| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Michael Kontoudis
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 817
$poons: 221.40
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 9:52 am Post subject: Super Mario Galaxy 2 Review |
|
|
 |
|
| Super Mario Galaxy 2 Review by Michael |  | | Wii Review: Reach for the Stars. | | [View Article] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RXWAG
Status: Offline
Joined: 30 Jan 2007
Posts: 2762
$poons: 13.40
Location: I'll be where I'm at!
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 9:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
urge to buy another wii rising...
_________________
Selamat Pagi Bitches...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ANDYBALLINA
Status: Offline
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 3461
$poons: 977.20
Location: Ballina
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 10:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Can't wait for July 1st. Great review.
_________________
PSN: ANDYBALLINA1
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
A13x
Status: Offline
Joined: 02 Apr 2007
Posts: 3362
$poons: 2126.10
Location: Adelaide
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| ANDYBALLINA wrote: | | Can't wait for July 1st. |
I couldn't either 
_________________
 <3
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
renegadesx
Status: Offline
Joined: 13 Feb 2006
Posts: 1599
$poons: 28.60
Location: Canberra
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 11:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
I didn't wait either. Currently on 71 stars after an intense weekend and the main 'game' has been completed.
I'm aiming for 120 stars and I will see how things go from there.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grim-one
Status: Offline
Joined: 07 Dec 2007
Posts: 6646
$poons: 1567.30
Location: Perth
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
My copy should be arriving any minute now... C'mon postal system!
_________________
Steam:grim_one | PSN/Live:najakh | Flickr
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Marlor
Status: Offline
Joined: 22 Dec 2006
Posts: 60
$poons: 5.20
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 4:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| PALGN wrote: | | Representing the first direct Mario sequel to appear within a single console generation |
Super Mario Bros, Super Mario Bros 2, Super Mario Bros 3. Am I missing something?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael Kontoudis
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 817
$poons: 221.40
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
^ Well, well, well, looks like we forgot to insert the term '3D'; mea culpa. I assure you that's what we meant!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spuderump
Status: Offline
Joined: 25 Aug 2008
Posts: 263
$poons: 8.20
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
if this is better than SMG1 and that got 10 how did this only ge 9.5
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Esposch
Status: Offline
Joined: 25 Sep 2009
Posts: 3858
$poons: 62.00
Location: Melbourne
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 8:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Hurry up Royal Mail! 
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wilmo
Status: Offline
Joined: 10 Jan 2009
Posts: 7
$poons: 7.00
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 9:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| spuderump wrote: | | if this is better than SMG1 and that got 10 how did this only ge 9.5 |
| PALGN wrote: | | Any sad soul burned out on the Galaxy experience or looking for a gameplay revolution is unlikely to have his flame reignited by this second part, and for this reason alone, Super Mario Galaxy 2, despite being the superior game, falls just short of a perfect score. |
Did you not even read the article?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Puddingfork
Status: Offline
Joined: 28 May 2006
Posts: 2708
$poons: 209.15
Location: Brisbane, QLD
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 11:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| spuderump wrote: | | if this is better than SMG1 and that got 10 how did this only ge 9.5 |
_________________
Unofficial PALGN Ventrilo Server 203.14.173.58:5704
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael Kontoudis
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 817
$poons: 221.40
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 21, 2010 11:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
Super Mario Galaxy 2 is as fun, if not more so, than its predecessor, but the gaming landscape has changed since 2007, and the game simply lacks the 'wow' factor of the original. It's a known quantity, albeit a close-to-perfect one, and the review spells it out quite clearly.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big Pete
Status: Offline
Joined: 02 Dec 2003
Posts: 3794
$poons: 278.80
Location: Brisbane QLD
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 5:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
I need to ask something and I know some people won't like this...
But what did Super Mario Galaxy bring to the video game industry that Mario 64 hadn't?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ANDYBALLINA
Status: Offline
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 3461
$poons: 977.20
Location: Ballina
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 9:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Big Pete wrote: | | But what did Super Mario Galaxy bring to the video game industry that Mario 64 hadn't? |
It bought the only good 3D Mario game to the industry. 
Not only that though, it bought motion controls into the game, a whole new theme, gravity gameplay (where you can walk upside down), multi player, different suits/abilities and new characters.
Its definately refined the genre.
_________________
PSN: ANDYBALLINA1
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Karai Pantsu
PALGN Moderator
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Posts: 10109
$poons: 29.06
Location: Melbexico
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 10:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Big Pete wrote: | I need to ask something and I know some people won't like this...
But what did Super Mario Galaxy bring to the video game industry that Mario 64 hadn't? |
Accessibility and elegance, pretty much. Mario 64 was an exploration of Nintendo's platforming prowess in a 3D space with analog control - Galaxy took what they've learned over the years, refined it down to an almost pure diamond of design excellence, and paired it with their newest control progression almost flawlessly.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeonJ
Status: Offline
Joined: 29 Sep 2004
Posts: 10312
$poons: 1868.80
Location: Grand Line
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 10:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
I think the key with this game over the original is accessiblity due to the removal of the hub. I actually don't really like hubs in games and the old skool map menu is a much improvement.
_________________
Shin J Leon.
XBL - LeonJ
PSN - LeonJ
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZeroX03
Status: Offline
Joined: 02 Jul 2008
Posts: 3582
$poons: 775.40
Location: Melbourne
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 10:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Dungeon Crawl has been selling the game for a bit now guys.
_________________
b+2,1 mindgames
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DancesInUnderwear
Status: Offline
Joined: 05 Oct 2005
Posts: 5194
$poons: 9.00
Location: radelaide
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 10:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Big Pete wrote: | I need to ask something and I know some people won't like this...
But what did Super Mario Galaxy bring to the video game industry that Mario 64 hadn't? |
Fun.
I do want to use this opportunity to say this 'doesn't bring anything new' complaint has to be one of the biggest flaws of video game reviewing, though. I mean, I certainly agree, there should be a 'reward' for developers that try something new and succeed in it - hell, if nobody did, we'd be playing the super refined, HD, online Pong 2010 - but, surely, if a game doesn't do 'innovate', it shouldn't automatically mean "uh oh better knock a point off the score".
Look at movies - Toy Story 3 (sorry, its lodged firmly in my mind at the moment) doesn't really 'innovate' like Toy Story 1 did, but if the story, characters, whatever are great, then the movie is considered great. There's no line in movie reviews that says 'but unfortunately it just doesn't change cinema like Toy Story 1 did, so therefore we can't give it 5 stars'. Because that would be stupid. But when it comes to games, its accepted.
It just bugs me.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeonJ
Status: Offline
Joined: 29 Sep 2004
Posts: 10312
$poons: 1868.80
Location: Grand Line
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 11:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Well if you are a good boy there is no real way to import this. Only a week or two to go anyway...
_________________
Shin J Leon.
XBL - LeonJ
PSN - LeonJ
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michael Kontoudis
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 817
$poons: 221.40
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| DancesInUnderwear wrote: |
I do want to use this opportunity to say this 'doesn't bring anything new' complaint has to be one of the biggest flaws of video game reviewing, though. I mean, I certainly agree, there should be a 'reward' for developers that try something new and succeed in it - hell, if nobody did, we'd be playing the super refined, HD, online Pong 2010 - but, surely, if a game doesn't do 'innovate', it shouldn't automatically mean "uh oh better knock a point off the score". |
The thing is, though, that scores are not static, objectives indicators. The truth is that a score is simply the way a publication or person expresses their feeling about a game / film / album / book / mongoose at a particular time.
| PALGN wrote: | | Super Mario Galaxy 2 is the best game on the Wii... Perhaps the only negative one could raise... is that Super Mario Galaxy 2 is not much different from its predecessor... Super Mario Galaxy 2 is unlikely to pack the same punch delivered by its predecessor in 2007... Super Mario Galaxy 2, despite being the superior game, falls just short of a perfect score. Such trifling matters are, of course, irrelevant ... |
Ultimately, what consituted a "9" or "10" or "6" in the year 2004 as compared to what merits a "9" today may be completely different. In any case, the text of most reviews should make it clear how a review outlet feels. In this case, the proclamation that "Super Mario Galaxy 2 is the best game on the Wii" should be telling, as should the notion that it simply lacks the 'wow factor' of the original. In an ideal world, people would realise that a numerical indicator of something's quality is utterly arbitrary and is in fact quite misleading in that it invites direct qualitative comparisons. So one ends up dealing with unhelpful strings of logic in the vein of: 'if the original game merited a "10" and the sequel is better, shouldn't it receive an "11"?'
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big Pete
Status: Offline
Joined: 02 Dec 2003
Posts: 3794
$poons: 278.80
Location: Brisbane QLD
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 12:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Am I reading this right, or didn't people like Mario 64?
It wasn't good nor fun hey?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DancesInUnderwear
Status: Offline
Joined: 05 Oct 2005
Posts: 5194
$poons: 9.00
Location: radelaide
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 1:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
This is fair enough. In fact, in an ideal world, review scores would be abolished, because as you've said, they draw comparisons that aren't there.
I feel I should point out that I don't take issue with this review or your reviews in particular or anything - this is a point I've wanted to bring up for ages, and the fact that this review happened to pop up when I had time off of work, uni and for some super annoying reason can't seem to take advantage of the extra sleeping time. I actually quite like how you've handled it by using the argument that 'if you didn't like the first one, this one won't change your mind' - this is a legitimate point. Its also a point that can be, and is, used in film / album / book / mongoose reviews, because it is, well, quite frankly, a point, not just a bunch of buzz words.
What bugs me is the apparent 'need' to drop something of the score just because it doesn't do something new. Many reviews will throw this in almost as fact - reviews wont even mention it, then, when it comes to wrap up time, theres a dot point in the 'negative' section which says it doesn't 'innovate', and knocks off a point because of it. Even in this article, where you explicitly make the point of pointing out how stupid it is to do so, you still are apparently obligated to lop that little bit off of the score. Does it make a difference in the end? No, of course not. But like I said, it just irks me.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Karai Pantsu
PALGN Moderator
Status: Offline
Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Posts: 10109
$poons: 29.06
Location: Melbexico
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Big Pete wrote: | Am I reading this right, or didn't people like Mario 64?
It wasn't good nor fun hey? |
I'd suspect that easily 80% or more of the active posters here would say it was a fantastic game. I certainly would - one of my all time favourites. It broke new ground, for Mario and the industry alike, while retaining the charm and fun we already associated with Mario. Plus it was hard enough to keep you going back for 'one more try'. Reason to own a 64 IMO.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Frozencry
Status: Offline
Joined: 04 Nov 2005
Posts: 9277
$poons: 1628.10
Location: Sydney
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
I definitely agree that lack of innovation in a game should not be marked down on. Not that I disagree with the score; the review is finely written as always by Michael and he makes valid points. I'm just going by what reviews usually have.
Like DIU, it irks me that games get rated down for lacking in doing anything 'new'. I can easily say that if Uncharted 2 didn't have the artificial lengthening at the end of it, I would've dumped the big 10 on it; and that game didn't innovate in anything. Games should be rated purely in their quality of execution rather than its new 'ideas'. And hell, on a random note, the reason why StarCraft 2 Beta was so immensely enjoyable was because it didn't try to innovate, it just stuck to the formula we know and polished it to an utterly insane level. While on the other end, innovation is half the reason why a game like Supreme Commander failed. It's good, but flawed in so many ways.
Stick with formula's that work IMO, and simply refine and polish up the design/structure of the game to a level that will blow people away.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
