Who else got this? Have you beaten it? What did you like and not like?

Here is my entry of 3,000 words on Mario in 2017:

From the start of the game the base movement of Mario felt unsatisfactory. The analog stick's alignment with the character's movement is a little slack, which is less preferable to the sturdy alignment of Super Mario 64 or tight alignment of Super Mario Sunshine. Gone is the locked aerial control scheme of being able to shift Mario sideways after a jump; you can now revolve the direction Mario is facing. I wasn't jumping for joy when pulling off long jumps since (1): the long jump has poorer momentum, if any from 64's, and (2): the camera is innately pulled back that the force felt from it is diminished. All of that meant this would be at its core another unengaging Mario title that couldn't match what came before Super Mario Galaxy movement-wise.

Thankfully, the hat (Cappy) throwing I took a liking to for its ability to repeatedly spin against coin boxes to batter bing out coins and its use as a spring. Cap throw makes you float for a brief second, which is a neat replacement to the air spin of Galaxy. You can bounce off the hat with a jump or dive. (Oddly enough the game doesn't tell you about how to do the dive [two buttons now: trigger button + face button] unless you check the action guide yourself.) This ability changes the nature of 3D Mario turning the game into a double jumper, which downgrades the stellar weighted down lift-off foundation 64 set. Now a game containing more aerial bouncing and less stage platform leaping.

64: jump
Sunshine: jump + jump assist (hover/rocket)
Galaxy: jump + jump assist (air spin)
Odyssey: jump + jump assist x2 (float via hat throw + dive and bounce -> float via hat throw + dive jump) = now a combinatory mental calculus of a max distance possible that is less readily clear.

The first capture of the frog was amusing and the level area was tightened for fairly enjoyable platforming with it. At this time my experience became positive and very interested on what lay ahead once I popped out of that pipe. Unfortunately, what lay ahead after what I would call a nice preview of the game was the regret of being right on being wary on buying the game.

You see the first world traveled to immediately shows off capture in the bad way: the non-platforming way. The first mission is to get a moon that's located by this massive chain-chomp. So you get to the chain-chomp and instead of fearing for your life running from it to avoid getting bowled over like in 64, you simply throw your cap to capture it. In Mario Kart: Double Dash if you got a chain-chomp item summoning (using) it would speedily drag your car forward in an uncontrollable manner while sending any kart in its path flying. In Odyssey getting a chain-chomp means solving a lock & key element of breaking a barrier containing a moon by pulling back on the control stick and releasing. That's it. Nothing to do with platforming.

Then the game does it again by letting you capture a T-Rex. The T-Rex is essentially a mega mushroom Mario. While being able to smash everything out of your path, having blocks explode from the pure physicality of your being, looks cool, it immediately registered ('real-time') in thought as completely antithetical to the purpose of playing Mario. When I left that world I would be searching for this purpose.

The next kingdom was where the real test began. A test on why I didn't rent this game. ("Because renting a Mario game is absurd" - my thoughts at the register.) In the very beginning of the game I mentioned my displeasure of controlling Mario. I didn't mention what impact this has on level design. Super Mario Odyssey has slow movement speed and almost non-existent momentum that like the Galaxy games is designed for short-style level design that engages the player with lots of jumping. Odyssey is not a fun game to move horizontally fast through due to the death of momentum and physical unpleasantness of mashing a button to roll, for which the latter is visually and mechanically inferior to repeated dive flipping. There is no running up inclined terrain like in Sunshine, nor watersliding—both of which were mechanically pleasantly done by holding one input (analog stick) in a direction. Spacious flat levels create a mismatch. So the major revelation here is that Mario's mechanics in Odyssey are not designed for the 64/Sunshine world design.

Upon stepping foot into the small town of this desert kingdom, a shop beckons. Buy something with all them coins, Mario. Buy a moon. Uh, okay. Buy a costume. Uh...sure. Buying that sombrero was something I did just because it's there to do. But when I saw how it looked, how it humanized Mario, I took it off. I don't want Mario downgrading into looking like a regular dude, albeit one who is really short. The game is constantly making a point to tease or show his brown hair, and I don't agree with playing up this humanizing design, but I digress, buying non-stars in Mario games is purely about some sort-of weird pride in ownership that does not belong in Mario games or at least for this game it serves no mechanical purpose other than acting as a key. [Random: It would have been amusing if an enemy could steal Mario's hat in this game with the possibility of it stockpiling a vast collection of clothing.]

Outside the shop are desert level citizens who have plain unartistic looking (i.e. unMario-looking) text boxes floating over their heads when you get close to them yet haven't engaged them by directly talking to them. The actual text displayed when talking to them is just as generic, and when compared to Super Mario Sunshine, hideous. This is a very irritating part of the game because it makes the dialogue less enjoyable to see displayed damaging the world design.

From what I can remember at this point after a lot of wandering through this desert world was how capturing a Goomba and accidentally stacking on top another one when jumping on it was possibly the most Mario thing I had ever seen.

Baddies acting as vehicles. All the classic baddies in this game are fine (except the chain-chomp). The problem is that the new ones are generally visually and mechanically unappealing. Paragliding desert lizard - awkward looking creature that only glides. Running statue lion - awkward since it's a reminder of how slow and lacking of momentum Mario is in this game. In Sand Land the new ability of rolling gets shown up to be good for quickly covering medium distances, but inadequate for long stretches of the non-downward sloped sand, not to mention making the mashing of the Y button to sustain the roll irritating. Rolling is real smooth beautifully connecting to the end of a long jump or dive. Glasses statue head - invisible paths have no place in Mario. Keep that time-consuming stuff in Mega Man.

The next kingdom, a water kingdom, highlights how captures are not terribly exciting but not exactly terrible either. Lots of water to swim through as a Cheep Cheep. [Note: Swimming in 3D Mario was properly de-emphasized in Sunshine.] Swimming as Mario was slower and remarkably less acrobatic than above water play, yet the potential of death as you lost oxygen kept you from meandering underwater. (Maybe all the capture mechanics can be looked at just as underwater movements were in 64 as a lower engaging exploratory progression function.) Delirium of high-count moon acquisition sets in here by shortening sequences required as if every moon became that ice block star from 64.

Mario was the character to be. Never did I look at enemies and think about how fun it would be to possess them. These enemies offer less control inputs only having two moves to input. They exist as a premature Mario. Transformations are geared towards amusement than impressive acrobatic movement.

With Sunshine the developers had trouble coming up with level design when they had to design the levels around the hover nozzle vs no nozzle /other nozzles. All Odyssey's transformations lend themselves to rather simplistic uses. Since they are so simple and quickly over with to discard, they feel inoffensive and uninspired, average. So -

*talk about one-speed movement. vehicles. double jumping /=Mario. artificial suspension of juggling Mario in air. changes the nature of falling; long jump + meager jumps afterwards. good, but sub-optimal Mario.

Mario's World Design
The game keeps you on the constant move to the next moon location rather than reloading an altered world. It feels more self-congratulatory with how easy moons come about than adventurous. Banjo Kazooie model of collecting by doing the most thoughtless banal tasks moving from area to area instead of well crafted episodes / action sequences. It's like having a beachcomber register something every 3 seconds. In Super Mario Sunshine, this feeling is somewhat present in the first section of the first level with the numerous sprayable windmills but only there. In Odyssey the entire outlook of the game is to molest and empty out every inch of ground.

Interlude Aesthetics - When flying to kingdoms Cappy talks to Mario about how to perform moves, which uglifies the charm of trips by textbookilizing the game.

Stars are now moons with the addition of having a mega three-moons-in-one version, the multi moon, which looks like a banana bunch. Aggravating the already curiously assigned types of sequences for stars in a platformer are moons that are locked behind what are essentially bonus rooms of Super Mario Bros 3. This is because there are no 1-Ups for rewards. Item hierarchy is messed up. Because there are so many moons the in-game moons list mirrors a disenchanting PDF file. The culmination of this hyper-inflationary design is a kingdom where Mario receives double-digits of moons from Toadette in production line fashion hopping in the air for each one.

The End - Bowser Kingdom has a neat bird capture that lets the player do poke and flick jump there way up walls. While this is neat, it does feel out-of-place in a level that thematically should evoke danger. When the credits roll the game repeats Galaxy's format of having the good content available after the finale, so the ending isn't a big point to reach anymore.

The Aftermath - My game quality assessment gauge was right: Introducing with New Donk City in the trailer looked impressive and was impressive to play in, but later showing clips of vehicles (the running sand lion) was the real indicator that disaster was in store by having a spacious level require dull vehicles.

Scattered Thoughts
Make sure to compare FLUDD's water utility to Cappy more - Wingcap & nozzles > captures

Ah. The first level as a linear tutorial walk-a-thon. heh.

Citizens don't get angry when I interact with them by bopping on their heads like in Sunshine. -_-. Game is pretty pleasing to look at in the athletic courses (void levels).

First day impressions: 2/5. Second day: 3/5

Setup scenario for one moon best design - Night time level was very impressive. I like New Donk City a lot more than the other worlds.

Game has a lot of items to collect, but the moons mostly feel rewarding slower, more inquisitive play than platforming prowess.

Scattered Thoughts Pt. 2
Capture mechanic dumbs down the defining element of 3D Mario: character control

A lot of the newer enemies are ugly

Music is mediocre for the most part

Mario is too jovial: he strikes tada! poses and has his mouth opened wide on the pause screen. Mario is way too ecstatic when collecting a multi-moon that it gets irritating. I don't need this twirling around in my Mario game.

Lack of platforms in boss battles. Boss battles repeated twice.

New Donk City is too good compared to everywhere else. Nintendo might as well have nixed the exploration and gone with a linear action adventure.

Playing fetch with dog using the cap throw is cool

Purple coins are still ugly. Purple coins change shape every world - doodadication of collectables.

World is beautiful or fake plastic garish

Blue coins > every collectable in this game

Take the blue bird versus the generic black bird in Odyssey with the shiny aura. The blue bird was fun to hunt after and squirt to create a blue coin. The black bird is just too obvious. And throwing a cap at it is less impressive than applying a consistently hitting stream of water. Blue coins have such a nice sound when you get one. The collectables in this game don't have that.

Odyssey isn't a game for the most part. It's basically a trick-or-treat simulator with moons being the candies you get for your "adventures" going door-to-door. The design is horizontal based compared to 64 and Sunshine's vertical basedness.

The game craps out moons to you every couple square feet for basically having the ability to move the control stick. what do you think moronic banana bunch multi moons are if not some dumb fun-sized candy.

Game is worst of both worlds (Sunshine and Galaxy).

Forgotten Kingdom and Luncheon Kingdom are ugly. The latter more so due to how flat it is.

None of the worlds have an iconic look.

http://culture.vg/reviews/in-depth/super-mario-odyssey-2017-sw.html
The main flaw of the following "review" is that it doesn't care to talk about the feel (physics) of Mario. In a platformer the game character is the most important part of the game. When you talk to people about Mario they will talk about how he jumps (!). When you talk to people about Sonic they will tell you about how he spins (!) and goes fast (!).

Quote:

I'm really not trying to flame bait here whatsoever, but I recently completed Mario Odyssey and, after a few days of reflection, just feel extremely underwhelmed by the experience as a whole.

It took this guy days to feel underwhelmed when it was bloody obvious from the very first kingdom that the game was underwhelming. The only time it was a proper experience was about 4-5 kingdoms in when you arrive at New Donk City.
-Agreed that game is underwhelming

Quote:

I'm genuinely shocked that the game did not receive lower marks than it did. That it currently sits high as one of the best-reviewed games of all time seems ridiculous to be honest.

Every reviewer is on this "It's not perfect, but GOLD STAR award". The game scores are just as ridiculous as users acting like this game is awesome or comparable to 64 or Sunshine, but this isn't surprising since majority of people have terribad opinion and think Super Mario Galaxy is superb. Super Mario Galaxy does the same thing this game does where the game starts and maintains a profoundly underwhelming experience 90% of the time until you beat Bowser the third time.
-Agreed that game deserves lower marks.

Quote:

I absolutely adore Nintendo and the polished, quality games they often produce. But I think something was fundamentally lost in the transition from the straightforward, linear platforming of previous Mario titles to Odyssey's free-roaming design.

Seamless continuity was lost I guess. Going into a pipe and falling into the underworld in Super Mario Bros is a way better transition than world map design or long-winded cutscenes.
-Agreed this game lacks Mario spirit.

Quote:

This was also a reason why Sunshine felt a bit off, though I will say that Odyssey is certainly leagues better than Sunshine.

Sunshine felt off even though the hub Isle Delfino is ten-thousand times more fun to perform acrobatic maneuvers in than anything found in Galaxy or Odysssey. ha. Just take it from this casual that Odyssey is leagues better than Sunshine despite not having one platforming level that delivers the fast-paced thrills of Sunshine's athletic courses (void levels) when you get the first credits roll.
-Disagreed. Sunshine is better. Anyone who thinks otherwise is casual.

Quote:

Odyssey lacks a sense of cohesion and propulsion that causes its level design to take a dive in quality and creativity.

The levels are very cohesive; the long horizontal nature of the stages with no proper non-transformative long distance Mario move is what mostly makes them boring. Repeatedly tapping a button to maintain a roll for long distance sucks. Being a flying lizard for BOTW paragliding physics sucks too compared to the Wingcap. Or the water jet spewing ugly in Seaside compared to FLUDD's Turbo Nozzle. This is why the 2nd level, the Mexican level, is such a bad level with its mostly flat desert land.

Quote:

Sure, there is wonder in exploring some of Odyssey's more open levels, and the Mario platforming levels of old do exist behind secret doors that transport you to more tightly designed platforming segments, but even these levels are either very short gimmicks or relatively throwaway platforming segments that have Mario jumping from rotating platforms or scaling plain walls and simply hopping from one moon to the next.

There is no wonder when the entire game floods you with as many moons as there are rings in a Sonic level.

Quote:

And I feel the capture mechanic is severely underutilized. Each kingdom seems designed around a few new creatures or objects for the player to capture, but they rarely marry the capturing mechanics to memorable, creative action. Outside of a few select moments and boss encounters, mainly the boss battles in the Seaside and Luncheon kingdoms, I rarely felt that the capture mechanics were mixed in new or very exciting ways.

That's because the capture mechanics are a deviation from Mario. If the game utilized capture mechanics more it would feel like you were playing Cubivore.

Quote:

The first time you romance a female Goomba is gold; the fifth time not-so-much. And the same goes for the timer tricks with the Scarecrows and many of the other ways moons are earned.

Agreed on the first part, although the Goomba stacking does have a sense of progression to it like when you have to dodge boulders in Seaside kingdom to get to her.

Quote:

And this brings with it the problem of difficulty. Since every kingdom is designed around a few new capture mechanics and exploration that evokes a more leisurely approach to the game, there is an issue with difficulty and the stacking of mechanics throughout the game. Seriously, these kingdoms could have arrived in any order whatsoever and still mostly brought about the same experience. There is no difficulty ramp, and the only moment where the game tries to bring the capture mechanics together during one end-game segment plays like a bit of a breezy letdown.

edit: reviewers observations on difficulty are fine.
I kept writing this too. Difficulty. Difficulty. Difficul- The problem isn't mostly the easy difficulty (or death count) as one Sydlexia user wrote "Mario games were never difficult". The problem is mostly that the momentum was slowed down with a physics engine that carried over from Galaxy than 64 or Sunshine. Mario simply is not anywhere near as enjoyable to control as he was in 64 or Sunshine due to this. This is because his movements are slower and less-coordinated: his side somersault is delayed, his walking is not tightly aligned with the control stick, his long jump can have him awkwardly running while braking, his dive halts momentum and is primarily used to bounce off his cap (but overall it is nice that diving is back in), etc. Even wall jumping is done in a slow-paced fashion where each wall bounce is on a controlled non-acceleratable hike upwards. Less acrobatic Mario+Less acrobatic than Mario captures = lesser game.

Quote:

The final encounter with Bowser is also memorable, but I felt the ending of Super Mario 3D World was even more stunning in a similar way.

If the final encounter he means boss battle then the final moment with Bowser is just Galaxy's Bowser with punching. The stark white hallway is more memorable than the Bowser fight. If he means the escape sequence, then yes, it is memorable, but ruined by the garbage-tier vocal music at the end.

Quote:

Also, the 8-bit segments are incredibly overused and lose their originality about halfway through the game.

The 8-bit segments to me are for pure nostalgia. They are little mini-games that unfortunately replaced the 2D-esque wall jumping segments in Sunshine (Noki Bay) and certain Bowser levels in Galaxy (i.e. the levels with the gravitational arrows).

Quote:

Of course the game is polished, controls perfectly for the most part, and looks technically accomplished.

This guy doesn't write a damn thing about the controls, but take it from him that it controls "perfectly for the most part." Discussion on Mario controls are probably the most argumentative and important focus. He didn't write one sentence on how the jumping has changed in this game. Does he even care?

Quote:

But that isn't enough for me. I was expecting more innovation. More moments of jaw-dropping discovery and wonder. But outside a few moments and kingdoms, I found myself going through the motions and just collecting moon after moon with no real sense of achievement while amassing them.

That's because the controls aren't as good as they used to be and the collection model is perverted to be at its worst. If the controls were as good as 64's or Sunshine's then any and everything becomes fun. That's why people can jump through an empty courtyard in 64. So you're going through mediocre Mario motions compared to magnificent Mario motions of 64 or Sunshine.

Quote:

I was reasonably impressed by the game in the beginning and finishing the 10-hour or so campaign by collecting the minimum number of moons (and any stray moons I could find) was fun. Going back to collect all of the remaining moons is not fun though.

He makes this game sound like the open world design where everything is impressive for 4-5 hours or so till you realize how bloated and fetchquest/tasky the game is. This is not the case. If you were reasonably impressed with the game when you beat it, it is because you are easily impressed by anything.

Quote:

Overall, I would say it's fun if you're a little kid or I guess have ADD. The game's monster copy mechanic gives you a variety of abilities but they're all surface level, barely explored before they give you some new thing or place to play around. The amount of moons in the game is absurd (you only need about 120 to finish the game). It feels equivalent to having achievements pop up every five seconds just for walking to the next section of the level (indeed, many moons are sitting in plain sight).

So the world design sucks. It's not like he even mentions how drab talking to anyone is in this game. He doesn't describe how bland the atmosphere is, yet he thinks Odyssey is leagues better than Sunshine. Sunshine did not give you ADD because coins and stars were properly separated from each other. The populace was also far more fun to interact with and had more interesting things to say with an absurdly stylized text display of sentences being punctuated with blue line streaks in place of the usual text box. Sunshine also didn't have you waiting 5 kingdoms in for platforming goodness.

Quote:

Platforming and exploring is easy as sin and dying merely takes ten coins from you and sends you back a few seconds (the coins can even be picked back up). In terms of the weird and jarring aesthetic and level variety it almost feels like one of those PC games that people load with a million random mods (GTA, Skyrim and the like). The Galaxy games had a nicer, more consistent look.

Okay, but he doesn't describe what is weird or jarring. There aren't any arrows floating overhead designating a mission or anything. Galaxy, for example, had dumb-looking multi-colored chunks called starbits littering the stage for no reason that were more jarring than what litters Odyssey. But that's just talking about the more important part of the oddity of platformers having realistic looking worlds strewn with carelessly placed doodads (i.e. Jak and Daxter).

Quote:

. . . I am not sure what they should do with the next Mario. It seems free-roaming is not the way forward for platformers, but we must await icy's Super Mario 64 review to understand why...

Of course this guy isn't sure. He doesn't have a good grasp on the genre. He waits for someone else to explain what is fun.

- - - - - - - -
Non-review rambling:

Free-roaming is bad for platformers according to someone else's review, eh? So a design critique of Super Mario 64? Well this is what that reviewer will likely write:

"Super Mario 64 is an easy care-free timerless game which doesn't make you stressed out when you jump or jump nearly as much in Super Mario World."

"Super Mario 64's hub and picture jumping break immersion of teh best world to be designed that has no stage selection; that one world or seamless progression between worlds is better than miniworlds."

"Super Mario 64's free-roaming subjects the player to a lowered level of platforming complexity testing factors by their abolishment in a sequential strip design outside of Bowser levels."

edit: There is an argument that platformers require a decent amount of dead space (i.e. out-of-bounds), which wide space (open world) largely negates.

Basically the review will just modify what was written in Insomnia's Burnout Paradise review (an open-world racer). Why? What's the similarity between a racing game and Mario? Well Mario has many gears the player shifts through to buildup and maintain speed. So it boils down to course design. But Mario (Sunshine) is fun to maneuver around with in any course cause watersliding completes his moveset that lacked a good move for covering long distances, whereas Mario (64) is best suited for smaller courses cause no waterslide, which would make Mario reliant for things outside his body (i.e. cannons). The only real difference between the two is that there are way more bottomless pits in Mario. (Mario encourages dead space.) But it's not like bottomless pits can't exist for racers since there are plenty in F-Zero. Or lava, which is in F-Zero again. Or powerups to acquire in succession (i.e. F-Zero GX story mode chapter 6 where Captain Falcon rescues Jody).

The problem with applying the logic of the critique behind Burnout Paradise to Mario is that Mario can become the ultimate game free-roaming or not because he is not bound to a car. Super Mario Sunshine balanced out its free-roaming aspect with classic athletic courses quite well. Timed blue coins in Sunshine are essentially Crazy Taxi customers. Also, Sunshine had collect a total of 8 timed red coins, which is similar to Crazy Taxi. Mario can be compared to GTA3 or Crazy Taxi.

If you want a game that seamlessly connected Sunshine's athletic courses with a Super Mario Bros [NES] course transition style with difficulty increasing as you progress (1-Ups would be important again) as the ultimate game that sounds good. If you want a game that seamlessly connects each level in Isle Delfino, nixes blue coins that appear only on certain episodes, and added another level or two, that could be the ultimate game right there. If you want a Crazy Taxi arcade styled Mario platformer in New Donk City that's another ultimate Mario game.

Platforming can be timer bound or not. The higher purpose of free-roaming in a Mario title is to allow for upping unexpected sudden events to pop up. Like if returning to the world, you could chase Shadow Mario without that small cutscene introducing him. There were levels to the freedom: Level 1: free-roam; Level 2: complete a renewable challenge (roll the largest watermelon to point b, grab the blue coin at point b before it disappears, etc.); Level 3: complete a life-ending or forced script event (get 8 red coins or die, rescue the 8 villagers or die, etc.). Maybe the higher purpose of a wide world (open-world) to free-roam in a platformer lies in the distraction from going to look at the outer edges of the stage or the perception of a constricted boxed-in linear level design (i.e. Super Mario 3D World). The player has to choose what he wants to look at more: platforms with the stage piece as the background, both equally in view, or platforms less in view with the world more in the foreground. Super Mario Sunshine athletic courses as a "stage rush" (boss rush but with stages) would be pure platforming as they have you hovering over a void without any chance to meander, but when done in succession you would likely feel like a 3D character in a 2D box. And that would happen regardless of what aesthetic (lava world, water world, etc.) coated over it.

Congrats if you read to this point. This post is still being editing.

If you enjoyed Banjo Kazooie, you'll enjoy this. It's not a good Mario game. I only hold onto my copy for reviewing purposes.

i'll_bite_your_ear wrote:

Why don't you compare Odyssey to . . . chess if you are at it?

I don't know about all that. Mario and chess? Who would think up something like that?