Club Nintendo surveys were cited as one of the reasons Paper Mario: Sticker Star was what it was.
I'm quite content with my viewpoint on this matter, thank you very much.
Didn't Miyamoto make some mention of Club Nintendo surveys when people criticized the lack of RPG elements in Paper Mario: Sticker Star? That's the only time I can remember Nintendo commenting on them.
I must be one of the few that liked SMG2 but enjoyed SMG way more. I dont enjoy yoshi and the hub was more fun then the Mario ship and the feel of it being first works better on me
Sticker Star has basically no story at all (this is actually not an exaggeration, it is in very stark contrast to all other Paper Mario titles), and the Club Nintendo surveys for Super Paper Mario apparently showed that like 90% of the people surveyed did not cite the story as one of the favorite aspects of the game, or something to this effect. This, combined with Miyamoto's incredibly silly "Does an RPG really need a story?" insistence, apparently set the game on its storyline-less road.I never played Sticker Star, from what I've heard though it wasn't what people were expecting, what was the comment about Club Nintendo? I usually just rush through the Club Nintendo surveys giving the usual "Good Job", mainly cause I have so many surveys built up.
umBut I don't know, eventhough I ended up enjoying it a loooooot, I had a few moments of "been there done that". The best part was without a doubt the nostalgia trip to (world 6 spoilers!!!!).Whomp Fortress remake...
Sticker Star has basically no story at all (this is actually not an exaggeration, it is in very stark contrast to all other Paper Mario titles), and the Club Nintendo surveys for Super Paper Mario apparently showed that like 90% of the people surveyed did not cite the story as one of the favorite aspects of the game, or something to this effect. This, combined with Miyamoto's incredibly silly "Does an RPG really need a story?" insistence, apparently set the game on its storyline-less road.
There were many other problems with Sticker Star that you can't trace the origin to Club Nintendo surveys, but this, at the very least, shows that somewhere in Nintendo there are people who take them to heart.
I'm guessing you have a different opinion than I do? I can't see what part 2 did better than part 1, besides the Yoshi themes levels according to most (which I relatively disliked as I said before). The Mario Bros. themed world progression was okay, but I much rather have the first one because you can basically see and feel
@NeoGAFShitPost?I love Mario games... but the Galaxy games give meaning to the word "overrated".
Oh how I'll envy you for playing through those game for the first time.I've never played a 3D Mario (or Zelda & Metroid) but I'm looking forward to playing both Galaxy's when I get a WiiU in 2-3 weeks.
I'm guessing you have a different opinion than I do? I can't see what part 2 did better than part 1, besides the Yoshi themes levels according to most (which I relatively disliked as I said before). The Mario Bros. themed world progression was okay, but I much rather have the first one because you can basically see and feel.that you're rebuilding the ship
You have seen greatness. Its all downhill from here!
I've never understood why some people think Galaxy 2 is better than the first. For such a similar sequel released pretty close to the first to be considered better, it would have to be clearly superior in a ton of ways. I've collected all the stars in both (twice) and I don't see any obviously superior design. I've always preferred the first. I remember how there was years of hype over how they'd turn gravity mechanics into focused Mario levels, and then it released and the answer was pure genius. By comparison, Galaxy 2 felt like more of the same. Plenty of fresh course ideas, but it was more of the same basic gameplay. It can't blow your mind twice.
So, can anyone answer why the consensus seems to be that Galaxy 2 is better?
And these games kinda ruined 3D World for me
It's fantastic but it just can't compete.
EDIT: Just to be clear, I think both Galaxy and Galaxy 2 are 10/10 games, but I give the nod to the one that came first.
Increased level variety. You weren't stuck getting 7 stars per galaxy, but only 3, and another 3 for the green stars if you wanted to go that far.
Yoshi
Less of a focus on "WOAH! LOOK! THERE'S WEIRD GRAVITY HERE!" and more on actual platforming. Core level design was more interesting. Galaxy 1 had a lot of "run around tiny planet and kill an enemy. Go to next planet and jump on switch. Go to next planet. Kill enemies and jump on moving platform. Go to next planet."
Yep. The music in the game was so perfect aswell, best of the generation.My game of the generation. You don't get any closer to perfection.
Maybe I'm misremembering but I recall a few levels that were much larger than levels in Galaxy such as that semi open world beach level, Starshine beach I think. Also didn't most of the worlds have more stars since there were 242 stars compared to Galaxies 121? Personally I'm in the 2> 1 crowd. I found the original Galaxy really got interesting in world 3 with the penguin falls level and the haunted galaxy with Bouldergeist. World 4 was amazing with Gusty Garden which is probably my favorite in the entire game possibly favorite level in the entire Mario series, tbh. World 5 was good but then world 6 was largely remixes of previous levels/ideas. So for me the real good part of Galaxy was worlds 3-5. Meanwhile Galaxy 2 had a lot more interesting and fun levels from start to finish highlights for me being Fluffy Buff, Starshine, Slipsand, Cloudy Court, Boulder Bowl, Throwback, Boss Blitz. I also loved the sheer amount and variety of bosses in this title. They are both amazing games but I felt Galaxy 2 was a lot more refined and was a much more enjoyable experience all around. If I had to rank the 3D Mario titles:SMG 2 is great but I liked SMG more as well.
You spend more time in each world in SMG. Each world in SMG 2 is very short, 3-4 levels and the levels are short as well. As soon as you're getting into the theme, it's on to the next one. And I like the semi-open explorable worlds in SMG, like the ring water level or the penguin falls level.
Also, agree on the hub. The ship was boring and the overworld map was not good. The overworld map in 3D World is incredible, though. Nintendo did something really great there.
Marvel at the pieces, but appreciate the whole. This isnt a game that redefines the genre: this is one that rolls it up and locks it away. Weve come so far, from stepping on mushrooms to drop-kicking meteors into the heart of the sun; Galaxy 2 offers a new understanding of where weve been, a new sense of wonder at where well go next.
I'm surprised that Galaxy 2 has so much critical acclaim on GAF.
Galaxy 2 threads are pretty refreshing, since everyone is happy.
I remember being amazed in SMG1 when the volcano exploded behind Mario in Melty Molten Galaxy. Does SMG2 have moments like that?
I just beatfor the first time this week.Grandmaster Galaxy
I still think the first game was better.
Aesthetically the levels were way superior. Nothing in Galaxy 2 came close to the magic and grandure of Good Egg, Gusty Gardens etc. A lot of the levels in Galaxy 2 were really boring in this regard.
The levels also felt more varied in length and design. Galaxy 2 felt more like from A to B but while this may be true in some ways for Galaxy 1, the first game mixed things up a lot more. One minute you're running upside down round a planet and the next you were inside a glass gravity chamber.
The only thing I prefer in Galaxy 2 over the first game is Yoshi and I dare say that 3D World is a better from point A to point B platformer than it as well.