What products do you think are cash grabby?

[LeftyGreenMario]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

But HOW are these games similar? You keep on saying that they're similar, and then you say "sure they have these different things" and never provide me with a definitive answer

Now I will. The only reason I can't provide a definite answer immediately because my answer is usually lengthy. Just look below.

Super Mario Galaxy 2 is guilty of all of these
-Recycled assets. They look virtually identical, even the little things like the HUD.

-Recycled ideas. FreezeFlame -> Shiverburn. Dino Piranha -> Peewee Piranha. Mega-Leg -> Digga-Leg. Honeyhive Galaxy/ Honeyclimb Galaxy -> Honeybloom Galaxy/Honeyhop Galaxy. The entirety of Stone Cyclone. Mandibug stack. Luigi's Purple Coins. The green-tile-covered planet planet in Hurry Scurry Galaxy -> the green-tile-covered planet planet in Sea Slide Galaxy. Ghostly Galaxy -> Haunty Halls Galaxy. Sea Slide Galaxy -> Starshine Beach Galaxy. Melty Molten Galaxy -> Melty Monster Galaxy. Sweet Sweet Galaxy -> Sweet Mystery Galaxy. Dusty Dune Galaxy -> Slipsand Galaxy. You can reference your first Galaxy, but don't excessively get your ideas from it. You can argue that they're going for coherent themes, but I think they stick too closely to the first game to qualify as different levels under the same theme, especially with the blatant copy paste of FreezeFlame to Shiverburn. Also, speaking of themes, one thing Galaxy 2 had a sore lack of were that only a few levels actually feel like they took place in space. This wouldn't have been a problem if Galaxy games weren't advertised and hyped as "MARIO BLASTS OFF THROUGH THE FINAL FRONTIER OF SPACE!!".

-Failure to build upon the mechanics that the first game had and even the ones this game introduced. Red Star could've seen much more use in Galaxy 2, but it's nowhere to be seen. The removal of the Ice Flower was disappointing. Boo Mushroom's appearances were disappointing. The first Galaxy game had powerup distribution problems, and the second one did absolutely nothing to improve it. Think the faux replay value the first one had and the second one had... lazily-designed Green Stars.

-Failure to improve upon the first game while tacking on gimmicks that end up bogging down the game. Think what Melty Monster could've been if the vast majority of the levels actually took place in the galaxy and not some stupid minigame area. Think how often Yoshi appears. Removal of Red Shells. Swimming controls that now restrict the amount of times you can spin underwater. Think about the story, where Rosalina, who had a fairly interesting backstory, is eschewed for... something else. The StarShip Mario thing is a mixed bag (like or dislike it), but I personally don't like it. Also, blaring comet noise once you complete the game. That's all.

-Uninspired boss fights. Find video game weak point (located at the bosses' behind), hit it. Rinse and repeat three times. I shouldn't have to explain the final fight. To be fair, Galaxy 1 doesn't a lot have great fights either (Bugaboom,
Kamella, TOPMANIAC, Baron Burr, Major Barrows, and Tarantox, uh, you suck).

-The soundtrack is disappointing. There are some nice tunes on Starship Mario, the credits, Cosmic Cove, Melty Monster, Puzzle Plank, the DiggaLegg fight, and Space Storm maybe, but the rest don't strike me as memorable or just that great. Fluffy Buff and Sky Station sound way too similar to each other and Gusty Garden. Galaxy 1 also has only select themes, but Galaxy 2 had that opportunity to actually do more with their music, and I have to say that I'm disappointed overall. Music, if not MIDI cover versions from Super Mario World, feels recycled from Galaxy 1 with the same overall themes, as if Galaxy 2 is trying to just be like Galaxy 1 rather than be its own game.

Actual good things (a few become level aspects in 3D Land/World, although not always to my liking).
-Cosmic Clones
-Beat Boxes (good, there should be more levels built around this)
-Co-Star Luma (also, good, but pretty much superseded by 3D World's game, but can work ala Murfy on Gamepad).
-Throwback and Twisty Trials were nice touches, although I'm not too fond of the level design in Twisty Trials anyway.
-Flip-swap switches. Good concept, horribly executed in multiplayer in Super Mario 3D World.
-Slimy Spring and the first level of Melty Molten were great. There was also this Space Storm level where it the music was played as if it's from a radio and it was in grayscale, if I recall correctly. Good.

I'm still not getting what you're saying, I mean if all of these things don't matter to a game to make it different, then what does? Does this mean that every 2D mario game is a rehash of the original mario game? Every 2D sonic game is a rehash of the original sonic game?

No. 2D Marios have at least graphical overhauls. I think the bare, bare minimum a game needs to be different enough is a graphical overhaul since it does go some way into distinguishing your game. But one thing: it's by no way a surefire solution because you also have to consider the context and genre of those games and how much else they actually improved. Pokemon, for instance, has always seen graphical updates, but I lambasted the series for its stagnant and convoluted mechanics, especially its battle system. The older 2D Mario games have less to work from and had limited technology, so they have more room to start establishing things and defining the emerging video game medium. And besides, the 2D Marios have introduced several things in the successive years: world maps, better level progression, established enemies, power-up reserves while also defining the platform genre. Super Mario Galaxy 2 does none of these.

Anyway, I hope you do consider my points on why I strongly dislike Galaxy 2 and why I think how it dodges criticism is unfair and, well, maddening for me. If you can disagree, go ahead, it's just my opinion anyway.

 

[Dr. Peach]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

Now I will. The only reason I can't provide a definite answer immediately because my answer is usually lengthy. Just look below.

Super Mario Galaxy 2 is guilty of all of these
-Recycled assets. They look virtually identical, even the little things like the HUD.

-Recycled ideas. FreezeFlame -> Shiverburn. Dino Piranha -> Peewee Piranha. Mega-Leg -> Digga-Leg. Honeyhive Galaxy/ Honeyclimb Galaxy -> Honeybloom Galaxy/Honeyhop Galaxy. The entirety of Stone Cyclone. Mandibug stack. Luigi's Purple Coins. The green-tile-covered planet planet in Hurry Scurry Galaxy -> the green-tile-covered planet planet in Sea Slide Galaxy. Ghostly Galaxy -> Haunty Halls Galaxy. Sea Slide Galaxy -> Starshine Beach Galaxy. Melty Molten Galaxy -> Melty Monster Galaxy. Sweet Sweet Galaxy -> Sweet Mystery Galaxy. Dusty Dune Galaxy -> Slipsand Galaxy. You can reference your first Galaxy, but don't excessively get your ideas from it. You can argue that they're going for coherent themes, but I think they stick too closely to the first game to qualify as different levels under the same theme, especially with the blatant copy paste of FreezeFlame to Shiverburn. Also, speaking of themes, one thing Galaxy 2 had a sore lack of were that only a few levels actually feel like they took place in space. This wouldn't have been a problem if Galaxy games weren't advertised and hyped as "MARIO BLASTS OFF THROUGH THE FINAL FRONTIER OF SPACE!!".

-Failure to build upon the mechanics that the first game had and even the ones this game introduced. Red Star could've seen much more use in Galaxy 2, but it's nowhere to be seen. The removal of the Ice Flower was disappointing. Boo Mushroom's appearances were disappointing. The first Galaxy game had powerup distribution problems, and the second one did absolutely nothing to improve it. Think the faux replay value the first one had and the second one had... lazily-designed Green Stars.

-Failure to improve upon the first game while tacking on gimmicks that end up bogging down the game. Think what Melty Monster could've been if the vast majority of the levels actually took place in the galaxy and not some stupid minigame area. Think how often Yoshi appears. Removal of Red Shells. Swimming controls that now restrict the amount of times you can spin underwater. Think about the story, where Rosalina, who had a fairly interesting backstory, is eschewed for... something else. The StarShip Mario thing is a mixed bag (like or dislike it), but I personally don't like it. Also, blaring comet noise once you complete the game. That's all.

-Uninspired boss fights. Find video game weak point (located at the bosses' behind), hit it. Rinse and repeat three times. I shouldn't have to explain the final fight. To be fair, Galaxy 1 doesn't a lot have great fights either (Bugaboom,
Kamella, TOPMANIAC, Baron Burr, Major Barrows, and Tarantox, uh, you suck).

-The soundtrack is disappointing. There are some nice tunes on Starship Mario, the credits, Cosmic Cove, Melty Monster, Puzzle Plank, the DiggaLegg fight, and Space Storm maybe, but the rest don't strike me as memorable or just that great. Fluffy Buff and Sky Station sound way too similar to each other and Gusty Garden. Galaxy 1 also has only select themes, but Galaxy 2 had that opportunity to actually do more with their music, and I have to say that I'm disappointed overall. Music, if not MIDI cover versions from Super Mario World, feels recycled from Galaxy 1 with the same overall themes, as if Galaxy 2 is trying to just be like Galaxy 1 rather than be its own game.

Actual good things (a few become level aspects in 3D Land/World, although not always to my liking).
-Cosmic Clones
-Beat Boxes (good, there should be more levels built around this)
-Co-Star Luma (also, good, but pretty much superseded by 3D World's game, but can work ala Murfy on Gamepad).
-Throwback and Twisty Trials were nice touches, although I'm not too fond of the level design in Twisty Trials anyway.
-Flip-swap switches. Good concept, horribly executed in multiplayer in Super Mario 3D World.
-Slimy Spring and the first level of Melty Molten were great. There was also this Space Storm level where it the music was played as if it's from a radio and it was in grayscale, if I recall correctly. Good.

I'm still not getting what you're saying, I mean if all of these things don't matter to a game to make it different, then what does? Does this mean that every 2D mario game is a rehash of the original mario game? Every 2D sonic game is a rehash of the original sonic game?

No. 2D Marios have at least graphical overhauls. I think the bare, bare minimum a game needs to be different enough is a graphical overhaul since it does go some way into distinguishing your game. But one thing: it's by no way a surefire solution because you also have to consider the context and genre of those games and how much else they actually improved. Pokemon, for instance, has always seen graphical updates, but I lambasted the series for its stagnant and convoluted mechanics, especially its battle system. The older 2D Mario games have less to work from and had limited technology, so they have more room to start establishing things and defining the emerging video game medium. And besides, the 2D Marios have introduced several things in the successive years: world maps, better level progression, established enemies, power-up reserves while also defining the platform genre. Super Mario Galaxy 2 does none of these.

Anyway, I hope you do consider my points on why I strongly dislike Galaxy 2 and why I think how it dodges criticism is unfair and, well, maddening for me. If you can disagree, go ahead, it's just my opinion anyway.

This.

You might as well ask if space shooters are rehashes and are worse.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

I thought you disagreed with me, though. I mean, you said that Galaxy 2 is a magnum opus or something. I'm, uh, lambasting it.

 

[Dr. Peach]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

I thought you disagreed with me, though. I mean, you said that Galaxy 2 is a magnum opus or something. I'm, uh, lambasting it.

I did said that it was a magnum opus. I'm just asking if space shooters like Gradius and and it's many followups are unoriginal and are worse than Galaxy 2. I know that space shooters do tend to get unoriginal.

Y'know stuff like this:

I know that Gradius is what every other space shooter imitates, even those on the biggest barf fest ever in existence and that is none other than Action 52 for the NES and Sega Genesis.

 

[DragonFreak]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

*complete entire annihilation on why SMG2 is terrible*

*slow claps*

I'm saving this post for when this conversation comes up again.

 

[Shyghoul]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

I played Galaxy 2 first so I basically feel more-or-less the same way about 1 as LGM does about 2

which is kind of off but w/e I guess lol

 

[Specific Neptune]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

the whole thing

i shall say to you bravo, this is what i was expecting as a response

i guess in my own personal opinion, none of that really bothers me as much as it does you

it doesn't change my opinion, but it makes one hell of a compelling argument

anyways, my argument has now been annihilated, so i shall succeed defeat, and now i am off to the rainbow room to smoke some cigars by the fire

 

[Lumastar]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

I still like Galaxy 2, but Galaxy is the better game.

 

[Dr. Peach]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

I love Galaxy 2 just a bit more than Galaxy 1. Sure Galaxy 2 doesn't have that thriller and suspense of the first Galaxy, but Mario doesn't need to have thriller and suspense.

And Baby Luigi and LeftyGreenMario, I actually think Galaxy 2 did improve over Galaxy 1 and that is when every time when you get a game over, you actually automatically continue. In Galaxy 1, you always went back to the title screen which was a downgrade from Sunshine which gave you the option to either go back to the title screen or continue. Going back to the title screen just to reload your save file in order to continue is just fucking atrocious and annoying. I can tell both of you twins about another game that does this, that game is none other than Castlevania: Symphony of The Night for the Sony PlayStation 1 and Sega Saturn (Japan only), and yes it's that very same Symphony of the Night which you've probably have seen the AVGN review.

In Symphony of the Night, it's even more atrocious because of the long load times on the PS1 (if you're playing it on the PS2 then the load times may be fast or worse), the Saturn version may be fast or slow and on PSP and the digital releases, no load times. I'm pretty sure this is the same case as with the other Metroidvanias but I've never played the rest so I don't know about the other ones.

 

[Stargazing]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

*post*

thank you

 

[Nysic]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

smg2 kinda just seems like a dlc expansion for smg1

 

[freakworld]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

blah

lies

 

[Stargazing]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

smg2 kinda just seems like a dlc expansion for smg1

overpriced*

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

I played Galaxy 2 first so I basically feel more-or-less the same way about 1 as LGM does about 2

which is kind of off but w/e I guess lol

Well, it's not really fair to judge Galaxy 1 like that since it came first, but yeah, the two feel too same to each other. Nintendo doesn't know how quickly the virtue of novelty can wear off, which is probably why you weren't impressed by the first one.

I did said that it was a magnum opus. I'm just asking if space shooters like Gradius and and it's many followups are unoriginal and are worse than Galaxy 2. I know that space shooters do tend to get unoriginal.


I know that Gradius is what every other space shooter imitates, even those on the biggest barf fest ever in existence and that is none other than Action 52 for the NES and Sega Genesis.

I don't know. If they're low-quality games to begin with, then they're probably worse than Galaxy 2. I have never said that Galaxy 2 in of itself is a bad game, but I despise it nonetheless.

the whole thing

i shall say to you bravo, this is what i was expecting as a response

i guess in my own personal opinion, none of that really bothers me as much as it does you

it doesn't change my opinion, but it makes one hell of a compelling argument

anyways, my argument has now been annihilated, so i shall succeed defeat, and now i am off to the rainbow room to smoke some cigars by the fire

Thanks. I'm aware that tightly-held opinions are hard to change so I'm not expecting to convince anyone. My goal was to state understandable reasons I dislike Super Mario Galaxy 2 and back them with evidence. But in the end, it's all subjective.

smg2 kinda just seems like a dlc expansion for smg1

That's exactly how I felt. Except it felt overpriced.

And Baby Luigi and LeftyGreenMario, I actually think Galaxy 2 did improve over Galaxy 1 and that is when every time when you get a game over, you actually automatically continue. In Galaxy 1, you always went back to the title screen which was a downgrade from Sunshine which gave you the option to either go back to the title screen or continue. Going back to the title screen just to reload your save file in order to continue is just *bleep*ing atrocious and annoying.

That's hardly an improvement. I showed Co-Star mode as the best thing the sequel has done. This is just an improvement over a minor inconvenience. It doesn't mitigate the worse swimming controls, the recycled levels and concepts, the worse boss fights, the uncooperative camera, and the fun-sucking gimmick levels. Plus, it doesn't even address how utterly pointless lives are; furthermore, lives are given like candy for those decent at video games so, unlike some other games I've played, players won't risk a Game Over.

 

[Dr. Peach]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

I played Galaxy 2 first so I basically feel more-or-less the same way about 1 as LGM does about 2

which is kind of off but w/e I guess lol

Well, it's not really fair to judge Galaxy 1 like that since it came first, but yeah, the two feel too same to each other. Nintendo doesn't know how quickly the virtue of novelty can wear off, which is probably why you weren't impressed by the first one.

the whole thing

i shall say to you bravo, this is what i was expecting as a response

i guess in my own personal opinion, none of that really bothers me as much as it does you

it doesn't change my opinion, but it makes one hell of a compelling argument

anyways, my argument has now been annihilated, so i shall succeed defeat, and now i am off to the rainbow room to smoke some cigars by the fire

Thanks. I'm aware that tightly-held opinions are hard to change so I'm not expecting to convince anyone. My goal was to state understandable reasons I dislike Super Mario Galaxy 2 and back them with evidence. But in the end, it's all subjective.

smg2 kinda just seems like a dlc expansion for smg1

That's exactly how I felt. Except it felt overpriced.

And Baby Luigi and LeftyGreenMario, I actually think Galaxy 2 did improve over Galaxy 1 and that is when every time when you get a game over, you actually automatically continue. In Galaxy 1, you always went back to the title screen which was a downgrade from Sunshine which gave you the option to either go back to the title screen or continue. Going back to the title screen just to reload your save file in order to continue is just *bleep*ing atrocious and annoying.

That's hardly an improvement. I showed Co-Star mode as the best thing the sequel has done. This is just an improvement over a minor inconvenience. It doesn't mitigate the worse swimming controls, the recycled levels and concepts, the worse boss fights, the uncooperative camera, and the fun-sucking gimmick levels. Plus, it doesn't even address how utterly pointless lives are; furthermore, lives are given like candy for those decent at video games so, unlike some other games I've played, players won't risk a Game Over.

You two wanna know something? Your complaint on how Galaxy 2 hardly does anything to improve over Galaxy 1 is the exact same complaint that Castlevania: Curse of Darkness received on the PS2. People criticized it for hardly improving over Castlevania: Lament of Innocence (also on PS2) aside from having that level up system that was featured in the Metroidvania games in the Castlevania franchise since Symphony of the Night.

Galaxy 2 and Castlevania: Curse of Darkness actually do try to add new gimmicks to at least make the experience a little different. Galaxy 2 adds a ton of new content and new and changed gimmicks. The Red Star in Galaxy 1 was useless since you can only utilize it in Rosalina's Comet Observatory and no other level uses it, some powerups and gimmicks are replaced throughout the game (such as that bubble thingy which you have to use the Wiimote to blow Mario across the screen is removed) and stuff that was originally intended for the first Galaxy that didn't appear in the final cut appeared in Galaxy 2.

What's the point of calling Galaxy 2 "Super Mario Galaxy 2" if it doesn't play like it's predeccessor "Super Mario Galaxy 1"? It has to remain mostly the same. I just honestly don't get why both of you twins criticize Galaxy 2 for something so simple as having the same gameplay. There's so many franchises that do this including Mega Man, Castlevania, Gradius, Contra,and Sierra's frigging King's Quest and Space Quest series on MS-DOS and Windows 95/Windows 98. Here's what Pyro told me about the Mario Party and Mega Man games when I thought that they were the exact same game over and over again.

 

[Stargazing]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

Galaxy 2 and Castlevania: Curse of Darkness actually do try to add new gimmicks to at least make the experience a little different. Galaxy 2 adds a ton of new content and new and changed gimmicks. The Red Star in Galaxy 1 was useless since you can only utilize it in Rosalina's Comet Observatory and no other level uses it, some powerups and gimmicks are replaced throughout the game (such as that bubble thingy which you have to use the Wiimote to blow Mario across the screen is removed) and stuff that was originally intended for the first Galaxy that didn't appear in the final cut appeared in Galaxy 2.

What's the point of calling Galaxy 2 "Super Mario Galaxy 2" if it doesn't play like it's predeccessor "Super Mario Galaxy 1"? It has to remain mostly the same. I just honestly don't get why both of you twins criticize Galaxy 2 for something so simple as having the same gameplay. There's so many franchises that do this including Mega Man, Castlevania, Gradius, Contra,and Sierra's frigging King's Quest and Space Quest series on MS-DOS and Windows 95/Windows 98. Here's what Pyro told me about the Mario Party and Mega Man games when I thought that they were the exact same game over and over again.

The ton of new content meaning Yoshi. That's literally all I can remember. If you can name me something else, please do. The Red Star had so much potential to be used in galaxies in Galaxy 2, however, the fact they chose to scrap it entirely just boggles my mind. I don't remember the bubble thing in 1, and the cut stuff was a nice little bonus, I'll give it that.

They aren't bashing it for playing like it's predecessor, they're bashing it for being almost exactly like it's predecessor while bringing little new things to the table. It's just $50 DLC. DLC is adding a few things. What is Galaxy 2? Adding a few things. I'm not even joking, there's so many similarities between tons of the galaxies in both games, it might as well be Galaxy 1.5. They aren't bashing it for having the same gameplay, either, refer to the first sentence of this paragraph.

I tried writing this as to how I think they see it, but it's 3 in the morning so my piece is short and flawed, unfortunately. We're going to have to make do as I'll probably forget about this when I wake up tomorrow, though.

 

[Dr. Peach]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

I added the Mario Party option for those who think Mario Party is cash grabby.

 

[Fawfulthegreat64]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

AFAIK it's pretty widely accepted that Mario Party is great up until 9, with some exceptions (advance)

 

[Lumastar]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

Pokémon Shuffle

It's like Candy Crush, but with a very well-established brand.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

Galaxy 2 and Castlevania: Curse of Darkness actually do try to add new gimmicks to at least make the experience a little different. Galaxy 2 adds a ton of new content and new and changed gimmicks. The Red Star in Galaxy 1 was useless since you can only utilize it in Rosalina's Comet Observatory and no other level uses it, some powerups and gimmicks are replaced throughout the game (such as that bubble thingy which you have to use the Wiimote to blow Mario across the screen is removed) and stuff that was originally intended for the first Galaxy that didn't appear in the final cut appeared in Galaxy 2.

What's the point of calling Galaxy 2 "Super Mario Galaxy 2" if it doesn't play like it's predeccessor "Super Mario Galaxy 1"? It has to remain mostly the same. I just honestly don't get why both of you twins criticize Galaxy 2 for something so simple as having the same gameplay. There's so many franchises that do this including Mega Man, Castlevania, Gradius, Contra,and Sierra's frigging King's Quest and Space Quest series on MS-DOS and Windows 95/Windows 98. Here's what Pyro told me about the Mario Party and Mega Man games when I thought that they were the exact same game over and over again.

The ton of new content meaning Yoshi. That's literally all I can remember. If you can name me something else, please do. The Red Star had so much potential to be used in galaxies in Galaxy 2, however, the fact they chose to scrap it entirely just boggles my mind. I don't remember the bubble thing in 1, and the cut stuff was a nice little bonus, I'll give it that.

They aren't bashing it for playing like it's predecessor, they're bashing it for being almost exactly like it's predecessor while bringing little new things to the table. It's just $50 DLC. DLC is adding a few things. What is Galaxy 2? Adding a few things. I'm not even joking, there's so many similarities between tons of the galaxies in both games, it might as well be Galaxy 1.5. They aren't bashing it for having the same gameplay, either, refer to the first sentence of this paragraph.

I tried writing this as to how I think they see it, but it's 3 in the morning so my piece is short and flawed, unfortunately. We're going to have to make do as I'll probably forget about this when I wake up tomorrow, though.

Protip: "it's" is a contraction for "it is" while "its" is a pronoun. That's a start. But yeah, Pwwnd123 isn't getting it, so I hope your post clears up what I'm trying to say.

Also, you shouldn't criticize Party as much for "rehashing" gameplay since it's a totally different genre. Multiplayer party games like Kart, Party, and Smash don't need to change as much compared to the platformers, because of their longer shelf-life. If it really lasts that long, it sticks to you, so in the next game, you'd want just more content and the kinks smoothened.

Pokémon Shuffle

It's like Candy Crush, but with a very well-established brand.

What's worse is that they're continuing this trend with the new Pokaymon Rumble that everyone probably instantly forgot about in the latest direct.

 

[Lumastar]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

I've actually played it a bit (I'll post full thoughts later in another thread) and by some miracle it's actually a decent system. Not perfect, but it works.

 

[Stargazing]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

yeah I'm sorry, it was late at night and I was also upset when I wrote it, I should of waited until I had some sleep

 

[Dr. Peach]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

To me Mario Party is worse than Street Fighter, Mega Man, Call of Duty, King's Quest, and Assassin's Creed. I also believe Madden and FIFA surpasses Mario Party in terms of repetitiveness. Mario Party used to be rapid fire like Street Fighter, Mega Man, Bomberman, King's Quest, and even Assassin's Creed for a more recent example.

 

[Glitchy Bowser Jr.]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

The older Mario Parties were actually good so I don't consider them a cash grab. 9 and 10 suck though but they had quite the gap between them so they aren't really cash grabs - they just sucked.

 

[Fawfulthegreat64]

Re: Which product do you think is cash grabby?

Don't forget Island Tour which came between them.