Yay.

Its a liverpool badge thing with 5 stars by it, representing how many times theyve won the champions league...

First of all, the first thing that happens right after you start off Mario Galaxy is you are plopped right in front of Peachs Castle (like in Mario 64) and you are allowed to run around and do whatever you want.  Jump around, talk to toads, kick the walls, etc.  Following this, you go watch a VERY short cutscene (nowhere near 15 minutes) and then you are plopped into a short tutorial mode of chasing bunnies (again, that takes like 5-10 minutes).

I will grant you that the intro to Twilight Princess was abysmal, but that game was Nintendo trying to market Zelda more towards those who liked 'story' and 'deep, rich experiences' (aka games like Uncharted and such with long cutscenes).  Mario Galaxy doesn't have this at all.  There's hardly any breaks in the gameplay and only about 4-5 major cutscenes in the whole game aside from 'storytime with Rosalina' (and even those are optional).

And tts pretty bad to claim Mario Galaxy is this horrible game filled with cutscenes when other games are being praised for having cutscenes.  Again, like games like Uncharted 2.  Or how about stuff like Resident Evil.  Or Halo 3.  I mean, why is it so bad for Mario Galaxy to have maybe 15-20 minutes of total cutscenes when other games have hours of cutscenes and are patted on the back for it and people claim they are 'better games' for it?

Rol I gotta say I loved Galaxy because of the cut scenes and polish Nintendo put into it. Infact I prefer Galaxy to Mario64 and yes to Sunshine too. Why did Mario really fail, a lack of hardcore gamers left in Nintendo's user base. The GameCube survived on the hardcore but when the Wii was announced Nintendo switched focus from the hardcore to the casual. This caused millions of gamers to jump ship and buy 360's/PS3's. You can argue all you want but fact is the hardcore gamers are the ones who buy Mario games.

The casual gamer doesn't care to play Mario, their too busy playing WiiFit and WiiSportsResort. The people that buy Mario are and always has been the hardcore gamer. Like you yourself, but as I said many hardcore gamers jumped ship when the Wii was first shown off and many haven't returned.

I'm sure that if Nintendo makes a competitive platform (Visually and software wise) next generation then we will see the hardcore gamers return. Infact maybe MarioGalaxy2/Zelda/Pikmin can bring home the gold. But in the end the reason that Mario Galaxy was a flop was the lack of hardcore gamers as you do point out.

Its not a question of "How can Nintendo dumb down their titles to appeal to casual gamers" its a question of "How Can Nintendo produce software that appeals to established and hardcore gamers".

A perfect example is looking at the attach rate. The GameCube had a 9 games per console attach rate (All being hardcore) the Wii has only about 5, why does the Wii only have about 5? because the casual gamers don't buy as many games as the hardcore do. When Nintendo makes a stronger effort to attract hardcore gamers (Who spend money on software) opposed to casual gamers (Who might pick up a game or two) then we will see games like Mario Galaxy selling better.

Mario Galaxy was an AAA+ game, don't wish for it to be dumbed down because some moronic casual gamer can't handle a half hour of patience!

Joelcool7, you are way off.

Mario isn't bought by the hardcore exclusively. Mario is bought by everyone. Look at New Super Mario Bros. and how well it has sold... Let me tell you right here and now that those are not 20 million hardcore gamers, those are 20 million gamers, hardcore, casual, it doesn't really matter. Everyone plays Mario.

Secondly, Mario Galaxy already is dumbed down. It's extremely easy compared to 64 and Sunshine. Loads of people will storm this topic now and yell at me about how Mario 64 only feels hard because I wasn't used to 3D Mario when it was released, but I play Mario 64 regularly pretty much every month, and it's still harder than Galaxy.

Does that make Galaxy a bad game? Absolutely not. But it is dumbed down, to a certain extent. It does have a few challenging parts, admittedly, but I can't say they challenged me very much.

And as I have said, the reason Mario Galaxy is praised was its production values and effort put into it.  And part of that is the things you're complaining about.  Its sales weren't deterred by a few cutscenes (which I think you are exaggerating) and a brief tutorial (which as I said only takes 5-10 minutes).  The first two levels are pretty much free roaming levels that allow you to learn the game by playing it.  The only 'tutorial' level is the catching bunnies level in the beginning (again, which takes 5-10 minutes).

I really feel you are exaggerating what you felt was a slow start to the game and making it out to be this drain on the sales of the game on the whole.  In hindsight, its what sets the title apart as a '3D Mario'.

I wholeheartedly agree with this thread.


SHAME ON YOU NINTENDO!

Correct in the strictly sense, as most things are subjective anyways. 

However, I believe 2D Mario games have by and large sold more than 3D Mario games.  Not sure if cutscenes have anything to do about it.

Do you believe the sales are below where they should be?

If so, why do yo think that is the case?

I've said three times in this thread that 3D Mario games don't sell as well as 2D Mario games and that's why Mario Galaxy isn't selling as high as some people think it should.  It has nothing to do with 'cutscenes' or 'flow' or etc.  3D Mario games cater to a different crowd than the 2D games.  Those who like more detail in the visuals, a little more emphasis in fighting and more exploration.  And many of the points made in this thread hint at people wanting a 3D Mario to play and cater to those things that a 2D mario does, such as 'getting right to the gameplay' and 'less story and cutscenes'.

In other words, you want all Mario games to do the same thing.  That's not smart on Nintendos part, as the reason Mario has been so successful is he has hit nearly every type of platform, genre and style of gaming out there.  If all the Mario games were the same, people would be complaining.  Much like some others in this thread are complaining that Mario Galaxy didn't cater to their tastes.  There's a remedy for that...go play a different Mario game.  There's only 120+ Mario games out there.

Plus, I doubt we'd be having this conversation if this was the GC/XBOX/PS2 gen and games that emphasized on story and graphics were selling the most.

I'm not talking about comparing Galaxy to the 2D Mario games.  Games that are 2D will pretty much always be more accessible than a similar 3D game.

I'm talking about comparing Galaxy to 64 and Sunshine.  I think that the sales of Galaxy are a bit disappointing compared to the sales of those two games.  Do you agree with that?  If so, what is your reasoning why it did not perform since you do not agree with Rol?