Yet another perfect score for the increasingly acclaimed SMG2!

  • 0 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by Yummylee (21496 posts) -

If anyone was to guess...I'm sure they'd guess right with gamespot being the other.  
Seems like 10s are really starting to rise along with the generations. Suffice to say, SMG2, whether people respect its quality or not, is souring through the skys and reaching the...Galaxies...ugh...with its critical synopsis.

Online
#2 Posted by eclipsesis (1242 posts) -

Isn't this this the best reviewed game this year?

#3 Posted by Rhaknar (5939 posts) -

who doesn't respect the game's quality? the most i heard is people not respecting a game getting 10s, in general. I haven't seen anyone say "galaxy 2 sucks man!" or even "galax2 is overrated"

#4 Edited by Scrumdidlyumptious (1639 posts) -

It's probably a great game, but Mario games can be a little less great than other games and still get a 10. They don't need to try as hard. This was to be expected. I won't believe all the glowing reviews until I try it for myself for that reason.

#5 Posted by NekuSakuraba (7240 posts) -

I would hate to be a Wii hater on IGN or Gamespot right now.

#6 Edited by Yummylee (21496 posts) -
@Rhaknar said:

" who doesn't respect the game's quality? the most i heard is people not respecting a game getting 10s, in general. I haven't seen anyone say "galaxy 2 sucks man!" or even "galax2 is overrated" "

Oh they're here...sooommmmewheeeeere.
Online
#7 Posted by mutha3 (4985 posts) -
@Scrumdidlyumptious said:
" It's probably a great game, but Mario games can be a little less great than other games and still get a 10. They don't need to try as hard. This was to be expected. I won't believe all the glowing reviews until I try it for myself for that reason. "
Nonsense. 
 
Here's a secret: the reason Mario games tend to get amazing scores.....is because they tend to be amazing games.
#8 Posted by 02sfraser (847 posts) -
@Scrumdidlyumptious said:
" It's probably a great game, but Mario games can be a little less great than other games and still get a 10. They don't need to try as hard. This was to be expected. I won't believe all the glowing reviews until I try it for myself for that reason. "
i totally disagree. due to mario being around for so long and always trying different things i think it has to try just as hard to get a 10 than any other game. it's Nintendo always pushing to do the best that gets there games these scores
#9 Posted by Slippery (103 posts) -

Personally I thought SMG got the difficulty curve all wrong, it just wasn't challenging for the first 75% or so of the stars, which made me not really want to keep playing.
 
(When I say first 75% this is from people who kept going, I stopped after getting enough to end the game)
 
If they can fix that though, I'll be totally up to play SMG2, I know my sister will buy it so not like I have to pay for it :P

#10 Posted by JJWeatherman (14558 posts) -

Seems kinda crazy to give a game a perfect score on the 10 point scale. Giant Bomb's 5 star system is more understandable since there isn't as much wiggle room.

#11 Edited by ChickenPants (934 posts) -
@JJWeatherman said:

" Seems kinda crazy to give a game a perfect score on the 10 point scale. Giant Bomb's 5 star system is more understandable since there isn't as much wiggle room. "

Well gamespot's is really a 20 point scale while IGN might as well be doing a 100 point scale if you count the possible divisions they use, so yeah even more crazy.
 
100 point scales like IGN's are complete BS though.
#12 Posted by JJWeatherman (14558 posts) -
@ChickenPants said:
" @JJWeatherman said:

" Seems kinda crazy to give a game a perfect score on the 10 point scale. Giant Bomb's 5 star system is more understandable since there isn't as much wiggle room. "

Well gamespot's is really a 20 point scale while IGN might as well be doing a 100 point scale if you count the possible divisions they use, so yeah even more crazy. 100 point scales like IGN's are complete BS though. "
Yeah, basically with any scale that uses 10 or more options, it should be damn near impossible to score a 10. I mean come on, where do you go from there? Are they gonna add an 11?
#13 Posted by Toms115 (2316 posts) -

i don't really believe in perfect scores, but if it's getting "perfect" tens everywhere, it must be pretty good lol.

#14 Edited by Willy105 (4690 posts) -

I don't believe in perfect scores, but if they and all these other sites believe the game deserves it, then even better.
 
@Scrumdidlyumptious said:

" It's probably a great game, but Mario games can be a little less great than other games and still get a 10. They don't need to try as hard. This was to be expected. I won't believe all the glowing reviews until I try it for myself for that reason. "

It's the other way around. Mario games are held to a lot higher standards than other games, simply because of the pedigree of the brand and development team. Which is why Super Mario Sunshine got lower scores and yet still was one of the most critically acclaimed games in the previous generation.
#15 Posted by MrRedwine (430 posts) -
@ChickenPants said:
" @JJWeatherman said:

" Seems kinda crazy to give a game a perfect score on the 10 point scale. Giant Bomb's 5 star system is more understandable since there isn't as much wiggle room. "

Well gamespot's is really a 20 point scale while IGN might as well be doing a 100 point scale if you count the possible divisions they use, so yeah even more crazy. 100 point scales like IGN's are complete BS though. "
Actually, Giant Bomb editors do have a 5 point scale, 1 to 5 stars, no half stars.  Users can submit half star scores, but not the editors.  At least that's the way it was when it started.
#16 Posted by Icemael (6316 posts) -

Could people please stop complaining about "perfect scores"? There is no such thing as a perfect score.

You know when the doctor asks you how much pain you're in on a scale from 1 to 10? Does the answer "10" mean "perfect, ultimate pain"? Of course not! It just means that the patient is in one hell of a lot of fucking pain. And similarly, giving a video game a 10/10 means the game is one hell of a lot of fucking fun.

#17 Posted by Mushir (2389 posts) -
@Icemael said:
" Could people please stop complaining about "perfect scores"? There is no such thing as a perfect score.

You know when the doctor asks you how much pain you're in on a scale from 1 to 10? Does the answer "10" mean "perfect, ultimate pain"? Of course not! It just means that the patient is in one hell of a lot of fucking pain. And similarly, giving a video game a 10/10 means the game is one hell of a lot of fucking fun. "
That's a nice way of explaining it.
#18 Posted by Jazz (2256 posts) -

mario game scores well. 
Headline at 10! 
 
*goes back to sleep*

#19 Posted by Geno (6477 posts) -

Seems like we have a GOTY on our hands. I would like to see ME2 and SMG2 duke it out in December. Or there may be a game released better than either of them before then 0_o. Last Guardian perhaps? 

#20 Posted by mutha3 (4985 posts) -
@Icemael said:
" Could people please stop complaining about "perfect scores"? There is no such thing as a perfect score.

You know when the doctor asks you how much pain you're in on a scale from 1 to 10? Does the answer "10" mean "perfect, ultimate pain"? Of course not! It just means that the patient is in one hell of a lot of fucking pain. And similarly, giving a video game a 10/10 means the game is one hell of a lot of fucking fun. "
Didn't you know?
 
Doctors reserve the '10' for the most painful recorded death in human history. Just like videogame critics do with videogames!
 
#21 Posted by oldschool (7264 posts) -

Sadly, it will probably make me sick, physically, just like the first and that sickness may score a 10.  Still going to buy it though.

#22 Posted by Chokobo (1228 posts) -

Local man shocked that good game gets good reviews; makes disgusted thread on internet message board.

#23 Posted by CharlesAlanRatliff (5408 posts) -

Picking it up tomorrow! Soooo many games.

#24 Posted by CharlieTuna (328 posts) -

I really don't see why 3D Marios get these scores, I even hated Mario 64. Not for me I guess.

#25 Posted by Yummylee (21496 posts) -
@Chokobo said:
" Local man shocked that good game gets good reviews; makes disgusted thread on internet message board. "
I reeeally hope that isn't referring to me. Otherwise you'll just be make yourself look like a moron.  
For starters, I'm not shocked nor disgusted about SMG2s reviews which you'de easily pick up if you read my OP. I'm completely neutral in it all and only posted the thread as a notice.
Online
#26 Posted by Lambert (404 posts) -

Red Dead Redemption is better.

#27 Posted by Red (5994 posts) -

Only thing I'm suspicious about is the fact that these sites gave the first SMG a lower score. 
 
 
Although most of my problem with these scores is from the stigma that comes with giving a perfect score on /100 sites. I just prefer GiantBomb's /5 system a billion times more.

#28 Posted by baconbits33 (1156 posts) -

I didn't enjoy the first game at all, my bro loved it to death though so I understand that for a lot of people this is kinda like the game of the year, not my cup of tea though personally.

#29 Posted by ArchScabby (5809 posts) -

I guess I'll be borrowing my sister's Wii for this one.  I don't have to have played the first one do I?  I mean, it's a Mario game.

#30 Edited by mutha3 (4985 posts) -

Man I should get a Super Mario Defence Force avatar for this, but...here we go:
 

@ChristOnIce

said:

" Frankly, such scores just reinforce my skepticism with a Mario game.  Both Mario and Zelda are held to a lower standard than other titles.

 
 Which is why people kept harping on SMG2  to be a ''expansion pack''(while simultaneously praising generic military shooter #1634)


So what if they've refused to grow and incorporate technological standards?  
  

 Maybe you haven't' realized, but SMG is easily the most graphically advanced title on the Wii. It also has orchestrated music and some of the industries best composers, artists and game designers.
 


So what if they are wholly lacking in a good story or character development?  
  

UGH
 
they don't try to have that crap. I don't even get this argument, 99% of videogame narratives are nothing short of embarrassing, and the remaining 1% worth a damn is clearly inferior to pretty much any storytelling medium. Even anime and comics are consistently better then fucking videogames.
 
Mario Galaxy is a perfection of the thing that makes videogames, videogames: 
 
Gameplay mechanics. Level Design. Controls.
 

 


So what if Mario still disregards any concept of internal consistency, logic, or conceit? 

Why should they restrict their creativity on the basis of having ''internal logic'''which really nobody gives a  flying fuck about when they're playing as a fat man flying through space on a dinosaur balloon.
 
 


So what if there's no challenge to be found and difficulty options are absent? 
 

SMG was perfectly balanced for players of all skills. If you were a newbie? there where still more then enough stars for you too collect to reach the end credits. But if you were a veteran there were plenty of stars which were ball-crushingly hard.
 
Maybe you like cutscene-loaded, expostion-heavy, embarresing-conspiracy-theory-bullshit military shooters. But I'd rather take this amazingly designed game.
#31 Posted by Cube (4366 posts) -

If GameSpot says it's a 10, it's a 10. 
 
Seriously, Gamespot is usually pretty cynical.

#32 Posted by mutha3 (4985 posts) -
@Cube: Who takes GS seriously these days? They are like Giant Bomb, only inferior.
#33 Posted by Cube (4366 posts) -
@mutha3 said:
" @Cube: Who takes GS seriously these days? They are like Giant Bomb, only inferior. "
Yes, their Red Dead Redemption review was way worse than Giant Bomb's.  
 
Wait... 
 
Giant Bomb is not a credible review source. At least Gamespot sticks to reviewing games that people actually care about, and not just Jungler. 
#34 Posted by mutha3 (4985 posts) -
@Cube: 
 
 I don't think  GB is a very credible source for reviews either:P 
 
But, at least they make up for it by having a myriad of entertaining content....GS  special features are terrible ever since the departure of Rich, Jeff and Ryan.
#35 Posted by Cube (4366 posts) -
@mutha3: GameSpot as a video content/feature site has been a joke forever. 
 
But this thread is about the review, lol. Pretty sad for GB when a GOTY contender comes out and they don't even review it. Coupled with their reviews of BlazBlue and MK vs. DCU, I can't take them seriously. 
 
Sites like IGN, GameSpot, and even 1UP at least assign reviews to people where we don't know their level of excitement for the game. 
#36 Posted by Endogene (4741 posts) -
@ArchScabby said:
" I guess I'll be borrowing my sister's Wii for this one.  I don't have to have played the first one do I?  I mean, it's a Mario game. "
You will be getting more out of it actually if you have played the first one. There are a lot of returning characters whose existence is not really explained in the second game.
#37 Posted by TMThomsen (2071 posts) -

I haven't played a Mario game since Mario 64. If anyone would sponsor me a Wii I'll be sure to check it out.

#38 Posted by TheGreatGuero (9130 posts) -

So much for Red Dead being GOTY...

#39 Edited by ryanwho (12082 posts) -
@ChristOnIce said:

" Frankly, such scores just reinforce my skepticism with a Mario game.  Both Mario and Zelda are held to a lower standard than other titles.  So what if they've refused to grow and incorporate technological standards?  So what if they are wholly lacking in a good story or character development?  So what if Mario still disregards any concept of internal consistency, logic, or conceit?  So what if there's no challenge to be found and difficulty options are absent?   "

Are these questions supposed to be rhetorical? Because the better question is who the fuck plays a video game, of all things, for any of this shit? Also the game isn't out yet and somehow you know there's no challenge to be found. Most games that have difficulty levels just give the enemy more HP and more attack power, and if the game is already mindnumbing like ME2 this just prolongs the tedium, it doesn't make anything more challenging. This game isn't better when the goomba takes 3 jumps to kill and you take 2 damage from its attack. You could be a more subtle troll.
#40 Edited by Icemael (6316 posts) -
@ChristOnIce said:

" Frankly, such scores just reinforce my skepticism with a Mario game.  Both Mario and Zelda are held to a lower standard than other titles.  So what if they've refused to grow and incorporate technological standards?  So what if they are wholly lacking in a good story or character development?  So what if Mario still disregards any concept of internal consistency, logic, or conceit?  So what if there's no challenge to be found and difficulty options are absent?  People are such whores for Nintendo products and continue to hail Miyamoto regardless of his contempt for progress.  That isn't to say that the game is crap.  I wouldn't care for it, but it would probably be fun for many.  However, the handicaps in place for the franchise taint any praise. "

Oh, the irony. Super Mario Galaxy is one of the, if not the most inventive, creative, imaginative and, yes, progressive games of this entire generation. It was released three years ago, yet makes more or less all of the recent critically acclaimed games -- Uncharted 2, Mass Effect 2 et cetera -- look like retrogressive, archaic, primitive fossils.

Super Mario Galaxy laughs at your idea of  progress. While your games -- the ones that are up to technological standards -- load their über-detailed wall textures and particle effects, it plays with gravity and perspective in ways no other game has even attempted; while your games display their "good" stories and character development -- stuff anyone who's watched a movie or read a book would laugh at -- and their internal consistencies, it creates worlds so unique, imaginative and wonderful that had they been created for another medium, they would never even work; but they weren't, and they do.

The Mario and Zelda games aren't held to a lower standard; no, it is your standards -- your preconceived notions about what a "progressive" video game should be like -- that are messed up. You've become too focused on all the crap the industry has become far too fond of -- pretensions about "depth" and "realism" and "immersion" -- to appreciate what video games were about in the first place. Go back and play some old classics. Mega Man, The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, Super Mario Bros. Try and think about what made those games so great; what still makes them great. Was it their incorporation of technological standards? Was it their character development? Was it their difficulty options, or their internal consistencies? No! It was their polished, creative gameplay, their imaginative worlds and their refusal to be, or try to be, anything other than exactly what they were: great video games. 
 
And that's exactly what Super Mario Galaxy and its sequel are: great video games. Not "interactive cinema". Not "realistic experiences". Not "art". Just great video games.
#41 Posted by Evilsbane (4591 posts) -
@Twilight said:
" @Icemael said:
" Could people please stop complaining about "perfect scores"? There is no such thing as a perfect score.

You know when the doctor asks you how much pain you're in on a scale from 1 to 10? Does the answer "10" mean "perfect, ultimate pain"? Of course not! It just means that the patient is in one hell of a lot of fucking pain. And similarly, giving a video game a 10/10 means the game is one hell of a lot of fucking fun. "
That's a nice way of explaining it. "
Yea I am saving this in a text file, very good way to say that.
#42 Edited by ProfessorEss (7318 posts) -

I'll never question Mario's quality or relevance, but after finally playing Mario Galaxy about a month ago - sadly I've begun questioning it's relevancy with me.
 
I have the utmost respect for the franchise, and I will hopefully never type this again, but I think I've become one of those guys. One of those guys who say "the last good blank was blank" - in this case the first blank is Mario, and the second blank is Mario 64.
 
I thought Sunshine was the exception.
You have no idea how saddening this was for me to discover.

#43 Posted by emkeighcameron (1876 posts) -

Those who love Nintendo shall love Nintendo.  Those who hate Nintendo shall hate Nintendo. 
 
This is law. This is history. This is legion. No force on Earth nor Heaven nor Hell nor the Internet can change these simple truths.

#44 Posted by Diamond (8634 posts) -
@Icemael said:
Oh, the irony. Super Mario Galaxy is one of the, if not the most inventive, creative, imaginative and, yes, progressive games of this entire generation. It was released three years ago, yet makes more or less all of the recent critically acclaimed games -- Uncharted 2, Mass Effect 2 et cetera -- look like retrogressive, archaic, primitive fossils.

Super Mario Galaxy laughs at your idea of  progress. While your games -- the ones that are up to technological standards -- load their über-detailed wall textures and particle effects, it plays with gravity and perspective in ways no other game has even attempted; while your games display their "good" stories and character development -- stuff anyone who's watched a movie or read a book would laugh at -- and their internal consistencies, it creates worlds so unique, imaginative and wonderful that had they been created for another medium, they would never even work; but they weren't, and they do.
Plenty of games have done everything Mario Galaxy did years before SMG did it.  If you didn't play those games it's not our problem.  Plenty of games have done abstract worlds as well.  Spherical worlds with obstacles aren't an innovative concept.
 
I would like you to point out what aspects made Super Mario Galaxy so innovative.
 
Uncharted 2, Mass Effect 2, and Super Mario Galaxy are all in the same category of non-innovative games that further refine the experience...
#45 Posted by ryanwho (12082 posts) -
@Diamond said:
" @Icemael said:
Oh, the irony. Super Mario Galaxy is one of the, if not the most inventive, creative, imaginative and, yes, progressive games of this entire generation. It was released three years ago, yet makes more or less all of the recent critically acclaimed games -- Uncharted 2, Mass Effect 2 et cetera -- look like retrogressive, archaic, primitive fossils.

Super Mario Galaxy laughs at your idea of  progress. While your games -- the ones that are up to technological standards -- load their über-detailed wall textures and particle effects, it plays with gravity and perspective in ways no other game has even attempted; while your games display their "good" stories and character development -- stuff anyone who's watched a movie or read a book would laugh at -- and their internal consistencies, it creates worlds so unique, imaginative and wonderful that had they been created for another medium, they would never even work; but they weren't, and they do.
Plenty of games have done everything Mario Galaxy did years before SMG did it.  If you didn't play those games it's not our problem.  Plenty of games have done abstract worlds as well.  Spherical worlds with obstacles aren't an innovative concept. I would like you to point out what aspects made Super Mario Galaxy so innovative.  Uncharted 2, Mass Effect 2, and Super Mario Galaxy are all in the same category of non-innovative games that further refine the experience... "
I love Psychonauts as much as the next guy but if you're suggesting anything gameplay related in that game is anywhere near what Galaxy did you're lying to yourself.
#46 Edited by mutha3 (4985 posts) -
@Diamond said:

" @Icemael said:

Oh, the irony. Super Mario Galaxy is one of the, if not the most inventive, creative, imaginative and, yes, progressive games of this entire generation. It was released three years ago, yet makes more or less all of the recent critically acclaimed games -- Uncharted 2, Mass Effect 2 et cetera -- look like retrogressive, archaic, primitive fossils.

Super Mario Galaxy laughs at your idea of  progress. While your games -- the ones that are up to technological standards -- load their über-detailed wall textures and particle effects, it plays with gravity and perspective in ways no other game has even attempted; while your games display their "good" stories and character development -- stuff anyone who's watched a movie or read a book would laugh at -- and their internal consistencies, it creates worlds so unique, imaginative and wonderful that had they been created for another medium, they would never even work; but they weren't, and they do.
Plenty of games have done everything Mario Galaxy did years before SMG did it.  If you didn't play those games it's not our problem.  Plenty of games have done abstract worlds as well.  Spherical worlds with obstacles aren't an innovative concept. I would like you to point out what aspects made Super Mario Galaxy so innovative.  Uncharted 2, Mass Effect 2, and Super Mario Galaxy are all in the same category of non-innovative games that further refine the experience... "
Yeah, no.
 
@Icemael:
Spoken as a true gentlemen and a scholar.
#47 Posted by Icemael (6316 posts) -
@Diamond said:
" @Icemael said:
Oh, the irony. Super Mario Galaxy is one of the, if not the most inventive, creative, imaginative and, yes, progressive games of this entire generation. It was released three years ago, yet makes more or less all of the recent critically acclaimed games -- Uncharted 2, Mass Effect 2 et cetera -- look like retrogressive, archaic, primitive fossils.

Super Mario Galaxy laughs at your idea of  progress. While your games -- the ones that are up to technological standards -- load their über-detailed wall textures and particle effects, it plays with gravity and perspective in ways no other game has even attempted; while your games display their "good" stories and character development -- stuff anyone who's watched a movie or read a book would laugh at -- and their internal consistencies, it creates worlds so unique, imaginative and wonderful that had they been created for another medium, they would never even work; but they weren't, and they do.
Plenty of games have done everything Mario Galaxy did years before SMG did it.  If you didn't play those games it's not our problem."
Funny, then, that neither I nor any of the video game critics have heard of any of these numerous games. Care to give some concrete examples?
#48 Posted by Shadow (4979 posts) -

Bayonetta reviewed slightly better, didn't it (and with good reason)?

#49 Posted by Brunchies (2484 posts) -

Possible GOTY but no game deserves perfect scores no matter how good it is since there is always at least one thing bad about it. 

#50 Posted by mutha3 (4985 posts) -
@Brunchies said:
" Possible GOTY but no game deserves perfect scores no matter how good it is since there is always at least one thing bad about it.  "
I think we've already established that 10 does not literally mean perfect.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.