By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Whats the general opinion on Paper Mario Sticker Star on VGChartz ;O?

Tagged games:

Worst game in a great series. No point of doing random battles, or getting money.



PSN: Saugeen-Uwo     Feel free to add me (put Vg Chartz as MSG)!

Nintendo Network ID: Saugeen-Uwo

Around the Network

It is a watered down paper mario experience.



"If new things are so great, where have they been the whole time?"

It looks and sounds great. Soundtrack is bright and cheery, and the world is beautifully realized...like 3D dioramas as Nintendo advertised. The sticker-based battle system COULD have been good...unfortunately all of the stickers are one-use and you have to collect "things" and turn them into "thing stickers" and hope that you brought the right one with you in order to solve puzzles or especially to beat the bosses. If you didn't, you'll have to reset, or go all the way back, make sure you have enough coins, and then try and figure out what the right "thing sticker" you need is. Ultimately it just creates a lot of backtracking and tedium in the game. Also, unfortunately, due to Miyamoto's meddling in games he's not really involved in, they eliminated the partner system from the first 2 games, as well as the leveling system. You get more powerful stickers gradually in the game as well as the ability to carry more stickers, and you can up Mario's HP fairly consistently, but because of the lack of leveling, there is almost NO incentive to fight enemies. Why would you when it uses your stickers and the only thing you get from them is coins which can be found elsewhere? Sticker Star is ultimately much more of a puzzle game than it is a RPG like the first two. Charm is still evident, though the lack of partners and meaningful NPC's prevents the localization team from offering up much of the clever, tongue-in-cheek dialogue from the previous entries as well. Enjoyment can be found in Sticker Star, but for veteran fans of the series (and especially the first two games) a return-to-form has not been realized.



Upcoming Games To Get

Definite: Kirby Star Allies (Switch), Mario Tennis Aces (Switch), Fire Emblem (Switch), Yoshi (Switch), Pokemon (Switch), Kingdom Hearts 3 (PS4), Monster Hunter World (PS4)

Considering: Fe (Switch), Donkey Kong Country Tropical Freeze (Switch), The World Ends With You (Switch), Ys VIII (Switch), Street Fighter V: Arcade Edition (PS4), Kingdom Hearts 2.8 Remix (PS4), The Last Guardian (PS4), Shadow of the Colossus HD (PS4), Anthem (PS4), Shenmue 3 (PS4), WiLD (PS4)

I bought the 3DS because of the screenshots of Paper Mario from E3 2010. Then my dreams were shattered when I read the Iwata Asks for the game, when Nintendo literally had Paper Mario 3DS as a turn-based RPG like the first two, and Miyamoto made them change the game into stickers because it was "boring".

So, that aside, it's a very fun game, and it has a lot of the original charm of the Paper Mario series, but the battle system is... basically nonsense. It's a fun game to play for the levels and for the exploration, but the battles are meaningless unless you're farming for money.

It it better the second time you play it, though.



The Screamapillar is easily identified by its constant screaming—it even screams in its sleep. The Screamapillar is the favorite food of everything, is sexually attracted to fire, and needs constant reassurance or it will die.

MDMAlliance said:
DerpSandwich said:
As a sequel to the first two Paper Mario games, it's a load of garbage. They took everything that made them great, added one admittedly interesting mechanic, and removed 90% of the rest.

As its own game it's a pleasant experience that devolves into worthless (to me, at least). Collecting stickers is fun, the visuals are a huge treat, and there's some nice humor in the game. But none of the battles give you XP, meaning that literally every battle that isn't used to advance the story is basically worthless. They give you coins, and that's it. The primary draw of the game is the sticker battles, but since they only sap your resources, you'll find yourself avoiding them at all costs, thus defeating the purpose of the entire game. So essentially it's a game that's oozing with charm but really has no point.

A lot of people said it was good if taken as its own thing, but my enjoyment of it slowly diminished throughout the whole experience. An enormous wasted opportunity. But for ten bucks you probably can't go wrong, to tell you the truth. There were still a few good times to be had.


However, there will undoubtably be some who say that the typical turn taking RPG involves too much artificial difficulty with the whole "grind to win" formula.  It can be said that Sticker Star uses a method to avoid this and move into making grinding optional, and more making enemies on the map a hazard than anything else.  

So it really is about perspective. 

True, but even so, I feel like there should have been at least SOME additional benefit to fighting.  Even if you could gain levels and get additional HP rather than getting them through finding them it would be so much better.  Even the tiniest bit of progression, whether it was necessary or not, would have made battling worth it.  But as it is the enemies are hazards, which is fine in a way, but they're the type of hazard that takes a lot of time and effort and permenently uses up the stickers you collect.

So I can see where you're coming from, but from a design standpoint it still seems just plain wrong to me.  But, a lot of people did enjoy the game, so I guess my standards are just different.



Currently playing:

Bloodbath Paddy Wagon Ultra 9

Around the Network

I bought it a little after it came out and it was meh. The sticker system is interesting, but if you run out in a battle your pretty much screwed :P. I would say its worth ten bucks if you can get it for that much.



 

RolStoppable said:
MDMAlliance said:

However, there will undoubtably be some who say that the typical turn taking RPG involves too much artificial difficulty with the whole "grind to win" formula.  It can be said that Sticker Star uses a method to avoid this and move into making grinding optional, and more making enemies on the map a hazard than anything else.  

So it really is about perspective. 

But Paper Mario is an RPG series where "grind to win" didn't really exist in the first place. There's only so much that more HP, flower points and badge points can do; if you suck at the action commands, you'll probably lose anyway. On the flipside, if you are good at the action commands, you will never need to grind. A fact that is all the more pleasant in combination with the EXP system where your level is measured against the enemies' level, thus rewarding highly skilled play.

Your argument doesn't hold water.

I'm not really sure you can actually get away with avoiding as many battles as possible in the other RPG Mario Games.  Action commands, if I recall correctly, do not completely protect you from damage.  It's been a while since I played it, but my argument "holds water" regardless because I wasn't actually comparing Sticker Star to other Paper Mario games anyway.  I was just referring to RPG's in general and the fact that some people don't like "grind to win" formulas.



It's a game more suited to younger people, or the mentally retarded. I wouldn't call it bad, just, not as good for more developed brains.



BasilZero said:
zippy said:
I love Paper Mario, but have been on the fence about picking sticker star up. So far in this thread no one is selling it to me :/


It is $10 right now on Walmart lol.


uh, buy it if it's 10 bucks haha



RolStoppable said:
MDMAlliance said:

I'm not really sure you can actually get away with avoiding as many battles as possible in the other RPG Mario Games.  Action commands, if I recall correctly, do not completely protect you from damage.  It's been a while since I played it, but my argument "holds water" regardless because I wasn't actually comparing Sticker Star to other Paper Mario games anyway.  I was just referring to RPG's in general and the fact that some people don't like "grind to win" formulas.

You can get away with that in the two proper Paper Mario games. You don't even need items to pull it off, you just need to manage your other resources intelligently.

Your point was that Sticker Star solved a potential problem, hence why its direction could be seen as a good thing. But the problem it solved never existed for the IP in the first place, hence why it isn't a good argument. Especially because it leads to Sticker Star being broken at its core. There are no drawbacks to skipping battles (you aren't forced to step up your game in mandatory battles like in the first two Paper Mario games). Actually, skipping battles is a win-win scenario. That puts it into Sonic Chronicles: The Dark Brotherhood territory and that's a place where no game should strive to be. Thankfully Sticker Star's rest of the game has redeeming qualities, so it's not an absolutely god awful game.


I wasn't trying to say Sticker Star had a system that solved a problem that existed in the other Paper Mario games.  I was simply putting into perspective why a decision for not having levels would be implemented.  I would also argue that Sticker Star's battle system has incentives besides just getting coins.  However that's really besides the point anyway.  I was trying to explain it from a viewpoint outside of "this is a Paper Mario game" and more into the mechanics of RPG's (especially what some people call "JRPG's").  I also am not speaking from my own personal view, as I am merely mirroring what I have seen some people complain about in other RPG games.