On a simplistic sense?  Something that is still true to Mario but is new.  I want a new Mario game,  not a Mario game that controls the same as the last 4..Over a 14 year time span.  I feel all Mario since 64 have been very comparable.

Give that post why in Gods name did you bring up Gran Turismo. GT5 may break the trend but GT has been the same game since PS1. The graphics have just gotten better.

Final Fantasy (13 years ago). 

Final Fantasy (Present day)

Nope....No Graphical Overhauls there.  /Roll eyes.   Let alone the story over hauls and differences in each game.  What is the objective in Mario Galaxy again?  Saving Peach? 

Call of Duty (Released in 2003)

Call of Duty (Only 7 years later)

Half Life 1 (Released in 98')

Half Life 2  (Released in 2004..*6 years ago now**)

Gran Turismo (Released in 1997)

Gran Turismo  5 (Present day)

Do I expect Nintendo to change their style?  No.  Do I expect them to make Mario adult? Gory?  No.   Do I expect them to do something  that makes me say 'Wow!  I really need to get that Mario....it looks like they've done a lot to it!'.  Yes I do.  Mario for SNES did that.  Mario for N64 did that.   No Mario since has done that.   Gravity doesn't impress me.  Every game incorporates some form of gravity nowadays.    Do these great 'gameplay' innovations include keeping the same jumping mechanics fourteen years later?   Or adding a bumble bee costume instead of Flower power?    Come on now.

Nintendo has the nostalgia angle that Morgan Webb mentioned.  I bought Super Mario Galaxy 1 based off of hype, ratings, reviews and nostalgia. "Well it is a Mario game..".  After I completed Mario Galaxy, I said "I won't be fooled again Nintendo".   Same thing after Super Smash Brothers on Wii.  They need some fresh ideas not re-hashed ideas from 1996. 

Well, they actually have Gran Turismo in real 3D and HD. They've added damage to GT5 and they've never released a Mario demo 2 years before the game came out.

I didn't bring up Gran Turismo.  I merely responded to it. 

Although, Gran Turismo is Driving Sim.  It's ideally trying to achieve "Real Life Simulation".  It's bound by hardware far more than Mario or many other game types.  Like I have said, Gran Turismo's may have been the same in many ways but there have been, (I would wager)  thousands of minor tweaks, changes, etc for the sake of making them more realistic and striving for a step closer to realism.  Additionally, you now have 3D Gran Turismo aspirations and what appears to be shaping up as the best graphics in the industry currently. 

Cosmetically, not too much has changed in Gran Turismo (You still drive around a track and try for first place).  Although fully detailed, life like interiors provide a whole other perspective of driving, a full-fledged online mode (Allow for competition with people across the world),thousands of different cars, thousands of control tweaks (On the development side) which give the games a far more life-like handling scheme, damage modeling (for a more realistic presentation), dynamic weather conditions, etc. 

I would certainly say that the Gran Turismo series is drastically different (In terms of how realistic it is) from the 1997 version.  I don't think I would say that Mario of present day has differentiated itself enough from Mario 64.  Little Big Planet is a good launching point for a totally different direction in terms of platforming than Mario and to me that is what bothers me with Nintendo.   We haven't got a fresh idea (Like LBP) provided.   And for the king of Platformers....I think that's pretty disappointing.

1.)  Wait so a game that is has colorful graphics and non-sensical characters isn't like by someone because they said they felt it had too much colorful graphics and non-sensical characters?  Isn't that again the very foundation of a basic opinion.  She feels it is over-done.  Over the top.  Too Cartoony.   Who are you to say which degree is too cartoony.

If i recall correctly, the woman mentions nothing about the colors or the style or atmosphere in the game or being over-done or over the top. She merely says it's too cartoony. It's not as if there is a whole list of things she could have meant, it is quite clear that she is ragging on the games premise and approach, which as has been mentioned before is hypocritical seeing as she's such a huge fan of other cartoony games, including various DS Mario titles. Super Mario Galaxy 2 is no more cartoony than any other game in the franchise, anyone who's even watched as much as a gameplay video will tell you this.

2.)  Again,  some people are picky SOBs.  That 30 minutes of 2D might have really been a deal breaker for her.  It's just like anything else.  Kill Zone 2 got panned critically for it's controls because they didn't resemble Call of Duty's.  (Well no shit it's a different game), but that doesn't matter.  Everyone has an opinion on a subject.   An incorrect opinion on this would be her saying that a game that contains NO 2D, has too much 2D.  Since this game has 2D portions, she is incorrect in her opinion.

Do you seriously believe a mere 30 minuets of 2D gameplay is enough to distract someone from a game that's primarily 3D. In fact i rather do doubt she even accumulated at least five minuets of 2D gameplay. The game doesn't slap you in a 2D style gameplay for a full half hour, they appear in small segments at various points in the game, they're not so lengthy either, how on earth would one be so distracted by these elements to completely ignore the 3D parts that the entire game is made up of. Would it be fair to say Modern Warfare 2 needs more FPS or isn't FPS enough simply because i tried the snowmobile portion of the games campaign? How does one yearn for more 3D in a game that is fully 3D, with a basis of jumping to various platforms that - almost each - have their own gravitational pull? Her cries for more 3D or a more 3D look in this game are irrational and illogical

3.)  Again, they are different games.  Maybe she felt they were fitting with what was being presented in the game.  Maybe she has different expectations from DS games or Wii games.  A console with more horsepower than a handheld you might hold with different regards in terms of appearance and how games should look.   Ratchet and Clank is a totally different ball of wax.   Just because Ratchet and Clank is a cartoon game doesn't mean it suddenly is Mario's equivalent in cartoon appearance.  Maybe, she feels that Ratchet and Clank is the right amount of Cartoony and Mario is too much.  I certainly would say in my opinion that R&C is less cartoony than SMG. (Even though both are cartoons).  Again, you can't prove this point.

Just how different could she have possibly expected a console and handheld iteration of these games to be? I mean really, Mario is not known for having numerous art styles. Mario and Ratchet & Clank are of course completely different franchises, but they are both created with a cartoon fashion and no there is not some giant chasm separating a really cartoony cartoon from a less cartoony one. I for one would not say Ratchet & Clank is less cartoony than Mario because they are both cartoonish in style and appearance, they just have their own respective roles. Dtewi already proved the point, you chose to ignore it apparently.

4.)  People dislike games for different things all the time.  People complain about swearing in games. People complain about controls, appearance, etc.  What's your point?   The points she raises certainly exist in the game and while some people love them, some might absolutely hate them.  Thus making the opinion valid (Able to be questioned, but still valid).   There is enough 2D in the game for someone to be bothered by it obviously and I'm sure she isn't the only one saying it.     Just because she didn't do the routine ball wash of Super Mario Galaxy 2 doesn't mean she is biased.

There are legitimate reasons for people to dislike certain games, from awkward or imprecise controls, to sloppy graphics and art styles, to irritating sounds effects and bland music, to bad and conflicting gameplay mechanics. It's too cartoony and It isn't 3D enough are not legitimate reasons to be used with the intent on lowering ones opinion of a game. There is a reason people think up ludicrous reasons like the aforementioned to try and bring specific games down. This game has no glaring flaws, the woman has no real reason for disliking the game aside from the gameplay not suiting her style, but if this was the case she could have simply said as much. However, she did not.

It is rather apparent that an individual has lost the plot and are merely afraid when they stutter to think of the flaws in a highly praised video game, and their only real response is something akin to It's the same game again or I wan't something different.

Sure it is. 

Mario has progressed in 25 years.  What I have mentioned is the stagnation of the series since the original 3D Mario hit the scene.   I showed several other series which have in most cases really changed a lot in 13-14 years.