It's extremely difficult for a game to achieve that score, due to the big number of reviews we get today... It'll score greatly, though, but no 99.

I predict a 200 since the media loves to overrate Nintendo games. Reviews are irrelevant anyway.

over under is 97

96 to 98.

99 is impossible in this day and age, with just how many reviews there are and the chance of a troll dev or 2.
I'd go with less than Galaxy 1 and 2 despite being a better game

Weres the inflation??

I'd say ~96.5.

To me the game looks great, but falls a little short of Super Mario Galaxy in creative excellence and ambition. Granted, we have obviously only seen a small part of the game, and Super Mario Galaxy was one of those games that had SO much diversity and so many gems (figuratively and literally) throughout in terms of creative design.

I think the potential is there for better ratings, but it's not quite Breath of the Wild or Galaxy, IMO.

One thing I will say about Mario Odyssey is that it has solidified the Switch as an argument for Nintendo's strongest first party lineup during its firs year on the market. I would certainly argue that Breath of the Wild + Mario Odyssey is a stronger combo than Twilight Princess + Mario Galaxy. While Wii had Metroid Prime 3, Super Paper Mario, and Fire Emblem Radiant Dawn in that first year, Switch has Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, ARMS, Splatoon 2, and Xenoblade 2.

BraLoD said: ktay95 said: 99 is impossible in this day and age, with just how many reviews there are and the chance of a troll dev or 2. I'd go with less than Galaxy 1 and 2 despite being a better game U WOT M8? Galaxy 2 is the best mario game ever.

yeah, I don't think what was shown is quite on par with it either. Although it is VERY easily the next best thing to the Galaxies, even if a little less ambitious and creatively awesome.

It'll get a 100 and then Jim Sterling will give it a 0 for trying too hard to be good and it'll drop to a 98.

This.

I am not sure why some youtube blogger counts alongside established review sources though, it seems like a problem with the methodology of Metacritic and Gamerankings. His reviews should be counted as "fan reviews" at best.