Umm... I really don't care anymore about this topic. Why are you people complaining. This is the number two game of all time. He isn't even a real reviewer. This won't mess with your 97.4 on gamerankings! Stop posting every little review that doesn't sip the juice saying this is the best title ever and so on.

@ Rath

The blogger was not wrong for having an opinion. You are wrong for not letting him have an opinion. As I said, who cares, this is the #2 game OF ALL TIME. be happy!

 Best Post in This Thread.

But you actually are a Sony fan. What's wrong with it? I want a 360, but that won't remove me from the Nintendo's fans list.

The guy on the review is clearly talking about the technical aspect of the graphics... and still SMG is well above the games you mentioned. The only one that has a shot on it is GoW2, but hell, GoW2 looked even better than some early 360 and Triple games.

Okay, someone in the comments made the comment

14 Worlds in SM64

9 Worlds in SMS

6 Worlds in SMG

That is absolutely the most stupid comment that i've ever seen and the person who made that comment has obviously not even played the game.

6 Worlds x 3 main worlds is 18 worlds, it is certain to me that Mario Galaxy has the most worlds and ideas and different various areas in all of the Mario games.

A lot of people making comments on their sound like Sony Viral Marketing trying to discredit the game.

Opinions are opinions and it's fine for someone not to like the game (though I find it hard to understand how they can't like it, I still believe it) but commenting on things that are blatently FALSE are just plain lame.

Thanks Rol but I didn't check to see exactly how many there were... thanks for clarification.

Well that certainly confirms what I felt was correct with SMG.

I think what really bothers a lot of gamers a lot is the fact that even though this is just a bloggers opinion and his opinion is just as important (or unimportant) as all of us, there are plenty of reviewers out there who do have a lot of authority and even though they have a responsibility to give an unbias yet opinionated review of a game, they review games just like how this blogger has reviewed SMG. Yes, it may not be as extreme as this poor excuse of a review, but there are reviewers who do these kind of things....which brings up the question, can we really trust reviewers out there anymore? Are they really as reliable as they used to, or are they as bias as most fanboys, from ALL camps, are?

Nice, someone doesn't like a Wii game = instantly biasED (its bi-as-ed, not bias). Anyways give me a break. I haven't played SMG, but I asked for it for Christmas, I'll comment on it when I play it. But not everyone who doesn't like SMG is biased!!!

 I agree. But everybody who claims it looks worse than a game from 2001 is.

 Or RE4 Wii, or MoHH2...

 I'm not sure that I agree, because define biased... and what people are saying when they accuse someone of being biased.

The comments in that review of the game are terribly biased, because of the reasons that many people have disputed.

Biased against the game because of Wii limitations when compared to other consoles.

That doesn't mean that people's opinions against this person's opinion isn't biased either, it's biased towards Nintendo and that's true.

However, the only people that I see not liking this game are people that are 'converted' into the HD age.