I can't help but feel that after the incredible Mario 64 video, this series has gone downhill. I usually love Matthewmatosis' analysis, but I feel he's gone over into missing the forest for the trees. The most important aspects of Galaxy 2 are the level design and streamlined pacing. If your video on Galaxy 2 is not mostly about those aspects, you've gotten so caught up in minutia that you're not able to critique the game well.
The level design is one of the most significant differences between the two games. If your Mario Galaxy 2 video does not spend a large amount of time detailing the level design changes, you have failed at properly critiquing Mario Galaxy 2.
Hell, I'd argue his Mario Galaxy video still doesn't do a very good job of covering the level design, using broad descriptions instead of getting into the nitty gritty of how the more linear approach works. And that's one of the problems of these videos post-Mario 64, he's not spending nearly enough time going over level design in games where level design is probably the most important part of the experience.
This has come up in each one of these threads. Some people (like you) think that if he doesn't spend a significant part of the review talking about a certain topic, he's not giving that topic enough importance. So it's not that he doesn't talk about what you mentioned, is that you disagree with his time management. And it makes sense.
For example, look at his shunshine review. In the last 2 minutes, he says a lot more about the game there than in most of the review. He probably thought that it was ok that way. Personally, i thought that his shunshine review perfectly captured and explained the feel of the game (even if sometimes he gave to much time to things that didn't deserve it).
About galaxy and the level desing, i think that he said enough between the galaxy 1 and galaxy 2 reviews (which is not much
) These review have never been about analyzing the level desing in each game "stage by stage". He just gives a general description of how he sees the level desing and how it interacts with mario's moveset in each game. And it so happens that that works best with 64 than galaxy. The reason why he talked more about it in 64 are obvious:
- the transition from 2d mario to 3d mario
- because of the limited memory of cartridges, mario 64 doesn't have many different levels, and each level is an open non linear stage where you can pick many stars. Moreover, mario has a really complex moveset in 64 (compared to galaxy) that allows the player to interact with the stage in different ways and taking different paths. So, mathewmatosis had a lot to talk about, without the need of looking at each star "one by one".
On the other hand, mario's moveset is rather simple is galaxy AND the levels are linear and focused. Now, compared to 64, the levels (and not mario) determine a lot more how you experience the game. There's less to talk about without looking at the levels individually. Galaxy's level throw surprises and awesomeness at the player all the time. It's something that the player has to experience by himself.
That would be my guess. I tried
