super Mario world vs super Mario bros 3

[Anonymous No.7996558]

What one you all think is better and why it possible?

[Anonymous No.7996561]

Mario 3

[Anonymous No.7996585]

3 was still good because it wasn't mixed with all that girly crap yet

[Anonymous No.7996609]

i've always enjoyed super mario world more, as a kid it felt more magical, and i like the bright colorful art and world map. 3 isn't far behind though, it's one if those 8 bit games that feels like it transcends it's limitations and competes with the best 16 bit platformers. also really good art direction

[Anonymous No.7996703]

>>7996609
Was there additional hardware in the cart of Mario 3?

[Anonymous No.7996706]

>>7996609
So you're gay.

[Anonymous No.7996901]

Personally I prefer the All Stars Mario 3,

[Anonymous No.7996904]

3 because I think having the overworld feel like a boardgame is important

[Anonymous No.7997135]

>>7996558
In smw you can throw upwards so it is better.

[Anonymous No.7997160]

Mario 3, the controls and platforming are tighter. Also for whatever reason SMW also felt bigger, but more empty, less enemies on levels so lots of "dead air" while playing. I say all of this as someone who played SMW before SMB3, so its not nostalgia for one over the other talking.

[Anonymous No.7997668]

nice

[Anonymous No.7997767]

I like Mario 3. I like the board game adventure map with the branching paths and the different ways of getting around. I like the item system and the variety of suits. Most of all I like the higher difficulty and more arcade-y pace which was long gone for Nintendo platformers when the 16 bit era hit.

Mario World is a nice game too but it feels like a step back. Less suits, less variety. Stages are bigger but the game overall feels shorter to complete despite all the secrets. It's more modern consolized where it's not really meant to be played in a single sitting and 1cc'd like Mario 1-3, and that IMO makes it a lot less exciting since even easier stage design aside there's not much tension from failing a run or resource management to worry about. It's still a good game but lacks a certain energy to it.

[Anonymous No.7997792]

>>7996558
SMB3, for sort of the reason >>7996585 alluded to. I think SMW marked the start of a new era for Mario, one highlighted by rainbow colors and not just cartoony, but silly characters like Chargin' Chuck. Mario was always a cartoon and the Mushroom World was always a fantasy world, but with Mario World came a slight increase in childish/child-like qualities in the character designs and aesthetic presentation. SMB3 was cool and stylish with it's unique stage play motif with its cinnamon swirl clouds and hills that resemble prismatic stickers (Pic related, I can't be the only one who saw the texture that way). It had airships and battle tanks and a man-to-Koopa duel with Bowser at the end. SMW ends with Bowser flying around in a clown-faced flying machine and tossing wind-up toys at you. It was the beginning of the end of Mario's cool, and although it somewhat came back with SM64, Mario's never been the cultural icon he once was since.

[Anonymous No.7997823]

3 was so much better.

[Anonymous No.7997874]

>>7996703
SMB3 used the MMC3 chip, which allowed for such things as diagonal scrolling among other tricks.

[Anonymous No.7997883]

>>7997160
Now that's an elite collector. 130 pristine copies of Mario 3 and he plays every one of them.

[Anonymous No.7997908]

>>7996558
I'm more of a fan of Super Mario World, but for no particular reason. The only version I've played of Super Mario Bros. 3 is the ALl-Stars one, though. Even so, I think SMW is the best game ever, probably because of sentimental value, that's why I prefer it over SMB3.

[Anonymous No.7998317]

>>7996558
I love them both + Yoshi land & Mario Maker 2.
But yes SMB 3 is a bit superior.

[Anonymous No.7998320]

>>7996558
I was a segafag growing up, so I didn't actually play a lot of Mario games until later on.

I prefer SMW because the ability to go back to any level you've previously beaten, coupled with the occasional branching paths for which level to go to next, was pretty neat. It made the game's environment feel like one big world.

I will admit, however, that SMB3 was a pretty amazing technical achievement on the NES. If I had the choice to play one or the other again it would be SMW though.

[Anonymous No.7998327]

They made it too cute

The first 3 were just as fun and didn't need all that nerdy cute cringe junk that ruined it

[Anonymous No.7998331]

>>7996706
thanks for your contribution nigger

[Anonymous No.7998438]

Mario 3 always had fun stuff to do in it

[Anonymous No.7998574]

Super Mario Bros. 3 because it includes Mario Bros.

[Anonymous No.7998576]

>>7996558

3 is much better

The sound design on SMW is fucking horrid

[Anonymous No.7998581]

>>7996558
The answer is 3. Everyone deep down knows it even tho SMW is a great game as well. We can stop having these threads now.

t. unbiased SegaChad

[Anonymous No.7999082]

Super Mario 3 is better for its clean and precise momentum. I've never played a platformer that controlled better.

Mario 3 is one of the best video games ever made. Super Mario World is an excellent nostalgic game. Mario 3 wins.

[Anonymous No.8000329]

>>7996558
There is more going on in SMB3 and was taken as much care into what the game would be. Sprites look like a 40's cartoon. Reggae music is a plus too.
SMW has Horrendous sprites and inconsistent artstyle. Levels are open with nothing to fill it. Filler levels that never got fleshed out (Ghost Ship). Start of the Corprate cute style of the series. Did I mention it was rushed too?

[Anonymous No.8000338]

SMB3 is better due to having more varied stages, enemies, and power-ups.

However, my nostalgia prefers SMW.

[Anonymous No.8000347]

>>7996558
SMW is the only game in the classic series that has aged well. and in my opinion SMB1 is better than the third and second game.

[Anonymous No.8000424]

>>7996558
Slight edge to World. I got a lot more out of World, since I found it easier. It has more secrets which felt very rewarding. I like Yoshi. I like the castles at the end of each world more than I like the airships in 3, which are very cool in their own right.

[Anonymous No.8000428]

>>7996558

the one without the auto-scrolling airship levels

[Anonymous No.8002969]

>>7996558
World = 3 > 1 > Lost Levels > 2

[Anonymous No.8002972]

The fact that there's even a discussion points to 3 being better. World is on superior hardware and came out later, it should be unquestionably better, but it isn't.

[Anonymous No.8002984]

SMB3 is better than SMW.
>more power-ups
>better art direction
>more varied worlds
>better level design
>better enemies
>better bosses
>better music

[Anonymous No.8003056]

>>8002984
true. 3 has so many unique enemies

[Anonymous No.8003384]

SMB3 was the apex of Nintendo's internal development team and the full application of what they learned about the NES/Famicom's hardware over the years to their full potential, whereas SMW, much like the original SMB, was a "learning process" game to figure out and understand the SNES/Super Famicom hardware, so it's more experimental, less refined, and generally just so early.

[Anonymous No.8003387]

>>7997883
underrated comment. I appreciate it at least

[Anonymous No.8003407]

I prefer SMW because of nostalgia. I grew up playing it on the GBA port. SMB3 is a much better achievement in the Super Mario series though, it pushed the NES's technology to the limit and it came out a damn near perfect game

[Anonymous No.8003413]

I liked World better as a dumb kid but now I can appreciate the reasons why 3 is actually better

[Anonymous No.8003414]

>>8003413
hmm actually to add on to this, my thoughts are almost identical to >>8003407

[Anonymous No.8003427]

Every 2D platformer before was a prototype.
Every 2D platformer after was a remix.
SMB3 is flawless.

[Anonymous No.8003431]

>>7997792
mario is for kids

[Anonymous No.8004428]

>>7997160
I feel like 3 added more stuff, there was a high amount of new power ups, new enemies, new environments, they really wanted to push the NES to its limit. World took what 3 had, threw out a bunch of it and recycled the rest with minimal additions, and in the long run wasn't technically impressive since it was a launch title. I think they're both good games and I prefer SMW's level designs, but if I was a kid at the time 3 would have blown my mind, and World would have just seemed like more of the same but with better graphics.

It's similar to Pokemon. GSC added all these cool new features that would later become staples, then RSE came out, threw out some stuff like the day/night cycle, and depended on people getting it because it's on a new system to sell. Both generations are good, but again, if I had a Gameboy at the time of GSC's release instead of starting with RSE, I would have never considered RSE to be the superior generation.

[Anonymous No.8004451]

>>8003427
based mushroom king

[Anonymous No.8004493]

Mario World. You can tell by the fact that so many in this thread need to resort to complaining about its aesthetic rather than any gameplay elements.

SMB3's stages are too short to ever get off the ground flow-wise and while it's definitely more challenging I don't necessarily think that makes for a better game. SMW is piss easy but it's just such a good experience, plus finding all of the tons of secrets is part of its own unique challenge. I also personally prefer its controls and moveset over 3's. You could say a lot about how it has less powerups and such but Yoshi is such a dynamic addition that he adds much more than it seems at first.

If I had to rank the classic Mario games it'd be SMW>SMB2US>SMB1>SMB2J>SMB3 but I realize that's about the hottest take around. At the end of the day I simply don't see what everyone else does in 3.