[QUOTE="super600"][QUOTE="Captainqwark10"]Now, I want serious answers here. Do YOU think, and I mean REALLY think, while looking at other games on the syste, heck not just on that system, do you REALLY THINK SMG2 deserves all of the critical praise it got> Think about this now. Because when I saw the game get high scores of 10/10 and all this praise about being one of the best ever made I seriously had my Wii out the window about to throw it as I thought the world had freaking gone crazy. I personally do not believe how this game got this much praise when it came out. Eventually becoming more popular and getting these hard to believe reviews. To me, the game was a step back and I cannot find one reason, not even an explanation from somebody that likes the game, that is enough of a reason to prove to me why this game got all it's godly reputation from. I think it has to do with the fact that most Wii games are indeed lacking. They are poor, and every game no matter who releases it, that is better than the large pile of lacking games, will instantly be overrated. I am even talking about the first SMG, which I still think is better than the 2 even though I also think that was overrated. But that's just an opinion. What's yours?Captainqwark10
Literally everything about the game was amazing.The graphics and art style were incredible, the gameplay was creative and fun in literally all the main 122 starmissions(even though the green stars were the weakest part of the game),the final mission was a brutal test in SMG2 gameplay,thesoundtrackis incredible and can't be matchedby any Wii game
Ok, While we are shouting opinions i will attack them anyway just so I am clearer. The Graphics were not amazing. It looked good but not to the point were I would even give them an 8. The game looks honestly like something that can be done/or close to being done by the GC. Also, a bit blocky at times. Art Style? Art Styles doesn't make the game, espeically when it looks simillar to other games in the SAME series. The gameplay was creative? Other than adding a Yoshi it is the same game I have played since SM64 with minimal upgrades. Fun is an opinion, but I think that's what's blocking people from seeing the flaw of the game that I will not be listing as it is long. The soundtrack? God I hope that's not why you buy games. Awesome game, and undeniably a 9.0 or higher, but giving it a 10 is quite a stretch (I try and reserve 10 for special occasions). I go back and forth between 9 and 9.5 for the game. My issues are the lack of a good hub world, lack of difficulty in most areas (some are brutal), and a couple other things. SM64 is still my favorite by far.
Adding: Very Linear, Some objects look like they were ripped from earlier games. Fuzzy, We have been collecting stars for how long now? Actually, what has this game done to improve the first game in ANYWAY is really my question.Graphics like on the GameCube? Um, did you ever play any GameCube games? Really just compare the game to Super Mario Sunshine, and that should be all that you need to know that Galaxy 2 looks WAY better.
"SM64 with minimal upgrades"? I didn't know that Super Mario 64 had spherical planets and gravity in it. Not to mention completely different power-ups, Yoshi, and tons of other new gameplay elements like, oh yeah - 2D levels.
Yes, it was pretty linear - but then again so was Super Mario Bros. 3, which is also one of the highest-rated games of all time. If you don't like that, fine - but that alone doesn't make it bad.
We've been collecting stars for 15 years since Super Mario 64 came out, and I can't wait to do it again. It's a ton of fun.
Super Mario Galaxy 2 improved on the original by introducing TONS of new gameplay elements. Every level had you doing something new - something that was not true of the first game. Every star was a new idea. That lent the game a sense of discovery and anticipation - that's why I personally never got bored while playing it. That's what makes it such a great game, and why it got so much praise.
Log in to comment