Rank the Mario Platformers (please separate 2D and 3D platformers!)

[Ray Trace]

What's wrong with SMG2?

It's the shameless same piece of crap I've already played in Super Mario Galaxy.

It is a mind blowing masterpiece.

My head explodes because of the game's sheer unoriginality

It has some more action in it and Yoshi makes it awesome.

Mario isn't a game series based on action. Super Mario Galaxy 2 is part of it. It's platformer-oriented. Go play Rayman 3 or any of the main Kirby games if you like action in your platformers, because they have far more action than this turd.

You know my opinion of Yoshi: he's terrible and he appears in only one percent of the game.

It adds more to the fun factor and there were a lot of beautiful things in it like the ending and all that stuff.

The ending isn't beautiful, it's home to the absolute worst final boss fight in Mario existence.

Why be so biased with a No#1 kick ass mind blowing masterpiece?

I feel like yelling at you for calling it a "number one masterpiece" when there are clearly far superior games out there far out of the Mario spectrum that are much more enjoyable than a 60 dollar barf fest.

I mean c'mon if you wanted some more action you got it.

No, it's the same game. You still spin, and you still receive power-ups like any other Mario game. Wake me up when Mario is something like Rayman 3 or Devil May Cry or something like that when the game is CENTERED around action.

I mean c'mon if Sunshine received a sequel called Sunshine 2 and it had more content and everyone else found it to be a no#1 badass sequel to Sunshine and you just had so much bias towards it. How would you feel if some people hated Sunshine 2 which you may have loved?

This is a red herring statement I will not bother answering

How dare you insult gaming's beautiful platforming masterpiece known to existance in mankind?

Because it's not gaming's beautiful master piece. I can name 10 more games in the top of my head that I've enjoyed more than Super Mario Galaxy 2. Rayman Origins, Rayman Legends, Tales of Symphonia, Super Mario Galaxy, Super Mario 64 DS, Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, Mario Party 6, Mario Kart 8, Kirby's Return to Dreamland, New Super Mario Bros. Wii, Donkey Kong 64...the list goes on and on. And to call it "the perfect game" is quite a show of your ignorance since 1. you're totally comparing different genres of games, which is STUPID and 2. Super Mario Galaxy 2 HAS flaws that you seem to ignore.

It was the excellence of Nintendo's engineering of how good a game could be and the visuals were so spectacular than the first Galaxy. What more could you ask for?

Last time I checked, the visuals are exactly alike to the first game. You have very low-poly models of Toads, Mario is lower poly than he is in say, Mario Party 9 and Mario & Sonic games, and you have poorly anti-aliased 2D graphics, just as the first game. The rim-lighting is there to mask up the low-poly of the models to make it not only run at 60 fps, but also render all the levels. You also have bad draw distance for that as well. It's NOT good as you think it is. You know why I know that? 3D modeling experience.

I'd bet heaven would offer a game so good to match SMG2's cleverness.

They already did. A tons. Just open your damn eyes outside of Nintendo's spectrum.

 

[Dr. Peach]

So Baby Luigi, what you are saying is that you think SMG2 is a mediocre game like Mario Sunshine even though a lot of other people think Sunshine and Galaxy 2 are the best ones ever? I mean Sunshine was remotely bad when compared to other Mario games. Sure it was criticized and do you think Sunshine is a 40$ barf fest just like how you called Galaxy 2 a 60$ barf fest. I mean if the AVGN (James Rolfe) were to play it, I'm pretty sure his reaction would be that it was so good. Sure I bet Metroid Other M and Mega Man X7 deserve the title of being barf fests. I mean Mega Man X4 as a lot of Mega Man fans say is the last real good Mega Man X game.

Galaxy 2 isn't that bad of a game like let's say Big Rigs:Over The Road Racing or all those piles of dog turds that the AVGN reviewed. If you think it is all that bad then suggest the idea to the AVGN to review it even though he will be moving from classic games. I think Galaxy 2 is like that one X4 of a Mario game. I mean it isn't repetitive and unoriginal like the Mega Man games on the NES. It is not that bad like how Mega Man 8 was on the PlayStation and Sega Saturn which you may call a barf fest because Mega Man 8 is considered by a lot of Mega Man fans to be the worst Mega Man game right next to X7.

 

[Ray Trace]

So Baby Luigi, what you are saying is that you think SMG2 is a mediocre game like Mario Sunshine even though a lot of other people think Sunshine and Galaxy 2 are the best ones ever? I mean Sunshine was remotely bad when compared to other Mario games. Sure it was criticized and do you think Sunshine is a 40$ barf fest just like how you called Galaxy 2 a 60$ barf fest. I mean if the AVGN (James Rolfe) were to play it, I'm pretty sure his reaction would be that it was so good. Sure I bet Metroid Other M and Mega Man X7 deserve the title of being barf fests. I mean Mega Man X4 as a lot of Mega Man fans say is the last real good Mega Man X game.

Yes I am saying that Super Mario Galaxy 2 is a mediocre game. It's not even a hard thing for me to say.

When did I ever say that Super Mario Sunshine was a mediocre game? I haven't even ranked it because I've never played it myself. I can only deduce conclusions based on what my sister played and the most serious flaw I see about Super Mario Sunshine was the Blooper surfing and the blue coins.

I don't give a dang about what reviewers say about Galaxy 2. Who's to say their opinion is better than my own personal opinion of the game that I've personally experienced and played for myself? Can't I have my own opinion, which is as valid as the most coveted review on the internet? Usually, reviewers' opinions have a degree of truth in them but ultimately, every single review is about 90% subjectively based as most criticisms are based off a player's expectations (the game is too long, it's too tedious, some game mechanics suck) and experience. The only objective things you can say about a game is its frame-rate and if its riddled with unplayable bugs. That's it.

For example, I personally find Pokemon to be probably one of the most boring and repetitive games I've ever played. No reviewer can ever sway my own opinion on this, and Pokemon is supposed to be a good series, right? It's simply not for me. I crave something a bit more....action-oriented and less tedious than what it feels like an overly complex game of rock-paper-scissors. Do I understand why other people enjoy Pokemon? Absolutely. Another example is Mario Party, which happens to be one of my favorite game series, yet receives middling scores. As well as Spore, which got like 70 metacritic when I feel like it's a brilliant game, especially its expansion pack. See why blindingly trusting reviewers is a bad thing?

Galaxy 2 isn't that bad of a game like let's say Big Rigs:Over The Road Racing or all those piles of dog turds that the AVGN reviewed. If you think it is all that bad then suggest the idea to the AVGN to review it even though he will be moving from classic games. I think Galaxy 2 is like that one X4 of a Mario game. I mean it isn't repetitive and unoriginal like the Mega Man games on the NES. It is not that bad like how Mega Man 8 was on the PlayStation and Sega Saturn which you may call a barf fest because Mega Man 8 is considered by a lot of Mega Man fans to be the worst Mega Man game right next to X7.

I never said it was. When did I ever said Super Mario Galaxy 2 is a bad game? I just said that I hate that game and I rather be playing the first Super Mario Galaxy any day of the week. I know crappy games too. You act like I never heard of crappy unplayable messes like Ride to Hell: Retribution, Big Rigs, Sonic Free Riders, etc. But just because a game is bug-free or polished doesn't mean I personally have to like it! It's like some vegetables being good for you, but you hate their taste, therefore, you refuse to eat it.

Stop comparing this game to other games. Super Mario Galaxy and Mega Man ARE. TWO. COMPLETELY. DIFFERENT. GAMES.

 

[Shyghoul]

SMG2 > SM3DL > SMG1 >>>>>>>>>>>>> SM64DS > SM64

SMB3 > SMW > NSMBW > NSMB > SMB2 > SMB:TLL > SMB

 

[Dr. Peach]

I never said it was. When did I ever said Super Mario Galaxy 2 is a bad game? I just said that I hate that game and I rather be playing the first Super Mario Galaxy any day of the week. I know crappy games too. You act like I never heard of crappy unplayable messes like Ride to Hell: Retribution, Big Rigs, Sonic Free Riders, etc. But just because a game is bug-free or polished doesn't mean I personally have to like it! It's like some vegetables being good for you, but you hate their taste, therefore, you refuse to eat it.

Stop comparing this game to other games. Super Mario Galaxy and Mega Man ARE. TWO. COMPLETELY. DIFFERENT. GAMES.

I know that. But I don't think it's something very awful like the third Ninja Turtles movie which a lot of TMNT fans hate including the AVGN who destroyed his VHS cassette after reviewing it.

 

[Nysic]

Lol I like how this guy keeps making completely irrelevant comparisons

What the hell do Ninja Turtles have to do with Mario Galaxy?

 

[Dr. Peach]

Lol I like how this guy keeps making completely irrelevant comparisons

What the hell do Ninja Turtles have to do with Mario Galaxy?

I was just slightly exaggerating/comparing and being sarcastic.

 

[YoshiGo99]

Lol I like how this guy keeps making completely irrelevant comparisons

What the hell do Ninja Turtles have to do with Mario Galaxy?

I was just slightly exaggerating/comparing and being sarcastic.

There's turtles in both series?

But I hate the fact he compares a game to the "mediocre" game Super Mario Sunshine. May I remind some that Sunshine was one of the top selling GameCube games. Could we compare him to another person on the forums.. Maybe.

But for 3D platformers,
1. Super Mario 3D World (Only played through W1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10 ,11 and it was amazing, way better than the others even though it is a Flagpole kind of game)
2. Super Mario Galaxy (It's great, if only i can get a new disc or get mine fixed)
3. Super Mario Sunshine (Oh that Watermelon Mission!)
4. Super Mario 64 DS (Still could use work but I love it)
5. Super Mario Galaxy 2 (dang Green Stars, I hate short levels, feels kind of like an add-on to the first)
6. Super Mario 64 (Feels somewhat empty but very good)
7. Super Mario 3D Land (from what I played, the levels all feel the same)

 

[Ray Trace]

Lol I like how this guy keeps making completely irrelevant comparisons

What the hell do Ninja Turtles have to do with Mario Galaxy?

I was just slightly exaggerating/comparing and being sarcastic.

That doesn't answer MKGuy's question of the relevancy of your statement

 

[Dr. Peach]

Lol I like how this guy keeps making completely irrelevant comparisons

What the hell do Ninja Turtles have to do with Mario Galaxy?

I was just slightly exaggerating/comparing and being sarcastic.

That doesn't answer MKGuy's question of the relevancy of your statement

I know, but I was being sarcastic and exaggerating that SMG2 isn't that bad and horrible like the 3rd Ninja Turtles movie. Guys don't you know what sarcasm is. For crying out loud all my statements are sarcastic comparisons. I mean sure the AVGN reviewed the 3rd TMNT movie and said it sucked and destroyed his copy of the movie.

Here is the Nerd's review of TMNT3 if you haven't watched it:

Spoiler

Not suitable for younger children because it's the AVGN

 

[Nysic]

Lol I like how this guy keeps making completely irrelevant comparisons

What the hell do Ninja Turtles have to do with Mario Galaxy?

I was just slightly exaggerating/comparing and being sarcastic.

That doesn't answer MKGuy's question of the relevancy of your statement

I know, but I was being sarcastic and exaggerating that SMG2 isn't that bad and horrible like the 3rd Ninja Turtles movie. Guys don't you know what sarcasm is. For crying out loud all my statements are sarcastic comparisons.

We do know what sarcasm is. Sarcasm is (basically) meaning the opposite of what you're saying to convey contempt. If all your statements are sarcasm, then you must love that TMNT Movie and hate SMG2.

 

[Dr. Peach]

So Baby Luigi,is your reaction to SMG2 the same as the same as the AVGN's review of TMNT3 like how he destroyed his copy of TMNT3 at the end. Do you want to do the same to your copy of Galaxy 2 like how the AVGN did to his copy of TMNT3

I mean the AVGN said that Castlevania II: Simon's Quest sucked and that was his first review but Eric Lappe from Let's Get or goemon047 from Retroware responded to his video with this. Though I think Simon's Quest is okay.

Spoiler

 

[Nysic]

I'm starting to think pwned is just a paid advertiser for AVGN

 

[Dr. Peach]

I'm starting to think pwned is just a paid advertiser for AVGN

I am not a paid advertiser for the AVGN. I am just showing it here for convenience sake.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

Super Mario Galaxy 2 is a horrid, awful game in its own way. It's not buggy; it looks nice; it sounds nice; it plays nice. But putting some things into context, it becomes an awful game. It's a glorified expansion pack that disgustingly escapes the same criticism Mario Kart and Call of Duty always get. The reviewers sound very dishonest and hypocritical because of this; all they do is praise its level design, its soundtrack, and its presentation while overlooking that Super Mario Galaxy 2 does exactly what every rehash does: recycle previously-novel concepts, reskin, add a few new enemies, levels, and items all while failing to improve on the original game. What makes this game different than Call of Duty, Pokaymon, and nearly every other rehash in existence? Is it because it's brand-name loyalty?

The timing of the game's release is awful, releasing in just, relatively, a few years after the first game is out. This is the first warning sign that the game will be a cynical cash grab. And it is. There are no drastic gameplay changes, but more importantly, not even noticeable graphical improvements. If it were released on the Wii U recently, I would be more forgiving. But there's no forgiveness from me for this half-digested intestinal cancer which I can't believe I actually shelled $50 for.

Super Mario Galaxy 2 does not redefine the genre, nor does it master its genre. It does nothing to remove the flaws from the first game, and it introduces more flaws and gimmicks on its own. The swimming controls are worse, the camera tends to be a *bleep*, and the motion controls and powerups are still a gimmick at best. It's usually not challenging, but when the challenge is there, it feels just cheap. The Green Stars, for instance, feel like a tacked on feature, appearing in sporadic spots in previously-played levels. Some Green Stars are found in surprising spots, but they don't feel creative. The Grand Finale Galaxy emphasizes on cheap difficulty with a very long level with no checkpoints, and the prankster comets just make it more frustrating rather than enjoyable. Speaking of which, the Prankster Comet alarm will get on your nerves.

The powerups are again scant, as in the first game. Super Mario Galaxy 1 had powerup distribution problems; the Boo Mushroom is really put to use in only one level, the first level it appears. Super Mario Galaxy 2 had the opportunity, but blew it, including the Boo Mushroom in, literally, a whopping one level. The Ice Flower is used decently enough, and it's a pretty fun powerup, but it is absent for no reason in the next game, which could've done more. The Red Star, one of the most fleshed-out powerups in the game (besides, it just looks amazing), is used only in one level and in the small HUB in Galaxy 1. Galaxy 2 blew it again by completely removing it.

In the meantime, Galaxy 2 introduces lame and rarely-used powerups of its own. Yoshi (who has a much more awful voice than normal) has some potential, but all his powerups are just... really limited. He's also used fairly rarely, so at best, he's just fan service, especially how he appears so prominently in the boxart, front and back. In fact, Yoshi seems to be treated as another major character. The Rock powerup sounds cool at first, but there's one level that will instantly make you hate it. Or actually, several levels. The dang thing is so hard to control, it makes me wonder if that's really what they're going for. The Cloud Flower is nice and all, but it falls on the other side of the spectrum of powerup distribution: it appears way too much. The Spin Drill is just an overall lame powerup that really just limits Mario, and it's not really that fun. The Mario Kart 8 concept probably would've done a better job.

Mario games usually have not much to say story-wise, but even then, Galaxy 2 had the opportunity to continue developing Rosalina's backstory or improving Galaxy 1's plot point. Instead, though, Galaxy 2 wipes the slate clean and introduces a lame story, even by Mario standards, and Rosalina appears only briefly at the end of the game.

Super Mario Galaxy 2 promises to give more chances at innovative level designs, but fails to deliver. For instance, Melty Monster has only one spectacular level, but this is short-lived as the other levels are bogged down by the Chimp and powerup gimmicks set nowhere near the main location. Level concepts are frequently reused, such as Shiverburn Galaxy (a ripoff of Freezeflame Galaxy, with even the same music!), Snowflake Lake (another ripoff of Freezeflame!?), sweets worlds, the bosses, Fluffy Buff (feels like a ripoff of Gusty Garden, including the music), Sky Station Galaxy (a ripoff of Good Egg Galaxy), Honeyclimb Galaxy (a ripoff of Honeyhive Galaxy), and too much forgettable 2.5d levels in Mario's apparently 3D platforming game. There are also levels directly ripped off and watered down from the first game (Mario Squared and Stone Cyclone!). I'm not overlooking levels and concepts such as Beat Blocks, Cosmic Cove, and Slimy Springs, but they are drowned out by all these other trite elements.

Also, Super Mario Galaxy 2 implies that it's set in space, but the majority of the levels have blue skies, making players feels like they're playing on little planetoids suspending way up in the stratosphere. Hell, just look at the box art compared to the first game. I thought Super Mario Galaxy had the "OMG MARIO IN SPACE" vibe, but Super Mario Galaxy 2 has barely any of that. It feels like Super Mario 64, rather, with the majority of its worlds suspended in the sky.

The only major improvement in Galaxy 2 is the co-star system, which is much more interactive than Galaxy 1's co-star, but even then, it can have some improvements. Independent hackers, who have virtually no budget and are doing their jobs without pay, can make Galaxy have two-player mode with Mario and Luigi fully playable. Why can't the biggest gaming corporation in the world do the same?

Finally, this reminds me of another point: hundreds of game developers are struggling to have their games stand out among the rest. Most likely, a lot of games have been canceled due to budget constraints. In the meantime, we have this shameless rehash getting heaps and heaps of praise. Stuff like Call of Duty aren't spared from this, not at all, but at least they get the flack they deserve. This sorry, money-printing, corporate whoring piece of *bleep* has dodged this, despite doing nearly exactly what the aforementioned games are doing, getting universal praise and gaming awards it does not deserve; what's worse, even the more honest gamers think this is a spectacular game, and this makes me outraged. Even New Super Mario Bros. 2 is bashed for its trite level design and presentation. Super Mario Galaxy 2 is a cynical cash grab that has done its work. I believe it did its job a little too well. Not only do I despise this game extremely, this game has also made me abhor Super Mario Galaxy as well, just not as much. Super Mario Galaxy 2 removes all the novelty the first game and spreads its toxic rehash vibe by associating itself with the shell of its former self.

I get it: Super Mario Galaxy 2 has a nice soundtrack (if it wasn't bogged down by awful MIDI covers of Super Mario World, MIDI music in general, and that grating Yoshistar Galaxy music in general). It looks nice and colorful. But does it deserve 9/10 or a 10/10?

No.

Not even higher than a 7/10.

 

[Dr. Peach]

Super Mario Galaxy 2 is a horrid, awful game in its own way. It's not buggy; it looks nice; it sounds nice; it plays nice. But putting some things into context, it becomes an awful game. It's a glorified expansion pack that disgustingly escapes the same criticism Mario Kart and Call of Duty always get. The reviewers sound very dishonest and hypocritical because of this; all they do is praise its level design, its soundtrack, and its presentation while overlooking that Super Mario Galaxy 2 does exactly what every rehash does: recycle previously-novel concepts, reskin, add a few new enemies, levels, and items all while failing to improve on the original game. What makes this game different than Call of Duty, Pokaymon, and nearly every other rehash in existence? Is it because it's brand-name loyalty?

Super Mario Galaxy 2 does not redefine the genre, nor does it master its genre. It does nothing to remove the flaws from the first game, and it introduces more flaws and gimmicks on its own. The swimming controls are worse, the camera tends to be a *bleep*, and the motion controls and powerups are still a gimmick at best. It's usually not challenging, but when the challenge is there, it feels just cheap. The Green Stars, for instance, feel like a tacked on feature, appearing in sporadic spots in previously-played levels. Some Green Stars are found in surprising spots, but they don't feel creative. The Grand Finale Galaxy emphasizes on cheap difficulty with a very long level with no checkpoints, and the prankster comets just make it more frustrating rather than enjoyable. Speaking of which, the Prankster Comet alarm will get on your nerves.

The powerups are again scant, as in the first game. Super Mario Galaxy 1 had powerup distribution problems; the Boo Mushroom is really put to use in only one level, the first level it appears. Super Mario Galaxy 2 had the opportunity, but blew it, including the Boo Mushroom in, literally, a whopping one level. The Ice Flower is used decently enough, and it's a pretty fun powerup, but it is absent for no reason in the next game, which could've done more. The Red Star, one of the most fleshed-out powerups in the game (besides, it just looks amazing), is used only in one level and in the small HUB in Galaxy 1. Galaxy 2 blew it again by completely removing it.

In the meantime, Galaxy 2 introduces lame and rarely-used powerups of its own. Yoshi (who has a much more awful voice than normal) has some potential, but all his powerups are just... really limited. He's also used fairly rarely, so at best, he's just fan service, especially how he appears so prominently in the boxart, front and back. In fact, Yoshi seems to be treated as another major character. The Rock powerup sounds cool at first, but there's one level that will instantly make you hate it. Or actually, several levels. The dang thing is so hard to control, it makes me wonder if that's really what they're going for. The Cloud Flower is nice and all, but it falls on the other side of the spectrum of powerup distribution: it appears way too much. The Spin Drill is just an overall lame powerup that really just limits Mario, and it's not really that fun. The Mario Kart 8 concept probably would've done a better job.

Mario games usually have not much to say story-wise, but even then, Galaxy 2 had the opportunity to continue developing Rosalina's backstory or improving Galaxy 1's plot point. Instead, though, Galaxy 2 wipes the slate clean and introduces a lame story, even by Mario standards, and Rosalina appears only briefly at the end of the game.

Super Mario Galaxy 2 promises to give more chances at innovative level designs, but fails to deliver. For instance, Melty Monster has only one spectacular level, but this is short-lived as the other levels are bogged down by the Chimp and powerup gimmicks set nowhere near the main location. Level concepts are frequently reused, such as Shiverburn Galaxy (a ripoff of Freezeflame Galaxy, with even the same music!), , sweets worlds, the bosses, Fluffy Buff (feels like a ripoff of Gusty Garden, including the music), Sky Station Galaxy (a ripoff of Good Egg Galaxy), Honeyclimb Galaxy (a ripoff of Honeyhive Galaxy), and too much forgettable 2.5d levels in Mario's apparently 3D platforming game. I'm not overlooking levels and concepts such as Beat Blocks, Cosmic Cove, and Slimy Springs, but they are drowned out by all these other trite elements.

Also, Super Mario Galaxy 2 implies that it's set in space, but the majority of the levels have blue skies, making players feels like they're playing on little planetoids suspending way up in the stratosphere. Hell, just look at the box art compared to the first game. I thought Super Mario Galaxy had the "OMG MARIO IN SPACE" vibe, but Super Mario Galaxy 2 has barely any of that. It feels like Super Mario 64, rather, which the majority of its worlds suspended in the sky.

The only major improvement in Galaxy 2 is the co-star system, which is much more interactive than Galaxy 1's co-star, but even then, it can have some improvements. Independent hackers, who have virtually no budget and are doing their jobs without pay, can make Galaxy have two-player mode with Mario and Luigi fully playable. Why can't the biggest gaming corporation in the world do the same?

Finally, this reminds me of another point: hundreds of game developers are struggling to have their games stand out among the rest. Most likely, a lot of games have been canceled due to budget constraints. In the meantime, we have this shameless rehash getting heaps and heaps of praise. Stuff like Call of Duty aren't spared from this, not at all, but at least they get the flack they deserve. This sorry, money-printing, corporate whoring piece of *bleep* has dodged this, despite doing nearly exactly what the aforementioned games are doing, getting universal praise and gaming awards it does not deserve; what's worse, even the more honest gamers think this is a spectacular game, and this makes me outraged. Even New Super Mario Bros. 2 is bashed for its trite level design and presentation. Super Mario Galaxy 2 is a cynical cash grab that has done its work. I believe it did its job a little too well. Not only do I despise this game extremely, this game has also made me abhor Super Mario Galaxy as well, just not as much. Super Mario Galaxy 2 removes all the novelty the first game and spreads its toxic rehash vibe by associating itself with the shell of its former self.

I get it: Super Mario Galaxy 2 has a nice soundtrack (if it wasn't bogged down by awful MIDI covers of Super Mario World, MIDI music in general, and that grating Yoshistar Galaxy music in general). It looks nice and colorful. But does it deserve 9/10 or a 10/10?

No.

Not even higher than a 7/10.

Do you think this game receives the AVGN or HVGN treatment?

Saying that SMG2 is a steaming pile of dog turds that the AVGN would review is exactly like if I were to say that Sonic Adventure 2 for the Dreamcast (one of the best Sonic games) is an awful game than Sonic Adventure 1 even though Sonic Adventure 2 has much more than Sonic Adventure 1 like having a dark mode and having better levels and an awesome rocky soundtrack. To be honest I love all of the 2 Sonic Adventures. It's like asking which Sonic Adventure is better, Sonic Adventure 1 or Sonic Adventure 2 and what Adventure would you choose? The former or the latter? I'd go for the latter.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

As I said, Super Mario Galaxy 2 is playable, bug-free, and probably even enjoyable. It's a masterpiece compared to the games AVGN reviews. By itself, it's not a bad game by any means. I've said, however, that it falls within another category of awful: it's the cynical cookie-cutter undertone that ultimately ruins this game. It may be even toxic because its success may encourage Nintendo to shell out more of this crap.

 

[Glitchy Bowser Jr.]

Super Mario Galaxy 2 is a horrid, awful game in its own way. It's not buggy; it looks nice; it sounds nice; it plays nice. But putting some things into context, it becomes an awful game. It's a glorified expansion pack that disgustingly escapes the same criticism Mario Kart and Call of Duty always get. The reviewers sound very dishonest and hypocritical because of this; all they do is praise its level design, its soundtrack, and its presentation while overlooking that Super Mario Galaxy 2 does exactly what every rehash does: recycle previously-novel concepts, reskin, add a few new enemies, levels, and items all while failing to improve on the original game. What makes this game different than Call of Duty, Pokaymon, and nearly every other rehash in existence? Is it because it's brand-name loyalty?

The timing of the game's release is awful, releasing in just, relatively, a few years after the first game is out. This is the first warning sign that the game will be a cynical cash grab. And it is. There are no drastic gameplay changes, but more importantly, not even noticeable graphical improvements. If it were released on the Wii U recently, I would be more forgiving. But there's no forgiveness from me for this half-digested intestinal cancer which I can't believe I actually shelled $50 for.

Super Mario Galaxy 2 does not redefine the genre, nor does it master its genre. It does nothing to remove the flaws from the first game, and it introduces more flaws and gimmicks on its own. The swimming controls are worse, the camera tends to be a *bleep*, and the motion controls and powerups are still a gimmick at best. It's usually not challenging, but when the challenge is there, it feels just cheap. The Green Stars, for instance, feel like a tacked on feature, appearing in sporadic spots in previously-played levels. Some Green Stars are found in surprising spots, but they don't feel creative. The Grand Finale Galaxy emphasizes on cheap difficulty with a very long level with no checkpoints, and the prankster comets just make it more frustrating rather than enjoyable. Speaking of which, the Prankster Comet alarm will get on your nerves.

The powerups are again scant, as in the first game. Super Mario Galaxy 1 had powerup distribution problems; the Boo Mushroom is really put to use in only one level, the first level it appears. Super Mario Galaxy 2 had the opportunity, but blew it, including the Boo Mushroom in, literally, a whopping one level. The Ice Flower is used decently enough, and it's a pretty fun powerup, but it is absent for no reason in the next game, which could've done more. The Red Star, one of the most fleshed-out powerups in the game (besides, it just looks amazing), is used only in one level and in the small HUB in Galaxy 1. Galaxy 2 blew it again by completely removing it.

In the meantime, Galaxy 2 introduces lame and rarely-used powerups of its own. Yoshi (who has a much more awful voice than normal) has some potential, but all his powerups are just... really limited. He's also used fairly rarely, so at best, he's just fan service, especially how he appears so prominently in the boxart, front and back. In fact, Yoshi seems to be treated as another major character. The Rock powerup sounds cool at first, but there's one level that will instantly make you hate it. Or actually, several levels. The dang thing is so hard to control, it makes me wonder if that's really what they're going for. The Cloud Flower is nice and all, but it falls on the other side of the spectrum of powerup distribution: it appears way too much. The Spin Drill is just an overall lame powerup that really just limits Mario, and it's not really that fun. The Mario Kart 8 concept probably would've done a better job.

Mario games usually have not much to say story-wise, but even then, Galaxy 2 had the opportunity to continue developing Rosalina's backstory or improving Galaxy 1's plot point. Instead, though, Galaxy 2 wipes the slate clean and introduces a lame story, even by Mario standards, and Rosalina appears only briefly at the end of the game.

Super Mario Galaxy 2 promises to give more chances at innovative level designs, but fails to deliver. For instance, Melty Monster has only one spectacular level, but this is short-lived as the other levels are bogged down by the Chimp and powerup gimmicks set nowhere near the main location. Level concepts are frequently reused, such as Shiverburn Galaxy (a ripoff of Freezeflame Galaxy, with even the same music!), , sweets worlds, the bosses, Fluffy Buff (feels like a ripoff of Gusty Garden, including the music), Sky Station Galaxy (a ripoff of Good Egg Galaxy), Honeyclimb Galaxy (a ripoff of Honeyhive Galaxy), and too much forgettable 2.5d levels in Mario's apparently 3D platforming game. I'm not overlooking levels and concepts such as Beat Blocks, Cosmic Cove, and Slimy Springs, but they are drowned out by all these other trite elements.

Also, Super Mario Galaxy 2 implies that it's set in space, but the majority of the levels have blue skies, making players feels like they're playing on little planetoids suspending way up in the stratosphere. Hell, just look at the box art compared to the first game. I thought Super Mario Galaxy had the "OMG MARIO IN SPACE" vibe, but Super Mario Galaxy 2 has barely any of that. It feels like Super Mario 64, rather, which the majority of its worlds suspended in the sky.

The only major improvement in Galaxy 2 is the co-star system, which is much more interactive than Galaxy 1's co-star, but even then, it can have some improvements. Independent hackers, who have virtually no budget and are doing their jobs without pay, can make Galaxy have two-player mode with Mario and Luigi fully playable. Why can't the biggest gaming corporation in the world do the same?

Finally, this reminds me of another point: hundreds of game developers are struggling to have their games stand out among the rest. Most likely, a lot of games have been canceled due to budget constraints. In the meantime, we have this shameless rehash getting heaps and heaps of praise. Stuff like Call of Duty aren't spared from this, not at all, but at least they get the flack they deserve. This sorry, money-printing, corporate whoring piece of *bleep* has dodged this, despite doing nearly exactly what the aforementioned games are doing, getting universal praise and gaming awards it does not deserve; what's worse, even the more honest gamers think this is a spectacular game, and this makes me outraged. Even New Super Mario Bros. 2 is bashed for its trite level design and presentation. Super Mario Galaxy 2 is a cynical cash grab that has done its work. I believe it did its job a little too well. Not only do I despise this game extremely, this game has also made me abhor Super Mario Galaxy as well, just not as much. Super Mario Galaxy 2 removes all the novelty the first game and spreads its toxic rehash vibe by associating itself with the shell of its former self.

I get it: Super Mario Galaxy 2 has a nice soundtrack (if it wasn't bogged down by awful MIDI covers of Super Mario World, MIDI music in general, and that grating Yoshistar Galaxy music in general). It looks nice and colorful. But does it deserve 9/10 or a 10/10?

No.

Not even higher than a 7/10.

tl;dr

2D
Super Mario World
Super Mario Bros. 3
New Super Mario Bros. U
New Super Mario Bros. Wii
Super Mario Bros.
Super Mario Bros. The Lost Levels
Super Mario Bros. 2
New Super Mario Bros.
New Super Mario Bros. 2

3D
Super Mario Galaxy
Super Mario 64 DS
Super Mario Galaxy 2
Super Mario 64
Super Mario Sunshine
Super Mario 3D World
Super Mario 3D Land

For 2D, Super Mario World was my favourite because of how much fun it is to explore the world, introducing Yoshi and the level design. The best by far. Super Mario Bros. 3 got second for its level design and amazing power ups. New Super Mario Bros. Wii and U were decent, and had some good level desingns. The original two were fun, but honestly aren't as fun as World and 3. Super Mario Bros. 2 didn't feel "Mario" enough. New Super Mario Bros. DS was dull and New Super Mario Bros. 2 is dead last because it was super dull, had a completely recycled soundtrack, boring levels and TOO MANY 1-UPS!

For 3D, Super Mario Galaxy completely takes the win because of lots of creativity, amazing soundtrack, beautiful visuals and fun levels! Super Mario 64 DS was a remake that really expanded on the original. It added new playable characters, minigames and other fun stuff. Super Mario Galaxy 2 was fun but felt more like an expansion pack. Super Mario 64 was great, but 64 DS is infinitely better. Sunshine was cool because of FLUDD and introduced BOWSER JR.! The 3D games weren't as fun but still good.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

tl;dr

Don't quote my entire post then, you.

 

[Dr. Peach]

Anyways I can't think of a better way to rank all of the goddamn platformers.

 

[Ray Trace]

So Baby Luigi,is your reaction to SMG2 the same as the same as the AVGN's review of TMNT3 like how he destroyed his copy of TMNT3 at the end. Do you want to do the same to your copy of Galaxy 2 like how the AVGN did to his copy of TMNT3

I mean the AVGN said that Castlevania II: Simon's Quest sucked and that was his first review but Eric Lappe from Let's Get or goemon047 from Retroware responded to his video with this. Though I think Simon's Quest is okay.

Spoiler

I don't need a comparison to another guy to know how I think of the game.

I'll stop taking you seriously until you stop making those vacuous and asinine comparisons

 

[Dr. Peach]

So Baby Luigi,is your reaction to SMG2 the same as the same as the AVGN's review of TMNT3 like how he destroyed his copy of TMNT3 at the end. Do you want to do the same to your copy of Galaxy 2 like how the AVGN did to his copy of TMNT3

I mean the AVGN said that Castlevania II: Simon's Quest sucked and that was his first review but Eric Lappe from Let's Get or goemon047 from Retroware responded to his video with this. Though I think Simon's Quest is okay.

Spoiler

I don't need a comparison to another guy to know how I think of the game.

I'll stop taking you seriously until you stop making those vacuous and asinine comparisons

Ok, I will but you do realize that I am just only 13 years old. But did that AVGN video induced you to slice your own copy of SMG2 in half and smash SMG2 into pieces.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

I'd rather do that to the game developers.

But I did the next best thing by scribbling all over the box. Which is juvenile, I guess, but it's fun scribbling on Mario's face.

 

[Ray Trace]

Ok, I will but you do realize that I am just only 13 years old. But did that AVGN video induced you to slice your own copy of SMG2 in half and smash SMG2 into pieces.

Age is not an excuse. I was 13 years old and I clearly remember not making comparisons to every game in existence, and if I did, I would certainly CUT IT OUT if I was told to do so.

I would never destroy a game copy that I paid 50 bucks for. Doesn't matter what game it is. If I hate it, it collects dust. Forever.

 

[Dr. Peach]

Ok, I will but you do realize that I am just only 13 years old. But did that AVGN video induced you to slice your own copy of SMG2 in half and smash SMG2 into pieces.

Age is not an excuse. I was 13 years old and I clearly remember not making comparisons to every game in existence, and if I did, I would certainly CUT IT OUT if I was told to do so.

I would never destroy a game copy that I paid 50 bucks for. Doesn't matter what game it is. If I hate it, it collects dust. Forever.

So which means you wouldn't give it the AVGN treatment even if you were the Nerd.