Variety's review of super mario galaxy (it says it's a BAD game)

link here: http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117935396.html?categoryid=1269&cs=1

meh...there had to be atleast one non perfect review

with it averging 97.5 on gamerankings i'm not really bothered

they are a crappy site, don't listen to them and don't support them by going therewii60_lukatoll

you guys are getting a little too worked up about that review.

its from some no name place, and it talks about the visuals when we can all see for ourselves that mario has a good artstyle and holds its own.

the thing is, if you guys will notice the circle at the top most part, that review is sponsored by Sony.

and that reviewer has the guts to mention Ratchet and Clank on the PS3 (comparing it to SMG...pfft)

well done Sony...well done.

the thing is, if you guys will notice the circle at the top most part, that review is sponsored by Sony.

and that reviewer has the guts to mention Ratchet and Clank (comparing it to SMG...pfft)

well done Sony...well done.

nomadph

if you look around a little more, sony just sponsored the site for the day it got posted. sony isnt paying people to attack nintendo (nintendo is the least of their worries. they would attack MS before nintendo).

OMG MARIO IS MENTIONED IN RATCHET AND CLANK REVIEWS! NINTENDO MUST HAVE PAYED THEM. games from the same and similar genre will be compared. some guy wasnt happy that mario hasnt changed at all....

Alright, lets limit the attention to this article and site.. it's not worth it.

I think even the biggest fanboys, and the biggest nay-sayers of the wii, can all agree that mario galaxy is fantastic. Heck, even most of system wars has come to agree that SMG is brilliant.

you guys are getting a little too worked up about that review.

its from some no name place, and it talks about the visuals when we can all see for ourselves that mario has a good artstyle and holds its own.GlassDominion

Variety Magazine is definitely not a "no name place." Gamers don't go there to get their video game reviews, but the magazine itself (and probably the website) is generally popular.

It's obvious that this reviewer doesn't have much experience with the Wii. The remote-nunchuck combo is awkward... for the first couple of days, maybe. But I find it to be much more comfortable than your traditional controller, simply because you can freely move each hand wherever you want.

The graphics argument "growing tired" doesn't really make sense. And neither does the claim that a console capable of better graphics would inherently be capable of better 3D platforming. If this game suffered from framerate problems or overall graphical glitchiness, he'd have a point. But the game is nearly flawless in those areas.

He calls pointing at the screen to collect star bits "a chore," but I find that it adds another dimension to the gameplay. You have to be focused on the entire screen, not just the little area around your character. Sometimes trying to collect star bits while you're running through a platforming section can be challenging, but that just makes it more fun.

One more disagreement... I've never had problems with the camera. Most of the time, I'm glad that the camera is fixed, otherwise I'd have to spend time trying to get it just right, like in Mario 64, where the camera was a pain.

This review is bad because it's plain wrong about many things. He harps on the fantastic physics and creative level design, yet he says the hardware is limiting the game. That doesn't add up.

What's reallyunfortunate is that non-gamers, who might be interested in picking up or reviving interest in gaming they abandoned since games grew in complexity past the SNES era, are exactly the kind of people likely to read this sad excuse for a game review and ignore a truly fantastic game for a truly fantastic game system.

I don't know the reasoning behind it, but I know a review written by someone who's probably played less video games than a newborn child when I see it.

[QUOTE="GlassDominion"]you guys are getting a little too worked up about that review.

its from some no name place, and it talks about the visuals when we can all see for ourselves that mario has a good artstyle and holds its own.JordanElek

Variety Magazine is definitely not a "no name place." Gamers don't go there to get their video game reviews, but the magazine itself (and probably the website) is generally popular.

It's obvious that this reviewer doesn't have much experience with the Wii. The remote-nunchuck combo is awkward... for the first couple of days, maybe. But I find it to be much more comfortable than your traditional controller, simply because you can freely move each hand wherever you want.

The graphics argument "growing tired" doesn't really make sense. And neither does the claim that a console capable of better graphics would inherently be capable of better 3D platforming. If this game suffered from framerate problems or overall graphical glitchiness, he'd have a point. But the game is nearly flawless in those areas.

He calls pointing at the screen to collect star bits "a chore," but I find that it adds another dimension to the gameplay. You have to be focused on the entire screen, not just the little area around your character. Sometimes trying to collect star bits while you're running through a platforming section can be challenging, but that just makes it more fun.

One more disagreement... I've never had problems with the camera. Most of the time, I'm glad that the camera is fixed, otherwise I'd have to spend time trying to get it just right, like in Mario 64, where the camera was a pain.

This review is bad because it's plain wrong about many things. He harps on the fantastic physics and creative level design, yet he says the hardware is limiting the game. That doesn't add up.

bottom line is its a personal opinion, same deal with the gamespots review of ratchet and clank (no matter how much i think that review was unfair and almost bias). i havent played enough of the game to give my personal input, but i would agree this review should be thrown out just based on what little i have played.

as for noname place, i meant more on the gaming level. i dont go to HEB and expect to get a quality review of a game.

bottom line is its a personal opinion, same deal with the gamespots review of ratchet and clank (no matter how much i think that review was unfair and almost bias). i havent played enough of the game to give my personal input, but i would agree this review should be thrown out just based on what little i have played.

as for noname place, i meant more on the gaming level. i dont go to HEB and expect to get a quality review of a game.

GlassDominion

It's not personal opinion, Variety is sponsored by Sony. I'm not saying that in the same way idiots say "omg MS owns GS!" It's an actual fact. They aren't to be taken seriously. Ever.

[QUOTE="GlassDominion"]

bottom line is its a personal opinion, same deal with the gamespots review of ratchet and clank (no matter how much i think that review was unfair and almost bias). i havent played enough of the game to give my personal input, but i would agree this review should be thrown out just based on what little i have played.

as for noname place, i meant more on the gaming level. i dont go to HEB and expect to get a quality review of a game.

kieranb2000

It's not personal opinion, Variety is sponsored by Sony. I'm not saying that in the same way idiots say "omg MS owns GS!" It's an actual fact. They aren't to be taken seriously. Ever.

[QUOTE="kieranb2000"][QUOTE="GlassDominion"]

bottom line is its a personal opinion, same deal with the gamespots review of ratchet and clank (no matter how much i think that review was unfair and almost bias). i havent played enough of the game to give my personal input, but i would agree this review should be thrown out just based on what little i have played.

as for noname place, i meant more on the gaming level. i dont go to HEB and expect to get a quality review of a game.

GlassDominion

It's not personal opinion, Variety is sponsored by Sony. I'm not saying that in the same way idiots say "omg MS owns GS!" It's an actual fact. They aren't to be taken seriously. Ever.

I dont know what thread you're reading but no one is being radical, or getting too upset. Stating that it's a poorly written article isnt radical, it's true. And we all know it's a personal opinion Ghandi, but who cares when it's biased?Sports-Fan

not all people are just saying its a poorly written article tho ;).

and thats my point...why do you care about that review when you know better...theres theads all over the internet with outraged wiifanboys about this single reviews.

[QUOTE="nomadph"]

the thing is, if you guys will notice the circle at the top most part, that review is sponsored by Sony.

and that reviewer has the guts to mention Ratchet and Clank (comparing it to SMG...pfft)

well done Sony...well done.

GlassDominion

if you look around a little more, sony just sponsored the site for the day it got posted. sony isnt paying people to attack nintendo (nintendo is the least of their worries. they would attack MS before nintendo).

OMG MARIO IS MENTIONED IN RATCHET AND CLANK REVIEWS! NINTENDO MUST HAVE PAYED THEM. games from the same and similar genre will be compared. some guy wasnt happy that mario hasnt changed at all....

how would you know that guy wasn't paid off? are you from Variety magazine?

and that reviewer didn't just _mentioned_ ratchet and clank...he actually compared the two games (saying galaxy looks old fashioned and lifeless compared to that SONY PS3 game -- wtf?)...from two different consoles...on a ps3...on a sony sponsored review...

duh man...duh...

how would you know that guy wasn't paid off? are you from Variety magazine?

and that reviewer didn't just _mentioned_ ratchet and clank...he actually compared the two games (saying galaxy looks old fashioned and lifeless compared to that SONY PS3 game -- wtf?)...from two different consoles...on a ps3...on a sony sponsored review...

duh man...duh...

nomadph

with that logic how do we know anyone is actually telling the truth and isnt payed off?how do you know he was? do you work there?

and ratchet and clank and mario have a bit in common. similar genre, cartoony artstyles, and even released near each other. so i feel its natural they get compared.

it's upsetting to see a review like that, but glassdominion has a point. this reviewer's opinion is so many deviations beyond the general concensus that it becomes a useless review. it's an outlier, and therefore, more or less irrelevant. it will have almost no impact on total sales of the game, so, no worries :)

the review isnt even that bad...about the only thing in there i thought was a bad case of judgement was how he talked about the nunchuck and wii-mote vs a normal controller and how he didnt like how the nunchuck was seperate.

as for the comments about ratchet and clank i think hes talking about all the things in the background. where in mario you get small and large worlds, you dont get a ton of action going on in the background. where as ratchet and clank i look out and is see cars zooming by, buildnings being blown up etc.

the more i read the review the more critical and nit picky i feel people are being over the review.

I realize that this is (probably) the weakest point to attack (for massive damage) but if this magazine is so big and proud, shouldn't they have someone proofread the thing and tell Mr. Ben Fritz that the word is spelled LIFELESS rather than that thing he used as a word at the end of his review. Of course, this comes from me, the beaner that things he can sort of spel.(sic)

Also, said proof reader should kick him in the jewels for such an awful review and comparing graphics to a powerhouse machine that is the PS3, but like his, this is just my opinion.

HAhahaahahh this article actually made me laugh. Seriously, this guy is SO full of it.

Oh, and sponsored by Sony? Yeah, thats not fishy at all huh?

Lol...makes gamespot look like IGN

AHAH
No but seriously, they shold be fired...the way it's being reviewed is that it's set up to be the 3rd or 2nd best game of ALLLLLL TIME!

even a playstation review site gave it a 10!

Variety is about the last place I would look for a videogame review. That would be like relying on the National Enquirer for financial advice.

That review is rediculous. The graphics easily compare to games on the 360 (granted, if the game was on the 360 it would look a TON better...somehow) and the controller? Are they just dumb? It's the same thing as a normal controller but seperated by a cord OMG SO CONFUSING. Just tape the two together if you really are that stupid.

Ignorant people like this shouldn't be allowed an opinion.

isnt Variety known for being douche bags who dont know anything?Maxned

They are now at least,if they weren't before. I think that's like Maxim reviewing games, they aren't credible at all and they definitely aren't now after saying that one of the bestgames of the year is "bad".