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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - IGN Editorial: Blinded by MARIO

I agree with IGN. Gamers sip on Nintendo's kool aid a little too much. I grew tired of Mario for being the same old, same old a WHILE ago.



"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)

"WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler

Around the Network
MANUELF said:
So according to you NSMBWii doesnt deserves its sales?

According to me, it does not.

It deserves far better.

 

Pristine20 said:
I agree with IGN. Gamers sip on Nintendo's kool aid a little too much. I grew tired of Mario for being the same old, same old a WHILE ago.

 Mmm, Nintendo-flavored Kool-aid.

Tastes like Italian.



Chairman-Mao said:
I can't say as I disagree with this article.

You can't possibly deny the fact that because its a Mario is the only reason it got so much recognition. If it has been the exact same game with different characters and a different name it wouldn't have done well at all.

You could swap out 'Mario' and imput many other games into that Scenario and get the same result.  From Halo 3 to Final Fantasy to Uncharted 2.  You can't play the 'its only selling because of name recognition card' if you're not willing to claim the same thing for all the other games that are selling based on name recognition as well.



Six upcoming games you should look into:

 

  

Kenryoku_Maxis said:
Chairman-Mao said:
I can't say as I disagree with this article.

You can't possibly deny the fact that because its a Mario is the only reason it got so much recognition. If it has been the exact same game with different characters and a different name it wouldn't have done well at all.

You could swap out 'Mario' and imput many other games into that Scenario and get the same result.  From Halo 3 to Final Fantasy to Uncharted 2.  You can't play the 'its only selling because of name recognition card' if you're not willing to claim the same thing for all the other games that are selling based on name recognition as well.

I can see you lumping Halo and Final Fantasy with Mario, because the name sells the game.  But I don't agree that Uncharted 2 belongs in that category.  The sales of that game are good, but not spectacular, and it is selling on its own merits.  Uncharted 1 was a similar ciritical hit, but not so much a commercial hype machine.  Naughty DOg could have conituned the Jak and Daxter series, if they wanted to live on hype alone.



I cannot agree with that article at all.

The basis of any art shouldn't be to move forward, it should be to deliver the best quality possible. What level of technology you use is not a relevant measure of quality, or how lazy you are, nor is how difficult the process is. And using 25 year old ideas is not in itself a bad thing, if the audience still find the ideas fresh.

Yet this is what he basis his conclusions on. And I cannot agree with any of it.



This is invisible text!

Around the Network
Pristine20 said:
I agree with IGN. Gamers sip on Nintendo's kool aid a little too much. I grew tired of Mario for being the same old, same old a WHILE ago.

This is the first 2D console Mario in over 15 years.



Tag - "No trolling on my watch!"

Killergran said:

I cannot agree with that article at all.

The basis of any art shouldn't be to move forward, it should be to deliver the best quality possible. What level of technology you use is not a relevant measure of quality, or how lazy you are, nor is how difficult the process is. And using 25 year old ideas is not in itself a bad thing, if the audience still find the ideas fresh.

Yet this is what he basis his conclusions on. And I cannot agree with any of it.

Exactly.  By Daemon's logic, Capcom was lazy with MegaMan 9.  But I doubt he would agree with that.

 

Nintendo plays the heart strings of nostalgia and they are lazy.  Any other developer does it and they are praised.



rajendra82 said:
Kenryoku_Maxis said:
Chairman-Mao said:
I can't say as I disagree with this article.

You can't possibly deny the fact that because its a Mario is the only reason it got so much recognition. If it has been the exact same game with different characters and a different name it wouldn't have done well at all.

You could swap out 'Mario' and imput many other games into that Scenario and get the same result.  From Halo 3 to Final Fantasy to Uncharted 2.  You can't play the 'its only selling because of name recognition card' if you're not willing to claim the same thing for all the other games that are selling based on name recognition as well.

I can see you lumping Halo and Final Fantasy with Mario, because the name sells the game.  But I don't agree that Uncharted 2 belongs in that category.  The sales of that game are good, but not spectacular, and it is selling on its own merits.  Uncharted 1 was a similar ciritical hit, but not so much a commercial hype machine.  Naughty DOg could have conituned the Jak and Daxter series, if they wanted to live on hype alone.

I think Uncharted 2 would belong in that category although at a lesser degree. Uncharted 1 established the name of the franchise which contributes to the much bigger opening Uncharted 2 had. If Uncharted 2 is called Adventure in Tibet (as a new IP), I'm sure it would not sell that well.



MikeB predicts that the PS3 will sell about 140 million units by the end of 2016 and triple the amount of 360s in the long run.

radiantshadow92 said:
Zucas said:

Well here's my comment I left IGN in that little article. I'm sure they'll appreciate it and know that people of logic will:

"Haha well this is a silly editorial. First and foremost, both games are very good, and show that platforming is still well and alive even in 2009.

Where you failed first is of course you didn't actually take down New Super Mario Bros Wii but simply boasted some of the features of Splosion Man. It's called a suppressed information fallacy and indeed illogical. If the author had thought on an analytical level rather than a purely biased one, they could have given a fair comparison.

I'm all for thinking that games get overhyped and overrated but none of that was proven here. Splosion man offers 4 player online co-op, but it is also plagued by lag. Splosion Man offers 100 levels, but none are even close to the same length as that of the NSMB Wii levels. Splosion Man is more original, simply becuase it is a new IP, but it doesn't mean that the game is actually a better one.

Sure if you simply find everything that Splosion Man has over NSMB Wii you can make it sound like you've actually stated something true. But all you've done is stated something completely illogical. You could have discussed which had better level design (key in platformers), which was more enjoyable, which had more replay value, which multi player worked better or more fun, etc. You could have gone over actual evidence and given a fair comparison but ya didn't.

It is because of that I can label this editorial as lazy. How ironic. Actually a lot of these so called articles IGN has written lately about all three hardware developers have been rather lately. Been all about shock value of what is being said rather than trying to say something that was well thought out. IGN you are lazy and selling out for hits. How funny."

this was quite good, but not all true, all of the reasons why the game was not all that was in the review, this article was not a review of the game, but more like a hey this game is actually better, this shoulda been goty article....so yeah...but nice read overall, you bring some good valid points, too bad they wont read it lulz =/

Well true it wasn't a review but still a comparison.  Therefore might want to compare everything.  But he knew if he did that, he obviously wouldn't have come up with the same answer or would have had to make some wild streches.  Therefore he did something you usually see out of politicians or political pundits... only tell them part of the story instead of the whole of it and act as if you have exhausted all options.  Simply illogical and therefore nothing we should take seriously. Other than that though, is he really just pits two things against each other for no forseeable reason whatsoever.  Both are great games in their own right, why use them for his own personal biases.  I think he has disrespected both Nintendo and the creators of Splosion Man along with the games themselves by using them for his petty indifferences.

But yea no one will read it or ever know it exists other than there but I can deal with that haha.  As long as someone said it haha.



Ah Nintendo turning "gaming journalist" into hate machines. Perfect!