Wait, What? Mario Strikers Charged Review

Kawaii · 11:33 AM

Dutch Magazine [N]gamer
Rough Translation:

They tested the full game but the online wasn't ready yet.

"Graphics:
The term gamecube+ suffices. The game looks as good as the Gamecube version, some extra graphic effects.
Sound:
Monotonous, predictable, boring. We heared three different songs in the entire game, mediocre quality. Where are the Mario tunes?
Gameplay:
Wiiremote and nunchuck controls are OK, but so much more was possible? Waggling to do a sliding? Come on!
Long term:
Single player is short, with just a few cups and a few challenges, the lone gamer isn't in for a treat.
Conclusion
Strikers charged doesn't add anything to the previous part, nearly doesn't use the capabilities of the Wii and doestn't feel like a quality title. Will the online mode rescue it?

6.5

In comparison, they gave the gamecube game a 8.0

More to come...

Stopping the mega strikes with the wiiremote pointer feels gimmicky.
Animations before the megastrikes are to long and non-skippable
Abilities of side kicks are useless because of the importance of making megastrikes

Blablurn · (05-04-2007, 11:27 AM)

sprsk · (05-04-2007, 11:28 AM)

Already?

AniHawk · (05-04-2007, 11:28 AM)

These guys just have it out for Nintendo. I for one will boycott this magazine from here on out.

jj984jj · (05-04-2007, 11:30 AM)

Originally Posted by AniHawk:

These guys just have it out for Nintendo. I for one will boycott this magazine from here on out.

Yeah!!!

Not surprised though, look how quick the game came out.

[Nintex] · (05-04-2007, 11:31 AM)

Ngamer

They reviewed MarioKart DS prior to the release just so it would make their magazine in time. Their rumor section is a translated Neogaf, hell even the jokes are from Gaf! The magazine sucks really,(Nintendogs got a 10, Smash bros scored a 8). It should be burned pissed on and then burned again!

Fischbrot · (05-04-2007, 11:32 AM)

German N-Zone mag Singleplayer 79% and Multiplayer 86%

Stop It · (05-04-2007, 11:34 AM)

Sorry, but where the hell did they obtain review code? I mean they even admit the online wasn't active yet, I vote illicit methods, is the Dutch version of NGamer published by Future or linked in any way to the UK one? if so I'm not buying that mag again, (I only bought it a few times), stop reviewing games that aren't even finished yet, idiots.

[Nintex] · (05-04-2007, 11:35 AM)

Originally Posted by Stop It:

Sorry, but where the hell did they obtain review code? I mean they even admit the online wasn't active yet, I vote illicit methods, is the Dutch version of NGamer published by Future or linked in any way to the UK one? if so I'm not buying that mag again, (I only bought it a few times), stop reviewing games that aren't even finished yet, idiots.

No they have nothing to do with UK Ngamer... but in my book they are just as bad.

Kawaii · (05-04-2007, 11:36 AM)

This magazine is NOT related to the UK one.

They did NOT give Nintendogs a 10 @Nintex

B_Rik_Schitthaus · 12:48 PM

Originally Posted by [Nintex]:

Ngamer

They reviewed MarioKart DS prior to the release just so it would make their magazine in time. Their rumor section is a translated Neogaf, hell even the jokes are from Gaf! The magazine sucks really,(Nintendogs got a 10, Smash bros scored a 8). It should be burned pissed on and then burned again!

Edit: I did not write this post.

Moz La Punk · (05-04-2007, 11:37 AM)

Originally Posted by [Nintex]:

Ngamer

They reviewed MarioKart DS prior to the release just so it would make their magazine in time. Their rumor section is a translated Neogaf, hell even the jokes are from Gaf! The magazine sucks really,(Nintendogs got a 10, Smash bros scored a 8). It should be burned pissed on and then burned again!

Ehrm... I disagree. They're pretty honest. Their rumor section? They only post news and I've never seen a Gaf joke in the magazine. And how on earth does making a review before it comes out in the shops a bad thing? Are you sure you aren't confused with the British N-Gamer magazine?

[Nintex] · (05-04-2007, 11:38 AM)

Originally Posted by Kawaii:

This magazine is NOT related to the UK one.

They did NOT give Nintendogs a 10 @Nintex

Checks... you're right a 9,5.

MasterMFauli · (05-04-2007, 11:38 AM)

Lol
My fellow n-haters already take this ridiculous score as a proof of the crappyness of the game. Idiots.

The game will be great fun, even if it was only its precedssor with online. But it has more options, more arenas and online. If this is a 6.5, then 6.5 is the ne 9.0.
Also, from the videos i saw the game looks a lot better than the first game. Moreso compared to other Wii-games, where Mario Strikers is easily the best looking one together with Excite Truck.

maxmars · (05-04-2007, 11:39 AM)

Originally Posted by B_Rik_Schitthaus:

mario footballs gonna be shit don't let the fact its a nintendow game make you stick up for a lost cause

The original was quite a nice game and Next Level Games basically just improved on it; if they don't screw up with the controls I don't see how the game can suck.

Moz La Punk · (05-04-2007, 11:40 AM)

The biggest problem with the game is that its so bare bones, according to the review. its pretty much the same as the first version. Of course they didnt make a secret out of it that they didnt test the online mode so if thats good you can probably add a point to that score, but I get the feeling that they're pretty spot on with it.

And nowhere did it state the game sucked. I have this review in front of me, believe.

wonderfuldays · (05-04-2007, 11:41 AM)

Wait, What?

Mithos Yggdrasill · (05-04-2007, 11:41 AM)

So, we can say that this is the last Mario Football game developed by Next Level Games. In these cases, I agree with Iwata: if that studio was a Second Party, it would be a problem.

Fredescu · (05-04-2007, 11:41 AM)

Originally Posted by Kawaii:

Abilities of side kicks are useless because of the importance of making megastrikes

Damn, my main complaint about the Gamecube game. Would like to know the method to make a megastrike though before writing it off completely.

[Nintex] · (05-04-2007, 11:41 AM)

Originally Posted by Moz La Punk:

Ehrm... I disagree. They're pretty honest. Their rumor section? They only post news and I've never seen a Gaf joke in the magazine. And how on earth does making a review before it comes out in the shops a bad thing? Are you sure you aren't confused with the British N-Gamer magazine?

No I'm not I used to buy their magazines untill a certain farmboy showed up on GAF, saying something like:

Quote:

Hey I'm dutch and I work for a N only magazine!

Then I checked out their rumor section and every rumor/troll/joke stated on GAF was in their magazine. I'm not sure if its still as bad... but it sucked pretty hard back then. Especially the reviews, reading a "review" equals a university class... using words that don't even make sense. Huge spoilers in some reviews etc.

Quote:

they didnt make a secret out of it that they didnt test the online mode

They probably played the same preview build as Jeux France. Otherwise the review wouldn't have made it in time.

DefectiveReject · (05-04-2007, 11:42 AM)

German mag reviewed the game, gave it a good score and said the online was ready and is actually worldwide to friends codes

Moz La Punk · (05-04-2007, 11:43 AM)

Haha what? I never read a review that had difficult words or whatever you're claiming. And again, no GAF rumours/jokes either. But seriously, give me some examples so that at least you can try to make a case from this.

QVT · (05-04-2007, 11:44 AM)

Originally Posted by maxmars:

The original was quite a nice game and Next Level Games basically just improved on it; if they don't screw up with the controls I don't see how the game can suck.

Because of all the sports, football is the one that translates the worst to videogames. I didn't feel that the first was great but it did offer quite a bit of fun in short bursts.

Heres how it works:

Better than real life:
Golf
Hockey
Boxing
Being a Ninja

Decent but not better than real life:
American Football
Basketball
Baseball
Tennis

Bad, but probably because the design sucks and it could translate if given good treatment:
Football (union)

Do not want:
Football (real)

CAPCOWNED · (05-04-2007, 11:45 AM)

Nice score.

DevelopmentArrested · (05-04-2007, 11:45 AM)

I love reviews of betas.

OatmealMu · (05-04-2007, 11:45 AM)

Oh, Jesus. Here we go.

Moz La Punk · (05-04-2007, 11:46 AM)

Originally Posted by CAPCOWNED:

The awesome Wii games just keep on coming. I can't keep up.

Now now, was that needed?

Edit: ah, stealth edit.

Bossman · (05-04-2007, 11:46 AM)

It was a singleplayer review, we already knew the singleplayer wasn't going to be anything special. I'm buying it for multiplayer.

DefectiveReject · (05-04-2007, 11:47 AM)

As someone just up from me states if their review copy didn't have online ready it wasn't the final build as i know one mag that did.

CAPCOWNED · (05-04-2007, 11:47 AM)

Originally Posted by Moz La Punk:

Now now, was that needed?

Edit: ah, stealth edit.

Damn you.

Moz La Punk · (05-04-2007, 11:48 AM)

Other scores from that issue that were spot-on imo:

SSX Blur: 8
Elebits (Eledees): 7.5
Godfather: 8
Heatseeker: 6

maxmars · (05-04-2007, 11:48 AM)

Originally Posted by QVT:

Because of all the sports, football is the one that translates the worst to videogames.

Hmm keep in mind this is not football, but roughly corresponding to the indoor 5 people variant. Quite a bit faster and without interruption of play (e.g. ball never exits the field), plus this is almost speedball-like in its implementation (no fouls, items etc).

It won't be a sim or a conventional sports game, I will agree on that.

Moz La Punk · (05-04-2007, 11:49 AM)

Originally Posted by DefectiveReject:

As someone just up from me states if their review copy didn't have online ready it wasn't the final build as i know one mag that did.

Its worth wondering how much change there is in the final version, APART from the online mode. Anyone know this? If there is much change in that version, I'm sure they'll mention it in a future issue.

Taker666 · (05-04-2007, 11:49 AM)

Originally Posted by Fischbrot:

German N-Zone mag Singleplayer 79% and Multiplayer 86%

I wish more mags/websites reviewed both the single player and multiplayer seperately. It gives a much clearer picture of the title you're buying.

QVT · (05-04-2007, 11:52 AM)

Originally Posted by maxmars:

Hmm keep in mind this is not football, but roughly corresponding to the indoor 5 people variant. Quite a bit faster and without interruption of play (e.g. ball never exits the field), plus this is almost speedball-like in its implementation (no fouls, items etc).

It won't be a sim or a conventional sports game, I will agree on that.

Yeah, thats exactly why the earlier version worked, and why fifa street is a better pure video game than Fifa or PES/WE. They are more speedball than football which is the greatest sport ever for reasons much other than video game fun.

_Alkaline_ · (05-04-2007, 11:52 AM)

Originally Posted by Moz La Punk:

Other scores from that issue that were spot-on imo:

SSX Blur: 8
Elebits (Eledees): 7.5
Godfather: 8
Heatseeker: 6

Yea I can't disagree with those scores, though I would give Godfather and SSX Blur both 8.5. Damn fun games.

[Nintex] · (05-04-2007, 11:54 AM)

Originally Posted by Moz La Punk:

Its worth wondering how much change there is in the final version, APART from the online mode. Anyone know this? If there is much change in that version, I'm sure they'll mention it in a future issue.

Most of the time the bugs are fixed and alle the modes/options stuff is available, its even possible that the preview build didn't have all the music in place. It seems to me that they ****ed up just like the MarioKart DS review.

Kafel · (05-04-2007, 11:55 AM)

A review of a copy without online modes is pointless.

jj984jj · (05-04-2007, 11:56 AM)

If they didn't review the final build that's pretty ****ed up.

Moz La Punk · (05-04-2007, 11:57 AM)

Originally Posted by [Nintex]:

Most of the time the bugs are fixed and alle the modes/options stuff is available, its even possible that the preview build didn't have all the music in place. It seems to me that they ****ed up just like the MarioKart DS review.

But that's the thing: they don't mention bugs or anything. They claim the game is just too bare bones, not enough gameplay options. It seems to me that, if I look at the original game, it's spot on. Of course I cant judge yet, but if this game is a lot like the first one, and the review claims so so I have no reason to believe otherwise, the score is indeed justified.

Can I also know how they ****ed up the Mario Kart DS review, btw? Was the review wrong in your opinion and why?

Originally Posted by Kafel:

A review of a copy without online modes is pointless.

In some ways, yes, but keep in mind this has to happen in the Netherlands a lot. Its not the only magazine here to do this because its simply not possible to do otherwise, unless you want a game that comes out in May to feature in your August magazine. I do know N-Gamer takes a look at online stuff in a seperate segment in the magazine as well. As long as a review clearly states that the online mode hasnt been checked out, whats wrong? Scores arent even important imo, its the text that counts and which will make you realise if a game is for you or not.

Blue Geezer · (05-04-2007, 11:58 AM)

hmm considering i never played the first should i enjoy this then?

Moz La Punk · (05-04-2007, 12:00 PM)

Originally Posted by Blue Geezer:

hmm considering i never played the first should i enjoy this then?

I do think you will, as long as you love Mario and the particular sport. I mean, if you never experienced the first one this is a completely new game, WITH online.

[Nintex] · (05-04-2007, 12:02 PM)

Originally Posted by Moz La Punk:

But that's the thing: they don't mention bugs or anything. They claim the game is just too bare bones, not enough gameplay options. It seems to me that, if I look at the original game, it's spot on. Of course I cant judge yet, but if this game is a lot like the first one, and the review claims so so I have no reason to believe otherwise, the score is indeed justified.

Can I also know how they ****ed up the Mario Kart DS review, btw? Was the review wrong in your opinion and why?

In some ways, yes, but keep in mind this has to happen in the Netherlands a lot. Its not the only magazine here to do this because its simply not possible to do otherwise, unless you want a game that comes out in May to feature in your August magazine. I do know N-Gamer takes a look at online stuff in a seperate segment in the magazine as well. As long as a review clearly states that the online mode hasnt been checked out, whats wrong? Scores arent even important imo, its the text that counts and which will make you realise if a game is for you or not.

Just like this review with the MarioKart DS reveiw they didn't test the online and stated it. They reviewed the game 5 weeks before it was released.

Quote:

In some ways, yes, but keep in mind this has to happen in the Netherlands a lot. Its not the only magazine here to do this because its simply not possible to do otherwise, unless you want a game that comes out in May to feature in your August magazine. I do know N-Gamer takes a look at online stuff in a seperate segment in the magazine as well. As long as a review clearly states that the online mode hasnt been checked out, whats wrong? Scores arent even important imo, its the text that counts and which will make you realise if a game is for you or not.

Then they should preview the game, instead of writing a review based on the preview build.

Blue Geezer · (05-04-2007, 12:04 PM)

as a chelsea fan i naturally love football (hush!) so yeah i will enjoy this then since the criticisms seem to be that its too close to the original...

maxmars · (05-04-2007, 12:05 PM)

Originally Posted by Blue Geezer:

hmm considering i never played the first should i enjoy this then?

If you enjoyed titles like Speedball or any other team-based, quick-paced game featuring a ball to be put into a goalpost you will like it.

Roelatie · (05-04-2007, 12:07 PM)

Originally Posted by Blue Geezer:

as a chelsea fan i naturally love football (hush!) so yeah i will enjoy this then since the criticisms seem to be that its too close to the original...

I loved the first game in Multiplayer. Just disable the mega strikes and its on!

ITS ON!

maxmars · (05-04-2007, 12:07 PM)

Originally Posted by Roelatie:

I loved the first game in Multiplayer. Just disable the mega strikes and its on!

ITS ON!

Why disabling mega strikers? Just get on their toes while they build up.

No.1 · (05-04-2007, 12:10 PM)

Who cares? Soccer sucks. :)

Moz La Punk · (05-04-2007, 12:11 PM)

Originally Posted by [Nintex]:

Just like this review with the MarioKart DS reveiw they didn't test the online and stated it. They reviewed the game 5 weeks before it was released.

Then they should preview the game, instead of writing a review based on the preview build.

I'm still not convinced of that :P I read about eight videogame magazines a month and the lion share does not wait for the online modes. It posts a piece of information on it with the review or you see impressions in another issue.

Especially for a magazine like N-Gamer, which comes out once in TWO months, it would be terrible to delay a review of a game thats about to come out for just the online mode.

Oh well, different opinions :)

Thomper · (05-04-2007, 12:20 PM)

I don't really see the problem with the 'early' review. Let's say the deadline for this issue was two weeks ago - it's still a sports game, so a week of thorough play should be more than enough for a full review, so at most, the review was made about six weeks before the release. If [N]Gamer had an incomplete build, there couldn't be a lot missing, could it? I mean, you'd need a week to distribute it to retailers, a week for all the discs and packaging to be pressed, to at most, it'd be four weeks from the final version. Add in QA, and besides perhaps the tiniest of bugs that probably wouldn't influence the gameplay (or Next Level games would have a lot of crunching to do) the version [N]Gamer played shouldn't really differ from the final version.

I myself can see where the 6,5 is coming from: though I really enjoyed the GameCube-game, it wasn't really a huge game. You mainly played it for the multiplayer, that's it. So if this sequel is the same as the original with online added in and some extra characters/playing fields, then Next Level has just been really lazy and that 6,5 is deserved.