The 9th Anniversary of Super Mario Galaxy 1.

The RPG Gamer

The RPG Gamer

I am the greatest RPG gamer alive
Super Mario Galaxy 1 an amazingly great game for the Wii has turned 9 years old today OMG! Time sure goes by real fast.
 
It'll turn 10 next year along with Super Mario Sunshine becoming 15.
 
Yeah that's pretty amazing considering the game actually looks like a modern game but hey, time doesn't stop.
 
ah the game that i respect to utmost degree but simply cannot get into, sad world for me but congrats to the game itself.
 
Koops the koopa troopa said:
Yeah that's pretty amazing considering the game actually looks like a modern game but hey, time doesn't stop.
Click to expand...

Super Mario Galaxy does not look like a modern game
 
Super Mario Galaxy's presentation is nice, but it still looks like an old game from 2008. Mario himself doesn't even look that great. Heck, his body texture files is only 256x128 pixels and his face is a measly 128x128 pixels while high-quality PC games at the time could have 1024 pixel resolution AND include other neat things like bumpmapping (give the texture an illusion of depth without changing the mesh itself) and specmapping (i.e. mask that determines how much light can reflect off here and there). Meanwhile, Brawl had 512x512 pixel resolution on textures. I think it's graphically on par, if not under, with its contemporaries. That's from a pure technical standpoint, not accounting for presentation / arrangement and frame-rate, both which are good.

So, while I don't think it aged super poorly, Galaxy had piss-poor camera work during cutscenes that DID exemplify its age (this one is a notable example, where I think even people at the time complained about it but it just showed its age more).

Super Mario Galaxy doesn't necessarily have bad graphics per se, but it looks graphically less powerful than its contemporaries and obviously our modern games.
 
what is that video
 
LeftyGreenMario said:
Super Mario Galaxy's presentation is nice, but it still looks like an old game from 2008. Mario himself doesn't even look that great. Heck, his body texture files is only 256x128 pixels and his face is a measly 128x128 pixels while high-quality PC games at the time could have 1024 pixel resolution AND include other neat things like bumpmapping (give the texture an illusion of depth without changing the mesh itself) and specmapping (i.e. mask that determines how much light can reflect off here and there). Meanwhile, Brawl had 512x512 pixel resolution on textures. I think it's graphically on par, if not under, with its contemporaries. That's from a pure technical standpoint, not accounting for presentation / arrangement and frame-rate, both which are good.

So, while I don't think it aged super poorly, Galaxy had piss-poor camera work during cutscenes that DID exemplify its age (this one is a notable example, where I think even people at the time complained about it but it just showed its age more).

Super Mario Galaxy doesn't necessarily have bad graphics per se, but it looks graphically less powerful than its contemporaries and obviously our modern games.
Click to expand...
Then again, the Wii is nothing more than just a beefed up GameCube with slightly improved graphics making it close to the original Xbox.
 
Maria Renard said:
Then again, the Wii is nothing more than just a beefed up GameCube with slightly improved graphics making it close to the original Xbox.
Click to expand...

According to a Super Mario Galaxy preview on G4 (circa 2006), it was initially going to be a Nintendo GameCube game.
 
If that source is good and all, I wouldn't be surprised. That one screenshot alone convinced me that Super Mario Galaxy is not very sophisticated graphically.

Doesn't make it a bad game though I think it's sad that Galaxy 2 was released in the same console because the Wii U could've definitely granted way better graphics (its textures are 1024 resolution and has bumpmaps and specmaps for instance) and it would slightly at worst improve my opinion on that game.

So yeah, I'm part of the crowd who does think graphics matter... quite a lot, but not as much as the gameplay of course. A lot of it has to do with personal things like ripping the models. It's no good to me as a modeler / animator that Galaxy has distorted Mario's model and uses such a low texture resolution.
 
^ In years to come, I could see them making a port of Super Mario Galaxy with updated graphics of the day. You often see "HD remakes" of classic games that were first released several years ago (Zelda: Twilight Princess and Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath are some examples that some to mind).
 
With few exceptions, graphics have never mattered that much to me, especially when the aesthetics and overall presentation make up for it. If the game's trying to show off graphics that it's clearly not able to, that's one thing, but it's another thing entirely if a game is able to work around its limitations. As you've said, graphics will (almost) always be secondary to gameplay, but unless the graphics are extremely unbearable, I usually don't notice it.
 
Shokora said:
^ In years to come, I could see them making a port of Super Mario Galaxy with updated graphics of the day. You often see "HD remakes" of classic games that were first released several years ago (Zelda: Twilight Princess and Oddworld: Stranger's Wrath are some examples that some to mind).
Click to expand...
It would be great. I would like to see them update the model quality and actually proportion Mario and Luigi correctly rather than forcing both into a skeleton. And I would like to see more work put into it rather than better lighting effects (though I doubt it because the footage of Mario in the Switch did NOT impress me graphic-wise AND presentation-wise). I wasn't largely impressed with Twilight Princess, though, but I do like to see side-by-side the Oddworld ones.

Time Turner said:
With few exceptions, graphics have never mattered that much to me, especially when the aesthetics and overall presentation make up for it. If the game's trying to show off graphics that it's clearly not able to, that's one thing, but it's another thing entirely if a game is able to work around its limitations. As you've said, graphics will (almost) always be secondary to gameplay, but unless the graphics are extremely unbearable, I usually don't notice it.
Click to expand...
I think I've cultivated a bit more of an eye to notice the graphics. I also account for aesthetics and overall presentation and I do think Galaxy looks pleasant in the eyes (bar some atrocious camera work like in that image I linked there). But yeah, I didn't necessarily say the graphics are bad or unpleasant, but, simply, they don't compare to a modern game or perhaps even a contemporary game of its generation.
 
LeftyGreenMario said:
Super Mario Galaxy's presentation is nice, but it still looks like an old game from 2008. Mario himself doesn't even look that great. Heck, his body texture files is only 256x128 pixels and his face is a measly 128x128 pixels while high-quality PC games at the time could have 1024 pixel resolution AND include other neat things like bumpmapping (give the texture an illusion of depth without changing the mesh itself) and specmapping (i.e. mask that determines how much light can reflect off here and there). Meanwhile, Brawl had 512x512 pixel resolution on textures. I think it's graphically on par, if not under, with its contemporaries. That's from a pure technical standpoint, not accounting for presentation / arrangement and frame-rate, both which are good.

So, while I don't think it aged super poorly, Galaxy had piss-poor camera work during cutscenes that DID exemplify its age (this one is a notable example, where I think even people at the time complained about it but it just showed its age more).

Super Mario Galaxy doesn't necessarily have bad graphics per se, but it looks graphically less powerful than its contemporaries and obviously our modern games.
Click to expand...

It's important to remember that single-layered Wii game discs can only hold up to 4.37 GB. However, it is quite odd that Super Mario Galaxy uses more space than Super Mario Galaxy 2.

Interestingly, there are some models in Super Smash Bros. Brawl that have 1024x1024 pixel textures. Such large texture parts would use a lot of memory if they're left uncompressed, however, which is why the CMPR texture format is often used instead of RGBA8. The only problem with CMPR, however, is that its compression can affect texture quality more than RGB565 and RGB5A3, and it's not too friendly with video game sprites.
 
Baby Luigi said:
Koops the koopa troopa said:
Yeah that's pretty amazing considering the game actually looks like a modern game but hey, time doesn't stop.
Click to expand...

Super Mario Galaxy does not look like a modern game
Click to expand...

yeah i can agree with this one, its decent looking game but not up to todays standards by any means, although i do feel it has aged pretty well thus far.
 
MnSG said:
It's important to remember that single-layered Wii game discs can only hold up to 4.37 GB. However, it is quite odd that Super Mario Galaxy uses more space than Super Mario Galaxy 2.

Interestingly, there are some models in Super Smash Bros. Brawl that have 1024x1024 pixel textures. Such large texture parts would use a lot of memory if they're left uncompressed, however, which is why the CMPR texture format is often used instead of RGBA8. The only problem with CMPR, however, is that its compression can affect texture quality more than RGB565 and RGB5A3, and it's not too friendly with video game sprites.
Click to expand...
Haha, I'm not sure how the images are compressed but they likely had compression like mipmapping (the general idea is that it causes textures to look pixelated at increasing distance thus saving space; it's a texture version of low-poly models) and other optimization things I'm not even aware of. Those texture formats remind me of DDS compression as well, though I'm not at all familiar with how DDS works at all.

That's also interesting, but not super surprising. Harp on Brawl's art style all you want, but their texture quality (in terms of resolution and attention to detail) is pretty high for a Nintendo Wii game.

Zae Eildus said:
yeah i can agree with this one, its decent looking game but not up to todays standards by any means, although i do feel it has aged pretty well thus far.
Click to expand...
As far as I know, I think it still plays pretty well and again, it's still pleasant to look at. Sunshine and Super Mario 64, on the other hand.... ugh. Sunshine just doesn't look that great at all.
 
ugh yeah sunshine is painful to look at despite the beautiful water graphics
 
In terms of gameplay, that thing did not age well at all. At points, it feels broken.

If you disagree, try playing the Pachinko Game level. It's utterly broken. How did Nintendo think that's acceptable!? Even if you didn't die, the level's physics feels like it's constantly glitching out on you, the camera's going apeshit, Mario's face is smacking against every goddamn thing, the trampoline barely works as it launches Mario but Mario stops immediately to try to wall-jump, and Mario takes fall damage after slamming his face into a wall because the slope behind the Pachinko Machine launches him into that wall.

That Sandbird level feels like the slightest angle would make you go skimming off and dying. The slope detection isn't gradual to me; it's either you're standing or you're sliding off. Ugh. And there's Blooper Surfing where I actually got all 8 red coins in Ricco Harbor on the freaking Pink Blooper but died because of the effing collision detection on those logs you have to jump on before you can jump and grab the star (which itself is stupid anyway. They should've let you get off the blooper). There's also that Pinna Park Roller Coaster shit where you shoot missiles at balloons and it's much less fun than it sounds because there's no way to properly aim those stupid missiles.

Anyway, that's as far as I've gotten before I lost interest in that game. I heard about the raft thing in one level and that sounds like goopy molten crap.

Galaxy and Galaxy 2 may be tinted by rosy retrospection, but I'd be hard-pressed to find something like the Pachinko Game level. I don't even think Manta-Ray surfing in the trial galaxies would be broken even though physics are working against you there. Besides, I beat that one on one try. :/

Maybe I have a penchant for remembering the utter crap more vividly than the good stuff, but Sunshine is not held in high regard by me.
 
i like things about sunshine but yeah there are more dominating mario games, i used to like sms more then other 3d marios but after playing sm64 and remembered a bit more of smg id say its probably the worst of the 3d marios.
 
The biggest offense with Super Mario Sunshine is hunting down the Blue Coins. A lot of them are episode specific, and you can't even tell if you've gotten all the Blue Coins from a specific episode or not.

At least Super Mario Galaxy doesn't do anything like that.
 
MnSG said:
you can't even tell if you've gotten all the Blue Coins from a specific episode or not
Click to expand...

This annoyed me so much. I just read the wiki to quickly get it over with :P
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back