Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
It appears that you are using ad block :'(
Hey, we get it. However this website is run by and for the community... and it needs ads in order to keep running.
Please disable your adblock on Smashboards, or go premium to hide all advertisements and this notice. Alternatively, this ad may have just failed to load. Woops!
No, it isn't, it's my opinion.
Trolling is for the purpose of causing a reaction.
I don't want people to get all up in arms, I'm just saying what I think this is.
Shovelware with Mario slapped on it.
Hell, they could have at least come up with a better name.
Galaxy 2?
Just no.
But the final battle with Bowser is what makes it a Mario game! People might get upset if Bowser wasn't the final boss, and I know Nintendo doesn't want their fans to get upset.
No, it isn't, it's my opinion.
Trolling is for the purpose of causing a reaction.
I don't want people to get all up in arms, I'm just saying what I think this is.
Every game with Mario and Sonic in it (except Brawl).
I see where you're coming from in saying that it didn't take them much time to develop since the engine is already in place and a lot of the levels I'm sure are going to be ideas that didn't fit into Mario Galaxy 1, but that doesn't mean it's going to suck by any means. In fact, using the logic of "they didn't have to build the engine from the ground up so it must be terrible", a large majority of the great games that use the Unreal 3 engine (Bioshock, Gears, Mass Effect, MK vs DS, Batman: Arkham Asylum, Lost Odyssey, Mirror's Edge, Rainbow Six Vegas, and UT obvioulsy) must be bad, right? Now, admittedly not every game that uses the UT3 engine is good (50 Cent's new game used it), but still, look at it from a production standpoint: it's cheaper to use an existing engine for your game and focus on the rest of the game later than it is to write one from scratch. Twilight Princess used a heavily modified version of the Wind Waker engine and it was FAR from shovelware (aside from the obvious porting of everything but the controls to the Wii).
Hell, they could have at least come up with a better name.
Galaxy 2?
Just no.
I know right? Games that only have numbers after their names are terrible and unoriginal. Just look at all the sequels to Resident Evil, Final Fantasy, the NES Mario games, the God of War games, the Bioshock games, and just about every other game series out there. Those games were ****.
OH WAIT, THEY TOTALLY WEREN'T.
Allow me to get Shakespearian on you:
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose,
By any other word would smell as sweet"
Furthemore, allow me to supplement that with a philosophical musing from Dracula:
"What is a name?! A miserable pile of secrets! But enough talk, have at you!"
My point being that Nintendo could really call it anything and it would sell well and likely be a great game too.
You know, it's odd that people would complain about Galaxy 2. Most games don't reinvent themselves with every sequel, but Mario makes a habbit out of it. Maybe that's why there's a little disappointment?
I don't get what the problem is. After Galaxy, it was pretty hard to imagine where Mario could possibly go from there without a major overhaul. It pretty much perfected level / platforming design for 3D Mario, so it makes sense that they are redoing the mechanics but with new gameplay elements (like Yoshi). If they keep everything that worked before but add upon it and make it a little harder then it'll be great. After Galaxy 2 though, they are gonna need to think of something else...
You know, it's odd that people would complain about Galaxy 2. Most games don't reinvent themselves with every sequel, but Mario makes a habbit out of it. Maybe that's why there's a little disappointment?
Basically, Mario hasn't had a numerical sequel with an identical engine since.....the NES. Up to now, every Mario platforming sequel has been much different from it's predeccessor (even Sunshne with FLUDD). So people expecting some vastly new Mario platformer may be dissapointed.
Can't see why can't they be happy we are getting a new 3D Mario game instead of the usual long drought in between releases.
☆ Galaxy's have the best graphics on the Wii so they shouldn't complain from the get-go. I just hate to wait until 2010 to get this game. This better be released around at least early Spring.☆
Every game with Mario and Sonic in it (except Brawl).
I see where you're coming from in saying that it didn't take them much time to develop since the engine is already in place and a lot of the levels I'm sure are going to be ideas that didn't fit into Mario Galaxy 1, but that doesn't mean it's going to suck by any means. In fact, using the logic of "they didn't have to build the engine from the ground up so it must be terrible", a large majority of the great games that use the Unreal 3 engine (Bioshock, Gears, Mass Effect, MK vs DS, Batman: Arkham Asylum, Lost Odyssey, Mirror's Edge, Rainbow Six Vegas, and UT obvioulsy) must be bad, right? Now, admittedly not every game that uses the UT3 engine is good (50 Cent's new game used it), but still, look at it from a production standpoint: it's cheaper to use an existing engine for your game and focus on the rest of the game later than it is to write one from scratch. Twilight Princess used a heavily modified version of the Wind Waker engine and it was FAR from shovelware (aside from the obvious porting of everything but the controls to the Wii).
I know right? Games that only have numbers after their names are terrible and unoriginal. Just look at all the sequels to Resident Evil, Final Fantasy, the NES Mario games, the God of War games, the Bioshock games, and just about every other game series out there. Those games were ****.
OH WAIT, THEY TOTALLY WEREN'T.
Allow me to get Shakespearian on you:
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose,
By any other word would smell as sweet"
Furthemore, allow me to supplement that with a philosophical musing from Dracula:
"What is a name?! A miserable pile of secrets! But enough talk, have at you!"
My point being that Nintendo could really call it anything and it would sell well and likely be a great game too.
Cool story bro.
The word opinion doesn't seem to quite penetrate your skull.
Please stfu and stop trying to force your opinions down my throat, because I just don't care to be persuaded.
Also, it's not so much that it's running on the same engine more than it's just a complete f***ing rehash of the EXACT same concept.
No, it isn't, it's my opinion.
Trolling is for the purpose of causing a reaction.
I don't want people to get all up in arms, I'm just saying what I think this is.
Shovelware with Mario slapped on it.
Hell, they could have at least come up with a better name.
Galaxy 2?
Just no.
There's too much "You shouldn't complain" in this thread, to be honest. Not EVERYONE thought Galaxy was the best game ever. Just because you do doesn't give you the right to tell people that they're trolls/shouldn't dislike the game for whatever reason...
Apparently, when it comes to this game, opinions are irrelevant.
Mm, doesn't make me like the game any more. I wouldn't even dislike it if it weren't the most overrated game of this generation, but it's average in my opinion as it is.
(And if fanboys flame me out of here I'm going to kill someone.)
Haha I actually thought you were serious when I read the first half of that sentence.
I'm about to make myself very unpopular and agree with Teran and Firius. I didn't find Galaxy to be very fun because not only does it unecessarily repeat themes found in other mario games but it takes a few steps back as a series.
For those of you who haven't played Sunshine you should check out the cutscenes on youtube. Sunshine had fantastically animated and fully voiced cutscenes. Imagine my dissapointment when Galaxy went back to text bubbles.
Sunshine may not have been a perfect game. Yet it showed a honest effort by the devs to progress the series by implementing the cutscenes and a new gameplay mechanic in FLUDD. This was very appreciated by fans who have been playing Mario for years now.
Some of us just aren't excited that we are getting a direct sequel, meaning we are going to be seeing the same exact thing that we already played in a franchise that already seems to suffer from overfamiliarity.
Haha I actually thought you were serious when I read the first half of that sentence.
I'm about to make myself very unpopular and agree with Teran and Firius. I didn't find Galaxy to be very fun because not only does it unecessarily repeat themes found in other mario games but it takes a few steps back as a series.
For those of you who haven't played Sunshine you should check out the cutscenes on youtube. Sunshine had fantastically animated and fully voiced cutscenes. Imagine my dissapointment when Galaxy went back to text bubbles.
Sunshine may not have been a perfect game. Yet it showed a honest effort by the devs to progress the series by implementing the cutscenes and a new gameplay mechanic in FLUDD. This was very appreciated by fans who have been playing Mario for years now.
Some of us just aren't excited that we are getting a direct sequel, meaning we are going to be seeing the same exact thing that we already played in a franchise that already seems to suffer from overfamiliarity.
I really enjoyed SMS. The cut scenes were pretty good and it added some pretty big steps for mario platformers. I would have loved to have seen those type of cutscenes and voice acting in SMG. It would have looked really great because of the whole space feel.
The new gameplay was also really great. FLUDD was a lot of fun to use and it had some interesting uses through out the game. Galaxy on the other hand left it's new inventions like ghost Mario and Bee Mario only appear once in a while. Plus, they seemed tacked on and weren't really as big as FLUDD was.
Other then that I enjoyed galaxy. There were some other minor flaws but the game IMO was still fun to play, just not up the SM64 and Sunshine standards.
I hope galaxy 2 fixes some of these things. By including yoshi it's already fixed some of it so that at least has me happy.
Maybe add something else. I don't know, I just feel that galaxy needs that extra thing like FLUDD to make it awesome. We didn't see it in the trailer but I really wish they added that "push" to it to make it from good to great.
A game doesn't have to reinvent an engine for me to be happy with it. I enjoyed 64 greatly, Sunshine a little less, and Galaxy a little more than Sunshine but not as much. Galaxy was fun to me, sorry if it wasn't to you, but don't try and tell me that it wasn't a good game, because in my opinion, it was, and in your opinion (which frankly, I really don't care what you think) it wasn't, so let it be.
Engines are meh, as long as I have fun with the game, it doesn't matter if it's similar or not similar to it's predecessor.
Case and point: Pokemon, Pikmin, F-Zero, Snowboard Kids (Lawl, like anyone knows that this is?), Wave Racer, Space Invaders, Pac-Man, Early Super Mario games, Punch Out, I could really go on.
None of these games differ greatly with their prequels, but I still liked 'em.
So who cares if it's the same? I liked the first, I'll most likely enjoy this one.
♫This game basically confirmed my long lost thought that the story line wasn't completed. It was that very thought that I kind of knew that there was going to be another Mario game that sequel this, kind of like Mario Sunshine needed a sequel , and I clam that Mario Galaxy is that sequel .☼
Cool story bro.
The word opinion doesn't seem to quite penetrate your skull.
Please stfu and stop trying to force your opinions down my throat, because I just don't care to be persuaded.
Also, it's not so much that it's running on the same engine more than it's just a complete f***ing rehash of the EXACT same concept.
I wasn't aware in depth information was revealed. All I knew about was a minute or so long teaser trailer. Since, obviously, with the level of complete rejection you're getting, you must know for sure that the gameplay has no real difference whatsoever, I'd be glad to hear what you know that we don't.
The reason people seem to be so against your idea seems to be that you're not giving any real reasoning. Your just calling it shovelware, and deriding it as being uninspired and exactly the same, and then saying the basic equivalent of "it's my opinion, go to hell" when people call you out on it. Which would be fine if you just said "I don't like the idea," but instead you're giving definitive statements based on little actual information.
In any case, all the first few Mario games had the same premise, with new elements added to each one, and the difference between Galaxy 1 and 2, from the little I've seen, seems to be similar to the difference between Super Mario Bros 3 and Super Mario World. Same foundation, with the preexisting gameplay elements being evolved, with some new quirks thrown in. Both of those ended up being amazing games, and I'm willing to believe the same will hold true for Super Mario Galaxy 2, as well.
♫It better be, the last boss on the first one was cake easy, and I find the second Bowser battle to be the hardest over all, and that wasn't too hard. Nintendo needs more hardcore games to cover 2008 mistake.☼
I hope galaxy 2 fixes some of these things. By including yoshi it's already fixed some of it so that at least has me happy.
Maybe add something else. I don't know, I just feel that galaxy needs that extra thing like FLUDD to make it awesome. We didn't see it in the trailer but I really wish they added that "push" to it to make it from good to great.
For sure, even if Galaxy wasn't my favorite Mario game it wasn't a bad game by any means.
I'm not going to condemn Galaxy 2 before playing it. Even if I don't end up liking it I will at least try if for no other reason than Yoshi is back! Yoshi is my favorite Nintendo character so I just hope he gets more use than Sunshine and that he won't drown.
Maybe if Yoshi is able to continue with you ,something we haven't seen since SMW, he can be that "thing" that makes Galaxy 2 special or different.
A game doesn't have to reinvent an engine for me to be happy with it. I enjoyed 64 greatly, Sunshine a little less, and Galaxy a little more than Sunshine but not as much. Galaxy was fun to me, sorry if it wasn't to you, but don't try and tell me that it wasn't a good game, because in my opinion, it was, and in your opinion (which frankly, I really don't care what you think) it wasn't, so let it be.
Engines are meh, as long as I have fun with the game, it doesn't matter if it's similar or not similar to it's predecessor.
Case and point: Pokemon, Pikmin, F-Zero, Snowboard Kids (Lawl, like anyone knows that this is?), Wave Racer, Space Invaders, Pac-Man, Early Super Mario games, Punch Out, I could really go on.
None of these games differ greatly with their prequels, but I still liked 'em.
So who cares if it's the same? I liked the first, I'll most likely enjoy this one.
♫I'll have enough balls to say that Galaxy was better than Sunshine: storyline, gameplay wise. I'll agree that Super Mario 64 is better most of the way than Galaxy.☼
See, now I know you're trolling. HAHA NEVERMIND IT'S YOUR OPINION RIGHT SO IT'S OK FOR YOU TO SH*T ON THINGS THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE LIKED JUST BECAUSE YOU THINK IT'S BAD WHICH MEANS THAT YOU CAN CALL IT SHOVELWARE RIGHT?
I don't care if you didn't like Super Mario Galaxy or not, I'm just insulted that you dared to call it shovelware, especially given the amount of Wii titles that actually are shovelware, like Carnival Games and every other equivalent. Shovelware by definition is just sh*t that uses some other means to capitalize on success, like 90% of all movie games coming out when the film is in theaters or a party game collection boasting it has over 9000 minigames. Because these games will likely make money for these seemingly stupid reasons, development time is often rushed (sometimes it seems like most of it's ignored) and the game comes out with graphics that range from "meh" to "blech", poorly thought out or implemented gameplay mechanics, control issues, and glitches like crazy. You could argue that a lot of Mario games do just to mooch off the success of Mario, and in all fairness that is largely true in the case of Mario Sports, Mario Party, etc.
But Mario Galaxy was not one of those games and had none of the symptoms of shovelware. It's graphics were phenomenal, regardless of whether you think it's best on the Wii or not (and there are several games that can compare to it in this category now). Gameplay mechanics were simple but worked very well and all the powerups were fun to use (except that dumb spring one) and spread sparingly so that they would not become overly common to the point of mediocrity which would make you look forward to a level because you got to be Fire Mario instead of just playing through a level and saying "oh, a fire flower, I guess I should pick it up even though I just collected 3 **yawn**". Controls worked great, although a lot of people did say it would work just as well with a GCN controller, which I can kind of see but I ultimately disagree with because I find shooting star bits easier with the Wii remote (a feature that's rarely useful but still nice to have). Also, I've only seen 2 glitches in all of Mario Galaxy, one of which isn't fatal or game-breaking in any way (you go inside a house on one of the planetoids in some Galaxy), and the other one can cause minor problems but I've never run into it on 2 playthroughs so I assume it's not that common (it has something to do with getting stuck somewhere, idk).
Being irritated by Nintento using Mario as a universal company mascot is one thing, but calling a MAIN SERIES Mario game shovelware is completely different.
Also, it's not so much that it's running on the same engine more than it's just a complete f***ing rehash of the EXACT same concept.
Oh. In that case, a lot of the stuff I said still applies. Seriously.
Think of it this way: If someone gave you a sandwich and you said "Hey, this is a pretty good sandwich; It's not perfect and I've had better, but it's pretty good" and they offered you another sandwich that looked similar to the last one, would you say "No, this sandwich looks too much like the last one so I'm going to use judgment on the relatively small amount of information I have on the upcoming sandwich and decline it, even though the last sandwich I ate that looked like it seemed pretty good". If you would, have fun starving while I get fed.
I wasn't aware in depth information was revealed. All I knew about was a minute or so long teaser trailer. Since, obviously, with the level of complete rejection you're getting, you must know for sure that the gameplay has no real difference whatsoever, I'd be glad to hear what you know that we don't.
The reason people seem to be so against your idea seems to be that you're not giving any real reasoning. Your just calling it shovelware, and deriding it as being uninspired and exactly the same, and then saying the basic equivalent of "it's my opinion, go to hell" when people call you out on it. Which would be fine if you just said "I don't like the idea," but instead you're giving definitive statements based on little actual information.
^^This also basically accurately sums up my thoughts on your argument. I would like to hear at least one legit thing you didn't like about Mario Galaxy (ie. not "the name is dumb" or "it has Mario in it"). In fact, let me go ahead and write your post for you.
Seriously though, if you give me a legit complaint as to why you don't like Mario Galaxy instead of just saying you don't like it without justifying it I will drop this entire argument.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This concludes the rage part of the post. We now return you to our regularly scheduled glee.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone is always saying that Mario Galaxy is "soooo easy", but I've gotten all 120 stars (with Mario) and gotta say, the last 10 or 15 are extremely difficult to get (I was stuck for so long on the Melty Molten Galaxy Daredevil run, don't even get me started). I agree that the first 80 stars or so were easy or moderate at best, but the ones in particular that stand out in my mind are the hard ones I was stuck on for what felt like (and probably was) months. I was still able to persevere and get 120 stars with Mario and >100 stars with Luigi, so I guess in the end it wasn't that hard, but still, I felt it kept a decent balance near the end. As for boss battles, they were easy and they re-used most of them, but that's not really why I play Mario games in the first place.
Still, I feel inclined to ask, both for personal curiosity and for the sake of the discussion: How far did everyone get in Mario Galaxy? By "how far" I mean how many stars. From what you guys are saying, I'm guessing a lot of you got to 60, beat Bowser, and stopped?
As for comparing it to other games, I think I should, starting with Mario Sunshine. Before I do though, let me just say that these are all great games and I enjoyed them a lot.
I loved Super Mario Sunshine when I first played it and it was definitely one of my favorite games from the Gamecube era. I had tons of fun with the FLUDD and all its nozzles, especially the Turbo nozzle. It also had good scenery, even if it wasn't very diverse, and the graphics were very impressive for its time. I also liked the cutscenes, particularly the "Mama Peach" scene, which I found hilarious. However, playing Mario Galaxy made me realize that the FLUDD was used so much I came to rely on it like a crutch, and in the levels where Shadow Mario swipes it away I often had trouble for this reason since before if I missed a jump I could hover back to safety and try again as long as I had enough water whereas without the FLUDD I would die. I guess Mario Galaxy is still kind of guilty with this due to the spin attack, but the difference is that the FLUDD is required for a large majority of the levels in Mario Galaxy. As for the cutscenes, I missed them a lot at first too, but then a friend reminded me that all Mario games basically have the same plot anyway (Bowser and Affiliates capture Princess Peach for no significant reason). Sunshine mixed it up at first with Shadow Mario and the mystery behind his identity, but eventually (SPOILERS)
it turns out to be Bowser's son
which you find out like 1/4 of the way through the game (in fact, doesn't she get captured before then too?). On top of that, Mario Galaxy has Rosalina's storybook, which, though sad, provided a nice break from the main story (which you generally knew the outcome of). Also, and this is just personal, I thought it was a tad too hard at times and I did think it was irritating how you HAD to reach the Shadow Mario levels in each area before you got to Bowser whereas with Mario Galaxy and Mario 64 you had more freedom as to where you got your stars. I do appreciate Nintendo trying to mix it up though, and all in all I think it's a good game, just not as good as Galaxy.
As for Mario 64...I feel like I shouldn't talk about it because I never owned an N64 and thus didn't play it until the DS remake. Still, I thought it was a great game and it was easily better than many of the other platformers on the N64 and PS1 (and GCN, PS2, Xbox...hell, it's one of the best platformers of all time and basically invented the 3D platforming genre). I thought the platforming was fun and varied, and even though I had the misfortune of having to throw Bowser with a control pad and stylus+touch screen instead of a control stick I still enjoyed fighting him. I guess because of N64 Bowser I can see why you guys are calling Mario Galaxy Bowser a pushover. N64 Bowser is harder by far (in fact, and I'll have to double check, I don't think I've actually beaten the game yet because of the irritations the final fight against him caused me). Ultimately though, I guess I can't really appreciate it's full amazingness that N64 owners felt by it since when I played it 3D platforming wasn't new to me but with the N64 it was. I have the same problem with Ocarina of Time - It's a phenomenal game but by the time I played it I was close to getting Wind Waker and I never really went back to it because I couldn't fully appreciate how revolutionary it was (that and the controls age poorly, but I digress).
So yeah, I loved Mario Sunshine and Mario 64, but I think Mario Galaxy is better. **shrugs** Can we all agree to disagree?
Also, does anyone think Rosalina might be in this game?
Is it just me or is Light House turning into /v/? Half the stuff I read about lately is OMG THIS GAME IS GOING TO BE SO TERRIBLE, and hating video games is a classic /v/ symptom.
I didn't like Galaxy 1 that much so I wont even bother with this one, but it is really stupid that they're releasing basically the same thing, same console etc. instead of coming up with a genuine story like each previous 3d mario title. I mean, do they really think Galaxy is the new age "thing" for mario, like how the early platformers were the norm, and sequentially numbered? I don't really see it.
I didn't like Galaxy 1 that much so I wont even bother with this one, but it is really stupid that they're releasing basically the same thing, same console etc. instead of coming up with a genuine story like each previous 3d mario title. I mean, do they really think Galaxy is the new age "thing" for mario, like how the early platformers were the norm, and sequentially numbered? I don't really see it.
Okay, can people stop saying that this game is going to be "the same" just because the engine is the same? Alot of games are sequels to games that hold the same principal "platforming" engines. Hell, most people agree that the 2-D Mario games were the best, and they all followed the same sort of platforming engine.
What you have to realize is that the game will not be the same as the first one. Not as much as you think, at least. I mean, we've seen ONE trailer, you could really have NO idea what is coming >_>.
Okay, can people stop saying that this game is going to be "the same" just because the engine is the same? Alot of games are sequels to games that hold the same principal "platforming" engines. Hell, most people agree that the 2-D Mario games were the best, and they all followed the same sort of platforming engine.
What you have to realize is that the game will not be the same as the first one. Not as much as you think, at least. I mean, we've seen ONE trailer, you could really have NO idea what is coming >_>.
Bowser King
