Don't you know that even if Mario sucks it is still the best platformer available?

Realistically, this would be like saying Uncharted or Tomb Raider is Platformer of the year because you jump across cliffs. You can't win a category for game of the year if you hardly fit in it. I've played enough of the first game on the PS3 to know that it isn't a strong platformer.

Ah, now I see what you're saying.

It is the same game, Ratchet and Clank and Ratchet and Clank. People shouldn't complain about the lack of innovation, but be happy that they get to continue with the story. That's why I buy sequels, for the continuation of the story. I mean why change a working formula that has brought so many happiness. I would rather stick with what works, than get something that completely ruins what the game is known for. I mean it does new things, like the new space exploration, right?

Take Halo for example, it has been repeating the same game play formula now, since it's inception, yet no one complains. Why? Because it works. And people don't want to change what works and is fun, which is basically what Ratchet and Clank is doing. So next time anyone is about to say it is more of the same, just think of Halo and everything will be OK.

PS: I used Halo as an example of an aging, yet working formula. I am not bashing any of these games in anyway. I am also not being Sarcastic.

Quest for Booty is a pretty strong platformer. That's partly because the combat sucked.