Poll Talk

Status
Not open for further replies.
Your new poll is here!

Do you agree with the practice of censorship done by video games companies on the content of their games?
  1. I fully agree with this practice, it makes certain games more accessible by removing content that I am not comfortable with.
  2. I sometimes agree with censorship, but sometimes I feel that it lowers the quality of a game.
  3. I don't mind censorship; it doesn't impact my enjoyment or opinion on a game one way or another.
  4. I do not like the practice of censorship in video games, but I understand that sometimes it is necessary.
  5. I am completely against censorship in video games. I think it goes against the creative freedom of the developers. This is why I prefer to acquire the uncensored version when possible.

I'd go with option 4, I don't really like this practice, but sometimes better safe than sorry.
 
Option 1. I don't need to see inappropriate content in a game that everyone can play(Like swear words, nudity, etc.), especially if it's intentional.
 
It really depends on the censorship and how you define it.

No, localization changes is not "censorship". Just because the NA version of a game lacks a Japanese character or has something generic in place of a Japanese icon that won't resonate well with audiences in NA doesn't mean it's censorship. Censorship is a powerful word that shouldn't be thrown around like that.

There are games that do remove violent content, however. Germany for example has taken out the blood and gore in Left 4 Dead 2, since they have very strict and draconian laws about violent content in games (although they've gotten CounterStrike weapons as a recuperation, modders can still mod the gore back in too if they want to so lol).

And of course, there's really bad examples of age-gating games due to the country's backward laws on progressive issues, or removing content like that altogether. I remember the hullabaloo over Tomodachi Life's same sex relations. And of course, I will continue bringing up the fact that Miitopia in Russia is 18+ because of its gay "propaganda" laws.

Mario...really doesn't have serious issues with "censorship". The worst they've gotten is the removal of transfolk references and a disgusting misunderstanding of transgenderism, and those are somewhat dotted throughout the franchise, and especially towards Birdo. I really hope Nintendo does improve on calling Birdo a female as she should, since we know have much better understanding of transfolk than we ever had.
 
Most times, I don't mind it or agree with it. America got face-pettingless Fire Emblem Fates, a more covered up Lin in Xenoblade Chronicles X, and adjusted spirits in Smash Ultimate like Camilla and Mythra that I think actually make them look better.

Funny how this poll went up the same day DYKG made a Switch Censorship video:
 
A new poll, just for you! Also, please take note that polls are now on a bi-weekly schedule.

Do you feel that Paper Mario: Sticker Star deserves the abysmal reputation that it has, due to its departure from the formula of the previous games?​
  1. Yes, I feel that the game completely deserves its harsh treatment.​
  2. The game was definitely not good, but I don't think it warrants such disrespect.​
  3. I think it deserves to be criticized for its changes to the series, but that it should be praised for being a good game not regarding previous entries.​
  4. I think its criticism for its changes to the series is not deserved, but that it is bad for other reasons.​
  5. There's some flaws with the game, but I otherwise think its a decent title that needs more love.​
  6. No, its poor reputation is not deserved at all and should be redeemed.​
  7. I feel that the game deserves its criticism, and the the other games in the series deserve similar or equal criticism.​
  8. I have no opinion on the matter.​
 
Paper Mario: Sticker Star has its fair share of extremely low raters who give it, like, a 0-2 out of 10 on Metacritic (you can easily spot the bombers right now if you visit Sticker Star's user review page). Those people have no idea of what a 1/10 game is REALLY like, and they should thank their lucky stars that the Mario series don't get games deserving of such a low rating: everyone who gives Paper Mario: Sticker Star a 1/10 or a 2/10 should play games like WWE 2020 or The Quiet Man: they would WANT to be playing Sticker Star after sitting through those games.

That being said, its disappointment was justified, especially from the changes we saw in pre-release footage to it now: its gameplay was a huge departure from the original games and in its place was a tepid, rather mediocre RPG. It's a cautionary tale of the pre-release hype: don't immediately pre-order a game, because you never know what may happen to it. Even though Mario games typically do release as promised, pre-ordering is still a decision entirely mired on trust of the game developer: you may as well take a gamble even if the odds are in your favor.
 
Last edited:
Option 5. It's got flaws but nevertheless is criminally underrated. It's definitely not the worst Mario game (see Mario Kart Tour), and in my opinion it's not even the worst Paper Mario (see Super Paper Mario). I also really dislike how it's monopolized the Fail Awards when it doesn't deserve the half of them. It was different, but offered fun and unique gameplay, and unlike SPM, actually remembered to be a Mario game.

I'll save the rest of my ranting about SPM and the negative reputation of SS for another post.
 
I must admit I haven't played Sticker Star, and I don't think criticism because it tried something different from the others games does merit such a harsh reception. Nonetheless, from what I have heard, the game does have its issues, and I feel number 4 is the option for me.
 
Sticker Star wasn't terrible, but it didn't feel like Paper Mario (aside from having a Paper and Mario aesthetic). Battles were pointless, stickers for those battles were OP and too few in number, story is practically non-existent, and Kersti is the most annoying and useless partner I've ever seen in a Mario game.

The visuals and soundtrack for the game, though, are incredible.
 
Option 1. I didn't like this game at all and it deserves to be criticized.
 
I haven't played Sticker Star, but I'm going to comment based on my anticipation and what I've heard about it from other people. My impression is that it's a perfectly decent game on its own which is overhated for its differences from the first two games, but unlike Super Paper Mario, its changes took away the internal feel of a Paper Mario game. Original characters, creative partners, story, original villains, Bowser's amazing dialogue, unique bosses, Kammy Koopa, Luigi's independence and importance, the progressive feel of the game, the unique worlds, variety in NPCs, the list continues. It doesn't go out of the box. It doesn't do what you wouldn't expect from a Mario game. SPM kept most of the things that made Paper Mario feel like a truly inspiring experience, as much as it changed the gameplay, whereas Sticker Star looks at least a little fun for sure, but it doesn't look like it'll feel the same. Before I played PM64 I knew about it and I anticipated that it would feel like a true Paper Mario game like SPM and TTYD were to me, and I was right, but I sadly can't anticipate Sticker Star in the same way.

All in all I'd say Option 3 is closest to my thoughts on it, but I can't be sure at this stage.
 
While I am not in a position to judge because I haven't played the game and I merely only watched playthroughs, I have also seen people just jump on STORY or CHARACTERS when criticizing the game without actually talking about the gameplay itself. Ok, no story like the previous games had (And again I don't even think those stories were THAT deep, and no, saying they're deep for Mario does not deepen them.), ok, characters are now all Toads. But can you imagine playing a game that has all the story and chars as the older games but at the same time the game makes you go through hell and back and punishes you unfairly because it doesn't control well or it throws some random bullshit at you and is just being plain unplayable? There's many games out there with shit story but are a blast to play. I don't consider the plot of Mario Galaxy to be anything as groundbreaking as Bowser's lifting Peach's castle, but it plays so well and the cutscenes and locales are so beautiful visually that it still sits upon the throne of my favorite Mario game. Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon (Developed by IntSys, who made Paper Mario, FYI) has the blandest story I've seen in FE, and a lot of its characters don't even get a single line in the game. Yet it's still a decently functional game that is enjoyable to play, especially with a Warp Staff with infinite range.

The point here is, if I enjoy a game for whatever reason, so long as playing it is fun, it is still a good game. From what I've seen, there's far more people who complain about SS's story than the gameplay. And while you could argue that the gameplay isn't even that good, my point still stands. This is about how people treat the game, and I think a lot just aren't judging it using the right criteria.

I think I've gushed about this enough for today. So Option 4 is the closest option to my opinion. Just change the wording to make it say that it "should be criticized for different reasons" rather that employing the word bad.
 
Ooo, this one's tough. Although I feel that Sticker Star is easily the worst Paper Mario game, I also think it has gotten enough hate over the years, and I think that Nintendo has learned by now about how much people dislike the gameplay departure; the company wanted to try something new, and it didn't work out, they then tried it again with much better writing, and I'd go so far as to say it worked beautifully in Color Splash. I'm gonna go with Option 2.
 
Rinka Hayami said:
While I am not in a position to judge because I haven't played the game and I merely only watched playthroughs, I have also seen people just jump on STORY or CHARACTERS when criticizing the game without actually talking about the gameplay itself. Ok, no story like the previous games had (And again I don't even think those stories were THAT deep, and no, saying they're deep for Mario does not deepen them.), ok, characters are now all Toads. But can you imagine playing a game that has all the story and chars as the older games but at the same time the game makes you go through hell and back and punishes you unfairly because it doesn't control well or it throws some random bullshit at you and is just being plain unplayable? There's many games out there with shit story but are a blast to play. I don't consider the plot of Mario Galaxy to be anything as groundbreaking as Bowser's lifting Peach's castle, but it plays so well and the cutscenes and locales are so beautiful visually that it still sits upon the throne of my favorite Mario game. Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon (Developed by IntSys, who made Paper Mario, FYI) has the blandest story I've seen in FE, and a lot of its characters don't even get a single line in the game. Yet it's still a decently functional game that is enjoyable to play, especially with a Warp Staff with infinite range.

The point here is, if I enjoy a game for whatever reason, so long as playing it is fun, it is still a good game. From what I've seen, there's far more people who complain about SS's story than the gameplay. And while you could argue that the gameplay isn't even that good, my point still stands. This is about how people treat the game, and I think a lot just aren't judging it using the right criteria.

I think I've gushed about this enough for today. So Option 4 is the closest option to my opinion. Just change the wording to make it say that it "should be criticized for different reasons" rather that employing the word bad.
Click to expand...
I get that story isn't essential to have a good game. Look at my list https://www.thetoptens.com/l/#video-games/MiracleDinner not all of them have good stories but that doesn't stop me from enjoying them.

As you can also see from that list I'm a HUGE Paper Mario fan, and a great part of that is because of their stories. Each one had their own set of story and characters that made the game feel special and amazing. I don't need the gameplay to be good to appreciate that either. If I have to be honest I don't actually enjoy PM64 a huge amount gameplay-wise, but I can tolerate it, it doesn't make the story elements any less amazing nor does it stop me from enjoying them. Look at Chapter 4 in TTYD when you had all the twilighters who were slowly being turned into pigs by a shapeshifting monster who eventually stole Mario's identity. Look at Chapter 2 in SPM where you had all the Gloam Valley residents who had been forced into essential slavery by this creepy girl posing as a maid, and you try to find this magic woman to give you something that will help you save the multiverse, and you find her, but she turns out to be the shapeshiter girl who goes through a nightmarish transformation into a giant spider monster. That's the kind of thing that made SPM and TTYD FEEL like true Paper Mario games, regardless of whether or not they played like ones. If I have to choose I'd go with SPM since I get more nostalgia and the feel was just a bit better but really they're both truly worthy of being number one on my list. PM64 is definitely my least favoruite of the three (haven't finished that one though) but it's still comfortably in third place.

The fact that this is Mario does not make the story any better by itself but it's that out-of-the-boxness, that uniqueness, and that special feel I can't get from anything else. I played Zelda. I watched movies. I read books about children driven to attempt suicide because of how emotionally troubled they were. And sure, I enjoyed all three of those experiences because I like a good story. But it's not the same. Paper Mario showed me what I don't expect from a Mario game, and in a great way.

If there was a game which had the story and presentation elements of what I think of as a true PM game but awful gameplay, sure I'd have preferred it to be better in the gameplay department, but in the end it wouldn't matter the most. I'd play through it, because the story would be so worth it to me.

So, if SS proves to be fun enough in gameplay and presentation departments, which I believe it can, I'll like the game on its own. But without the story elements that made the first three feel special it will never come close to those games.
 
I can tell you this, though. As much as I brush story off as almost unnecessary, that doesn't mean I don't enjoy a good story, or more notably, a good moment. I mean, take away literally everything else about him, BoneChill's entrance is fucking gorgeously befitting a terrifying monster from hell. Build-up to Smorg's fight? Nice.

Oh, but imagine having to backtrack back and forth a million times through the same tedious area just to spell a stupid name! That doesn't sound fun, even if the writing for that would be genius, right? GUESS WHAT TWILIGHT TOWN EXISTS. Oh, how about we make these dumb players have to just repeatedly jump under a single block until they figure out how to bypass the huge paywall standing in their way, unless they don't ever find out and just keep hitting that block 1000000 times? SPM 2-3 has it covered for you. Or wait, what if we make a whole Japanese chapter where you just fight the same guy over and over again? I don't see how that is wrong!

With all this, I doubt Sticker Star has any of this level of bullshit level design to it. I have seen some bad levels, but you have to admit, some of the chapters in TTYD or SPM were just outright terrible to play through. You have to actually play that to see that story you love so much. Or well... if it's the story you're here for and not the actual game... then you can watch people play the game instead. While you're at it, how about we just make movies out of them instead?

Don't get me wrong, both are really good games in my opinion but story alone does not justify their success to me. Gameplay is sill tolerable for the most part, and that's what keeps them together really. The story is just there for show, really. Of course you need story in an RPG, the genre relies on those, but it only serves as a backbone for the main attraction. I do see where you're coming from though, because again, I do find myself enjoying some dialogue at times. I respect your opinion. I'm just putting my two cents on the whole matter.
 
Rinka Hayami said:
I can tell you this, though. As much as I brush story off as almost unnecessary, that doesn't mean I don't enjoy a good story, or more notably, a good moment. I mean, take away literally everything else about him, BoneChill's entrance is fucking gorgeously befitting a terrifying monster from hell. Build-up to Smorg's fight? Nice.

Oh, but imagine having to backtrack back and forth a million times through the same tedious area just to spell a stupid name! That doesn't sound fun, even if the writing for that would be genius, right? GUESS WHAT TWILIGHT TOWN EXISTS. Oh, how about we make these dumb players have to just repeatedly jump under a single block until they figure out how to bypass the huge paywall standing in their way, unless they don't ever find out and just keep hitting that block 1000000 times? SPM 2-3 has it covered for you. Or wait, what if we make a whole Japanese chapter where you just fight the same guy over and over again? I don't see how that is wrong!

With all this, I doubt Sticker Star has any of this level of bullshit level design to it. I have seen some bad levels, but you have to admit, some of the chapters in TTYD or SPM were just outright terrible to play through. You have to actually play that to see that story you love so much. Or well... if it's the story you're here for and not the actual game... then you can watch people play the game instead. While you're at it, how about we just make movies out of them instead?

Don't get me wrong, both are really good games in my opinion but story alone does not justify their success to me. Gameplay is sill tolerable for the most part, and that's what keeps them together really. The story is just there for show, really. Of course you need story in an RPG, the genre relies on those, but it only serves as a backbone for the main attraction. I do see where you're coming from though, because again, I do find myself enjoying some dialogue at times. I respect your opinion. I'm just putting my two cents on the whole matter.
Click to expand...
I mean sure SPM and TTYD had their bad moments but I still enjoyed their gameplay elements on the most part.

Sure I have to do a fair deal of backtracking with every playthrough of TTYD. Sure I have to look up the code every time I pass 5-1 and sometimes 2-3 of SPM but I do it, because the good parts of the games are so worth it to me.

I mean copyright things exist for a reason. If I've bought a game and/or it's not really sold anymore then I don't have any qualms watching other people's reactions to it on YouTube. But N gain real money from putting good stories in their games and I'm not going to just get that for free if I'm not going to actually buy the game.

Talking of movies I believe that someone wanted to make SPM into a movie which I'd have killed to watch, but sadly this never happened.

I wouldn't say story is the only thing that made the first three valuable nor is it needed to make a good game but if you ask me and several other PM fans it's the most important reason why the first three were so great, and imo being my top 3 fav games in existence
 
considering every major boss fight is designed around figuring out the specific object that is an instant win button rather than knock down drag out battles with planning, and that its possible to be unable to finish fights - even boss fights - because you ran out of stickers, i feel that sticker stars gameplay has flaws as well as its story
 
Starfire said:
I mean copyright things exist for a reason. If I've bought a game and/or it's not really sold anymore then I don't have any qualms watching other people's reactions to it on YouTube. But N gain real money from putting good stories in their games and I'm not going to just get that for free if I'm not going to actually buy the game.
Click to expand...

People aren't going to get legally busted for posting a playthrough of the game on YouTube, and that's not what copyright laws for games are primarily for.
 
Redshift said:
People aren't going to get legally busted for posting a playthrough of the game on YouTube, and that's not what copyright laws for games are primarily for.
Click to expand...
I know. But I feel that if a major reason I'm motivated to buy MaRPGs in the first place is because of the story then it's a little dishonest to just not pay anything and get it for free. I pay for games for a reason and story is one of them.
 
Well yeah but don't bring copyright into this because it has nearly nothing to do with the game's plot, which was pretty much just lifted from other JRPGs but with Mario's name in it.
 
OK yes. As I said in the ROM document copyright is complicated and whatnot and it's not always the same as the morals behind our actions.

You probably got this already but Zelda is more or less the only JRPG series outside of Mario I play.
 
As of right now, I think it's deserved.

When Paper Mario shows that Sticker Star wasn't a one-way street to never having original characters or storytelling like the first 3 games again, then maybe I'll have an easier time accepting the game for what it was, but as of now part of its identity is that it stripped the series of all the reasons I loved it before this game, and these things have, for the most part, not returned yet.

It's ironic that Tanabe, the same man who has insisted multiple times they have no intentions of having original characters or making games like the originals again, is the same person who was quoted at the time of Super Paper Mario as saying "Of course, this being Paper Mario, I asked the team to keep the RPG-like story" (paraphrased as idr the exact quote). I want him to either go back to that mindset, or bring in someone who will.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back