So, I read this interview with Shigeru Miyamoto and once again, I have to ask myself: What the fuck is he talking about?
http://www.nintendo.com/nes-classic/sup ... -interview
Mario's current size change has no relation to how far you can see. So, if his size was an issue regarding the perspective of the level, that means they originally also intended the background tiles to be larger.
So, are we really supposed to believe that they originally intended the game to look like this?
SMB.png [ 3.67 KiB | Viewed 5832 times ]
Because that's the only situation that I can imagine where the game was designed in a way so you couldn't see very far.
Are we seriously supposed to believe that the game was originally intended to have huge 32 x 32 tiles and they only resized them to the classic 16 x 16 tiles when (What a surprise!) they realized that you cannot show many 32 x 32 blocks on a 256 x 240 screen?
I mean, it's not like there's anything in between. 24 x 24 doesn't work because of the color grid. So, if they really designed the levels in a way so you initially couldn't see very far, then this is what it must have looked like.
But if this is what it would have looked like, are we seriously supposed to assume that this was ever a thing? After designing a ton of NES games, shall we believe that they totally overlooked the fact that doubling the meta tile size will leave you with a mere eight meta tiles per row?
And are we supposed to believe that they intended a Mario that is built of 32 (or maybe 16) hardware sprites?
And then they were
Also:
What? Pulling back? Is he trying to imply that you can zoom the whole image of the NES in and out, mode 7-style?
Is there any meaning behind his words that make sense here? Or is he just talking out of his ass?
http://www.nintendo.com/nes-classic/sup ... -interview
Quote:
Miyamoto: I remember this clearly. Tezuka-san and Nakago-san and I were having a meeting, and we had the length of all the courses drawn up on a whiteboard. We were discussing whether there was any way to see farther ahead.
Mario was big, so you couldn't see very far?
Miyamoto: Right. We could pull back for a broader view, but then Mario would be smaller. Then Nakago-san said, "Wait a minute. Wouldn't it be fun to have a small Mario, too?"
Ah, I see. You introduced a smaller Mario to make it easier to see what's ahead in the course.
Miyamoto: Yes. And then we decided that you'll lose a turn when the smaller Mario runs into an enemy, when big Mario runs into an enemy, he would just get smaller. That would be a brand-new game mechanic, and we decided to go with it right away in that meeting.
Mario was big, so you couldn't see very far?
Miyamoto: Right. We could pull back for a broader view, but then Mario would be smaller. Then Nakago-san said, "Wait a minute. Wouldn't it be fun to have a small Mario, too?"
Ah, I see. You introduced a smaller Mario to make it easier to see what's ahead in the course.
Miyamoto: Yes. And then we decided that you'll lose a turn when the smaller Mario runs into an enemy, when big Mario runs into an enemy, he would just get smaller. That would be a brand-new game mechanic, and we decided to go with it right away in that meeting.
Mario's current size change has no relation to how far you can see. So, if his size was an issue regarding the perspective of the level, that means they originally also intended the background tiles to be larger.
So, are we really supposed to believe that they originally intended the game to look like this?
Attachment:
SMB.png [ 3.67 KiB | Viewed 5832 times ]
Because that's the only situation that I can imagine where the game was designed in a way so you couldn't see very far.
Are we seriously supposed to believe that the game was originally intended to have huge 32 x 32 tiles and they only resized them to the classic 16 x 16 tiles when (What a surprise!) they realized that you cannot show many 32 x 32 blocks on a 256 x 240 screen?
I mean, it's not like there's anything in between. 24 x 24 doesn't work because of the color grid. So, if they really designed the levels in a way so you initially couldn't see very far, then this is what it must have looked like.
But if this is what it would have looked like, are we seriously supposed to assume that this was ever a thing? After designing a ton of NES games, shall we believe that they totally overlooked the fact that doubling the meta tile size will leave you with a mere eight meta tiles per row?
And are we supposed to believe that they intended a Mario that is built of 32 (or maybe 16) hardware sprites?
And then they were
Quote:
discussing whether there was any way to see farther ahead.
And what did they come up with: Simply lower the size to (Tadaaa!) the block size of the other NES games in existence. What a discovery! Who would have imagined that the solution is to simply do it as it was done in the other games, like "Clu Clu Land", "Gyromite" or totally unrelated games like "Mario Bros."?Also:
Quote:
We could pull back for a broader view, but then Mario would be smaller.
What? Pulling back? Is he trying to imply that you can zoom the whole image of the NES in and out, mode 7-style?
Is there any meaning behind his words that make sense here? Or is he just talking out of his ass?