Super Mario Galaxy?

[Renzatic Gear]

With Gadfly currently making sweet sweet tongue love to his PS3, I guess that only leaves one other hardcore Wii fan to talk to.

So Trebor, got it yet?

[Gadfly2317]

Yeah, I'm hooked on the Ps3 right now.

I'm not forsaking Mario Galaxy though, I just want to be able to focus solely on it. I promised myself I wouldn't buy any new games until I finished Ratchet and Clank and Zelda Phantom Hourglass. Those aren't the only games I'm playing right now, but I need to at least finish these two.

Believe it or not, I do use the Wii, but its mostly just stoner stuff, like the new Mii Channel with the "Mario With his Hat Off" contest. I spent an hour this morning, wake and bake, checking out this new channel.

[trebor]

I DID get it and played about 1.5 hours last night. First and foremost, this is quite the departure from Sunshine. Once you get past the story sequences, this game is far more intense than the way Sunshine started out. It's pretty chaotic, but chaotic in the good way.

The sense of scale is MASSIVE - each stage is basically it's own world or asteroid. The physics/gravity of the game are really disorienting at first. Frankly, the game just looks really cool. Very polished.

I'd suggest anyone who wants to buy it should do so at a Toys R' Us and pick yourselves up a free $25 gift card with purchase (that's the deal going on this week). Hard not to justify that purchase.

[Renzatic Gear]

I was off yesterday and didn't have any other plans, so I played it til my mouth was dry, my eyes were grainy, and I had a splitting headache from staring at the screen too long. So far, 40 stars in, I've found every second of the game to be worth the horrible excruciating pain.

Seriously, I haven't felt the need for a marathon session since Okami. But like Okami, I couldn't put it down for the promise of more awesomeness around each and every corner. If you're like me, you'll want to play it nonstop just to see what craziness Nintendo will throw at you next. And believe me, there is ALOT of craziness in this game. Hell, enough craziness for 10 games at least.

[Gadfly2317]

I was off yesterday and didn't have any other plans, so I played it til my mouth was dry, my eyes were grainy, and I had a splitting headache from staring at the screen too long. So far, 40 stars in, I've found every second of the game to be worth the horrible excruciating pain.

Seriously, I haven't felt the need for a marathon session since Okami. But like Okami, I couldn't put it down for the promise of more awesomeness around each and every corner. If you're like me, you'll want to play it nonstop just to see what craziness Nintendo will throw at you next. And believe me, there is ALOT of craziness in this game. Hell, enough craziness for 10 games at least.

That is EXACTLY why I'm not buying this game yet. If I get away from a game for a long time, I tend not to get around to going back and finishing it, and Ratchet and Clank is definitely cool enough I'd like to see it through to the end.

I expect that Mario Galaxy will be probably the best game I play this year, and I want to play it exclusively start to finish. Looks like it will be my December game. It's pretty exciting to see Mario return to his true glory after the solid but not mindboggling Sunshine and "New Super Mario Bros DS."

[Ludicrum]

I got the game yesterday. I've played it a few hours and currently have about 21 stars. Really fun so far!

[folken001]

I also have the game and I have about 10 stars. It is a lot like 64 which I expected. It's far better than sunshine because sunshine was POS. I really hate the whole water gun idea. It's fun so far. I think I will actually beat this game.

[Gadfly2317]

Finished R&C and picked up Galaxy yesterday. . . am already 22 stars in.

It's a very good game. . .it really is an exceptional platformer.

But. . . it seems to be getting unwarranted worship. It's like the highest reviewed game this year I think, sitting at 97% composite score at Gamerankings.

I may be alone on this, but I don't think the graphics are very good at all. The thing is jagged everywhere--jaggy like a chainsaw. Jaggy and muddy and, hell, even the waterlines against the shore are anglular, not fluid. I may need to pop in Mario Sunshine again as a reminder, but this doesn't look better than a gamecube game.

That's one complaint. The other is that the levels seem small and cramped. And the platforming design is brilliant, but I don't see anything particularly revolutionary about the control. Honestly, water pack in Sunshine seemed more groundbreaking in your physics and platforming style than wiggling the wand for a spin move.

The variations in gravity are cool, and its fun. It's a great game, but I really feel like the game is being overly adored. . . the music is not extradinary. This is a really great gamecube game with some control improvements. I hate to say that, but that was the feeling I'm left with.

And I'm sure having just wrapped up R&C exacerbates this. I'm not normally a graphics whore, I'm a fan of gameplay. But both R&C and Mario are more similar to their predecessors than they are different. And graphics is important to these games in the sense that the big part of the payoff is exploration of fantastical worlds, and the graphics are more important to that experience of "new and exciting world to explore" than I realized. . . but this is the first time we've had a system that had the same graphics as the old one vs. a system with a massive graphical jump. And its impossible for me to experience this mario game without the jaggy muddy graphics diminishing the experience and leave me wondering what it would have been like to have this game, this brilliant level design. . .but with graphics on par with R&C and Kameo. I've long thought Nintendo is "the best" and Mario Galaxy IS the best PLAYING platformer, but without also being the best looking (and instead being the worst looking by virtue of not being "this gen" in its graphics) it leaves a small, but real sense of "man this could have been. . . "

[Renzatic Gear]

I think the ultrasharp resolution of the PS3 has spoiled you a bit, Gad. SMG, while admittedly low res, has a higher poly count and throws enough next-genish effects around to make it stand out as a game that couldn't be done on the GC. I mean hell, it has normalmaps and shaders out the ass.

Gameplaywise, at 20 stars, you haven't begun to see what the game has to offer. Even I was feeling the sting of disappointment at that stage. The levels seemed too easy, too short, and I figured it was gonna be yet another neat but ultimately disappointingly easy Nintendo game in the same vein as Phantom Hourglass.

If you're like me, you'll be nice and warmed up to the game once you get closer to 60 stars, and absolutely in love with it when you're closing in on 120 (106 stars here, btw).

[trebor]

Finished R&C and picked up Galaxy yesterday. . . am already 22 stars in.

It's a very good game. . .it really is an exceptional platformer.

But. . . it seems to be getting unwarranted worship. It's like the highest reviewed game this year I think, sitting at 97% composite score at Gamerankings.

I may be alone on this, but I don't think the graphics are very good at all. The thing is jagged everywhere--jaggy like a chainsaw. Jaggy and muddy and, hell, even the waterlines against the shore are anglular, not fluid. I may need to pop in Mario Sunshine again as a reminder, but this doesn't look better than a gamecube game.

You might as well get rid of your Wii if you can't get past the graphics in SMG, because right now it's the pinnacle of what the Wii can do graphics wise.

Maybe the jaggies have more to do with your tv, though. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you have a LCD, yes? I think the crispness of an LCD screen would do far less justice to an upscaled image than a DLP or Plasma would.


That's one complaint. The other is that the levels seem small and cramped. And the platforming design is brilliant, but I don't see anything particularly revolutionary about the control. Honestly, water pack in Sunshine seemed more groundbreaking in your physics and platforming style than wiggling the wand for a spin move.

I think you're crazy - the levels are HUGE. Each planet isn't a level unto itself, but a group of planets/asteroids are. Given that, the levels are pretty expansive.

Plus, the sheer amount trippy surrealism is beyond the scope of any game I've ever played. It is, without a doubt, one of the creative games I've ever seen from a level design perspective.


The variations in gravity are cool, and its fun. It's a great game, but I really feel like the game is being overly adored. . . the music is not extradinary. This is a really great gamecube game with some control improvements. I hate to say that, but that was the feeling I'm left with.

Renzatic addressed this one.


And I'm sure having just wrapped up R&C exacerbates this. I'm not normally a graphics whore, I'm a fan of gameplay. But both R&C and Mario are more similar to their predecessors than they are different. And graphics is important to these games in the sense that the big part of the payoff is exploration of fantastical worlds, and the graphics are more important to that experience of "new and exciting world to explore" than I realized. . . but this is the first time we've had a system that had the same graphics as the old one vs. a system with a massive graphical jump. And its impossible for me to experience this mario game without the jaggy muddy graphics diminishing the experience and leave me wondering what it would have been like to have this game, this brilliant level design. . .but with graphics on par with R&C and Kameo. I've long thought Nintendo is "the best" and Mario Galaxy IS the best PLAYING platformer, but without also being the best looking (and instead being the worst looking by virtue of not being "this gen" in its graphics) it leaves a small, but real sense of "man this could have been. . . "

Based on what I understand, R&C could very well be the most beautiful videogame ever, from a pure graphics perspective, so that might be why you're so distracted by the graphical differences.

Funny that you mention Kameo, though. One thing I've been thinking while I've been playing SMG, is that it's graphically right on par with Kameo - possibly even better. I haven't had too much experience with Kameo, though, so that's entirely based on memory.

[no.1gamer]

Finished R&C and picked up Galaxy yesterday. . . am already 22 stars in.

It's a very good game. . .it really is an exceptional platformer.

But. . . it seems to be getting unwarranted worship. It's like the highest reviewed game this year I think, sitting at 97% composite score at Gamerankings.

I may be alone on this, but I don't think the graphics are very good at all. The thing is jagged everywhere--jaggy like a chainsaw. Jaggy and muddy and, hell, even the waterlines against the shore are anglular, not fluid. I may need to pop in Mario Sunshine again as a reminder, but this doesn't look better than a gamecube game.

That's one complaint. The other is that the levels seem small and cramped. And the platforming design is brilliant, but I don't see anything particularly revolutionary about the control. Honestly, water pack in Sunshine seemed more groundbreaking in your physics and platforming style than wiggling the wand for a spin move.

The variations in gravity are cool, and its fun. It's a great game, but I really feel like the game is being overly adored. . . the music is not extradinary. This is a really great gamecube game with some control improvements. I hate to say that, but that was the feeling I'm left with.

And I'm sure having just wrapped up R&C exacerbates this. I'm not normally a graphics whore, I'm a fan of gameplay. But both R&C and Mario are more similar to their predecessors than they are different. And graphics is important to these games in the sense that the big part of the payoff is exploration of fantastical worlds, and the graphics are more important to that experience of "new and exciting world to explore" than I realized. . . but this is the first time we've had a system that had the same graphics as the old one vs. a system with a massive graphical jump. And its impossible for me to experience this mario game without the jaggy muddy graphics diminishing the experience and leave me wondering what it would have been like to have this game, this brilliant level design. . .but with graphics on par with R&C and Kameo. I've long thought Nintendo is "the best" and Mario Galaxy IS the best PLAYING platformer, but without also being the best looking (and instead being the worst looking by virtue of not being "this gen" in its graphics) it leaves a small, but real sense of "man this could have been. . . "

Wow, it's sad to see Gadlfly turning into the typical graphics this framerate that, jaggies, camera blah blah blah whore.

I'm putting off buying a wii for a while because a 300 dollar unexpected expense came up. But the Wii is clearly the best console of this generation just as the gamecube was last gen. I really just wanted to get battalion wars 2......but now super mario galaxy is another must have!!!!!!!!!!!

[Gadfly2317]

Wow, it's sad to see Gadlfly turning into the typical graphics this framerate that, jaggies, camera blah blah blah whore.

I'm putting off buying a wii for a while because a 300 dollar unexpected expense came up. But the Wii is clearly the best console of this generation just as the gamecube was last gen. I really just wanted to get battalion wars 2......but now super mario galaxy is another must have!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm sad to see it too. I still prefer great art design over hi-tech, but last gen that was an easier proposition when all consoles where similarly powered, so you could look at specific developers who may have pushed creativity and gameplay but not necessarily realism which I still don't like.

I love Mario Galaxy. I'm just saying that having spent a lot of time looking at real next gen graphics makes the Wii a little hard to look at. And at the same time, having played with real next-gen control on the Wii, there's always a lingering sense of something missing on the other consoles too.

I don't think the Wiimote/nunchuck turned out quite as revolutionary as I'd hoped, but there are still far and away the best console controls ever designed.

[Mochan]

Gadfly has simply seen the light! Come here brother! Give the guy a break. And a cookie!

[no.1gamer]

I'm sad to see it too. I still prefer great art design over hi-tech, but last gen that was an easier proposition when all consoles where similarly powered, so you could look at specific developers who may have pushed creativity and gameplay but not necessarily realism which I still don't like.

I love Mario Galaxy. I'm just saying that having spent a lot of time looking at real next gen graphics makes the Wii a little hard to look at. And at the same time, having played with real next-gen control on the Wii, there's always a lingering sense of something missing on the other consoles too.

I don't think the Wiimote/nunchuck turned out quite as revolutionary as I'd hoped, but there are still far and away the best console controls ever designed.

What happen to the guy who likes games like Cubivore and Ikaruga? Are those games not good enough for you anymore? What kind of graphics whore would waste time with simple fun games like those?

I mean I've been coming to this website just as long as anyone (the old format rocked!) and I still don't even know what the hell a Jaggy is! I don't really care either. The game is fun or is not fun. Obviously the graphics are there to set the mood and what not, and can be impressive just as a novelty, but is the game actually less fun because it has a few less polygons or blah blah blah. Does a Jaggy actually ruin your gaming experience?

That's why awesome games like battalion wars never get noticed, just because it doesn't have cutting edge graphics or whatever even though it's super fun and one of the best games on Gamecube (and I'm sure BWii is freaking sweet on Wii). And also why Resident Evil 4 was hailed as the best RE ever when it really sucked it just had good graphics.

Don't get me wrong I grew up playing the Atari 2600 just like most of you guys, and it's interesting to see the technological advancements with modern systems. But to me the difference in nearly every game these days is so minute I can't see it at all.

Gadfly has simply seen the light! Come here brother! Give the guy a break. And a cookie!

Don't listen to them Gadfly! You are succumbing to the dark side. The next thing I'll hear is you claiming that some multiplatform game is "better" because it has the slightest bit better framerate on blah blah blah system.

Bad Mochan! No cookie for you!

[General Q]

Now that I've beat it at 100% with Mario...is it so bad that I feel I MUST beat it at 100% with Luigi to have "really" beaten the game??

[Gadfly2317]

What happen to the guy who likes games like Cubivore and Ikaruga? Are those games not good enough for you anymore? What kind of graphics whore would waste time with simple fun games like those?
I see this is an old post, but I never saw it. Where is the guy who liked Cubivore and Ikaruga? I still like those games. Ikaruga happened to be pretty cutting edge looking at the time. And a low-fi retro art game like Cubivore is cool. But imagine if the N64 graphics of Cubivore were the best that Gamecube was capable of. . .if the GC were competing against the Xbox and Ps2 last gen with nothing but N64 graphics how cool would Battalion Wars have been, or Pikmin? Where would those great hi-wire jumping and water-pack physics have been in Super Mario Sunshine if the GC were just an N64 with a new controller? It's not all graphics, though no one could deny that graphics add to the experience. . . do you think Eternal Darkness would have been that scary with Atari 2600 graphics?

You say the difference in graphics is so "minute" you can't see it; dude, the jump from GC/Xbox/Ps3 has been a bigger jump in visual quality than the jump from Ps1/N64 to GC/Xbox/Ps3. So compare Cubivore again which I liked despite the clunky gameplay and horrid camera and jaggy graphics.. .compare Cubivore which was just a port of an N64 game never released in America with the cutting edge of Gamecube, like Zelda: Twilight Princess, Pikmin and Eternal Darkness and then realize that Wii games look and play with an even greater gap than that to the physics, sound, AI and graphics of the Ps3. And realize that even if both systems just offered games that were equally fun, why would you not want the more cutting edge experience as opposed to spending another FIVE MORE YEARS playing with the same graphical, AI and physics performance you played with the PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS. INSANE!

Was Cubivore fun? Yeah. But would I have enjoyed the GC as much if it just gave me a second helping of N64-level graphics? No.

What happened to the guy who liked Cubivore and Ikaruga? I'm coveting XBLA's release of Ikaruga in HD with online co-op, achievments, leaderboards, and more. And I'm enjoying PSN games like Elephunk, Pixel Junk Monsters, Super Stardust HD, Every Day Shooter and more. Games like Cubivore and Ikaruga? There is a veritible smorgaspord of those kind of games on PSN and XBLA, and they would be fun even if they were jaggy and ugly and on the Wii, but Wii doesn't offer content on its Wiiware channel that comes close to the creativity, quality and originality of what the other consoles are offering; it happens to just be a really nice bonus that these games look fantastic in high-resolution.

If this were an argument of "great games with slightly inferior graphics" to "superficial boring crap in hi-def" well, of course gameplay is king. But that's not the distinction. Aside from a handful of stellar titles like Mario Galaxy and Resident Evil Umbrella Chronicles, the Wii has a boatload of uninspiring crap that is is ugly to look at as it is boring to play.