Doesn't Sanic 3D blast...

>>3970873

You're probably right.

>>3970876

I heard a rumor there was a 3D Mario prototype in the works based on the FX2 chip prior to Mario 64. But that Miyamoto shut it down because the hardware just wasn't up to the task, he didn't like anything he saw.

I expect that's true, I doubt you could make a worthwhile 3D Mario on FX2. Even with flat 2 poly platforms and a sprite Mario.

Nintento is too cautious sometimes. It holds them back from risky greatness. But also sometimes it prevents terrible blunders...most of the time anyway.

So it would be kinda like Snake n Rattle Roll but without the eating spheres part...
That might be a pain in the butt depending on how the platforming is

Isometric platformers are definitely better off with polygons though. It's much easier to judge depth and distance.

isometric platforming never works intuitively

>Sonic 3D blast did it
but normies hated it

>>3970873
Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should do something.

>>3970873
Interesting

>>3971410
Wish your father would have thought of that before shagging your mum.

File: image.gif (2MB, 360x480px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 360x480px

>>3971928
HOLY FUCK, ANON GOT BTFO

It could've had a control scheme identical to Mario 64, even. GBA Banjo Kazooie controlled like the N64 games, there's no reason it couldn't work just because the view is fixed isometric.

File: SNES - Super Mario RPG Legend of the Seven Stars - Lands End 2.png (143KB, 1359x551px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 1359x551px

>>3970873
There WAS an isometric Mario game for the SNES though. It was made by Square, and if not for the battles, it was pretty much your average SMB but in 3D.

>>3970886

I believe it was Argonaut who were working on that prototype, it was going to be full camera-behind 3D though - supposedly built from the grounded sections of Star Fox 2. I don't really blame Nintendo for skipping on that or an isometric platformer though, just would've felt like a stop-gap much like Sonic 3D did.