@SkyBlueFox1

4 months ago

While I understand the thought process behind “invincibility removes the challenge”, I feel like looking at the abilities that way ignores the rest of their design elements. So, to counterpoint: “If this wasn’t invincible, would it be fun?” - Balloon: Not in the slightest. What really sells the balloon form is its fittingly-floaty controls. However, they’re also finicky and imprecise, which would ruin any attempt at ‘challenge’ that could be made. If you wanted to add challenge, you would need to remove most of the enemies, or scale back the floatiness, both of which arguably defeat the point. - Lavaproof: No, probably not. The dark-level mechanics make the fire a visual treat, but also obfuscate the platforming or enemy placement. More lighting would need to be added to make the challenge fair, but this would also take away from the contrast of the darkness and fire, and frankly that just wouldn’t be as interesting. - Freefalling: Maybe. The Special level is certainly good, but it also has the age-old problem of “enemies dropped on me from offscreen and I had no warning”, which I’ve seen 90% of players die to at least twice. I don’t think the first level would be ‘more fun’ without the stars, though - you’d either need to ditch the time-limit or make the whole segment longer. To me, the fun part is trying to hit all the enemies while you’re invincible. It’s like how that wall-jumping poison level in MM2 was a late-game stage; because that kind of challenge can be extremely frustrating to practice. I can tell that difficulty and obstacles are clearly something you value, but I feel like tagging the “fun invincible romp” powers as “terrible” is kind of harsh. We’ve all played Mario Maker 2 before, so I think we all understand how “difficult” and “interesting” are not exactly the same thing. :V

57 |