[P.P.A.]

In my opinion, Super Mario Sunshine is superior to SM64 in almost every way. The controls are smoother, the graphics are better, the level design is fantastic and everything is more charming. And I love those surreal, hard-as-nails platform levels.

Sure, Super Mario 64 was the game that defined 3D platformers. But it didn't really age well. Why people keep praising it over Sunshine is a mystery to me.

Also I still have to buy UR MR GAY. :(

[UninspiredUsername]

It's just too repetitive in my opinion. There's hardly any enemies besides the squid thingo and the sludge monster, there's very little variety in what you have to do to get shines, and you have to fight the same bosses over and over. That is also true in SM64 just not as much in my opinion, and I enjoyed the things you had to do multiple times in 64, like fight Bowser, but not things you had to do multiple times in Sunshine, like fight Petey Piranha and that stupid sludge plant thingo, and also that mole thing who hides in that bomb shelter thing.`I only got the first 30 or so stars, the game might be alot better after that, but i'm not the kind of gamer who plays a game for ages just to see if it gets good.

[bertin]

Me personally I like sunshine the best...I always liked it more than SM64 IN EVERY WAY.
Plus in 64 you couldnt ride a Yoshi....so Sunshine wins.

[eggFL]

Here's my angle on the subject. This is coming from someone who hates the 3D Zeldas.

Mario 64 was at fun because it at least focused more on the fundamental aspects of Mario and what makes it fun. Running, jumping, beating the koopas, etc, yay! The puzzle/exploration elements in a sense just served as a structure to tie everything together and to make better use of the small yet sprawling type of level design.

Mario Sunshine on the other hand makes at least two very sad mistakes. 1) it becomes even more convoluted with the puzzle element as well as gimmicks and this aspect takes over the game.... you have to find nozzles, you have to unlock Yoshi, you have to push a watermelon on a bridge, find coins of eighty different colors, find the door in the haunted hotel, you have to ride a rollercoaster on-rails shooter (that was purely awkward) clean up paint here and there etc etc. Less fun, more shit you have to do. And the other mistake: 2) Less running, jumping, and good fun Mario stuff. You now have fludd, which ruins EVERYTHING. Instead of jumping on enemies in 3D, which is true fun, you are now stopping and holding the trigger and aiming in place. OH MY GOD. And platforming isn't fun anymore either because now it's all about the nozzle, and Hovering for a Short Time, instead of natural platforming physics and skill.

In short Mario Sunshine does everything better on paper but at the expense of gameplay and fun factor. (kind of like every Nintendo game nowadays) >______>

It does look good.... however, it takes place in wherever it does, which is a washed out, ugly, repetitive tropical island/resort, as opposed to "Mario world". (Curiosity about this new locale rapidly wears off, since if you've seen one area it seems you've seen them all.) Also one particular complaint of mine is the whole deal that the lack of shines make the island dark... so you have a plaza in broad daylight, yet it is dimmed... so that's just kind of confusing.

[JBertolli]

I wouldn't exactly compare the games as how "Mario" they are. Sunshine isn't meant to be in the "Mario World" (the Mushroom Kingdom?) and is supposed to bring something new in to make it different. Doesn't Galaxy do the same thing with the new world, or worlds. Personally, I like Sunshine and I like the nozzle as a one game thing. Super Mario 64 is better but that doesn't make Sunshine a bad game.

[P.P.A.]

2) Less running, jumping, and good fun Mario stuff.

THAT'S WHAT THE CHALLENGE LEVELS ARE FOR

Yeah, I agree it's a very unusual Mario game, far away from the simple, linear levels of the 2D games. However it is great fun, and I'd say that's what matters.
Just like Sonic Adventure 2, which was nothing like the old games (linear levels as opposed to complex ones that allow exploration; also shooting and hunting stages) but very fun to play and with quite some replay value.

[Crowbar]

I wouldn't exactly compare the games as how "Mario" they are. Sunshine isn't meant to be in the "Mario World" (the Mushroom Kingdom?) and is supposed to bring something new in to make it different. Doesn't Galaxy do the same thing with the new world, or worlds.

That's the point, though, it's not "Mario World", and just seems too normal compared to it. Galaxy is a different location, but in a way it's MORE like traditional Mario environments than any we've seen so far.

I think the main reason people pan it, though, is because it just wasn't the quantum leap from SM64 that SM64 was from SMW.

[X-5]

I don't know why so many people hate sunshine.. its definitely different from SM64, and has waay too few levels which is the only thing I didn't like, but I still love the game alot.

[elecmouse101]

I agree with P.P.A. in every way. People say Sunshine is to repetitive and boring, but that's how I feel about 64.

[eggFL]

2) Less running, jumping, and good fun Mario stuff.

THAT'S WHAT THE CHALLENGE LEVELS ARE FOR

That's kind of the ultimate, fundamental flaw of Mario Sunshine. The Mario gameplay is just a challenge level. And the challenge levels are dumb anyway. ("VR" mini-stage does not compare to serious Mario settings)

Yeah, I agree it's a very unusual Mario game, far away from the simple, linear levels of the 2D games. However it is great fun, and I'd say that's what matters.
Just like Sonic Adventure 2, which was nothing like the old games (linear levels as opposed to complex ones that allow exploration; also shooting and hunting stages) but very fun to play and with quite some replay value.

Well two distinctions I would make between Sunshine and Sonic Adventure 2. If you compare straight-up Sonic segments to straight-up Mario segments, Sonic Adventure 2 has a higher ratio of the good stuff than Mario Sunshine. I would make a comparison between FLUDD and Tails, and of course you spend only 1/3 of the game as Tails as opposed to over 95% of the time with FLUDD. But even Tails is straight action gameplay and not obnoxious puzzles and utility. The only thing SA2 has like that is the Chao missions.

I wouldn't exactly compare the games as how "Mario" they are. Sunshine isn't meant to be in the "Mario World" (the Mushroom Kingdom?) and is supposed to bring something new in to make it different. Doesn't Galaxy do the same thing with the new world, or worlds. Personally, I like Sunshine and I like the nozzle as a one game thing. Super Mario 64 is better but that doesn't make Sunshine a bad game.

Galaxy is prettier than Sunshine. Space and planetoids is vastly more appealing than a highly repetitive tropical island resort motif. I mean I think Mario should go to realistic locations (kinda like Sonic) but between Mario world and earth, Sunshine's locale (Delfino, is it?) is like the worst of both worlds. Oh and I see that Crowbar kind of said a similar point.

"as a one game thing" yea Sonic has its fair share of one-game-things as well so what can I say. But true Mario games are so far and few between so it's kind of insane to have it be a FLUDD game. Sunshine might have been better as the "Majora's Mask" to a more traditional Mario for Gamecube. But eh, doesn't make any difference to me, just pointing that out. As for Sunshine not being the quantum leap from SM64, it's also arguably a step back. I knew someone who referred to Sunshine as "Mario 64 0.5" ... makes sense to me.

[UninspiredUsername]

Yeah I totally agree; FLUDD was great as a one game thing.

And to be honest, my dream for a 3D Mario would to be to have the whole game like those challenge levels. With more detailed enviroments and stuff, of course. It's just that, 2D or 3D, I always liked linear platforming more then exploration based platforming.

[yse]

Sunshine gives you cancer :(

[P.P.A.]

Yeah, I agree it's a very unusual Mario game, far away from the simple, linear levels of the 2D games. However it is great fun, and I'd say that's what matters.
Just like Sonic Adventure 2, which was nothing like the old games (linear levels as opposed to complex ones that allow exploration; also shooting and hunting stages) but very fun to play and with quite some replay value.

Well two distinctions I would make between Sunshine and Sonic Adventure 2. If you compare straight-up Sonic segments to straight-up Mario segments, Sonic Adventure 2 has a higher ratio of the good stuff than Mario Sunshine. I would make a comparison between FLUDD and Tails, and of course you spend only 1/3 of the game as Tails as opposed to over 95% of the time with FLUDD. But even Tails is straight action gameplay and not obnoxious puzzles and utility. The only thing SA2 has like that is the Chao missions.

Hey the FLUDD is awesome ok. :(

I didn't meant to compare SMS to SA2 directly. I just said that both are very different from their 2D predecessors, yet a lot of fun on their own.

I wouldn't exactly compare the games as how "Mario" they are. Sunshine isn't meant to be in the "Mario World" (the Mushroom Kingdom?) and is supposed to bring something new in to make it different. Doesn't Galaxy do the same thing with the new world, or worlds. Personally, I like Sunshine and I like the nozzle as a one game thing. Super Mario 64 is better but that doesn't make Sunshine a bad game.

Galaxy is prettier than Sunshine. Space and planetoids is vastly more appealing than a highly repetitive tropical island resort motif. I mean I think Mario should go to realistic locations (kinda like Sonic) but between Mario world and earth, Sunshine's locale (Delfino, is it?) is like the worst of both worlds. Oh and I see that Crowbar kind of said a similar point.

"as a one game thing" yea Sonic has its fair share of one-game-things as well so what can I say. But true Mario games are so far and few between so it's kind of insane to have it be a FLUDD game. Sunshine might have been better as the "Majora's Mask" to a more traditional Mario for Gamecube. But eh, doesn't make any difference to me, just pointing that out. As for Sunshine not being the quantum leap from SM64, it's also arguably a step back. I knew someone who referred to Sunshine as "Mario 64 0.5" ... makes sense to me.

Hey Majora's Mask is awesome too ok. :(

Also I don't think it's a step backwards. It's simply a step in a different direction - one that is a lot of fun.
And while I agree that the island setting is a bit repetitive, it's otherwise excellent in execution. The levels are huge, they're alive (with all the people walking around), the water looks great, and the somewhat washed-out textures are a nice touch.
Though yeah, Galaxy is superior to that.

And I found the level design (not the looks) of 64 to be a lot more repetitive than Sunshine's.

Also I say Mario should stay colourful and happy and stuff. While the realistic touch does suit Sonic rather well.

[eggFL]

Yea Majora's Mask might be good... IF and only if you like Ocarina of Time in the first place.

[Auriman1]

Super Mario Sunshine was a good game with some nice innovative ideas. I personally liked the tropical setting, it was a nice change of pace from the usual, and FLUDD added a whole new line of physics to experiment with. It just had a lower replay value than Super Mario 64, although no particularly good reason comes to mind besides nostalgia. For me, it was fun while it lasted, I got all 120 shine sprites, but I wasn't compelled to come back for more after one or two play-throughs.

Ocarina of Time defies logic for me. It's an exploration and collection game, and even though I've done everything possible multiple times, I keep coming back for more. It's probably because it tied in more action aspects than most exploration games, similarly to most RPG's, and it holds many good memories. Majora's Mask, on the other hand, had its moments, and I have come back to play it once in a while, but the recycling of three days' events and strict timeframes hurts the replay value quite a bit. I'll likely play it again in the future, however, as it's still a good game.

Like most games, though, they're not for everyone.

[KnucklesSonic8]

P.P.A, I totally agree. I'm sick of people bashing Sunshine. It IS superior to SM64 almost tremenduously IMO. That being said, it CAN get repetitive but think of SatSR and then come back.

[UninspiredUsername]

I don't know why, but after this thread I started playing Sunshine a bit. All the challenges were still boring, bar a few. I was under the impression that I was basically starting on the game but then I just realised i've unlocked all of the levels except the last one, and I don't even have 40 stars. There's hardly any levels compared to SM64. On the bright side, Yoshi is pretty fun, and the level that has all the fungi growing under it was really awesome artisticly, though I haven't had too much fun with the challenges there. This game just feels really rushed.

[KnucklesSonic8]

Rushed? Really, you think so?
Wow... I thought Nintendo did a good job with Sunshine.

[UninspiredUsername]

Rushed? Really, you think so?
Wow... I thought Nintendo did a good job with Sunshine.

Well yeah, it feels rushed, there's considerably less levels then SM64, alot of the shines were from blue coins (though I didn't mind that) and the camera was horrible (IMO).

[eggFL]

The segment where you had to push a boat through the lava was pretty lame.

Sure was creative tho... =/

[P.P.A.]

Rushed? Really, you think so?
Wow... I thought Nintendo did a good job with Sunshine.

Well yeah, it feels rushed, there's considerably less levels then SM64, alot of the shines were from blue coins (though I didn't mind that) and the camera was horrible (IMO).

Quality > Quantity I say.
Sure, Sunshine had very few levels. But they were very well designed, the layout changed throughout the missions (!), and they had those Mario Challenge sublevels.
Whereas SM64 had a lot of levels but they stayed the same all the time, they were rather small and to get to the different mission goals, you usually had to use the same routes and visit the same places - it all got a bit repetitive.
Also the missions in Sunshine were innovative and fun. Except for the reoccurring Shadow Mario chases and red coin collecting (however that was also better implemented than in SM64 imo), each stage had its own unique tasks. You roll melons around, dive into a waterfall to clean a big ale's teeth, save villagers from the lava, explore the hotel and so on...

And I didn't have any problems with the camera. While ii may have not been 100% perfect, it was certainly miles ahead of what that incompetent Lakitu did.

[ieatatsonic]

I don't hate SMS, though I don't play it much. I mainly like SMS for the way you could go wherever you want(the reef in the beachy place is one place I like to go) and the fact that itb has some puzzle elements(take the level in the hotelwhere you have to go through the hotel(i.e. bathroom, painting,ventalation, etc.) as an erxample). As for SM64, that game is just better in an unexplainable way. Also, I'm looking forward to UR MR GAY.



This is off topic.Remember, All Toasters, Toast Toast!

[UninspiredUsername]

Rushed? Really, you think so?
Wow... I thought Nintendo did a good job with Sunshine.

Well yeah, it feels rushed, there's considerably less levels then SM64, alot of the shines were from blue coins (though I didn't mind that) and the camera was horrible (IMO).

Quality > Quantity I say.
Sure, Sunshine had very few levels. But they were very well designed, the layout changed throughout the missions (!), and they had those Mario Challenge sublevels.
Whereas SM64 had a lot of levels but they stayed the same all the time, they were rather small and to get to the different mission goals, you usually had to use the same routes and visit the same places - it all got a bit repetitive.
Also the missions in Sunshine were innovative and fun. Except for the reoccurring Shadow Mario chases and red coin collecting (however that was also better implemented than in SM64 imo), each stage had its own unique tasks. You roll melons around, dive into a waterfall to clean a big ale's teeth, save villagers from the lava, explore the hotel and so on...

And I didn't have any problems with the camera. While ii may have not been 100% perfect, it was certainly miles ahead of what that incompetent Lakitu did.

Of course quality > quantity, but it still kind of sucks that there's not as many levels. And I just can't agree that they're more fun then in SM64. Blooper racing, or whatever they were called, was no where near as fun as racing down those big slides in SM64 in my opinion, I had way more fun in 64's boss battles, I enjoyed the level design in general more in 64, to the extent where I really didn't like the missions where all you had to do was run to a point in the level and fight a boss, which were some of my favourite parts of the game in SM64.

And yeah, there was some originality there, but originality alone doesn't make things fun. For example the level where you had to throw those chain chomps in the water; pretty original but boring as fuck in my opinion. But yeah, I liked the challenge levels alot. Oldschool Mario platforming in 3D is awesome, though I felt they were a little too hard at times.

I found SMS' camera to be even worse then something like Sonic Adventure 2's, Mario 64's was pretty good for the most part. Unless they made a major update to the camera in Mario 64 DS; I haven't played the N64 version in years.

By the way, how many stars do you need to access the last level? If it's not too many I might actually try and beat this game.

[eggFL]

pushing a watermelon across a bridge....

..very original indeed...

It's like "Miyamoto does: Physics! the game"

[P.P.A.]

To get to the last level, you have to get the 7th Shine in every course.