Exactly, so we need to see whether this isn't another case of reviewers being out of touch, or if the game continues to underperform.

I dont buy into that reviewers being out of touch. If a vast majority are saying that something like coin rush feels gimicky, then im more inclined to go with that than the average Joe who is going to buy a Mario game regardless.

3D Mario is still tonnes of fun. I maintain that Super Mario Galaxy 2 is the second-best game I've played this generation. Endlessly inventive and enjoyable.

But 'New' Super Mario Bros. doesn't interest me in the slightest. The Wii version I played was repetitive and - in my opinion - incredibly inferior to other 2D platformers on the system (I played it side-by-side with Donkey Kong Country Returns and it was easy to see which was the better game. Rayman Origins showed it up as being rather dated too).

My only issue with Mario is that series. But - my own problems with it aside - it sells like hotcakes and clearly interests a lot of people. So if it is a creative dead end, it seems to be a very profitable one for the time being.

Somehow the review system is flawed. Im pretty sure the game is better than the Wii version or the DS version it just has no novelty bonus now. So how can a game that is not worse than another game get a lower score? How does this work? Sure the music sucks by now etc but its the same music the Wii version had plus NSMB2 has cooler levels with more secrets like the oldschool games.

Isnt this a Bonus? And what about the coins etc?


Seriously if people can give COD 9's all the time they can also give Mario a 9 argh i dont get it the system is faulty....

Well anyways I lost interest in this series because its always the same  but does this really make it a game that deserves a lower score?  I mean I also dont play Super Mario Bros1 all the time because the game doesnt change   its not worse then before right?  

P.S.  NSMBU  would be a great DLC game.  Instead of letting us pay 40 bucks and another 50 bucks and another 50 bucks etc for the "whole" games, they should just make DLC instead if sequels because its always the same.
You dont really need the next game if you have a prior one.  So giving us New Super Mario Bros WiiU  2 for 10 bucks as DLC would be good especially when the new game will again feature the same music and graphics etc.....

isnt the game the same as the previous one but with new levels and a new gimmick?

for me thats more than i get from Rayman, SMeatBoy, DKCR...
and please dont even mention LBP...

lol at how now the metascore matters....
reviewers are full of shit, you should know that...
and how can it be a reliable source when theres people giving a 4 to games other people gave a 9?

But wouldnt that be the very reason WHY there are not 9s and 10s being thrown at it like prior Mario games? Havent played it yet, but you did say yourself (and some others) that it felt rushed. 

well, that and the fact that every recent  3D Mario game has been more innovative,ambitious and just plain better than any of the 'New' Super Mario 2D titles.

I think the critics have actually gotten it right for once, and I agree with the stance(taken by the article) that 2D mario isn't for the long term Nintendo/Mario fans anymore ...That's the difference between 2D and 3D Mario in a nutshell

I don't enjoy 2D Mario games as I do 3D so i won't be buying this one and I am not sure i will get the WiiU version either. can't wait for WiiUs 3D Mario though!

Metacritic gave 95 to Little Big Planet, probably the worst 2d platformer I've ever bought, that's just to say how scores are unreliable.

And it is just a Downloable title