Who played MARIO GALAXY? its a must play for the generation.

Played both and didn't care for either.

Chutebox

This :P

Though i dropped the second one half way the game

Super Mario Galaxy 2 is on the same level of Super Mario Brothers 3, Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island, and Mario 64.

Timeless Classics.

Bought and played half way through the first, got bored once the childhood nostalgia wore off.

Second one was basically the same as the first so I skipped it altogether.

I played the first on my cousins Wii because of all this panic and 10s all over the internet... I think im not into this mario thing at all.... Nice platformer , nothing to go in panic mode though. Just a good game. AzatiS

Lol, says the guy with the Tekken display pic.

I dont card for the 3d mario games. I like the 2d games like super mario on the NES.

Mario64 still is the best.. Time will show this. SMG2,1 were good for the moment and obviously the best game for any avid nintendo fan. Mind you, there are other great platformer/fun games too like banjo and kazooie, donkey kong, little big planet etc that are more than worth checking out. I think for me, the wii, will only be known for SMG2 mainly and that's kinda sad. (as well as red steel and wii play)g0ddyX

It already fixed the few problems that the first galaxy had and went crazy with the level designs.

I played both and I like the 2nd one a lot more then the first because I love that they went to the map system of the 2D games with Super Mario Galaxy 2.

I was never a big fan of HUB worlds in platformers.

Played both and didn't care for either.

Chutebox

[QUOTE="Chutebox"]

Played both and didn't care for either.

daledoback

hm, what kind of games do you like?

[QUOTE="daledoback"][QUOTE="Chutebox"]

Played both and didn't care for either.

jettpack

hm, what kind of games do you like?

[QUOTE="jettpack"]

[QUOTE="daledoback"] Pretty much.daledoback

hm, what kind of games do you like?

That makes sense then. Not great, not amazing, but just good. That's not a bad idea. Playing mediocre games would probably be a lot more fun if I didn't have experiences like the SMG games to compare them to.

[QUOTE="jettpack"]

[QUOTE="daledoback"] Pretty much.daledoback

hm, what kind of games do you like?

no, im genuinely interested. what genres of games do you like, titles?

Bought and played half way through the first, got bored once the childhood nostalgia wore off.

Second one was basically the same as the first so I skipped it altogether.

1080pOnly

1. How could nostalgia carry you half way through a NEW game especially when that new game is not like the previous titles?

2. SMG2 is not really the same, its actually much better.

I know that not everyone will enjoy the SMG games, but this just seems like another one of those "I never played it, but I'll assume what its like and bash it anyways!" type of posts.

[QUOTE="daledoback"][QUOTE="jettpack"]

hm, what kind of games do you like?

jettpack

no, im genuinely interested. what genres of games do you like, titles?

I wouldn't expect a real response. Most gamers can play a game and not enjoy it, but still recognize that the game is good. To say the SMG games are not good is basically saying "My opinion is worthless!"

I'd really like to hear a well thought out response as to how SMG is not good, but I'm not holding my breath lol.

[QUOTE="jettpack"]

[QUOTE="daledoback"] Good ones.Wiimotefan

no, im genuinely interested. what genres of games do you like, titles?

I wouldn't expect a real response. Most gamers can play a game and not enjoy it, but still recognize that the game is good. To say the SMG games are not good is basically saying "My opinion is worthless!"

I'd really like to hear a well thought out response as to how SMG is not good, but I'm not holding my breath lol.

Both games are pretty much the best platformers this gen IMO.

[QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

[QUOTE="jettpack"]

no, im genuinely interested. what genres of games do you like, titles?

daledoback

I wouldn't expect a real response. Most gamers can play a game and not enjoy it, but still recognize that the game is good. To say the SMG games are not good is basically saying "My opinion is worthless!"

I'd really like to hear a well thought out response as to how SMG is not good, but I'm not holding my breath lol.

[QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

[QUOTE="jettpack"]

no, im genuinely interested. what genres of games do you like, titles?

daledoback

I wouldn't expect a real response. Most gamers can play a game and not enjoy it, but still recognize that the game is good. To say the SMG games are not good is basically saying "My opinion is worthless!"

I'd really like to hear a well thought out response as to how SMG is not good, but I'm not holding my breath lol.

Yes, or course, most people would agree. I guess that explains why both Galaxy titles are among the highest rated games of all time. I guess that also explains why every time there is a thread about either game they are showered with praise, even by those who aren't into Nintendo games.... like this thread for example! :D

Funny how pretty much everyone who, ya know, actually played the games finds them to be extremely creative. Almost every level in SMG2 throws something completely new at the player, but no, I should listen to you right?

The only thing being regurgitated here is your oh so typical response of a hater. You just threw away any type of credibility you had. Its like you just came to a forum and called Ninja Gaiden Black a button masher, or called Star Craft 2 a casual mp game.

What I would really like to know is what drives people like you to post negativity about games you have never played, but since you wont admit to that then I would like for you to tell me in detail how "they failed" with these games.

Its an entertaining game, but its hardly amazing, was worth the 5 dollar rent.

[QUOTE="daledoback"][QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

I wouldn't expect a real response. Most gamers can play a game and not enjoy it, but still recognize that the game is good. To say the SMG games are not good is basically saying "My opinion is worthless!"

I'd really like to hear a well thought out response as to how SMG is not good, but I'm not holding my breath lol.

Wiimotefan

Yes, or course, most people would agree. I guess that explains why both Galaxy titles are among the highest rated games of all time. I guess that also explains why every time there is a thread about either game they are showered with praise, even by those who aren't into Nintendo games.... like this thread for example! :D

Funny how pretty much everyone who, ya know, actually played the games finds them to be extremely creative. Almost every level in SMG2 throws something completely new at the player, but no, I should listen to you right?

The only thing being regurgitated here is your oh so typical response of a hater. You just threw away any type of credibility you had. Its like you just came to a forum and called Ninja Gaiden Black a button masher, or called Star Craft 2 a casual mp game.

What I would really like to know is what drives people like you to post negativity about games you have never played, but since you wont admit to that then I would like for you to tell me in detail how "they failed" with these games.

[QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

[QUOTE="daledoback"] It's not a good game, deal with it. Most people would agree it's the same old,same old Nintendo likes to regurgitate over and over again. Could have been great but they failed. Mario 64 is a great game. daledoback

Yes, or course, most people would agree. I guess that explains why both Galaxy titles are among the highest rated games of all time. I guess that also explains why every time there is a thread about either game they are showered with praise, even by those who aren't into Nintendo games.... like this thread for example! :D

Funny how pretty much everyone who, ya know, actually played the games finds them to be extremely creative. Almost every level in SMG2 throws something completely new at the player, but no, I should listen to you right?

The only thing being regurgitated here is your oh so typical response of a hater. You just threw away any type of credibility you had. Its like you just came to a forum and called Ninja Gaiden Black a button masher, or called Star Craft 2 a casual mp game.

What I would really like to know is what drives people like you to post negativity about games you have never played, but since you wont admit to that then I would like for you to tell me in detail how "they failed" with these games.

This kid is 28. Your statement about the Wii is obviously biased. My profile pic and user name is nothing more than an inside joke on this forum based on a user that got banned months back (PNF lol). PS3/PC are my systems of choice, but I am currently enjoying the 360 as well. Cant say I've been into the Wii this year.

Now with all that assumption out of the way. PDZ got a 9 on GS. That is very different from SMG and SMG2 being two of the highest rated games of all time on MC and GR. I'm talking metascores here, not the judgement of one site lol. Plus, both SMG and SMG2 won many Goty awards. Nice job trying to compare a launch hype game that got a good score on one site to two games further into the gen that got universal praise.

Elaborate on how the controls, often considered perfect by many with the few motion complaints here and there, could be considered bad. Please be specific. When I want to slam a game I can be very specific, but it seems you are having trouble (as you have not played the games). Then :lol: at story in Mario. I mean really? :lol: Graphics look great as most agree. And then its the "same stuff over and over again" nonsense that absolutely kills your argument. This is what exposes you as someone that has not played these games. I thought SM64 was ok and Sunshine was meh. Never cared too much for either, but somehow I love the SMG games. Why? Because they are so damn different and worlds better.

I also own all platforms as well.... just as many other posters in this topic do. I cant believe people still try to hide behind statements like that lol.

Now will you give some actual specific reasons as to why the SMG games are no good, or can we just end this nonsense charade?

[QUOTE="1080pOnly"]

Bought and played half way through the first, got bored once the childhood nostalgia wore off.

Second one was basically the same as the first so I skipped it altogether.

Wiimotefan

1. How could nostalgia carry you half way through a NEW game especially when that new game is not like the previous titles?

2. SMG2 is not really the same, its actually much better.

I know that not everyone will enjoy the SMG games, but this just seems like another one of those "I never played it, but I'll assume what its like and bash it anyways!" type of posts.

lol i totally used to do that to HL2 before i had played HL2. and you know what happened? I played HL2 and now its my favorite game of all time.

[QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

[QUOTE="jettpack"]

no, im genuinely interested. what genres of games do you like, titles?

daledoback

I wouldn't expect a real response. Most gamers can play a game and not enjoy it, but still recognize that the game is good. To say the SMG games are not good is basically saying "My opinion is worthless!"

I'd really like to hear a well thought out response as to how SMG is not good, but I'm not holding my breath lol.

you still havent answered my question, What kind of games do you like? genres? titles? developers?

[QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

[QUOTE="daledoback"] It's not a good game, deal with it. Most people would agree it's the same old,same old Nintendo likes to regurgitate over and over again. Could have been great but they failed. Mario 64 is a great game. daledoback

Yes, or course, most people would agree. I guess that explains why both Galaxy titles are among the highest rated games of all time. I guess that also explains why every time there is a thread about either game they are showered with praise, even by those who aren't into Nintendo games.... like this thread for example! :D

Funny how pretty much everyone who, ya know, actually played the games finds them to be extremely creative. Almost every level in SMG2 throws something completely new at the player, but no, I should listen to you right?

The only thing being regurgitated here is your oh so typical response of a hater. You just threw away any type of credibility you had. Its like you just came to a forum and called Ninja Gaiden Black a button masher, or called Star Craft 2 a casual mp game.

What I would really like to know is what drives people like you to post negativity about games you have never played, but since you wont admit to that then I would like for you to tell me in detail how "they failed" with these games.

Strange, after better aquanting myself to western games and talking with my friends, I'm the opposite, with no Wii I really wouldn't have bothered this gen. Generic boring Western title #3739739730 is not intriguing to me.

Played both. Both are two of the best games I've played. 2 is better than the first.

[QUOTE="Wiimotefan"]

[QUOTE="daledoback"] It's not a good game, deal with it. Most people would agree it's the same old,same old Nintendo likes to regurgitate over and over again. Could have been great but they failed. Mario 64 is a great game. daledoback

Yes, or course, most people would agree. I guess that explains why both Galaxy titles are among the highest rated games of all time. I guess that also explains why every time there is a thread about either game they are showered with praise, even by those who aren't into Nintendo games.... like this thread for example! :D

Funny how pretty much everyone who, ya know, actually played the games finds them to be extremely creative. Almost every level in SMG2 throws something completely new at the player, but no, I should listen to you right?

The only thing being regurgitated here is your oh so typical response of a hater. You just threw away any type of credibility you had. Its like you just came to a forum and called Ninja Gaiden Black a button masher, or called Star Craft 2 a casual mp game.

What I would really like to know is what drives people like you to post negativity about games you have never played, but since you wont admit to that then I would like for you to tell me in detail how "they failed" with these games.

Actually, it's very simple, sir. Both Galaxy games are mustplays. The controls are fantastic. And really, if people are playing videogames for story rather than sharp gameplay, they're doing it all wrong seeing as how no single game has managed to ever rise above a B-movie level storytelling. Yes that includes Half-Life and Metal Gear Solid in that camp.

See, people like me, with two consoles and a gaming PC know that Super Mario Galaxy 2 is a better game than almost everything available on the market right now.

You point out PDZ getting a 9, but that was just here. It wasn't as well received as you make it out to be. The two Galaxy games with their multiple GotY wins/nominations and 97 average review scores are significantly higher than something like PDZ which even in 2005 was not a must-play. That year belonged to Resident Evil 4 and F.E.A.R. (just going a bit off-topic there :P)

Collected all but the last star in first game and the second game i didn't finish because i sold my Wii.

guess most people on these forums have, otherwise they shame the rest of us :P

Some of the best platformers of this gen indeed, altho I still prefer 2d platformers ;)

I just want to throw my two cents in about SM64. SMS was by far a better game than 64. It is totally a nostalgia thing. When I got to the Throwback Galaxy in SMG2, my nostalgia kicked in, the music got me going and the familiar layout got me going even more... but looking at the galaxy from a more objective stance, compared to the rest of the galaxies in the game, its design is bland and highly uncreative. It is decidedly two-dimensional, despite being in 3D. In many SMG2 levels, the dimensions are fluid, and you can feel the difference between going around on a simple flat surface and a round object in a field where "up" and "down" are entirely relative (for instance in the one ghost galaxy where the floor becomes a wall, then a ceiling). SM64 was a revolutionary first step for 3D games... but SMG2 is the next step... and a much bigger one at that. So go ahead, reminisce of the "good old days" but don't assume that a primitive game like SM64 can come close to competing with a standard-setter like SMG2.foxhound_fox

SM64 is one of thee most overated games ever. It has not aged well, its nothing special either. Its a 1 dimensional game that people seem to think is amazing because its 3D. It lack the cohesiveness and fluidity in level design present in like every other mario game, the camera is atrocious amd its approaching least creatively striking Mario game ever. SMG2 is not only a better game, its actually a good game.

Found them both enjoyable.... Only played a little of both, but thought they were good.

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]I just want to throw my two cents in about SM64. SMS was by far a better game than 64. It is totally a nostalgia thing. When I got to the Throwback Galaxy in SMG2, my nostalgia kicked in, the music got me going and the familiar layout got me going even more... but looking at the galaxy from a more objective stance, compared to the rest of the galaxies in the game, its design is bland and highly uncreative. It is decidedly two-dimensional, despite being in 3D. In many SMG2 levels, the dimensions are fluid, and you can feel the difference between going around on a simple flat surface and a round object in a field where "up" and "down" are entirely relative (for instance in the one ghost galaxy where the floor becomes a wall, then a ceiling). SM64 was a revolutionary first step for 3D games... but SMG2 is the next step... and a much bigger one at that. So go ahead, reminisce of the "good old days" but don't assume that a primitive game like SM64 can come close to competing with a standard-setter like SMG2.ActicEdge

SM64 is one of thee most overated games ever. It has not aged well, its nothing special either. Its a 1 dimensional game that people seem to think is amazing because its 3D. It lack the cohesiveness and fluidity in level design present in like every other mario game, the camera is atrocious amd its approaching least creatively striking Mario game ever. SMG2 is not only a better game, its actually a good game.

For the most part I agree with both of you. SM64 is a great game but even when it came out, after the wow factor, it was my least favorite in the series and made me want to go back to palying the 2D games. Now it has not aged well compared to the later titles. In fact, SMG was the first 3D Mario title I really enjoyed.

SM64 is one of thee most overated games ever. It has not aged well, its nothing special either. Its a 1 dimensional game that people seem to think is amazing because its 3D. It lack the cohesiveness and fluidity in level design present in like every other mario game, the camera is atrocious amd its approaching least creatively striking Mario game ever. SMG2 is not only a better game, its actually a good game.

ActicEdge

You don't rate games based on how they are gonna age lol. At the time, those things such as the camera where good, considering there's no second analog stick and that it was the "first" 3D game. The game isn't broken dude, it's just outdated.

So yeah score wise, I give scores for older games based on what I would give them at the I played them for the first time, around release. But to say that SM64 is a better game than the Galaxy games is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. For instance scoring SM64 10 and Galaxy 9.5 wouldn't bother me, but to say that 64 is superior is like wtf.

That's why I think it's hard to rate older gen games as you have to relate the game to other games during its time, on the hardware available and also consider the standards at the time. Everything is relative, not absolute. I can make any game seem like a masterpiece and simultaneously the worst game ever, it all depends how you compare things.

Obviously 99.99% of games would drop score wise as the year goes by. Some gems like Mario Bros. 3 still haven't aged in any sense, just amazing.

TL;DR: I'd give SM64 a 9.5, but it's a game that I could not replay today due to how horrible ( by today's standards ) the controls & camera is. If you are arguing that at the time what you said still applied, i.e. bad game, then you're crazy :P

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

SM64 is one of thee most overated games ever. It has not aged well, its nothing special either. Its a 1 dimensional game that people seem to think is amazing because its 3D. It lack the cohesiveness and fluidity in level design present in like every other mario game, the camera is atrocious amd its approaching least creatively striking Mario game ever. SMG2 is not only a better game, its actually a good game.

SuperFlakeman

You don't rate games based on how they are gonna age lol. At the time, those things such as the camera where good, considering there's no second analog stick and that it was the "first" 3D game. The game isn't broken dude, it's just outdated.

So yeah score wise, I give scores for older games based on what I would give them at the I played them for the first time, around release. But to say that SM64 is a better game than the Galaxy games is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. For instance scoring SM64 10 and Galaxy 9.5 wouldn't bother me, but to say that 64 is superior is like wtf.

That's why I think it's hard to rate older gen games as you have to relate the game to other games during its time, on the hardware available and also consider the standards at the time. Everything is relative, not absolute. I can make any game seem like a masterpiece and simultaneously the worst game ever, it all depends how you compare things.

Obviously 99.99% of games would drop score wise as the year goes by. Some gems like Mario Bros. 3 still haven't aged in any sense, just amazing.

TL;DR: I'd give SM64 a 9.5, but it's a game that I could not replay today due to how horrible ( by today's standards ) the controls & camera is. If you are arguing that at the time what you said still applied, i.e. bad game, then you're crazy :P

Super Mario Galaxy 1 and 2 is awesome

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

SM64 is one of thee most overated games ever. It has not aged well, its nothing special either. Its a 1 dimensional game that people seem to think is amazing because its 3D. It lack the cohesiveness and fluidity in level design present in like every other mario game, the camera is atrocious amd its approaching least creatively striking Mario game ever. SMG2 is not only a better game, its actually a good game.

SuperFlakeman

You don't rate games based on how they are gonna age lol. At the time, those things such as the camera where good, considering there's no second analog stick and that it was the "first" 3D game. The game isn't broken dude, it's just outdated.

So yeah score wise, I give scores for older games based on what I would give them at the I played them for the first time, around release. But to say that SM64 is a better game than the Galaxy games is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. For instance scoring SM64 10 and Galaxy 9.5 wouldn't bother me, but to say that 64 is superior is like wtf.

That's why I think it's hard to rate older gen games as you have to relate the game to other games during its time, on the hardware available and also consider the standards at the time. Everything is relative, not absolute. I can make any game seem like a masterpiece and simultaneously the worst game ever, it all depends how you compare things.

Obviously 99.99% of games would drop score wise as the year goes by. Some gems like Mario Bros. 3 still haven't aged in any sense, just amazing.

TL;DR: I'd give SM64 a 9.5, but it's a game that I could not replay today due to how horrible ( by today's standards ) the controls & camera is. If you are arguing that at the time what you said still applied, i.e. bad game, then you're crazy :P

Even when SM64 came out I thought it wasn't anything special. But right now the game has aged like a piece of crap and time moves forward not backwards. I don't care what was "good" back then (even if I was able to see it wasn't very good). True;y great games remain great no matter what time has past, some things will degrade with time like graphical wow but in a genre like platforming, level design certainly is not one of them and SM64's was terribad. I'm also not giving a game a 9.5 because the technology isn't there yet. That's dumb, if you can't work within your limits to create something that is universally good you do not deserve a high score. SM64 is no 9.5 game now or back then.

Your post was invalis as soon as I read "First 3D game"Captainqwark10

It was the first 3D game played with an analog stick and could move the camera independently of the character.

It sort of set the standard as a whole for 3D games, there wasn't one pre SM64. Every 3D game after that is based on Mario 64.

Even when SM64 came out I thought it wasn't anything special. But right now the game has aged like a piece of crap and time moves forward not backwards. I don't care what was "good" back then (even if I was able to see it wasn't very good). True;y great games remain great no matter what time has past, some things will degrade with time like graphical wow but in a genre like platforming, level design certainly is not one of them and SM64's was terribad. I'm also not giving a game a 9.5 because the technology isn't there yet. That's dumb, if you can't work within your limits to create something that is universally good you do not deserve a high score. SM64 is no 9.5 game now or back then.

ActicEdge

I remember loving it then. Played it first at a friends who just got it, and after that I told my parents to sell my SNES and all my games (which sounds crazy now) to afford N64 with Mario 64. :P Back then I viewed consoles as upgrades, now I really regret selling all those old systems.

I never got 120 stars, too hard for me lol

I never really like SM64. I enjoyed it a little when it first came out, but I instantly missed games like SMB3, SMW, and Yoshis Island. I felt Mario was doomed when I played SM64. Even after that I never got into 3d platformers that much. Tried them all and never enjoyed them like the good old 2d days, but the SMG games changed that somehow. I cant explain why.

As a whole I still prefer 2d platformers, but SMG2 is my favorite platformer of all time. Its that one strange exception lol.

On the subject of sm64 being overrated doodoo, I agree :P Always thought spyro 2 and 3 were better. come at me bros. SilverChimera

Spyro 2 yeah. Spyro 3 was a step back from 2. Took mini games to the extreme when playing as spyro was the best part of Spyro. There is only so many **** mini games you can take before you just start getting annoyed. Yeah boxing was fun, so was skate boardbing and subs. Other then that it really was a game lacking focus a lot of the time. (I really like the game though and it is better then Spyro 1). I think Crash Bandicoot 3 and Spyro 2 were the best platformers on the PS1. C2, C3, S2, S3 all aged better then SM64 but SM64 was better then the first in those series. Crash 1 sucked hard. Spyro 1 was a mess.

How many of you guys played super mario galaxy? 1 or 2. I feel like even if you dont really like platformers or nintendo smg is a must play game of the generation.

your thoughts?

jettpack

[QUOTE="jettpack"]

How many of you guys played super mario galaxy? 1 or 2. I feel like even if you dont really like platformers or nintendo smg is a must play game of the generation.

your thoughts?

mastercheifxbox

xD

You go do that bud.

/oblivious

As a whole I still prefer 2d platformers, but SMG2 is my favorite platformer of all time. Its that one strange exception lol.

Wiimotefan

This is how I feel aswell.

[QUOTE="jettpack"]

How many of you guys played super mario galaxy? 1 or 2. I feel like even if you dont really like platformers or nintendo smg is a must play game of the generation.

your thoughts?

mastercheifxbox

Skipping out on probably the best SP around to play one of the worst? Damn, I will never understand people.

I have second one only. Am I safe?funsohng

[QUOTE="funsohng"]I have second one only. Am I safe?godzillavskong

The first one is an amazing game, but after playing 2 it might not seem that way. Still a lot of fun and definitely worth a play.

[QUOTE="mastercheifxbox"][QUOTE="jettpack"]

How many of you guys played super mario galaxy? 1 or 2. I feel like even if you dont really like platformers or nintendo smg is a must play game of the generation.

your thoughts?

ActicEdge

Skipping out on probably the best SP around to play one of the worst? Damn, I will never understand people.

why is he playing the black ops singleplayer, IT BASICALLY PLAYS ITSELF