What Are You Playing?

[Aazealh]

Picked up Tyranny on Steam because it was 75% off. I've heard it's good for fans of Pillars of Eternity. Anyone played it?

I played Tyranny when it launched. I enjoyed it, though I found the ending disappointing.

[Walter]

Mario Odyssey arrived a few minutes before I left for a weekend trip So I played about 3h of it last night. I'm enjoying it, but what has been the most exciting for me is watching my 4-year-old son enjoy it — whether he's playing or just watching me. He has had zero exposure with 3D mario games, so this is a pretty special experience for him. Needless to say, he really loves it.

**MY SPOILER-FREE IMPRESSIONS**

It's just about what you'd expect from this kind of game. But it's not the huge leap for the brand that Zelda: BotW was, or that Mario Galaxy was. It's just a fun (often funny) 3D Mario platformer in a big world, structured more like Mario 64 than recent games.

Speaking of Mario 64, I do love how you aren't forced to end a level after getting a moon (stars for this game). In fact, you'll probably find 6-8 moons while en route to the main quest's moon. It really encourages you to explore the worlds, and not just gun it for the direction you know you're supposed to be headed in.  In M64, you could explore, but often weren't rewarded, because the levels were very goal-oriented, and a star only existed in 1-2 places in a level at a time.

The hat-control stuff is neat, but it's really just a gimmick so far — not a huge part of the game. You use it to solve a handful of puzzles per level. Most of the time, you'll be doing standard 3D Mario platforming, perhaps with 2-5 seconds of enemy possession interspersed in the course of a minute. By comparison, the gravity in Mario Galaxy was an all-encompassing feature that influenced how the levels were designed and what you could do within those worlds.

As far as level design goes, it feels like it has a lot in common with Mario 3D Land, writ large, with full multi-path zones to explore, instead of a streamlined experience. This means there's a lot to discover, but also sometimes you will be sort of aimlessly wandering the borders of the world, looking for secrets, not sure exactly where the next moon will be. The level design also changes slightly depending on different world events. Not sure how consistent that will be for all worlds, but it's definitely a big factor for one world.

I'm of course excited to play more, but I can't say that I'm on fire to jump back in.

[Johnstantine]

Couldn't agree more, Walter. All four of my kids absolutely love it. I think that's why I'm enjoying it so much.

[Rhombaad]

I finished Super Mario Bros. 2 on the bus ride home yesterday and started playing Zelda II: The Adventure of Link this morning.

[ThePiedPiper]

Super Mario Odyssey is my Super Mario 128. It is the Mario 64 sequel we deserve, and my favorite in the entire long-running series. I started my Wolfenstein 2 playthrough before starting Mario, and I haven't played Wolfenstein since. I really need to get back to that, lol...

[Griffith]

Super Mario Galaxy - I've actually owned this one for a while, but never had the inclination to dive in for some reason; that changed yesterday when I ripped open a packed moving box (I'm moving, this was dumb) because I just had the urge to Mario and since I can't go on the Odyssey yet it was high time I explored the Galaxy... and so far it's pretty good! I beat the first Galaxy and everything was pretty cool and even a little trippy with the shifting gravity and perspectives. It feels both extremely simplified, like core Mario 64 gameplay, but with all sorts of unique wrinkles on top. It's actually a stimulating challenge too (though I'm not sure if that's on account of the game design itself or the Wii controls =). Anyway, looking forward to more as so far it lives up to its reputation. I've played other entries by the same team, and particularly loved Mario 3D Land, but 3D World didn't have the same effect on me and I'm hoping Galaxy will.

[Walter]

Super Mario Galaxy - I've actually owned this one for a while, but never had the inclination to dive in for some reason

My god... You're in for a treat. The sensation of long-jumping off a platform in that game, then being pulled back down by the gravity, it's such a good fucking design. Definitely my favorite Mario since 64, and so far, nothing in Odyssey has toppled the fun I had with Galaxy.

[Rhombaad]

I finished Zelda II: The Adventure of Link yesterday and started playing Super Mario Bros. 3. I played this one a lot as a kid, but never beat it (mainly because you had to finish it all in one go, and there was never enough time to do that at my friend's house). I played through the first world on the bus to work this morning and I'm having a blast.

[Walter]

I finished Zelda II: The Adventure of Link yesterday and ...

Well don't just coast over that! What did you think of Zelda 2? How about that final dungeon? 

[Griffith]

My god... You're in for a treat. The sensation of long-jumping off a platform in that game, then being pulled back down by the gravity, it's such a good fucking design. Definitely my favorite Mario since 64, and so far, nothing in Odyssey has toppled the fun I had with Galaxy.

It's pretty great, and getting better as I go along and see all its tricks (I'm about a dozen stars away from getting the station moving...), but it's not smacking me in the face with transcendence as I expected (like it would naturally assert itself in the pecking order after SMB1, SMB3, SMW, Mario 64, and then... Galaxy! It's more just a proper sequel to Mario 64, which isn't a bad thing, but I don't think it's having the same impact on me now as audiences at its launch because I've played the "3D" games that followed and built on it. Also, because I played the ever-living shit out of Mario 64, like 120 stars, speed runs, glitches, making up your own little "movies" and having Mario act them out (), it was almost something more than a game at the time and I feel like I spent years exploring that world, to the point that I had hardly played another 3D Mario since until 3D Land, which was different enough to really grab me (like SMB3 and Mario 64 had a new perfect baby). The thing is, objectively, I recognize Galaxy as a bigger, better game and leap forward than any of those others since 64, but given that it's not resonating with me like it probably should, or would have in its day. So, I guess what I'm saying is I'm not disappointed in the game per se... but a bit by my reaction to it. Like I'm having fun but feel like I should be more awestruck, maybe I'll get there by the end. Sorry Mario Galaxy, it's not you, it's me.

[Rhombaad]

Well don't just coast over that! What did you think of Zelda 2? How about that final dungeon? 

Haha, sorry! I liked it. It was an interesting departure from the other 8- and 16-bit Zelda games. The final dungeon sucked, but not as much as the approach to Death in Castlevania (my litmus test for all platform games). It was the final two bosses that were a killer for me. I'm ashamed to admit it, but I was down to no lives left and very little health when I encountered Dark Link, so I had to use the corner trick to beat him (I can feel the scowls of hardcore gamers everywhere turning toward me). I still think The Legend of Zelda is my favorite of the two, but I enjoyed them both.

[Aazealh]

I'm ashamed to admit it, but I was down to no lives left and very little health when I encountered Dark Link, so I had to use the corner trick to beat him (I can feel the scowls of hardcore gamers everywhere turning toward me).

Hah, I doubt that many people out there have actually finished the game, and those who did, like me, know the pain of these two bosses. Congrats on beating it, corner trick or not!

I still think The Legend of Zelda is my favorite of the two

Duh.

[Walter]

Haha, sorry! I liked it. It was an interesting departure from the other 8- and 16-bit Zelda games. The final dungeon sucked, but not as much as the approach to Death in Castlevania (my litmus test for all platform games). It was the final two bosses that were a killer for me. I'm ashamed to admit it, but I was down to no lives left and very little health when I encountered Dark Link, so I had to use the corner trick to beat him (I can feel the scowls of hardcore gamers everywhere turning toward me). I still think The Legend of Zelda is my favorite of the two, but I enjoyed them both.

I've never beaten Z2. That final dungeon defeated me as a child, and again as an adult when I tried replaying it on 3DS. It's just monstrous...

As for using "cheap tricks," dude, it's you against an endless army in there! Anything that can tip things in your favor sounds legitimate to me.

[Rhombaad]

Hah, I doubt that many people out there have actually finished the game, and those who did, like me, know the pain of these two bosses. Congrats on beating it, corner trick or not!

Thanks, Aaz!

Duh.

I've never beaten Z2. That final dungeon defeated me as a child, and again as an adult when I tried replaying it on 3DS. It's just monstrous...

It's definitely one of the hardest final levels I've ever played.

As for using "cheap tricks," dude, it's you against an endless army in there! Anything that can tip things in your favor sounds legitimate to me.

Haha, that's true. One day I may try to beat Dark Link the "legitimate" way, but my list of other games to play comes first. 

[ThePiedPiper]

I guess what I'm saying is I'm not disappointed in the game per se... but a bit by my reaction to it. Like I'm having fun but feel like I should be more awestruck, maybe I'll get there by the end. Sorry Mario Galaxy, it's not you, it's me.

This wasn't far from my feelings with the game, and I played it [a year?] after release. Objectively, it is really good. And even nonobjectively it has a way of getting one addicted to some of the [unique] particular ways it plays that no other game does or can do. I think what it was for me was I took the overwhelmingly positive reception of those who played it at release, and I expected it to be like rediscovering Mario 64 all over again, but with spectacular ways of movement across different dimensions.  I think I even tried to love it like I did 64. And it was a very great game, even now as I think back to it. It's just, I couldn't get it like others got it. That is not to take anything away from it, I need remind.

When I played 64, I was so taken by the adventure and imagination that I wasn't completely aware I was having fun, but I always knew I was in hindsight. With Galaxy, I was way too conscious, and at times I felt like I was in a hurry, and I don't know why.

If you get Galaxy 2, let me know, because I'm seriously considering giving that a try. Love me some Mario.

[Aazealh]

When I played 64, I was so taken by the adventure and imagination that I wasn't completely aware I was having fun, but I always knew I was in hindsight. With Galaxy, I was way too conscious, and at times I felt like I was in a hurry, and I don't know why.

The thing is, Mario 64 was one of the great watersheds in video game history. Galaxy was a great game, but obviously it could never have the same impact for those who saw the birth of 3D gaming.

[ThePiedPiper]

The thing is, Mario 64 was one of the great watersheds in video game history. Galaxy was a great game, but obviously it could never have the same impact for those who saw the birth of 3D gaming.

I agree it was an icon, and the birth of modern video games, but in this case I was too young to comprehend why Mario 64 was so good when I played it at launch. I never really received the impact of 3D games even though my first games were with SNES. Back in [1997?] all I knew was that it was Mario and I could explore entire worlds inside a castle. I remember coming back to it a decade later and it being so great, it was surreal. I remember wondering why not many other games were like it in design. If you compared Mario 64 to a 3D game today like, say, Horizon Zero Dawn, the latter is astoundingly greater, objectively. But Mario 64 still holds up today in design, even if that design is so simple and accompanied by very little in the way of options (by today's standards). Though, there are plenty of games with a simple design made even today.

[Aazealh]

the birth of modern video games

I wouldn't go that far.

If you compared Mario 64 to a 3D game today like, say, Horizon Zero Dawn, the latter is astoundingly greater, objectively.

I don't really agree with that statement.

[ThePiedPiper]

I wouldn't go that far.

It wouldn't change the point I was making either way, but I don't have any qualms with labeling it that. If we're being super technical, it wasn't the first 3D-platformer, but it was involved in kick-starting what modern gaming is.

Have I overlooked something in gaming history?

I don't really agree with that statement.

Okay, no biggie >.>

[Griffith]

The thing is, Mario 64 was one of the great watersheds in video game history. Galaxy was a great game, but obviously it could never have the same impact for those who saw the birth of 3D gaming.

I think that's why 3D Land resonated so much with me, it was a different way to do 3D Mario and like a perfect fusion of that with classic platforming. Its basically an alternative Mario 64 or what it could have been, and arguably it's a much truer translation of Mario to 3D. Anyway, I'll need to get back to 3D World eventually, but the cat powers and it's level/camera design emphasizing multiplayer don't appeal to me.

the birth of modern video games

I wouldn't go that far.

Have I overlooked something in gaming history?

Yeah... Zelda 64 was the birth of modern video games!

As much as I actually believe that to an extent, gaming is not so monolithic and there's plenty of genres and elements and that came before and after that define gaming today.

[ThePiedPiper]

I think that's why 3D Land resonated so much with me, it was a different way to do 3D Mario and like a perfect fusion of that with classic platforming. Its basically an alternative Mario 64 or what it could have been, and arguably it's a much truer translation of Mario to 3D.

This is absolutely true; Super Mario 64 is less Mario than 3D Land. And I liked that one a lot

As much as I actually believe that to an extent, gaming is not so monolithic and there's plenty of genres and elements and that came before and after that define gaming today.

I think the fact that gaming isn't monolithic is what makes Mario 64 the godfather that I describe (though I think we can agree all games are letters, numbers, and algorithms :p ). Mario 64 takes the element of a 3D field used before, models made of polygons (that move and change under certain conditions, including the Player Character), an open-world, visuals and sounds (that, bless their heart, attempt to provide immersion),  a variety of different objects to interact with and methods of interaction, and collecting items (power stars) that will remain the next time you turn the game on.
I think you could find many combinations of those attributes in games that came before it, but there's barely any games with all of them. Heck, Monster Hunter World releasing next year has all of them.

I'm more than happy to change my mind if there's evidence or reasonings against this line of thinking, but I thought it was pretty sound

[MrFlibble]

I'm very late to this party, but I recently finished Nier Automata, (Not ending E, I don't know if that counts). For someone who has never touched the Nier franchise, it doesn't bog you down with exposition from previous games, it's by in large its own story, except for Emil the weird omnipotent ball creature. I liked the story, it doesn't entirely make sense, but I thought it was effective, two armies of robots who hate each other despite being the same, fighting a proxy war that no longer matters, and can't break out of their cycle because they can't think of doing anything else. I like how it gives you half truths on your first run and fills in the blanks later. Something I thought was funny/effective was bringing back gag characters for  boss battles, namely the robot who tries to make an older brother robot by resurrecting him with oil . The combat and the boss battles were great, as expected of a Platinum game, I especially liked the ball tanks and the opera singer, but like Platinum games I've played, most of the environments feel dull and lifeless, there are exceptions, like the white tower and the amusement park, but by in large the open world environment fell flat for me.

[Aazealh]

I think that's why 3D Land resonated so much with me, it was a different way to do 3D Mario and like a perfect fusion of that with classic platforming.

For what it's worth, Super Mario 3D Land was my favorite Mario game since 64. Odyssey is charming in many ways, and Galaxy was a truly great game (and Sunshine is greatly underrated), but I really had a blast with 3D Land that goes beyond that. Somehow it feels similar to what I experienced with Zelda: A Link Between Worlds. Just addictive fun that makes you play through it without end.

As much as I actually believe that to an extent, gaming is not so monolithic and there's plenty of genres and elements and that came before and after that define gaming today.

Yes. Super Mario 64 is by all means a landmark in gaming, as is Zelda 64, but calling it "the birth of modern video games" doesn't really make sense.

Super Mario 64 is less Mario than 3D Land

That is really a very strange thing to say...

[ThePiedPiper]

That is really a very strange thing to say...

What is strange to me is that you add nothing to the discussion except 'I disagree'. Forgive me if I anticipate actual discussion on forums, I do it very frequently

[Aazealh]

What is strange to me is that you add nothing to the discussion except 'I disagree'. Forgive me if I anticipate actual discussion on forums, I do it very frequently

Hahaha, as if I owed you anything. Oh, and what discussion am I supposed to add to here? Your off-topic posts about your personal interpretation of video game history? This isn't what the thread's about.

Besides it's not like you've made a convincing argument. Putting aside factual errors (Super Mario 64 doesn't feature an open world, it has a central hub that connect to individual levels), you're grossly oversimplifying the lengthy iterative process (both before and after Super Mario 64 came out) across many genres that led to current video games in all their diverse forms. Basically what Griffith said (that I noted I agreed with): your definition of modern gaming just isn't correct to begin with. You can't trace a direct line between Super Mario 64 and games like PUBG, LoL, GTA V, Overwatch, FIFA 17 or Destiny, just to name a few.