Joy in a box.
| Platform | OVERALL |
|---|---|
| Wii | 9.80 |
| Overall | 9.80 |
|
Mario. That name means so much to so many of us gamers. To some it's just a game they played a long time ago. To many others it is a symbol of gaming at it's purest, a game with the sole purpose to entertain, to have FUN. The first Galaxy took the 3D Mario formula and changed it forever, making it more like the old school Mario games we all grew up with. Super Mario Galaxy 2 is the refinement of that formula and takes us back even further into the design philosophy of the very best old Mario games. I am going to assume everyone reading this has played Galaxy, if not you are a horrible human being, go away. :P You know it has perfect controls, you know the levels play with gravity and you know how it looks. Galaxy 2 takes all those elements and builds upon it with more focused level design and better powerups. The levels are more streamlined than ever. I can think of maybe two levels in the entire game that had the open level design of Mario 64, those were interesting when 3D was new but now those kinds of levels offer unfocused gameplay. The genius of this game is that the 3D levels play out almost like 2D ones. There are moments in the first Galaxy that felt this way this but for Galaxy 2 it's the entire game. The wizards at Nintendo effortlessly transition from 3D to 2D back to 3D and none of it feels any different. I cannot stress enough how amazing the level design of these levels are, I feel like it is 3D platforming perfected. There are nearly 50 unique Galaxies in this game, of course the standard 120 stars, and somehow nearly all of the stars offer a level or objective that brings something new to the table. The amount of variety in this game is staggering. 100 stars in and you are being introduced to a new gameplay element, it's crazy. A lot of the variety is possible because of all the new power ups and the return of Yoshi. Yoshi controls exactly how you would dream Yoshi would control, this is not crappy pointless Sunshine Yoshi. His levels have a distinct feel to them and they all use Yoshi's particular skill set, which mostly means his tongue. There are levels where you eat special fruit which gives Yoshi new powers like the yellow fruit which reveals hidden platforms. Mario has new suits and they all bring something unique to the table. The cloud suit is by far the best one; this power up needs to be in the Mario hall of fame. How have we played Mario games without it? Many of my favorite levels involve the use of the cloud suit, which if you are a savvy gamer, can be used to create shortcuts. This game has a far better collection of powerups than the previous game and uses the suits from that game in better ways albeit more sparingly. In fact Galaxy 2 makes the bee suit awesome, that is a special achievement in my book. The level select screen is now streamlined to a more SMB3 style map which makes going from level to level easier than ever. Sure it removes the hub but lets face it, the hub in Galaxy was completely pointless, might as well remove it. There are far more unique galaxies than in the first, the game flows almost like an old school Mario game with new levels constantly unlocking after completing one. It can become overwhelming at times as you have so many levels to choose from, many times I was like "I want to play this! oh but that looks awesome! Oh how about that one!" It feels like a giant box of chocolates with so many delicious choices and you really never know what you are going to get. Because the game has more levels, it also means each galaxy has less stars, this time 3 per galaxy at max. Here is the biggest complaint I have about Galaxy 2, not all stars are created equal. They never were but they never stood out as much as they did in Galaxy 2. Each galaxy has one main star, which is basically the true level. The majority of galaxies have an additional hidden star and a comet star. The hidden star isn't really hidden, its usually a fat luma asking for coins which transports you to a simple section leading to a new star. The comet is of course the same level but with a challenge added on top. Many levels have some mini game as one of the star objectives, something like kill a certain amount of enemies in a certain time or burn boxes. I kind of felt like each galaxy had one real star, only one time to explore the gameplay of that section. So many incredible gameplay elements never get reused again cause they are only used in one galaxy and only for that one simple star. You are constantly moving from galaxy to galaxy and trying new things without ever fully exploring one element. The levels feel too short and concepts feel like they get overlooked. It's like having the largest appetizer sampler but never having the meal. Maybe the game should have slowed down a bit, maybe adding more stars per level was the way to go as it allows the designers to fully explore all the possibilities of that level. It hurts even more when some galaxies are below average, mainly the water ones. Why couldn't I get more stars in this extremely well done galaxy instead of getting this poorly made boring galaxy? For most of the game it felt like the game design was still being held back by a desire to make a game that everyone can finish. It's all a bit too easy and it's not until the end where Nintendo basically made levels for advanced gamers, I wanted a whole game like that. It's not a game without it's faults but in the areas where it matters, gameplay and level design, for the most part it is flat out better than Galaxy 1. I feel like the game would have benefited from doing away with stars. It is almost structured like an old school Mario game, so why not take away the stars? Enough of the mini games and comets, just make levels. Musically this is the best Mario soundtrack ever, in fact its one of the best game soundtracks of all time. Huge epic orchestral pieces that feel like they should be in a big budget movie, not a simple platformer. yet it retains the catchy vibe, the hummable quality that I love about game music. Visually it is a better looking SMG, it clearly looks cleaner on an HDTV. It is simply the best looking Wii game. There is so much ORIGINAL content in this game that it will keep you playing for 30+ hours easily. The majority of you will not be able to finish it cause you will give up. Super Mario Galaxy 2 is a sequel that is better than it's predecessor but not to the extent where everyone can safetly say that "it is a way better game". All it does is build on what is there before so that magic I felt playing Galaxy for the first time was absent. I think the perfect comparison between the two Galaxy games is the comparison between Super Mario Bros. 3 and Super Mario World. Both are all time classics, both represent Mario at it's peak and while World seems to have the edge in terms of respect, there are plenty of SMB3 fans. What matters most is that there is no loser between the two, they are both masterpieces. I think Galaxy 1 and 2 will be viewed in the same manner, two incredible masterpieces that will compliment each other for all time. |
|
Posted by Dvader Thu, 03 Jun 2010 22:07:11
Okay. Yeah, cause the Luna feeding was required in the first one to unlock enough stars (at least the way I played it).
Cool, good reviwe man, and it really was spoiler free.
SMW is better than SMB3.
Hence this review is not worth the paper it's written on.
Oh wait, there is no paper so it's completely worthless.
Just kidding man, nice reading that. Can't believe it's out in 7 days from now.
Flop.
Poor example? Seriously.
Check this out
"TP is a sequel that is better than it's predecessor but not to the extent where everyone can safetly say that "it is a way better game". All it does is build on what is there before so that magic I felt playing OOT for the first time was absent."
But guess what you gave TP a 10! That is inconsistent, they both build one the previous games. Yet review wise only Galaxy 2 was docked points. This is inconsistent.
It not just you, I see it everywhere. For instance Virtual Fighter 4 or 5, did not get 9s because the lack of good single player. Yet SF4, comes out and none even mentions the single player portion.
And the excuse I am just human is pretty weak. So we should not even try? What the hell man.
Galaxy 2 has issues that go beyond it being like Galaxy 1, plus SMG wasn't a 10 for me, I wanted a bit more out of it. Two different series, two different genres and two different levels of quality. The comparison does NOT work.
I am not comparing across genres. I am comparing OoT to Tp. Did you even read the example I gave you?
The critique more of the same can me applied to all genres. And it is still a 10 is a stupid argument. does that mean that not all 10s are created equally? So why not give the lower 10s, a lower score?
And Zelda TP is not the best Zelda in every aspect. It is not the most side quest heavy (that would be Majora), nor has it the best story (windwaker) or has the best characters (Majora again), nor is it the most revolutionary (OoT, original Zelda) neither does it have the best exploration aspect (original Zelda). It has the best dungeons and combat, that is true.
So what do you have left. The game is not revolutionary, nor does it approve in all aspects to previous games. Nothing, so go ahead and call my arguments stupid.
P.s. I would not give Galaxy 2 a 10 either.
A 10 is a 10, its not a science its just a number, its just a feeling, a sort of award meaning I want to give that game the highest "score" or honor or whatever you want to call it. It is not perfect, and yes there can be games that I give 10s that I like more than others, what the all have in common is that I feel they represent an absolute masterpiece and is one of my favorite games ever.
Galaxy and Galaxy 2 are very close to that but I didn't feel it for various reasons. In the end its not meant to be broken down scientifically or anything, its just a feeling, a reaction.
"TP is better game than galaxy so they don't deserve the same score"
"Iga the TP does not work, it is a crap example. You are comparing games across genres, games of different quality levels."
Who's the one comparing across genres?
Just because you give a game a lower score than another game across the genres, does not mean that you like the game you scored higher more. It just means you have a certain genre preference. TP princess did not deserve a 10 if we would use the same logic consistently. That is comparing it to other games of the genre and not compared to Galaxy.
"A 10 is a 10, its not a science its just a number, its just a feeling, a sort of award meaning I want to give that game the highest "score" or honor or whatever you want to call it."
A number is used to quantify things, it is used in science and not to display emotions. Basically if you want to show emotions do not use numbers. If you do be prepared to be argued against with logic.