>>2967407 >Point #1: Not as good as SMW or SMB3. Still a good game though. Entirely subjective. I find it way more enjoyable. But I do enjoy the SMB games.
>Point #2: Those transformation sections are dumb. They provided some variety while being more or less tedious. The mole was definitely broken, but I think the car worked really well, the helicopter wasn't bad and being a train driving in the background was really funny.
Every level throws a gimmick at you at probably won't return in later levels. That makes Yoshi's Island really memorable. I can remember at least one part, one small section of every single level.
I'm playing it right now for the first time. I like the game, love the graphics, the mechanics are solid (minus the transformations which I think are not really flshed out), the controls are good and the OST is fun to listen to, albeit a bit too repetitive.
But I'm not a fan of the 2d collectathon thing it's trying to accomplish. Games like Banjo and Spyro don't do anything for me. and although this game has a much more focused and well thought out level design compared to those, the gameplay is still mostly about collecting stuff. If I don't collect everything in a level, it feels like I'm missing out on what the game is supposed to be
Not really, YI is still fun even if you don't go for 100% scores in every level. When I was a kid and played it, I didn't care either. It gets deeper if you try to get 100% on every level though, and you're rewarded with new levels, but it's not mandatory to play it like a collecting game.
They really should have dropped "Super Mario World 2" from the title and just left it as Yoshi's Island. Even if it takes place earlier in the story line, it's really more of a spinoff than a sequel or prequel to Super Mario World.
Pros: More levels More gameplay variation More gimmicks More interesting bosses More collectibles More unique graphic style
Cons: Music isn't as good (Sonic games pretty much always have better music) If not going 100% not as much fun More "what the fuck is this bullshit" difficult towards the end Less variation/more linearity in paths towards goals Multiplayer is shitty mini-games that are more games of chance then skill
Results: TWO FUCKING DIFFERENT GAMES THAT CAN'T BE OBJECTIVELY COMPARED AND WEIGHED AGAINST EACH OTHER SO DON'T BE A RETARD THAT ACTUALLY TRIES TO PROVE THE ONE THEY LIKE IS BETTER
>>2972108 >DIFFERENT GAMES THAT CAN'T BE OBJECTIVELY COMPARED In some ways you can. For example, YI may have a greater variety of collectibles -- but I'm curious what would be the sum total of all of them combined? If it's less than 8,000+, which is the number of power rings contained within S3K, then it could be rightfully stated that the statement "YI has more collectibles" is objectively false.
>>2972179 >>It's not necessary to collect rings to get 100% in Sonic First of all, there is no "perfect bonus" or whatever that you can trigger a special acknowledgement by the game if you get all rings in a stage like there is in Sonic 2 and essentially in YI. That's not something which the game itself tracks.
So, anyway, how does that make it unnecessary to collect 100% of the rings in Sonic in order to -- well, collect 100% of the rings in Sonic?
Your position hinges on the definition of what's considered "100%". And I think your view is that all 14 chaos emeralds are all that's needed. And in the traditional and even widely accepted public definition, that may be true. But objectively, are not the rings the main collectible item of the game? True 100% does not simply entail unlocking bonus content (transformations, in Sonic; extra levels in YI), but gathering all collectibles (rings in Sonic; red coins and flowers in YI).
Now it's true I did not include yellow coins in YI. That's because the game itself doesn't track those as part of its own 100% determination. But similar to my point about Sonic's rings, technically it may be fair to consider even YI's yellow coins fair game in a true 100% run. Just saying, for the record.
Anyway TL;DR: yes it is necessary to get max rings to 100% Sonic.
>>2972179 >>2972179 >>There are 20 red coins, 5 flowers in each level in Yoshi >>There are 8 Emeralds and 8 Super Emeralds to collect in S3&K Your comparison is invalid. Collectibles are not equal to special stages -- which are essentially what the emeralds, quite literally ARE, since in order to get each of them you must first complete the corresponding special stage. It's an entire separate game mode with completely different graphical style from the rest of the game. Your analogy only works insofar as you have to find the giant rings which lead you to the special stages, since they are hidden throughout the levels much like the red coins or flowers are but it all breaks down after that. And also it goes without saying but your focus on the amount of these things is silly because the whole pretense of your idea is faulty.
>>2972179 >>Getting all the collectibles in Yoshi gets yous 100 points for a level >>You easily exceed 100 points in S3&K, from something as simple a destroyed on enemy Oh come on now. Are you really going to make me explain why this is wrong? Basically the two games value points differently. So what? This proves nothing.
I do appreciate the discussion we're having though.
>>2972215 >>2972219 Alright fine, whatever, let's say hypothetically you've won this argument because I really don't think we'll see eye to eye on this.
You've successfully proven that you can objectively compare the collection aspects of the two games...
So what about the several OTHER points I made, to reinforce you can't objectively compare two games?
>>2972219 even brought up the special stages, which I completely forgot about. Are these any equivalent in Yoshi's Island? Not that I can immediately recall. The bonus stages don't count, you get those for 100% a world. Sonic doesn't give you an extra level for 100% a level - it does give you a bonus zone for 100% the special stages, but it's more like the true final boss.
Also before you say "bonus areas where you transform, therefore meeting the 'different gameplay requirement'" there are sections of S3&K where something changes the level, such as the water tubes, or snowboarding sequences that are more equal counterparts.
I'm just really tired of the constant attempts to OBJECTIVELY qualify the BEST GAME EVER, or even the better option of two. Sometimes, when you're hungry, you could eat a salad or a hamburger. Sometimes you want a salad, sometimes you want a hamburger. There is no objectively better option - even nutritionally, you could argue a salad is healthier, but if you need more protein and calories today?
The people who shit up these argues, are like vegans or whatever who HATE hamburgers, and therefore can't accept other people like them.
>>2972215 I didn't even know there was a perfect bonus - I assumed it was impossible to get EVERY single ring <shrug>
You need to remember that by the time Nintendo came to making a new Mario game, there were fucking platformers EVERYWHERE.
Platformers were the glut of lazy software development in that era (pretty much the same way that most modern games are first person shooters).
Nintendo could have shat out anothet by-the-numbers Mario game and people would have lapped it up. Especially considering the kind of sales boost a bona-fide Super Mario Bros.5 would have give them (the SEGA Saturn and SONY PlayStation had already launched by this point).
It's a testiment to Nintendo that they wanted to try something different and (somewhat) original.
Personally, I thought it was brilliant.
The art direction was charming, the control scheme and mechanics were inspired (especially that floaty manoeuvre you could do at the end of your jump), great character design and memorable bosses and superb use of the Special FX chip.
I always did hate the transformation sections though, they seemed completely out of place.
Minor niggle though. It was the last, great swansong for the SNES.
>>2972305 >So what about the several OTHER points I made >>2972108 >Pros: >More levels In quantity, there's no question. But it's not about the sheer number of levels a game has -- for the same reason the value of points isn't comparable, though as an aside if you wanted to meaningfully compare the overall systems that determine score that is something you could do -- it's about the quality of the levels. Firstly, what is the area (length x width) in pixels of the entire level as it exists within the game's memory? This may be different than the portion of that which is actually playable, or accessible to the players -- so then we need to figure that out. From there, how complex is the layout on average in YI compared to S3K? Is there often only a single linear path or are there frequently multiple, branching, interconnected, character-specific routes like Sonic is known for? How is the density of enemies, objects, gimmicks, collectibles -- everything. How are the asthetics?
I am quite familiar with Sonic but I don't know YI that well so these are legitimate questions on my part. But they still show the kinds of things I believe ought to be considered in order to do a proper comparison. And for the record I have played and enjoyed both games so I'm not saying YI has bad level design or anything. Both games have it good. The question is how good is each and which is better?
>More gameplay variation That's debatable. It has lots of different colored Yoshis, but they all play identical to one another and even just visually are nothing more than mere palette swaps. At first glance it may appear YI has more characters and that the Yoshi's have more abilities. But do they, really? I can explain more later but for now it'll suffice for me to say you may be surprised at the answer to that question. Which, by the way, I don't even know myself. However I'm pretty sure you're underestimating the variety present in S3K's gameplay, as most people tend to do.
>More gimmicks Again I'd say that's debatable.
>More interesting bosses I'm sorry, but no and no -- no, it does not have more bosses and no, its bosses are not more interesting. More varied, more distinctive, more memorable -- perhaps. I might give you those, but not "more" or "more interesting".
>More collectibles Objectively false.
>More unique graphic style When you say this, what are you evaluating, exactly? What's more important: the fact the game had its own personal art style developed specifically to distinguish it from its peers within the franchise; or, the fact that art style so happened to end up becoming something of an anomaly in the sense that no other games imitated it, most likely just due to how late in the SNES lifecycle YI was released -- in other words, for unrelated economic circumstances?
Subjectively, sure you can value the uniqueness of YI's art direction all you want. I don't care. But objectively isn't the crux of the issue that YI received a complete graphical makeover from its predecessor, which indicates an above-average level of care and effort was put into crafting a truly good video game? Well, the same can be said of Sonic 3's engine. So in that sense it's a draw for this criteria.
>>2972362 >That's debatable. It has lots of different colored Yoshis, but they all play identical to one another and even just visually are nothing more than mere palette swaps. That wasn't really a gameplay feature though. It was more a nice little touch, illustrating the "relay" aspect of the game - all the Yoshis working together to bring baby Mario back home.
There's more to gameplay variation than simply having more than one playable character and I think Yoshi's Island has tons of it.
I haven't played Sonic 3 and Knuckles properly. I fired it up on an emulator once and it just struck me as the typical Sonic formula on steroids. I always found Sonic to be fairly boring and linear compared to Mario though. Sonic was always more of a cheap thrills, style over content kind of deal.
Yoshi's Island has both style and content in spades.
>>2974520 Sonic 3 let you save, and I think upon completion would let you replay starting at whatever zone you wanted so you could just do the last one over again to get the Emeralds. Sonic & Knuckles you couldn't, but it had the lock-on technology that turned Sonic 2 and Sonic 3 into "Sonic # & Knuckles" games. S&K had less zones, and was basically an expansion pack for a cartridge game (heaps of & Knuckles content can be found in their original games, Sonic 2 has heaps of areas only Tail or Knuckles could reach, Sonic 3 has music and alternate routes intended only for Knux but weirdly not bosses).
Sonic & Knuckles is pretty short compared to three, something like 6 zones to 3's 8 zones, and two of those zones technically only being half-zones (Hidden Sanctuary/Sky Sanctuary) so it could get away with not needing saves. Really I'm 80% Sonic 3 & Knuckles was intended to be a single game, judging from the dummies out content such as a credits medley having music from all the zones in an order that differs from the final game (instead 3 has no medley and the one in the final version only has tracks from S&K).
Sorry for prattling on, I just find the whole thing fascinating. The Sonic series has always had interesting development cycles and prototypes - more so than Mario at least, but maybe it's because Sega were always showing demo versions at trade shows and such whereas Nintendo didn't really do that back in the day.
Yoshi's Island has some interesting beta elements but mainly their just cut transformations, like a tree. Seriously a tree. (Shrug)
I don't know why we're talking about Sonic on a Yoshi thread, but bro, Sonic 3 only had 6 zones. S&K has actually more zones (even if you cound hidden/sky sanctuary as one) if you count Doomsday Zone, and Death Egg Zone is remarkably larger than Launch Base on Sonic 3, I think S&K is a bigger game in comparison, but yeah they were supposed to be one single game.
>>2974886 >Don't know why we're talking about it Because some faggot had to ask which was objectively better, it or Yoshi's Island. Which is just tempting an argument because you're on a board dedicated to discussing different, albeit related, tools of entertainment, something that is purely subjective. That and the combination of an embarrassing fanbase and some faggoty e-celebs playing the worst iteration of the franchise, making a bunch of sad loners with no friends thinking the entire franchise sucks just so they can feel like their not completely alone, means it had necessary to defend the franchise to a bunch of people that have never tried it but already written it off.
Thread replies: 43 Thread images: 4
Thread DB ID: 505109
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.