As part of my ongoing quest to please Beuli2, I am going to be doing a regular series of threads called "against the grain", bringing up news stories which are either overlooked or too big to miss...

However, I have received many messages from users who have commented on how much they enjoy this series. If I can just do that with this writing, then that's important to me. One day, I am to become a writer for this site, or another. Well, actually, I say this, but I'd prefer to be a moderator (so, Machina, if you're reading this!). I didn't really enjoy it beforehand, but I've been getting quite into it now!

Now, those of you with an attentive mind will remember this thread. If you don't then here it is:

http://www.x360magazine.com/360-is-better/why-super-mario-galaxy-would-be-better-on-360/

(Why Xbox is better. That site is so fanboy it's worrying. Comments are funny as well, look through them if you want a laugh. Just to clarify, this isn't "baiting" or anything. Just my opinion against an article which never should have been written in the first place)

So, why is Super Mario Galaxy 2 better on the 360? Here's my reasons:

...it isn't

What's that? You want value for money? Well then, fine. I'll explain more, but only because you asked nicely

You're probably also aware that, whenever the Wii (or, I suppose, any console really) gets an exclusive, it's instantly picked on by fanboys saying "but it would be so much better on the PS3!" etc. 

So now's your chance. Tell me, why would a game be so much better from one console and onto another?

Is it because it would look better? Because, last time I checked, graphics doesn't always equal quality. Example? How many people reading this consider Super Mario 64/Ocarina of Time to be some of the best games ever? Or, further back, the original 2D sonics and Marios? They certainly can't compare to modern games. Another example? OK, how many of you think this;

is better than this?

There's no denying the latter looks better, but the vast majority would say that FF7 is better than FF13

Another thing about the graphical fidelity is the fact it takes up so much room, time, and effort. FF13 was on 3 discs on the 360, yet had no towns, cities, NPC's etc. All it had was great graphics, no-one's denying that. But are all the sacrifices worth it? Just how much time and money was spent on FF13 again? I can't remember...

And anyway, does this game really look that bad, and how much more freedom do you have in it?

So, we can rule out the fact it's because of the improved graphics. So what other factors are there?

I think, in the end, it comes down to something mentioned in the original post (how good am I? It all links!) 

"Super Mario Galaxy 2 is, by all accounts, an absolute classic, generally being to ten out of tens what cake is to fat kids. There’s only one problem. It’s on the Wii."

That, ladies and gentlemen, is the real problem here. Not the graphics, not the controls, not the online, but fanboyism. People who have a PS3/360 don't want to get labelled as "that guy with the kiddy console" But surely all of the great games which have come out for it counteract the reason people won't get one, because it has "no games"? 

So, to close, my point is this. There are great games on all the consoles, don't get me wrong. But if there's a game, or many games, which you really want to get on that console, don't wish it to come out on another. Get the Wii if you don't already, you may be surprised. There is no way that any 1st Party Nintendo game will be released on any other console. So if you like the look of Galaxy 2, Monster Hunter Tri, Epic Mickey, Donkey Kong Country returns, Goldeneye etc. in that window, then you know what to do.

How would Super Mario Galaxy 2 be better on the 360? Answer: It wouldn't

Do you agree? As usual, post your response below!

The first part is both awesome and overly flamebait-ish!

Agreed.

I'm not sure how you mean. It's a response to an article from a long time ago which, with al the PS3 exclusives coming out this week, and more news on The Last Story, seems relevant.

However, the very first sentence before the gap I may change. Because I'm not sure even I agree with it now...

Thank god. I was worried no-one would agree with me and the thread would be full of people saying I was wrong with long reasons.

Still time...

(also, edited opening so it's not so controversial)

It would have better graphics- and with equal gameplay the xbox version would be better. Gameplay> graphics but there's no reason not to try and have both.

I played the definitive version of Super Mario Galaxy 2, on my PC with a 360 controller and 1080p/3D vision.

I'm pretty sure xbox 360 can't touch that experience...

>_> ....that so wrong...

This is where I have to step in

The key thing about Galaxy 2 (and the first) for me is that the spin attack was implemented so well. How would it be done with the same satisfying feel on the 360?

Also, how about collecting the star bits? How are you going to point at the screen, collect the star bits without ruining the camera?

Not a bash at you or anyone, just questions. I agree that you should strive for both, but you shouldn't sacrifice gameplay for graphics. Galaxy 2 was a good example, but Epic Mickey or The Last Story would be just as fine to choose...

Halo Reach would be sooo much better on Wii