fazz said: Seems like a fair score to me. I'm just imagining the reviews from these people... Gamespot: "It's a sequel (-1.0), it has motion controllers as the ONLY option (-0.5), it's not Super Mario 64 (-0.5), it doesn't has PS3-level visuals (-0.5)... TOTAL 7.5 1UP: "Motion controllers are for non-gamers (-3.0)" TOTAL 7.0 Everyone else high 9's and 10's.

 lol

ssj12 said: fkusumot said: Is everybody so upset that Mario got such a high score? I mean really, everyone knows Famitsu inflates the scores. nope its well deserving of it's scores truly im shocked it didnt get 40/40 honestly.

Wait. You didn't really like it but think it's a 10/10 game? It's like you're the anti-MontanaHatchet.

Not that you're against MontanaHatchet, you just seem to have better taste in games. 

 

Vengi said: another example of how Famitsu hates Nintendo!! On another note this will be the first Mario game I've ever played

 

Were you held captive in a basement for the last 22 years?

95% seems reasonable.. and i wouldn't put too much weight in famitsu's scores ever since they gave nintendogs 40 anyways (people who are worried that wii fit will get 40, prepare to be disappointed)

Honestly, believing a Famitsu rating about a high-profile Japanese game is akin to planning a trip to Thailand based solely on the experiences of a pedarest friend you last spoke to in a dark alley before he was arrested shortly thereafter.

I'm sure SMG will be brilliant (I never expect less from Myamoto) but Famitsu ratings are quickly becoming Amazon sales rankings to me.

I'm not felling bad about the 38/40. Really its right where it should be (strait 10's cross the bored would be freaky really).

 

But I'm more upset about these reasons.

 

and



 Almost too well? I'm not exactly picking up what they are laying down. In fact I don't think I can fathom what too well controls would be.  I can see the controls making the game to easy, but thats just it, it would make it too easy not to well. Maybe the full review elaborates more (an interesting read I'm sure) but it just seems like an attempt to make a flaw out of thin air.

I can, though,kind of grasp abnormally good tempo, but not overly so. Such as almost reading the players mind when it comes to the introduction of new components and such. Once again I assume it may go over it in the full review. Yet it's hard for me to tell what they really meant when they said that. Was it meant to be negative like its almost too good (which sounds silly, but if controls can be almost too good I'm sure they could fine a way) or that its good

 

I guess I shouldn't over analyze. I'm sure the game spot review will be overly flawed enough.

 

 

 

naznatips said: I really really don't understand why people give Famitsu any credit as a review source. Don't get me wrong, that's a great average (9.5), and I expect Mario Galaxy deserves a score that high, but seriously Famitsu reviews every big game that high. Someone show me a hyped game that ever got lower than an 8 average from a Famitsu review. Even garbage like Lair gets good reviews from them based on hype and company. They are the Play Magazine of Japan.

Jump Ultimate Stars | 7 / 7 / 8 / 8 | 30/40 Tales of the Tempest | 7 / 7 / 7 / 7 | 28/40 Metroid Prime: Hunters | 7 / 7 / 7 / 8 | 29/40

Well 38/40 is a good score, but it could definitely get 40/40. When you read the comments, they only have good things to say about the game... and they don't give it 40/40. Why ?

Opoona got a good review, that's nice. I've played it last month and it looked very nice. I'm pretty sure the game will be released in US and Europe, since I played it at the Micromania Games Show in France.

fazz said: Seems like a fair score to me. I'm just imagining the reviews from these people... Gamespot: "It's a sequel (-1.0), it has motion controllers as the ONLY option (-0.5), it's not Super Mario 64 (-0.5), it doesn't has PS3-level visuals (-0.5)... TOTAL 7.5 1UP: "Motion controllers are for non-gamers (-3.0)" TOTAL 7.0 Everyone else high 9's and 10's.

what about online multiplayer? Should get some points deducted.

Oh, and based on some game length discussions of late, maybe deduction for being too long: "my attention span is only 5-6 hours per game", or "jumping around for more than 5 hours? No thank you", or "based on the fact it has no online multiplayer, more than 10 hours seems awfully long for a rental".

Seems like a good score. I was expecting it to eventually end up between 92 and 95 on gamerankings/metacritic so this seems just about right.