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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - "An Unbiased Review" New Super Mario Bros U - A JayWood2010 Review

 

User Reviews

10 4 7.84%
 
9 12 23.53%
 
8 11 21.57%
 
7 9 17.65%
 
6 5 9.80%
 
5 2 3.92%
 
4 0 0%
 
3 0 0%
 
2 0 0%
 
1 7 13.73%
 
Total:50
DevilRising on 13 July 2013
Soma said:

I haven't played the game, but having played NSMB Wii and the two DS games, I agree with JayWood about the difficulty.

If one world or the task to collect coins is what makes this kind of games difficult , then that doesn't mean the game is difficult. Overall the game would still be easy.

For me this has been a terrible mistake of Nintendo and one reason I feel this NSMB games have been kinda boring. Adding coins to collect is just an artificial way for Nintendo to say "Look! The challenge is not to finish it but to collect everything!". This has affected the core of the gameplay and not in a good way IMO.

Mario games in the past were memorable because you could die a lot of times and repeat the level over and over. Now they are forgettable because you play them once and forget about them, unless you look for the coins. I rather have shorter and difficult levels than long and easy.


So.............you're saying that instead, perhaps, Nintendo should just throw more enemies at a time at you, more fucked up platforming to try and perform, more cheap deaths? Would that make the game hard enough? Or the "right kind of hard"?

The way they do it is fine, because people who aren't super-great at games can, with effort, still make it through the main game, but for more advanced/experience players, there are harder things like getting all the coins, completing Special World, doing the challenge mode, etc. I've personally never subscribed to the notion some gamers seem to have that "harder = better", and have never enjoyed games being hard JUST to be hard. Beyond that, developers aren't obligated to make a game, especially one with such a universal appeal as Mario, balls hard just to try and appeal to a vocal minority of so-called "hardcore" players. 



Around the Network
DJEVOLVE on 13 July 2013
JayWood2010 said:
DevilRising said:
It's kind of hard to claim to be doing an "unbiased review" of something, when at the end of the day, you're still just giving your own personal experience of the game, your own personal take, flavored by your own personal tastes and opinions. You may have found the game to not be challenging, as well as "repetitive and uninspiring", but others would likely totally disagree with you, thinking the game was very creative, a lot of fun, etc.

It would have been better to just say "Hey this is my take on the game", instead of trying to put forth the idea that somehow your review isn't just your personal opinions of the game. Everyone is biased, because life is subjective.


The definition of Biased

Biased - preference: an unfair preference for or dislike of something

That is what I approach each review with.  Never praise something unless it deserves praise and never bash something unless it deserves it.  Do you think i have an unfair preference in this review?



I think it was rated fair. however u got people who have mario in their sigs, telling you that your biased. So take what you want from it. i like the game but completely agree with the review. So i do think it was unbiased. i think being biased would have been a 5 or something.



archbrix on 13 July 2013
DevilRising said:
Soma said:

I haven't played the game, but having played NSMB Wii and the two DS games, I agree with JayWood about the difficulty.

If one world or the task to collect coins is what makes this kind of games difficult , then that doesn't mean the game is difficult. Overall the game would still be easy.

For me this has been a terrible mistake of Nintendo and one reason I feel this NSMB games have been kinda boring. Adding coins to collect is just an artificial way for Nintendo to say "Look! The challenge is not to finish it but to collect everything!". This has affected the core of the gameplay and not in a good way IMO.

Mario games in the past were memorable because you could die a lot of times and repeat the level over and over. Now they are forgettable because you play them once and forget about them, unless you look for the coins. I rather have shorter and difficult levels than long and easy.


So.............you're saying that instead, perhaps, Nintendo should just throw more enemies at a time at you, more fucked up platforming to try and perform, more cheap deaths? Would that make the game hard enough? Or the "right kind of hard"?

The way they do it is fine, because people who aren't super-great at games can, with effort, still make it through the main game, but for more advanced/experience players, there are harder things like getting all the coins, completing Special World, doing the challenge mode, etc. I've personally never subscribed to the notion some gamers seem to have that "harder = better", and have never enjoyed games being hard JUST to be hard. Beyond that, developers aren't obligated to make a game, especially one with such a universal appeal as Mario, balls hard just to try and appeal to a vocal minority of so-called "hardcore" players. 

Agreed, 100%.

@bolded in particular is what I was trying to convey to Jay. The game is not inherently difficult so that more inexperienced players can still have a chance to see the end (or for those who just want to rush through the game as fast as possible *cough* Jay *cough*). For those who seek a more challenging and rewarding experience, the goal of achieving 100% remains.



archbrix on 13 July 2013
DJEVOLVE said:
JayWood2010 said:
DevilRising said:
It's kind of hard to claim to be doing an "unbiased review" of something, when at the end of the day, you're still just giving your own personal experience of the game, your own personal take, flavored by your own personal tastes and opinions. You may have found the game to not be challenging, as well as "repetitive and uninspiring", but others would likely totally disagree with you, thinking the game was very creative, a lot of fun, etc.

It would have been better to just say "Hey this is my take on the game", instead of trying to put forth the idea that somehow your review isn't just your personal opinions of the game. Everyone is biased, because life is subjective.


The definition of Biased

Biased - preference: an unfair preference for or dislike of something

That is what I approach each review with.  Never praise something unless it deserves praise and never bash something unless it deserves it.  Do you think i have an unfair preference in this review?



I think it was rated fair. however u got people who have mario in their sigs, telling you that your biased. So take what you want from it. i like the game but completely agree with the review. So i do think it was unbiased. i think being biased would have been a 5 or something.

That's funny - I believe that I'm the only one who responded in this thread so far with Mario in my sig. How about you quote me where I said that Jay was biased?



DJEVOLVE on 13 July 2013
archbrix said:
DJEVOLVE said:
JayWood2010 said:


The definition of Biased

Biased - preference: an unfair preference for or dislike of something

That is what I approach each review with.  Never praise something unless it deserves praise and never bash something unless it deserves it.  Do you think i have an unfair preference in this review?



I think it was rated fair. however u got people who have mario in their sigs, telling you that your biased. So take what you want from it. i like the game but completely agree with the review. So i do think it was unbiased. i think being biased would have been a 5 or something.

That's funny - I believe that I'm the only one who responded in this thread so far with Mario in my sig. How about you quote me where I said that Jay was biased?

Sorry i didn't think I had to point out the pics too...



Around the Network
DJEVOLVE on 13 July 2013

Your review was right but you should have finished all of the game. I did. I agree with you.



archbrix on 13 July 2013
DJEVOLVE said:
archbrix said:
DJEVOLVE said:

I think it was rated fair. however u got people who have mario in their sigs, telling you that your biased. So take what you want from it. i like the game but completely agree with the review. So i do think it was unbiased. i think being biased would have been a 5 or something.

That's funny - I believe that I'm the only one who responded in this thread so far with Mario in my sig. How about you quote me where I said that Jay was biased?

Sorry i didn't think I had to point out the pics too...

So, you meant an avatar, not a sig...

Good to know.



hsrob on 13 July 2013
DJEVOLVE said:
Your review was right but you should have finished all of the game. I did. I agree with you.

I have no problem with the score but when part of the reason for the score was lack of difficulty and the reviewer hasn't even completed the hardest part of the game..... it begs questions.



Jaywood2010 on 13 July 2013
hsrob said:
DJEVOLVE said:
Your review was right but you should have finished all of the game. I did. I agree with you.

I have no problem with the score but when part of the reason for the score was lack of difficulty and the reviewer hasn't even completed the hardest part of the game..... it begs questions.


The core of the game.  Im sorry but i have played better platformers that are simply better that hasnt been repetitive like mario bros has been in the last 5 years.  And as i stated before, it being easy was not the only issue.  But when 8 worlds are not a challenge AT ALL i will stand by what I said. Being uninspiring, been there done that in the last 5 years multiple times, with little to no challenge, i see an issue. Nothing will change the fact that the level designs are easy. And for the coins on my second play through they are not hard to get either.  Just use the acorn power up for every coin.  I also stated that it made the game even easier when the game was already easy in the first place.  If the only way for a challenge is to go out of your way for coins then that is a flaw on the game because at the core of the game it is still easy.  As stated in the review, for the more CORE and EXPERIENCED i would not recommend this game.  It is more for the EVERyDAY gamer which is why its easier.    That way kids can have fun as well.  This is a core site and I will review it as such.  

Now instead of dwelling on coins so much you all can hop on over to the Donkey Kong Country 3D AUR review.




       

Soma on 13 July 2013
DevilRising said:
Soma said:

I haven't played the game, but having played NSMB Wii and the two DS games, I agree with JayWood about the difficulty.

If one world or the task to collect coins is what makes this kind of games difficult , then that doesn't mean the game is difficult. Overall the game would still be easy.

For me this has been a terrible mistake of Nintendo and one reason I feel this NSMB games have been kinda boring. Adding coins to collect is just an artificial way for Nintendo to say "Look! The challenge is not to finish it but to collect everything!". This has affected the core of the gameplay and not in a good way IMO.

Mario games in the past were memorable because you could die a lot of times and repeat the level over and over. Now they are forgettable because you play them once and forget about them, unless you look for the coins. I rather have shorter and difficult levels than long and easy.


So.............you're saying that instead, perhaps, Nintendo should just throw more enemies at a time at you, more fucked up platforming to try and perform, more cheap deaths? Would that make the game hard enough? Or the "right kind of hard"?

The way they do it is fine, because people who aren't super-great at games can, with effort, still make it through the main game, but for more advanced/experience players, there are harder things like getting all the coins, completing Special World, doing the challenge mode, etc. I've personally never subscribed to the notion some gamers seem to have that "harder = better", and have never enjoyed games being hard JUST to be hard. Beyond that, developers aren't obligated to make a game, especially one with such a universal appeal as Mario, balls hard just to try and appeal to a vocal minority of so-called "hardcore" players. 


How about the same level of difficulty as the Nes Mario games? I never said to make them extremely hard for hardcore only, but at least with some challenge. If experienced players can only have fun by collecting coins or the last levels, then there should be an option to skip the first 7 worlds, I really don't see the point and the game feels more like a homework. Why should we play it for several couple of hours to start having fun till the end?

I would like to know if Mario games nowadays are really memorable? Will kids of today remember fondly the Mario Wii and DS games as we did with the Nes and Snes games? We'll have to wait and see but I don't really think so. And I think a lot has to do with the difficulty, even if the games are easier I know a lot of casual players and kids that lose interest halfway, or finish it and never play it again.



Castlevania Judgment FC:     1161 - 3389 - 1512

3DS Friend Code:   3480-2746-6289


Wii Friend Code: 4268-9719-1932-3069