Gamespy Finals: Mario Vs. Halflife

[GePap]

Originally posted by bipolarbear
So thta means that if half life wins, then it is the anti-christ?

Yup.

I can;t believe so many posters here are doing the bididng of the whore of babylon....sinners!

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Funny seeing someone who backs SMB3 calling something else a shallow game .

SMB3 had creativity and variety, Wolfenstein did not.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Obviously you played a different Wolfenstein .

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Obviously you played a different Wolfenstein .

I played the one where you run around in maze-like levels and endlessly kill nazis.

Which one did you play?

[Asher]

Seeing as something like Wolfenstein had never been done before, and "SMB3" was a third sequel to a tried-and-true formula, I would not argue that SMB3 was more creative...

[Imran Siddiqui]

I played the one where you run around in maze-like levels and endlessly kill nazis.

Which one did you play?

Sounds like more creativity and variety than the game where you simply jumped around to try to get to the end of a level (one big jumping puzzle game?).

[GePap]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Sounds like more creativity and variety than the game where you simply jumped around to try to get to the end of a level (one big jumping puzzle game?).

Please....

Mario is far more imaginative than Wolfentein. Wolfenstein is fun, and the general gameplay was new and innovative-but what the game was about? Nope.

So-while Mario was using an tried and true medium, it was great imagination involved and took this old medium to it's limits.

Wolfenstein is a great game becuase it brought forth a new medium, even if the content was not new.

[Asher]

I agree that Mario was more imaginative, but not as creative.

Wolfenstein was creative because of all of the milestones of firsts it had, while Mario was imaginative because magic mushrooms made you bigger. Then again, that, too, is rather cliched and tired from the previous games.

[GePap]

Mario three was not just an extension of the previous 2 games.

In fact, there were signifcant differences.

One of them was the fact there was a map, and players had a certain freedom in choosing their path to victory-this was new to the series and is a HUGE change. Also, all the games and special levels was new to the system. New powers was also new to the system and more than just cosmetic changes.

[Ben Kenobi]

Mario was imaginative because magic mushrooms made you bigger.

I never would have suspected the Japanese as being fans of Jefferson Airplane.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Mario is far more imaginative than Wolfentein. Wolfenstein is fun, and the general gameplay was new and innovative-but what the game was about? Nope.

Being innovative doesn't mean you are imaginative? I mean this was an entirely new game! This wasn't a combining of genres or anything like that, this was innovation, which came into being because of the great imagination of id.

Hell, if you want some more imagination look at Level 3's boss (ie, Hitler).

[GePap]

NO, innovative and imaginative are not the same thing. Hence, 2 different words. Pong was innovative-not imaginative.

Wolfenstein was more innovative than SMB3, though it is false to say SMB3 was not innovative.

SMB3 was more imaginative than Wolfenstein.

[Imran Siddiqui]

NO, innovative and imaginative are not the same thing. Hence, 2 different words. Pong was innovative-not imaginative.

But they go together. You need to have some imagination in order to be innovative. Without imagination you get to make anything new.

[General Ludd]

I agree that Mario was more imaginative, but not as creative.

It was a side-scrolling platform game, and many had been made before, yeah. But SMB3 put alot of twists into it and did new things with it. Like the map, for isntance, or the side-levels and items, or the creative twists to levels like the boot, or airships and tanks. Or how every map had a completely original theme to it, reflected in the designs of it's levels.

This wasn't a combining of genres or anything like that

It's not like it was the first 3D/first person game, or the first shooter. They just put guns into 3D.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
But they go together. You need to have some imagination in order to be innovative. Without imagination you get to make anything new.

Not technically true-if you have a tool and you are doing something, then you think-hmm, I think this would be better-and try it, it was..that is innovation. It is a strech to call it imagination (unless you think every single new thought to be imagination).


As I said: In innovation
Wolfie>SMB3

IN imagination
Wolfie < SMB3