Your thoughts on this video of criticisms against Super Mario Galaxy?

Cheeze

Cheeze

Blooper
I'm tired, I couldn't think of a better title.

WARNING: The video in question is 35 minutes long.


Quick synopsis: The uploader lists four main problems that this game has: it doesn't know what kind of Mario game it is, it isn't a good "course clear" game, it doesn't love its own ideas, and it's linear as heck.

I love Super Mario Galaxy. It's my favorite Mario platformer AND it's my favorite platforming game of all time. That being said, Barry (I'm assuming this is the Game Grumps guy? I don't follow them anymore; I just remember they had a Barry and I heard some Egoraptor in the video) brought up some interesting points. However, I'm going to chalk it up to different strokes for different folks. I can see where he's coming from, but his criticisms are not gonna stop me from playing SMG again.
 
The criticisms are not for you to stop playing, he's just giving his opinion.

Yes, it does feel linear at times, especially if you compare it to previous 3D Mario Games and Odyssey. But that is NOT what makes Galaxy what it is.
 
oh whoops I didn't see we already had a thread for this

this was a really great video, and Barry brought up a lot of good points. some of his critiques really struck a nerve with me and helped me realize why I don't praise the galaxy titles to the extent I do with 64 and sunshine. that being said, it also made me realize I want Nintendo to re-visit the planetoid idea in the future
 
I agree with most things on here, but it’s still my all-time favorite game.
 
Iron Man said:
The criticisms are not for you to stop playing
Click to expand...

I know. I'm just saying I still love the game and I'll keep playing it despite the criticisms.
 
I generally agree with his points. The powerup thing is a real problem with both games. Galaxy 2 just exacerbated though. Galaxy 2 even had the opportunity to bring back missed concepts, but they failed. I can see a little better how Galaxy 2 improved a bit with the level design, maybe, but I expected bigger and better worlds. Galaxy 2 was just more of the same, but even more linear, so I was really disappointed in it. Galaxy 2 had egregious 2.5D segments.

It's also my opinion that Odyssey is much better than either Galaxy. And I liked Galaxy, hated Galaxy 2. Don't see why people would like Galaxies more, but okay.
 
Princess Mario said:
Don't see why people would like Galaxies more, but okay.
Click to expand...

You can play as Luigi in them
 
Yes, but this Luigi is hideously deformed.
 
I like all 3D Marios.
 
He makes good points, but I'm having a hard time seeing them as really being as big of a problem as he says. Also, the solution he proposes which basically amounted to turning Galaxy into Odyssey gameplay-wise is not the right solution. I think Galaxy's gameplay should be differentiated from Odyssey's gameplay because they're two different experiences that are at essence equally good. I don't think more exploration is totally necessary for Galaxy, but it all comes down to the fact that the things he criticizes don't make the game any less enjoyable for me and therefore personal taste causes the difference in opinions.
 
It's just typical "linear = bad" arguments that I see all the time.
 
Princess Mario said:
Yes, but this Luigi is hideously deformed.
Click to expand...

Who cares.
 
Mcmadness said:
It's just typical "linear = bad" arguments that I see all the time.
Click to expand...
He didn't necessarily say linear = bad. He more pegs on how Galaxy tries to be both. Galaxy gives you an impression that you'll be retreading on same Galaxies but with other paths you can take like in Super Mario 64. This is done generally in Good Egg, and Good Egg's an exception. He provides examples where other levels railroad you to take a specific route. But there is some degree of exploration as from the first impressions in Good Egg. It doesn't go much beyond that. He's spot on about Good Egg giving you those impressions and then not really developing those, as I've experienced something similar when retreading Good Egg, when I thought "hey, they don't do that path-setting thing very often in the entire game, do they?". He talked about how the "bigger" worlds in both galaxies were really empty and he's also spot-on. When they try to be "open", it ends up being huge expanses of nothing.

I also think linear just doesn't work as well for the outer space. I think a more open approach to a game where it takes place in space, and you can fill that space with really interesting planets you can visit rather than just go on a railroad and make some stops here and there. But seriously, it's outer space, that environment is asking for open exploration. It'll be like ocean exploring and you have to visit islands in a set order.

He's also spot-on with the powerups and the overreliance on one-off ideas. I'm not sure why Odyssey's capture gimmick didn't give me the "geez I wish there were more of that capture" while Galaxy 1 & 2 were littered with those feelings. I think Odyssey has a ton of captures, Galaxy doesn't, so Galaxy might feel more half-baked.

One oddity of his argument would be how he praised Galaxy 2 for being MORE linear-focused than 1, which is funny because his desire for Galaxy would be more of Odyssey-like gameplay. Galaxy 2 disappointed me for being MORE linear because I thought they'd really flesh out worlds, but Galaxy 2 is more of the same and Galaxy 2 is still, to me, really lame and even more forgettable than Galaxy 1. I still think Galaxy 2 has way too much 2.5D segments and way too much rehashing. Again, his examples of "lost potential", like Melty Monster Galaxy, is spot on.

I also had nearly the same impression about the third level in Freezeflame being a complete chaotic mashup, and his suggestion to make Mario cause it by causing two worlds to collide with each other would actually be right what I like to see. We got a glimpse of it in Cosmic Cove, where the level after you freeze the zone seems to have remain frozen.

So I agree with most of his arguments though I don't think Galaxy 2's level design is necessarily better. I think it's more suitable for the linear gameplay, but I didn't want more linear gameplay in forgettable 2.5d platforming and blatant recycling like Shiverburn or Toilet Bowl Galaxy redux while at the same time, not really expanding on the idea of Mario traveling through space.
 
I agree with almost NOTHING in this video. But i still gave it a like because of how well made it was. I even subscribed! The video has alot of interesting points and the game is not perfect. Especialy the first one. I like the video.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back