• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Super Mario Galaxy 1 or Super Mario Galaxy 2?

A

AzureTranquility95

Banned
Which entry do you prefer? Just a reminder that both games are pretty much equal in terms of quality, but certain aspects of each might make for some differing preferences.

Personally, I can admit that Galaxy 1 is really fucking fun, but I find more enjoyment in Galaxy 2 gameplay-wise. Galaxy 2 also had a'lot of great throwbacks(
Throwback Galaxy being da bes
) and fun new and old concepts.

The soundtrack is also arguably equal on both fronts;

Galaxy 1 Song - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcZhJDUFb58

Galaxy 2 Song - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oaf2gUhy74o
 
Super Mario Galaxy, the first one, probably because of the Wow factor at having experienced the Galaxy-style gameplay for the first time.

Both are really good games though.
 
Actually I made this topic because I'm in the middle of a replay of Galaxy 1. Do plan to replay Galaxy 2 soon as well. It needs to be done.

On a similar tangent, I like Sunshine as much as the Galaxies (mostly due to the fludd-less levels and also fludd itself... I know it's a contradiction, sue me), but I can admit that Sunshine is very flawed, whereas the Galaxy Duology is lacking in the flaws department overall outside of a few nuances either with the spin or gravity.
 
Galaxy 1 by far. I felt that a lot of the Galaxy 2 worlds near the end were just reused from other games and there weren't as many big worlds in Galaxy 2.
 
I never played the second one, but I loved mario galaxy quite a bit.

It was a bit rough in some areas, but overall it was a well polished game. I don't think you could go wrong with either game imo.
 
Neo Dark said:
First one. Both are great games but the first just seems to have a magical feeling to me than the second
Click to expand...

It's probaly due to Rosalina's presence, yeah. She's barely in Galaxy 2. People complain of "lack of magic" in Galaxy 2. 2+2=4, guys.

Ihaa said:
Galaxy 1 by far. I felt that a lot of the Galaxy 2 worlds near the end were just reused from other games and there weren't as many big worlds in Galaxy 2.
Click to expand...

Other than Throwback Galaxy definitely being a remake of a Super Mario 64 world as opposed to a straight port like the Galaxy 1 leftovers, and probaly only a touch-up at best for the one Sunshine leftover, there really isn't that much re-used content surprisingly. Gobblegut
being fought twice
is much the same as Dino Piranha in that regard, and
the way they brought back Bugaboom
could be seen as more of a glorified easter egg like the
Yoshi cameo in Space Junk
.

Not gonna lie though, rehash or not, the
Boss Blitz Galaxy with the top 5 bosses of Galaxy 1
was badass, and felt like a nice penultimate (
Green Stars aside
) challenge for the duology. It was like getting to use your mastery of two games and over 200+ stars worths of challenges to whup a bunch of big threats like they were minor goombas. Well, that's the impression I got from it anyway.

The Stone Cyclone Galaxy is my ultimate Super Mario galaxy guilty pleasure I must admit. I think I lost more lives to that monster than the Perfect Run.
 
Anth0ny said:
2 is better.

But it's like comparing a 10/10 game with a 9.9999999999999999999999999/10.
Click to expand...

Has there even been a pair of games so equally(Or near-equally in some eyes) great in quality, not counting dual-version releases like Pokemon, the Zelda Oracle games, or the Mega Man Battle Network/Star Force games?

I mean I want to say OoT+MM or Pikmin 1+2, but the differences between those two are significant enough to outright turn off some players. Whereas the Galaxy 2 situation is essentially what you get when you extract pure essence of the original Galaxy.
 
I'm going to go with Galaxy 1. It devoted a lot more energy to its presentation that I think goes unfairly unnoticed. I'm sure some of the game's "magical" feeling can be attributed to it being the first of the two, but the intro cutscenes are far more elaborate and establish the game better, Rosalina actually exists in the game instead of appearing in a cameo at the game's ending, the galaxies were bigger in scope and there were more elements of exploration more frequently.

Galaxy 2 is kind of like 3D World before 3D World. The latter is a "pure" platformer, taking the formula of 2D Mario platforming and giving it that extra dimension, but the pacing of the levels and linearity are very much reminiscent of the 2D series. Galaxy 1 is somewhat similar to that, but Galaxy 2 really went diving into that direction quite a bit. Tons of little levels with tons of linear platforming-heavy sections, but along the way there's a lot of the presentation that is simply missing.

Yeah, sue me, I actually prefer the hub world of Galaxy 1 to the world map of Galaxy 2. Galaxy 2 felt like a more sterile expansion pack to Galaxy 1 than anything. I wouldn't ever recommend playing Galaxy 2 first, or Galaxy 2 only. I'd recommend it after Galaxy 1 if you absolutely must play more of the formula, but keep in mind in many ways it'll feel like "3D World 0.5" (meaning it tries to follow the "2D Mario turned 3D" design of 3DW but in a more crude and simple implementation all around), and you shouldn't expect the same sense of scale and "magic" in presentation, if that matters to you at all.
 
I enjoyed Galaxy 1 more for the same reason I enjoyed Portal 1 more: it was totally new and mind blowing. While the second in each series was better in every way, it just didn't feel as fresh. That said, I'd definitely recommend the sequels to people unfamiliar with either series.
 
While 2 obviously didn't have the same impact, I usually say it's the better game of the two. It just felt like they took the concept and saw how far they could go with it. They did a great job creating a worthy sequel. It doesn't really matter though as both are incredible games. They're the closest to perfection gaming has ever gotten.
 
EatinOlives said:
I'm going to go with Galaxy 1. It devoted a lot more energy to its presentation that I think goes unfairly unnoticed. I'm sure some of the game's "magical" feeling can be attributed to it being the first of the two, but the intro cutscenes are far more elaborate and establish the game better, Rosalina actually exists in the game instead of appearing in a cameo at the game's ending, the galaxies were bigger in scope and there were more elements of exploration more frequently.

Galaxy 2 is kind of like 3D World before 3D World. The latter is a "pure" platformer, taking the formula of 2D Mario platforming and giving it that extra dimension, but the pacing of the levels and linearity are very much reminiscent of the 2D series. Galaxy 1 is somewhat similar to that, but Galaxy 2 really went diving into that direction quite a bit. Tons of little levels with tons of linear platforming-heavy sections, but along the way there's a lot of the presentation that is simply missing.

Yeah, sue me, I actually prefer the hub world of Galaxy 1 to the world map of Galaxy 2. Galaxy 2 felt like a more sterile expansion pack to Galaxy 1 than anything. I wouldn't ever recommend playing Galaxy 2 first, or Galaxy 2 only. I'd recommend it after Galaxy 1 if you absolutely must play more of the formula, but keep in mind in many ways it'll feel like "3D World 0.5" (meaning it tries to follow the "2D Mario turned 3D" design of 3DW but in a more crude and simple implementation all around), and you shouldn't expect the same sense of scale and "magic" in presentation, if that matters to you at all.
Click to expand...
Amazing summary - pretty much nails how I feel. Go with SMG1.
 
SMG1 evokes the space theme better and I slightly prefer the soundtrack over 2's. 2 probably has better worlds, though. So, uh... both.
 
I play 3d platformers because I like jumping on stuff, and as the game progresses I want to jump on crazier, more complicated stuff and Mario Galaxy 2 does that the best out of any 3D platformer so thats my pick. Both are rad games though, my brain compartmentalizes them as one long game instead of two seperate ones sometimes.
 
Sixfortyfive said:
I haven't played 2 yet, but I suspect I will enjoy it more for this reason alone.
Click to expand...

I have to ask, why are hub worlds so hated? Is there a memo I missed where everyone now hates Peach's Castle/Delfino Plaza/Grunty's Lair etc.? Because I never stopped hating them and in fact I prefer them over a generic menu from which to pick the levels.
 
2 is a better overall package if I HAD to pick, but man the feels of the first time I played SMG1 entering the first level, shit was magical.
 
Galaxy 1 has 2 beat in nearly every way. 2 is still amazing.

EatinOlives said:
I have to ask, why are hub worlds so hated? Is there a memo I missed where everyone now hates Peach's Castle/Delfino Plaza/Grunty's Lair etc.? Because I never stopped hating them and in fact I prefer them over a generic menu from which to pick the levels.
Click to expand...

I agree with this entirely. Except for the part where you accidentally wrote I never stopped hating.
 
EatinOlives said:
I have to ask, why are hub worlds so hated? Is there a memo I missed where everyone now hates Peach's Castle/Delfino Plaza/Grunty's Lair etc.? Because I never stopped hating them and in fact I prefer them over a generic menu from which to pick the levels.
Click to expand...

because it always drops you into the same part of the level when u finish a galaxy and you have to go aaaaaaaaall the way back to whichever room you want to continue through. it's still not immediate in galaxy 2, but its a lot faster.
 
EatinOlives said:
I have to ask, why are hub worlds so hated?
Click to expand...
Why would I want to spend my time searching for platforms when I could be platforming instead?

SMG1 is a really, really good game. I was glued to it from beginning to end and 100%ed it with both characters. Then there came a time when I wanted to replay a few of my favorite levels... but slogging through the observatory for that dragged it down too much for me to bother. It stunted the replay value of the game because I felt like I was dealing with too much busywork. It's a game to shelve and only pull out for a full playthrough once every few years.

SM3DW, on the other hand, is the only 3D Mario that I've 100%ed multiple times in succession. I feel like it respects my time. 1-minute cutscene and then you're actually playing the game for the remainder of the experience. SMG1 isn't exactly a huge offender in this regard, but it's not as good.
 
tapedeck said:
2 is a better overall package if I HAD to pick, but man the feels of the first time I played SMG1 entering the first level, shit was magical.
Click to expand...

But how did you feel while fighting DINO PIRANHA? The world is dying to know the satisfaction you felt smacking that nut right into his head.

Sixfortyfive said:
It's a game to shelve and only pull out for a full playthrough once every few years.
Click to expand...

This would explain why my last playthrough was dated to July...

...of 2010.

weekev said:
2 because Yoshi
Click to expand...

I love you.
 
Galaxy 1 will always have a special place due to it being the first and having a cool hub world and more integrated story, but Galaxy 2 will always be the more fun game.
 
EatinOlives said:
I have to ask, why are hub worlds so hated? Is there a memo I missed where everyone now hates Peach's Castle/Delfino Plaza/Grunty's Lair etc.? Because I never stopped hating them and in fact I prefer them over a generic menu from which to pick the levels.
Click to expand...

These are like the only good ones because theyre dense, hide cool secrets, and structured so you can get to any level in under a minute flat. Gruntys Lair is a shithouse hub because it has this dull hallway design and takes forever to get to the late game levels even using warps (I think from start to ClickClock Woods is like three plodding minutes with warps and longer without). Galaxy's hub isnt time consuming, but having to go down the same paths every time to get to the late game levels is mega tedious and the overall structure is a disappointment to me after 64 and Sunshine setting the gold standard.

If im playing a game to dick around, I want to get to the level I want to play megafast. The vast majority of hubs dont do this and are empty filler. They dont even have the decency to hide secret levels and stuff in them half the time. I mean the reward for exploring the hub in Banjo are warps so you can spend less time exploring the hub. Like fuck off just design the hub so i dont need warps in the first place.
 
The first was a damned memorable experience but Super Mario Galaxy 2 is flat out the better game and replaying both of these games in Dolphin made that super apparent to me
 
1, without a single doubt; 2 was so... It did not deserve to have that name.

Felt more like Super Mario 64 2 to me.
 
Galaxy 1 I like the story and felt like it was better put together - Galaxy 2 seems like a mosh up of whatever they felt like.
 
Young-Girl-Shrugs-Why-Dont-We-Have-Both.gif
 
AzureTranquility95 said:
That's it? Actually, I tend to hear this a'lot. It would also explain why sequels almost always sell less than the original: Some people are satisfied after one serving.
Click to expand...

I think it means more like a feeling of nostalgia, even if the sequel of a game got released 2 years after the original
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Fox McCloud joins The Super Mario Galaxy Movie
2 3
149
2K
GateofD replied
The Super Mario Galaxy Movie reviews are in... and not great
8 9 10 11 12
553
3K
IlGialloMondadori replied
Super Mario Galaxy Movie Direct Jan 25
2
98
1K
touchfuzzy replied
The Super Mario Galaxy Movie | Level Up
Trailer 
35
676
StreetsofBeige replied
  • Poll
What game is better? Super Mario 3D World or Super Mario Wonder?
35
276
Osthyvel replied
Top Bottom