Super Mario Galaxy - on track for "2nd Best Game Ever"

[Final-Fan]

Lost tears of Kain said:
I first off never dissed maro galaxy, only defended bioshock and the wii fans go wild, this is unbelievable.

Lost tears of Kain said:
What is Mario galaxy? Its a remake of super mario 64 with better graphics/ artwork and the gameplay is superior.

This is why people jumped on you. That statement is more wrong than "two Gamecubes duct taped together."

""""""Might want to rethink that one. Plus, you forgot that Galaxy makes this little thing called gravity really important and that instantly disqualifies it as a remake. """"

First off, leave some quotation marks for the rest of us, OK? That's just ridiculous.

You understand that all the games have perks added to them that change the gameplay, it still is a sequal, you collect stars, hit people people and jump on them to kill them, still the same enemie, but cause its got gravity its not a remake. No matter what i say its still a fantastic game and feels great but its still in a huge way its mario 64 with few added perks

Saying that it's "Mario 64 with [a] few added perks" shows that at least one of three things is true:
1. You don't know enough about SMG to talk intelligently about it.
2. You don't know enough about SM64 to talk intelligently about it.
3. You are abusing the word "perks". That phrase would make a lot more sense if you added, after "perks", "and unprecedented and amazing worldbuilding"

Naz
"""First of all Lost Tears of Kain, if you haven't played both games, you don't want to get into this discussion with me. Bioshock only has better gameplay than System Shock 2 if you were too stupid to figure out how to use the awesome RPG elements of System Shock 2.

"""My problem with Bioshock is that reviews recognized it as original. No reviews are claiming Super Mario Galaxy is original, because it's not. It's just a re-imagining of Mario. Bioshock on the other hand got credit for numerous innovations which were literally just copy-pasted from its predecessor. If the reviews had said "System Shock 2 was great and so is this because it's like SS2" then I wouldn't be complaining about it.

Also, I never said my opinion was fact. I specifically said some review scores bothered ME. I didn't say no one had a right to like these games or disagree with my opinions on them."""

You really dont have to be an asswhole about it, i defended bioshock without swearing at you, only stating your opinion is NOT fact. You confirm this by your assanine first comment. Even if i HAD played it, which i havent, that doesnt mean just cause you see System shock 2 as better, doesnt mean IT IS. Ive heard people say they like the combat in bioshock more, its opinon, not just your own.

You say its just like its predessor and is getting claimed for innovation. I hear the same thing for galaxy. Its supposedly been so long since a platformer that it feels so danm new, therefor it is new and will get rated higher. Even if they had mentioned it as SS 2 successor, doesnt mean it would of changed its score.

Again, you leave no compensation for other peoples opinions, calling them stupid if they dont agree with you. Thats making your opinion FACT. That and you said COD was 5-6 hours my ass. Ive exceeded that, so yes they were right, just because you did it doesnt mean its not true.

naznatips hasn't sworn at you, and I'm a little confused as to why you would accuse him of it in the same breath as calling him an "asswhole" (an asshole who doesn't do it half-assed?).

As for innovation, no one is praising Galaxy for its amazing new stomp-on-head combat system. People were praising Bioshock for "innovations" that in actuality were also in System Shock 2.

As for CoD4 playing time, I have no right to get into who is right because I haven't played it, but I do know that your argument makes exactly zero sense. I've put over 150 hours into my first playthrough of Final Fantasy Tactics -- does this make it a 150-hour game? Of course not.