As many of you I am a fan of Mario games (although I have yet to play some mythic titles like Super Mario Bros 3 or Super Mario World) and I just recently finished Super Mario Odyssey and loved it, I completed it at 100% (something that I rarely do) because I felt in love with the games mechanics, regardless I felt it was a bit overwhelming from time to time.
I played it “for fun” like half of the time, the other half time I was just playing it with a guide on hand because I HATE FINDING HIDDEN STUFF, the backtrack needed for this and attention to detail is too much for my taste.
I understand some people like this treasure hunt kinda quest, but it is really not for me.
As Super Mario 3D Land aims to be a “handheld” game I expecting it to be simpler, but, after all this is Mario and I’d finish enjoying game mechanics again, to the end to want to complete it, I just don’t want to have the guide on hand all the time, it would be nice if all hidden stuff wasn’t that well hidden lol.
Anyway do you think is fair to compare them?
Or I’ll be fine playing the older title and “stress” free?
To directly answer your question, no. They really aren’t all that similar. I mean, they share the same “Mario” DNA. But being that one is in 3D and is a rather large hub/spoke world design while the other is a 2D linear stage based experience, they are dissimilar gameplay wise.
I would really urge you to try Super Mario World in particular though. This game is damn near perfect and holds up incredibly well today. It’s just an amazing achievement and a must play title for everyone who enjoys games.
Super Mario World was my first game and it absolutely holds up. The gameplay is still as solid now as it was when it was released.