New Super Mario Bros. Wii

[Conando]

The same issue of EDGE gave the blatantly mediocre Operation Flashpoint an eight. Their scores have been pretty weird over the last couple of years.

Isn't that game like...4 years old? Why were they reviewing it in the latest issue? Kind of odd.

Anyway...are we really going to start this all over again? We've been doing it for a year now. Why don't we just stop and play, or not play, the damn game when it comes out. There's no use whining now.

[speedfreak]

Still, I'm looking forward to this "great extra" that ONM keep on talking about. I can't see why they would big it up so much if it was just a title screen change.

Meh, I don't trust ONM honestly. I think it will end up being something okay and ONM are just blowing it out of proportion. I'd love a "great extra", but I'm cynical and I don't think Nintendo will deliver anything nearly as cool as Luigi in Galaxy. Honestly if there aren't any secret characters what could be so "great" about this "extra"? Keep in mind there aren't any remade classic levels either. I honestly am drawing a blank.

[Conando]

It's probably just something like the weird alternate Mario World. Koopas wearing Mario masks or something.

[SuperLink]

Meh, I don't trust ONM honestly. I think it will end up being something okay and ONM are just blowing it out of proportion. I'd love a "great extra", but I'm cynical and I don't think Nintendo will deliver anything nearly as cool as Luigi in Galaxy. Honestly if there aren't any secret characters what could be so "great" about this "extra"? Keep in mind there aren't any remade classic levels either. I honestly am drawing a blank.

I'm drawing a blank too, it's one of the only reasons I still have hope for other characters.

But at the same time I don't see why ONM would say "you would gladly play the game through again" if this extra was OK? I can see a lot of people complaining about this and it wouldn't go down well with their review almost completely free of criticism.

I maintain that Luigi in Galaxy is probably the greatest surprise unlockable in gaming history, Nintendo didn't have to, and even when Luigi was an NPC too, it was really quite a jaw dropping moment for me

Which is why I hoped we'd get something great this time too.

[speedfreak]

It's probably just something like the weird alternate Mario World. Koopas wearing Mario masks or something.

Do you consider that a great extra? I sure don't. Without extra playable characters I really don't think the extra ONM are referring to can be great. I'd consider extra characters a great extra. Anything else will likely disappoint......well me at least. Not a big deal though. I just honestly don't think this extra will be anything special. If I'm wrong I'll be pleasantly surprised.

I maintain that Luigi in Galaxy is probably the greatest surprise unlockable in gaming history, Nintendo didn't have to, and even when Luigi was an NPC too, it was really quite a jaw dropping moment for me

Which is why I hoped we'd get something great this time too.

Well it's certainly one of Nintendo's best surprises. Makes me wonder if we'll get anything special for Galaxy 2. Luigi should be a given, but I hope we get something even better. If it's just Luigi again it would still be neat but predictable. Not much of an awesome surprise when you did the same thing last time. Maybe we'll be able to do a game as Peach in Galaxy 2.

Edited October 25, 2009 by speedfreak

[Conando]

Does it really matter? I play 2D Mario games through more than once anyway.

[SuperLink]

Maybe we'll be able to do a game as Peach in Galaxy 2.

Hahah, I wouldn't count on it, but that would be really awesome

Personally I'd just be happy to have Luigi unlockable again. I think that was a good enough surprise for 2 games! Especially since I would be really disappointed if he wasn't unlockable... which isn't very likely I guess.

Edited October 26, 2009 by SuperDarkLink

[Thirsty Pocket]

Hold on a moment. Just why is Luigi all that great of an unlockable? He's just a slippery Mario who jumps higher. If you wanna talk great unlockables, I'd say Metaknight in Kirby Superstar Ultra. At least he's sorta different, and has his own final boss...

Now if Wario or Bowser or some character that played nothing like Mario were unlockable ( and worked well... can't stress that enough as a Sonic fan... ) then it would be the greatest, because it would be like playing the game in a whole new way.

That's not to say I didn't appreciate Luigi in Galaxy.

As for the Toads... I can't hide the dissapointment. Mario games have tons of playable characters in the spinoffs, and the one time it should count, we only get 4 to choose from, and two of them are nameless Toads. They aren't even members of the Toad brigade or the blue one would have glasses! In any case, it doesn't matter much, because I will be flying solo 80% of the time, and my bud will definitely not pick the Toads. But being Wario when I played with my bud on his file would have been nice.

[Dr. Mechano]

Hold on a moment. Just why is Luigi all that great of an unlockable? He's just a slippery Mario who jumps higher. If you wanna talk great unlockables, I'd say Metaknight in Kirby Superstar Ultra. At least he's sorta different, and has his own final boss...

Luigi is a lovable and endearing character. Similar or not, it means a lot to his fans.

Plus, those subtle differences do make the game a bit more challenging in their own way, I feel.

[SuperLink]

I think I really appreciate Luigi because Mario Galaxy was huge enough as it is, and after Mario 64 and Sunshine what was I expecting? Not this! There's a first for everything and I'm just really glad that Luigi's first proper 3D outing was in Galaxy.

Also I just love having more characters to play as. I've wanted Luigi unlockable in a 3D Mario since Mario 64 was released (Mario 64 DS was pretty awesome in that way too, shame they ruined a few things in the process..)

EDIT: And yes, Super Luigi Galaxy was more challenging in ways. To me it almost felt like playing it for the first time all over again! Almost.

PS. Luigi is one of my favourite Mario characters, along with Wario, Yoshi and Peach.

Edited October 26, 2009 by SuperDarkLink

[Thirsty Pocket]

I actually found being Luigi easier. The only part that felt more difficult were the Cosmic races and some of the Purple coins. But it's true that Luigi's tweaks enabled some different feeling play, and that his appearance brought much joy after his absence in SM64 and SMS (and in SMB/SMB3/SMW, seeing as how if you never had anybody to be player 2, you wouln't even SEE Luigi for the most part. )...

But I would still only consider a great unlockable to be something like a character who controls much more differently, or a new level not connected to the main game ( Like Green Hill Zone in SA 2 )

...speaking of, while the Grand finale Galaxy was pretty sweet, even if it was an interactive epilogue with Purple Coins.

[speedfreak]

Does it really matter? I play 2D Mario games through more than once anyway.

No, but I have to admit that even something as simple as a different character (even if it is just a different character model) adds a lot of enjoyment/replay value for me. I loved going through Sonic's levels as Metal Sonic after getting all the emblems in SA. It was only a different character model, but I quite enjoyed it.

[Agent York]

No, but I have to admit that even something as simple as a different character (even if it is just a different character model) adds a lot of enjoyment/replay value for me. I loved going through Sonic's levels as Metal Sonic after getting all the emblems in SA. It was only a different character model, but I quite enjoyed it.

Not to mention Metal Sonic has ULTRA SWEET MOTION BLUUUUURRRR~

Unlockables can be awesome if done right. HOWEVER, if ONM is right, they said there was a really cool 100% unlockable in this game here... We still don't know what it is.

[Tornado]

I'm gonna chime in here once again (so let out your collective groans now):

Why is there so much complaining about a slight imperfection, a single missed opportunity?

Because the entire concept of the game, from announcement to recent interviews over content, has absolutely smacked of laziness and half-assedry (subjective, of course). It isn't a single missed opportunity. It is a plethora of little (and admittedly minor, mostly) things that would easily be correctable (for the most part) and that, when Nintendo is questioned about them, seems to essentially elicit a reaction (or at least a perceived one) of "we couldn't be bothered to do any better than this;" which is a terrible attitude to give off for a series such as this.

Speaking as someone who has little interest in the game in the first place largely for an entirely different reason (I didn't really like the original game that much, and none of the differences in this one seem like they would cause me to change my mind about it), that is the general idea that I seem to be getting from the reaction to the game, and it isn't one that I can entirely disagree with. Granted, how much of that reaction is overblown is up to debate; but writing it off as "People who have these niggling problems with this game are spoiled" is a crass reaction.

Hold on a moment. Just why is Luigi all that great of an unlockable? He's just a slippery Mario who jumps higher.

Because Luigi is awesome.

Edited October 26, 2009 by Tornado

[Mollfie]

Has anyone seen this yet? ONM posted up all the Q&As

http://www.officialnintendomagazine.co.uk/article.php?id=12629

[SuperLink]

Thanks Tornado, finally someone else who gets what I'm seeing here... =_=

What I want to know is how a game with so many "imperfections" can get a 96% from ONM. :/ That's not how gaming reviews should work, if this one had the promised amount of stages, Yoshi in all stages, online CoOp and more characters, would they give it 97%? 98%?

Actually this could be remedied simply if Nintendo would just adopt an /10 or /20 system.. xP

The point I'm trying to make it, there is ridiculous amount of space for improvement in this title, and ONM score it as if it's almost perfect. From the sounds of things they liked the stage design quite a lot, but that's not the only thing that comes into a review. I refuse to believe that noone that ONM was disappointed by anything else than Yoshi.

Edited October 26, 2009 by SuperDarkLink

[Agent York]

Thanks Tornado, finally someone else who gets what I'm seeing here... =_=

What I want to know is how a game with so many "imperfections" can get a 96% from ONM. :/ That's not how gaming reviews should work, if this one had the promised amount of stages, Yoshi in all stages, online CoOp and more characters, would they give it 97%? 98%?

Actually this could be remedied simply if Nintendo would just adopt an /10 or /20 system.. xP

The point I'm trying to make it, there is ridiculous amount of space for improvement in this title, and ONM score it as if it's almost perfect. From the sounds of things they liked the stage design quite a lot, but that's not the only thing that comes into a review. I refuse to believe that noone that ONM was disappointed by anything else than Yoshi.

Did it ever occur to you maybe the game is, you know, fun? It can do without those features and still be a blast?

Quality>>>>>>Quantity

/topic

Edited October 26, 2009 by Dusk the Crypt Keeper

[SuperLink]

Did it ever occur to you maybe the game is, you know, fun? It can do without those features and still be a blast?

Quality>>>>>>Quantity

Isn't that what gaming is for?

Right I forgot, we could only have quantity OR quality. Shit. A game is fun so we can excuse other nags entirely. Let's pretend that this game couldn't be quite a bit better if it had as many stages as Mario World, if you could ride Yoshi in any stage (something that a game nearly 20 years old could do fine), if fans could be whoever they wanted to be.

So it's a blast, I shouldn't be allowed to want better that could be so easily achieved?

Are you saying that if NSMBW had NES visuals and the titular character was a red blob who jumped on the heads of other red blobs it wouldn't make a difference as long as the gameplay was fun?

Would 2 games with identical gameplay but one with much more "pleasing" elements both get the same score?

Gaming reviews should take everything from a game into account, this is the same Mario gameplay we've had for 20 years, and gameplay is just one important factor of game development.

You can't give a game a near perfect score if it doesn't even rival games of 20 years ago in terms of content, it's ridiculous.

EDIT: Arg, think of it this way.

Mario Galaxy has been out for a few years now, and I can barely think of any way to improve it, it's deserving of a near perfect score.

This isn't even out yet and I can think of countless ways to improve it already, how can a game like that get a score of par with the likes of Twilight Princess or Mario Galaxy, both of which are epic gaming experiences? I doubt anyone in this entire forum will get the feeling of awe and immersion they got from either of those two games (no matter what you thought of TP...) Being "fun" just isn't on the same level, and anyone who's played a lot of Nintendo games should know that.

Edited October 26, 2009 by SuperDarkLink

[Agent York]

Isn't that what gaming is for?

Right I forgot, we could only have quantity OR quality. Shit. A game is fun so we can excuse other nags entirely. Let's pretend that this game couldn't be quite a bit better if it had as many stages as Mario World, if you could ride Yoshi in any stage (something that a game nearly 20 years old could do fine), if fans could be whoever they wanted to be.

Are you saying that if NSMBW had NES visuals and the titular character was a red blob who jumped on the heads of other red blobs it wouldn't make a difference as long as the gameplay was fun?

Would 2 games with identical gameplay but one with much more "pleasing" elements both get the same score?

Gaming reviews should take everything from a game into account, this is the same Mario gameplay we've had for 20 years, and gameplay is just one important factor of game development.

Hmn, interesting, buuuuuut-

Developers when they make a game set out to do something. Sometimes things they set out to do may be limited. Now, you speak of "nags" this game has. However, I don't see "nags", I see things that were not included. There is a difference. Because this wasn't things the developers were "too lazy to add", it's because it wasn't in their vision or choosing to add this stuff. They had an idea, they made that idea. I'm sorry that idea didn't include yoshi all over the place and playable Peach or whaever.

Honestly, sometimes less is more. You can get on me about that, but what I'm saying is if this game was overpacked with every little fans demand, it would not be the same game. It might loose it's very core of the experience in the process. Think about it. Lets say every Mario character in the world was playable, there was a million stages, and the graphics were surpassing that of any game known to man with 100 player online multiplayer. Now, I'm not saying this game wouldn't be freaking sweet, but it wouldn't be the same game. It would be something completely different than it was, which has been evident all this time.

the developers had an idea. They made it. Sorry their idea wasn't the same as yours.

And hey, Mega Man 9 has Nes style graphics and was still fun. Less was more there. If this game was a blast, it could have Nes style graphics and get away with it. I'm serious.

The two games wouldn't be identical if they had differences now, would they? What you define as pleasing anyways to another person would be horrible. It's all based on perception.

So what YOU are saying is that gaming reviewers should think to themselves "OMG, how come they didn't put this and this and that in this game? God, lets deduct points because they didn't add in every little fantasy we wanted!"

No, they base their reviews on what the game IS, not what it COULD BE. If they had a blast with this game as it is, it's their job to report it. Sucky time, report it. It's NOT their job to whine about what ISN'T in the game because then you get a theoretical list of infinite possibilities.

EDIT: And since you've been a good sport, I'll edit to your edit.

EDIT: Arg, think of it this way.

Mario Galaxy has been out for a few years now, and I can barely think of any way to improve it, it's deserving of a near perfect score.

This isn't even out yet and I can think of countless ways to improve it already, how can a game like that get a score of par with the likes of Twilight Princess of Mario Galaxy, both of which are epic gaming experiences. I doubt anyone in this entire forum will get the feeling of awe and immersion they got from either of those two games (no matter what you thought of TP...) Being "fun" just isn't on the same level, and anyone who's played a lot of Nintendo games should know that.

Hey, I would consider Four Sword Adventures one of the best multiplayer games ever made. I could complain it has SNES graphics, could have more worlds, and have more character playable than four different colored Links, and done this and that, but at the end of the day, I love the game, I enjoy it, and I wasn't the only one. What they did have was fun, and that is all that matters since what I enjoyed is what they sent out to create.

Edited October 26, 2009 by Dusk the Crypt Keeper

[Cortez]

Is the game Nunchuk compatible? I hate the D-pad.

No.

D=

[SuperLink]

They had an idea, they made that idea. I'm sorry that idea didn't include yoshi all over the place and playable Peach or whaever.

I find it hilarious that you think not having Yoshi in all stages when Mario World so long ago did it and it's one of the greatest Mario games of all time.

Lets say every Mario character in the world was playable, there was a million stages, and the graphics were surpassing that of any game known to man with 100 player online multiplayer. Now, I'm not saying this game wouldn't be freaking sweet, but it wouldn't be the same game. It would be something completely different than it was, which has been evident all this time.

Where's the moderation? Personally that game sounds ridiculous, the fans didn't ask for much at all, just a few extra characters and for it to be atleast as long as games from 20 years ago.

And hey, Mega Man 9 has Nes style graphics and was still fun. Less was more there. If this game was a blast, it could have Nes style graphics and get away with it. I'm serious.

It could get away with it, but personally I'd rather play Megaman 9 with HD visuals as long as the gameplay mechanics were identical.

The two games wouldn't be identical if they had differences now, would they? What you define as pleasing anyways to another person would be horrible. It's all based on perception.

Sorry that you think 1 or 2 unlockable characters would make the game worse.

So what YOU are saying is that gaming reviewers should think to themselves "OMG, how come they didn't put this and this and that in this game? God, lets deduct points because they didn't add in every little fantasy we wanted!"

No, they base their reviews on what the game IS, not what it COULD BE. If they had a blast with this game as it is, it's their job to report it. Sucky time, report it. It's NOT their job to whine about what ISN'T in the game because then you get a theoretical list of infinite possibilities.

I don't think you got me properly though. How can a game have a near perfect score if it has so many imperfections? Even a reviewer should be able to tell what's lazy, what's a missed opportunity.

"Hey, the gameplay is fun as always, so let's completely forget that Yoshi was playable in all stages in a bigger game about 20 years ago"

Do you seriously believe that the stage designs will be so good that this game can rival Super Mario World despite lacking features that even that had?

EDIT:

Hey, I would consider Four Sword Adventures one of the best multiplayer games ever made. I could complain it has SNES graphics, could have more worlds, and have more character playable than four different colored Links, and done this and that, but at the end of the day, I love the game, I enjoy it, and I wasn't the only one. What they did have was fun, and that is all that matters since what I enjoyed is what they sent out to create.

Four Swords is different, there are hardly any, if any at all characters in the Zelda series fit for playable roles, and if the game needs to fit anywhere in any sort of timeline they couldn't just grab random characters from random games. Not to mention the Four Sword was already and still is now an important part of the Zelda mythos, and potentially added another dimension of possibilities to Zelda's timeline.

The visuals I thought were fine, they were like the high quality sprites and backgrounds I wanted to see in this game, even if some enemy sprites were completely recycled. I didn't like how short it was though.

Edited October 26, 2009 by SuperDarkLink

[speedfreak]

Thanks Tornado, finally someone else who gets what I'm seeing here... =_=

What I want to know is how a game with so many "imperfections" can get a 96% from ONM. :/ That's not how gaming reviews should work, if this one had the promised amount of stages, Yoshi in all stages, online CoOp and more characters, would they give it 97%? 98%?

Actually this could be remedied simply if Nintendo would just adopt an /10 or /20 system.. xP

The point I'm trying to make it, there is ridiculous amount of space for improvement in this title, and ONM score it as if it's almost perfect. From the sounds of things they liked the stage design quite a lot, but that's not the only thing that comes into a review. I refuse to believe that noone that ONM was disappointed by anything else than Yoshi.

What did you expect? They gave Mario and Sonic Winter Olypics a 90 for Wii and 91 for DS. They're alright games, but that's WAY too high IMO.

As far as the things you listed that make NSMBW disappointing or feel lazy to you, I just think to some people it isn't that big a deal. Sure I would have loved more characters but I really don't feel too upset not having them. The only reason anyone expects them is because of the co-op feature this game has. If this was announced as a regular new 2D Mario adventure no one would expect Peach and Wario playable. However, Nintendo did do something extra and give us co-op and with that people wanted the entire Mushroom Kingdom playable. It's understandable to be disappointed, but I personally don't think of this as some huge negative on the game.

As far as Yoshi goes I think the only reason they didn't let you have him in every level is they didn't want to make the game too easy. SMW was made a lot easier because of Yoshi and NSMBW would be even easier because Yoshi can now do his famous flutter jump, which he couldn't do in SMW. I could be wrong but it's my best guess. Even so I still see thins a minor complaint. Sure if your a big Yoshi fan it might be a bummer, but at least you have Galaxy 2 coming.

The online thing has been gone over many, many times. It wouldn't work. Have you played Brawl online? A little lag makes it almost unplayable. Now imagine NSMBW online where every jump, every move you make is critical. There is no way it would run lag free and people would be dieing over bullshit lag reasons. Now before you bring up Mario Kart Wii remember that racing games are a much easier experiences to pull off online.

Now it's perfectly fine to be disappointed. I admit that I'm disappointed with some things too. To be honest there aren't too many games that I didn't find at least one thing that disappointed me. However, I still know that when all is said and done I'm going to have an absolute blast playing this game and those little annoyances don't really matter to me too much.

[SuperLink]

Honestly I'm not too bothered about the online myself, since I know that's mostly the Wii's problem and not the game's. I would want Brawl's online happening again in other series' >>

As for Yoshi, this is Nintendo. If their games are so fantastic that people can ignore lack of fun extras that most games these days have, then they can create stages hard enough for them to be difficult even with Yoshi. Even with Yoshi I found that Mario World was solid.

I've stated my case thousands of times anyway, my current point was just about ONM's score being way too high for the game it is.

Really I'd probably be happy giving this an 8 or 8.5 assuming it's better than NSMB (it looks it anyway), but I just can't accept that ONM thinks a game like this, that has disappointed not just me, but hundreds of other fans in terms of content, is as good as Mario Galaxy.

I just want to be overwhelmed you know? Can anyone honestly say the thought of this game overwhelms them? And don't start saying that 2D Mario can't overwhelm people, because I know it can (World was pretty overwhelming imo), they just need to hurry up and make it happen.

Edited October 26, 2009 by SuperDarkLink

[Agent York]

Lots of points, some fair and some BS, but lots of putting words into my mouth

Look, I know what you're saying but at the same time what you're saying is just pulling as much shit from places as it is. This game has what it has, I doubt it was their biggest concern whenever another character got it. I'm not saying an extra character wouldn't be dandy, but you state it like it's an expectation of the industry for developers to listen to the fans.

Speaking completely from my experience, it is great to please the fans, but don't listen to them. Too many conflictions with them and it's just best for you and your team to make what you set out to do. They set out to make a new Mario platformer. I will admit the yoshi thing sounds annoying to me but it's not game breaking for me, nor is other characters. It sounds weird, but Blue Toad has grown on me. If not for you, then so be it.

Though I am not calling them lazy, especially when their is evidence they put a lot of detail into the game.

Also I wanted to post this as a separate post (but can't) since I know it would get missed if I said it elsewhere, but there is evidence there will be more than 80 stages still... Just not all in the main game. Apparently their are other stages along with all the regular stages in coin mode for instance. Also lots of secrets they say, not revealing, could be a stage. *shruga*

Edited October 26, 2009 by Dusk the Crypt Keeper

[SuperLink]

Look, I know what you're saying but at the same time what you're saying is just pulling as much shit from places as it is. This game has what it has, I doubt it was their biggest concern whenever another character got it. I'm not saying an extra character wouldn't be dandy, but you state it like it's an expectation of the industry for developers to listen to the fans.

Speaking completely from my experience, it is great to please the fans, but don't listen to them. Too many conflictions with them and it's just best for you and your team to make what you set out to do. They set out to make a new Mario platformer. I will admit the yoshi thing sounds annoying to me but it's not game breaking for me, nor is other characters. It sounds weird, but Blue Toad has grown on me. If not for you, then so be it.

Though I am not calling them lazy, especially when their is evidence they put a lot of detail into the game.

None of these things are game breaking, but they're disappointments that could have easily been included. Yes listening to the fans is a bad idea, we're on a Sonic forum, we should know that better than anyone, but giving the fans something they'll like (two different things) is a fantastic idea. Giving us a couple of other characters to play as would have gone over very well, that I can assure you with certainty. And if you ask me the Yoshi thing is a design flaw, unless they give a good reason for it (they never do) I can't see how you can see it any other way.

And I'd say a large part of the industry are taking fan feedback a lot more often, especially Microsoft. Compared to them Nintendo have like 0 community contact.

Also I wanted to post this as a separate post (but can't) since I know it would get missed if I said it elsewhere, but there is evidence there will be more than 80 stages still... Just not all in the main game. Apparently their are other stages along with all the regular stages in coin mode for instance. Also lots of secrets they say, not revealing, could be a stage. *shruga*

That would be nice, I'm still looking forward to this "great secret" ONM keep talking about.

But right now NSMBW sounds like NSMB with CoOp, which is great and I'm looking forward to it, but I was heavily disappointed with NSMB which is really putting a downer on my faith in Nintendo's ability to make a 2D Mario anywhere near the level of Mario World again. Heck I'm more excited for the 0 hype Spirit Tracks than this.

@ SpeedFreak's post on the next page.

^Read above^

There's nothing particularly overwhelming about NSMB with CoOp, whether you've played it or not. SMW was huge compared to its predecessors, which is why it was overwhelming.

Edited October 26, 2009 by SuperDarkLink