
>>321276228
>It's the interaction with the heavy focus on physics that makes the rolling interesting.
Well, same thing can be said about Mario. As >>321275654 said, jumping on enemies and bouncing off them plays a lot with physics.
Super Mario World has the best physics out of any Mario game due to allowing you to throw enemies or objects upward.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWgvPSkgMzY
Say what you want about Mario being too popular/safe and thus not interesting enough for new generations, but you can't do this in many other games.
>>321276659
Does Yoshi's Island count as a Mario Game?
>>321276659
Mario World's physics are too forgiving. You can turn around in midair really quickly which makes movement have less oomph. In SMB you kinda feel like a train plowing through things because you have a lot of inertia, so it's fun to keep up the speed by timing jumps well. I can't say the same for SMW.
>>321267607
>>321267607
Gravity is very wonky because it locks to 2 different speeds
There is a noticeable delay before you can jump again after landing
Very low ground acceleration and deceleration, making mario slippery and unresponsive
Very little air control, making precise jumping difficult
World fixed nearly all of its problems
There is some difference on the physics of the NES game and the Super Mario All-stars game.
>>321276838
Kinda, I guess.
It has a lot of design philosophies from the Mario games (especially it borrows a lot from SMB2, and not only because of the Shy Guys). But the controls are a completely different thing, for one you don't need to hold any button to dash.
>>321276947
I really like how maneuverable SMW is, I think rather than forgiving, it can get pretty frentic. Try playing as little Mario, or no-cape Mario and see how hard the game gets. Also for additional challenge, don't go to any switch palace. Some castles and fortresses later in the game have a lot of tricky jumps without the additional color blocks.
But I know what you mean, SMB1 also has its own charm with the controls, the other day I played through the whole SMB1 and Lost Levels after years of not playing them and had a blast.
>>321276659
Throwing shells and shit aside, I think SMB3 had better physics.
World is overly responsive. You no longer have to carefully plan or accurately run up to jumps like you did in SMB and SMB3, because you barely have to contend with any momentum compared to those games.
This makes World easier to understand and control, but that's exactly the problem, much of the decision making and planning that used to be involved is gone, and jumping is now a relatively mundane task.
>>321277385
Only SMB1 and Lost Levels, when you break bricks in the All-Stars version, your jump height decreases while on the original games you can still jump high after hitting a block.
I think SMB2/USA and 3 are identical as far as controls go.
>>321267535
it's a normative question, so you can't really be wrong unless the logic of your proposition fails to support your conclusion.
your conclusion logically flows from your proposition: you do not think the game is fun because you don't like the physics.
ergo you are not "wrong."
>>321273684
Have you played Plok? I think that would be right up your alley.
>>321277857
I appreciate challenge, and I understand what you mean, but I'll still take World's physics and controls over any other Mario game. Precisely because they're overly responsive (this is mostly for people like us who are used to Mario games though, give SMW to any person who never played Mario or ins't good at it and they'll still struggle, my friend finds any Mario game extremely difficult and can't get past the first level of any game, not even World).
But yeah SMB3 is like a middleground between SMB1's controls and SMW's responsive and swift controls. I feel like the NSMB series actually have SMB3's physics, don't they?
I'm fine with it, but I wish they'd bring throwing shells upwards back, you can only throw them sideways on the New series.
>>321278043
I have. It's alright and I replay it sometimes, but I'm not a big fan.
I wish they did more with the limb throwing idea, and it really feels like it needs a save system to me.
That music though.
