[POLL] SMBX - GIMMICKY VS. CLASSIC

Poll

Which type of SMBX levels to you like to play? - Results

Classic
6
42%
Gimmicky
8
57%

Posts

Pages: 1
Blobofgoo
Legs are a burden. Return to snek.
2751
I actually prefer gimmicky stages. They are unique and unrelated to the classic stages. If I wanted to play classic stages, I would play SMW or SMB3. Gimmicks are a chance to extend your creativity and share it. I make my own levels gimmicky because I find them fun that way.

However, I realize everyone doesn't like gimmicky stages, so I am trying to see how RMN is divided. Gimmicks can be good sometimes, but if they are tedious and annoying, the player will hate you.

Please explain and defend your ansnwer.
I thought we got rid of you.
author=Jude
I thought we got rid of you.
I unbanned the guy. The original ban was only for 1 week anyway, but through The Spirit of Christmas (TM) I relented and believed and unbanned the bros.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
I prefer classic game design topics over gimmicky game design topics. Can we go back to talking about save points?
Isrieri
"My father told me this would happen."
6155
ALL GIMMICKY STAGES MUST DIE. YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO GIMMICKY STAGES, YOU ONLY THINK YOU DO.

Gimmicks are fun, but if they're badly implemented they can completely ruin things. You need to focus on classic design philosophies and know why they work before you go about implementing ancillary stuff that may deviate from the traditional.

Also, this is a SMBX topic on a site filled with RPG devs.
slash
APATHY IS FOR COWARDS
4158
The definition of a gimmick is something added to stand out but fails to provide much substance.

Unique mechanics can be very interesting but you should really think about what they add to the experience. If a SMBX game is all gimmick stages with different mechanics in each, the experience becomes disparate and muddled. Games are about learning and mastering mechanics, and building on what you've learned in new ways. Throwing away everything you've learned for a new set of mechanics may add some flavor, but also trashes everything the player has learned up to that point. Generally speaking, adding a unique mechanic that occurs in only one stage clashes with the rest of the game's interactive design.

Sometimes it's worth that clash for an eccentric level (Kuribo's Shoe) or an epic battle (Any Kirby game with the boss battle on a Warp Star) and these experiences are often the most memorable, but remember that you're asking the player to learn something completely new and you have to adjust your difficulty accordingly. In addition, if too many stages use unique mechanics, you're completely destroying player progression and cohesiveness in your gameplay. This is generally a bad idea although some games have done it to brilliant effect (Frog Fractions).

Anyway, for a SMBX game, I'd say skip any unique mechanics that don't somehow incorporate jumping, unless you're making a crazy final boss battle, or if your entire game (not just single levels) are based around that mechanic.

EDIT: GRS makes a good point; you can safely assume most people playing SMBX have played a 2D Mario before and have the basics mastered, so you could probably work in more uniqueness rather than boring samey levels.
Levels focused on a gameplay mechanic that is a gimmick is practically my SMBX MO! I like them because they help breath new life into application of an old formula and can help create a unique experience for a level/game. Across Mario 3, SMW, and all their scores of rom hacks and other SMBX titles stomping on koopas can get dull. I wouldn't want an entire game of gimmick levels though, keep it in moderation.

You just have to be able to recognize when a gimmick is fundamentally flawed and should be thrown out too. Some ideas are bad and can't be saved.
Craze
why would i heal when i could equip a morningstar
15170
Isrieri
ALL GIMMICKY STAGES MUST DIE. YOU DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO GIMMICKY STAGES, YOU ONLY THINK YOU DO.
Being part of a prject with BoG, I say gimmicks can be fun up to a point. I don't make gimmicky stages, but when I do, they have been pretty short. Back on the Knux96 forums, they LOVE gimmicky stages. But they still hate it when it is an annoying gimmick. Annoying as in, not implemented well. On these forums, most seem to not like gimmicks as much as the classics, and sure they say the stages are interesting, we all have to realize that we are on a site for RPG making, and yet we have way more than just RPG makers to get us into game developing. Meanwhile, people on NSMBX and Knux96 forums only have SMBX...kinda. In their case, since I'm part of all three forums obviously, I'm kind of biased to say Gimmick stages.
But one example of a bad gimmick. Things coming from all directions, and you have to focus on getting a tank to a key, just to grab and use to get through a key door, AKA Ice Tanks. Sorry BoG, I can tell when someone LPs our game, some will rage quit there. :(
Decky
I'm a dog pirate
19645
Classic. Why? Because classic stages implemented gimmicks in the context of the level. "Gimmick" stages feel experimental and poorly designed, for the most part. The gimmick has to fit within the Mario template or you risk some serious issues.

And yes, pretty much nobody around here is at the point in their development where they can make bold, experimental gimmick levels that work. We're all still working on our Mario fundamentals! You can't learn Calculus before Algebra.

I guess technically I prefer "Prettier Classic" - in other words, classic-style, fundamental Mario gameplay that happens to be more visually appealing.
Pages: 1