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

Forums - Gaming - Lets Discuss Super Mario Galaxy

Tagged games:

 

What'd you think?

I loved it! 35 66.04%
 
It was okay. 4 7.55%
 
It didn't like it. 10 18.87%
 
See results. 4 7.55%
 
Total:53
Solid-Stark on 01 October 2011

I'd like to add that in future 3D Mario games, maybe they should make the worlds much bigger and allow you to continue after getting a star instead of sending you back.



e=mc^2

Gaming on: PS4 Pro, Switch, SNES Mini, Wii U, PC (i5-7400, GTX 1060)

Around the Network
Solid-Stark on 01 October 2011
RolStoppable said:
The first Super Mario Galaxy was great, the second one even better. Nintendo should go back to a more consistent design though, instead of random worlds being stringed together.
Donkey Kong Country Returns beats NSMB Wii in production values, but not overall. Both excellent games, of course.

Something about Super Mario 3D Land seems off. Mario moves too slow for my liking, judging from the trailers and preview videos. The 2D sections won't match the quality of an actual 2D platformer, just like it has been the case in the Galaxy games.


Agreed.

Maybe it's the fixed camera.

Edit: Nvm i looked it up, its optional.



e=mc^2

Gaming on: PS4 Pro, Switch, SNES Mini, Wii U, PC (i5-7400, GTX 1060)

Moren on 01 October 2011

Both are overrated, but they are still better than Mario 64.
Galaxy 2 was a total improvement over the first, but suffered from lack of the "O_o OMG" factor.



Moren on 01 October 2011
RolStoppable said:
morenoingrato said:
Both are overrated, but they are still better than Mario 64.
Galaxy 2 was a total improvement over the first, but suffered from lack of the "O_o OMG" factor.

There definitely was an "OMG" factor when I saw that they blatantly reused a stage from the first game. It really was hard to believe.

Yeah, that sucked, the possibly worst desingNED level of the original came back, WTF?

The boss level was cool, but I hated to play that level.



Moren on 01 October 2011
RolStoppable said:
morenoingrato said:
RolStoppable said:

There definitely was an "OMG" factor when I saw that they blatantly reused a stage from the first game. It really was hard to believe.

Yeah, that sucked, the possibly worst desingNED level of the original came back, WTF?

The boss level was cool, but I hated to play that level.

You mean the level where you had to fight bosses from the first game? That one wasn't cool and really annoying to play. Just one more filler after the level they ripped straight from the first game.

The funny thing is that no gaming journalist called Nintendo out on that, but half a year before Nintendo was called lazy for NSMB Wii which had only original stages and tons of pleasant secrets.

Well, overall, World S felt like it was made in a rush a month before release.



Around the Network
Level1Death on 01 October 2011
morenoingrato said:
RolStoppable said:
morenoingrato said:
RolStoppable said:

There definitely was an "OMG" factor when I saw that they blatantly reused a stage from the first game. It really was hard to believe.

Yeah, that sucked, the possibly worst desingNED level of the original came back, WTF?

The boss level was cool, but I hated to play that level.

You mean the level where you had to fight bosses from the first game? That one wasn't cool and really annoying to play. Just one more filler after the level they ripped straight from the first game.

The funny thing is that no gaming journalist called Nintendo out on that, but half a year before Nintendo was called lazy for NSMB Wii which had only original stages and tons of pleasant secrets.

Well, overall, World S felt like it was made in a rush a month before release.

I feel the same way about the green stars.



 

 

 

Level1Death on 01 October 2011
RolStoppable said:
Level1Death said:
morenoingrato said:

Well, overall, World S felt like it was made in a rush a month before release.

I feel the same way about the green stars.

They are still much better than the first Galaxy's secret after getting 120 stars and they actually add some need for exploration which is something that some people wanted more of in the regular course of Galaxy 2.

That's true. It was better than the first Galaxy's secret but that so called exploration that some people wanted, I didn't see it.



 

 

 

Level1Death on 01 October 2011

Never mind this.



 

 

 

Level1Death on 01 October 2011
RolStoppable said:
Level1Death said:
RolStoppable said:

They are still much better than the first Galaxy's secret after getting 120 stars and they actually add some need for exploration which is something that some people wanted more of in the regular course of Galaxy 2.

That's true. It was better than the first Galaxy's secret but that so called exploration that some people wanted, I didn't see it.

You can't just rush through the stages and find the green stars at the end. The opening camera shots rarely show the locations of green stars, so you have to search for them. That falls under exploration, albeit not extensive exploration, because Galaxy 2's levels are rather linear. Hence why I said "some need for exploration".

They should've given us new and more challenging ground to traverse in each galaxy. The stars would be hidden through out the new grounds and you would receive no help in finding them. If you happened to pass one you would be able to go back, most of the time. This would've made the green stars more enjoyable. Also it got rather annoying to see the comet warning every time you got to the star select screen. `



 

 

 

Mr Khan on 03 October 2011
Chrizum said:
blunty51 said:
Chrizum said:
freebs2 said:

in M64 when you enter a level you don't have a forced objective, you can go for the star you prefer.

That's actually not true at all. You still had to choose a star before you start a level just like in all other 3D Marios after it. Banjo Kazooie had more freedom than any Mario game.

Yes, but you still had more freedom in M64 than any other even if you choose a star in the beginning. In most cases you basically had the same stage structure/design no matter what you choose, enabling you to get any star, whereas after M64 it got too specific. This is actually good, AND bad.

I agree that the structure of the levels remained largly the same regardless which star you chose, but in SM64 you could only get the star you picked in the beginning, any other star would be blank and thus wouldn't count to your star total. That's a design decision I never understood.

I can say for a fact that that wasn't the case. There were a small handful of stars where to obtain that star, you had to choose it specifically at the select screen (both of the races with Koopa the Quick come to mind), but most were free choice



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.