• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Super Mario Odyssey - 10/10 from Edge

Status
Not open for further replies.

Raven117

Member
I saw the same stuff about GTA5 for example. The problem is that's not exclusive so it's OK for some reason.

Yeah, but thats just one game. Not a whole company...I think thats the difference.

But yeah...Its weird. I mean... I love certain games too...some "reviewed" exceedingly bad, but there were still great.

A review doesn't affect personal enjoyment of a game one way or another. Ill never understand the obsessiveness some people have for them.
 

Pat

Member
Nintendo Switch = 400 CAD $
Super Mario Odyssey = 80 CAD $
Nintendo Switch Pro Controller = 90 CAD $
Total = 655 CAD $

Or

Nintendo Switch Console - Super Mario Odyssey Edition = 500 CAD $
Nintendo Switch Pro Controller = 90 CAD $
Total = 678 CAD $

The Bundle is pricier... NICE !

Guess I'll wait, that's way too much money... For a Nintendo Console with 1 Mario game.

The bundle comes with a Switch case which has 20$.
 

Wamb0wneD

Member
Yeah, but thats just one game. Not a whole company...I think thats the difference.

But yeah...Its weird. I mean... I love certain games too...some "reviewed" exceedingly bad, but there were still great.

A review doesn't affect personal enjoyment of a game one way or another. Ill never understand the obsessiveness some people have for them.

Noone is doing that for the whole company. The only games I saw this GOAT mention for are BotW and Odyssey in the recent years. For good reason, at least in case of BotW.
I know you don't share that opinion, but that doesn't make the people who think of it that way Nintendo fanboys or the reviewers who thought that way biased and/or paid off.

The problem is that those two games are exclusive to Nintendo so you mind automatically jumps to rabid NIntendo fans. When GTA5 got the same reaction in your mind it's normal PS4/Xbox fans.

Bloodborne got the same reaction. Are those Sony fans that scream GOAT as soon something comes out for Sony or do they just legitimately think it's that good? If you think it's the latter while thinking of Nintendo fans in case of Zelda and Mario then I'd reconsider how you perceive things if I were you.

When it comes to review scores, I think it's just people who want a game to be good, and the more entities share a positive consensus before launch the more hype is generated for that person. What I think is way more sad is when people want a game to be bad or insinuate those entities who found a game good are paid off or biased or something. That's just console wars. Obviously the positive reception can be used for that as well but it's not it's sole purpose.
 

Zedark

Member
Noone is doing that for the whole company. The only games I saw this GOAT mention for are BotW and Odyssey in the recent years. For good reason, at least in case of BotW.
I know you don't share that opinion, but that doesn't make the people who think of it that way Nintendo fanboys.

The problem is that those two games are exclusive to Nintendo so you mind automatically jumps to rabid NIntendo fans. When GTA5 got the same reaction in your mind it's normal PS$/Xbox fans.

Bloodborne got the same reaction. Are those Sony fans that scream GOAT as soon something comes out for Sony or do they just legitimately think it's that good? If you think it's the latter while thinking of Nintendo fans in case of Zelda and Mario then I'd reconsider how you perceive things if I were you.

Bloodborne is actually a more complicated situation, even. I would reckon a decent part of its hardcore fanbase originated from Dark Souls, a multiplatform game series. There is of course a case to be made that it in fact originated from Demon Souls, and that therefore the original "soulsborne" fans were in fact Sony fans, but I think Dark Souls itself has quite some influence in this as well, quite possibly more than Demon Souls did.

Anyway, I agree with your assessment that there is some narrative going on about fanbases whenever an exclusive game is great and fans say it is (and possibly say it's GOAT). To automatically declare that fanboyism is just too reductive to be reasonable imo.
 
Little story from last night.

I was at target with my daughter she is 5. She has played Super Mario World, Mario Brothers, Mario run etc.. she’s as never played a fully 3D Mario game.

I handed her the controller at Target and let her experience it. My heart was melted as I noticed her figuring out the camera and moving Mario in a 3D Space I was imedialty transported to Toys R Us when I was kid exploring that kiosk with Mario 64. She giggled and gasped and cheered.

It was a special moment I thought you guys would enjoy.

10/10 from me already :)
 

Servbot24

Banned
Little story from last night.

I was at target with my daughter she is 5. She has played Super Mario World, Mario Brothers, Mario run etc.. she's as never played a fully 3D Mario game.

I handed her the controller at Target and let her experience it. My heart was melted as I noticed her figuring out the camera and moving Mario in a 3D Space I was imedialty transported to Toys R Us when I was kid exploring that kiosk with Mario 64. She giggled and gasped and cheered.

It was a special moment I thought you guys would enjoy.

10/10 from me already :)

Biased nostalgia paid off sentimental review absolutely disgusting corrupt game journalism it should be me

Just kidding of course, that is awesome to hear :) I think it will bring those memories for me too
 
I can't disagree more harshly with this. By that logic, Tetris has no merit as a video game because it has no story to speak of.

A game like Tetris, or driving games, would not receive a score to story.

I think the idea that you have to score a game for every separate aspect is erroneous. As some here jokingly refer to, many of the best and most popular games don't have story at all (chess and Minecraft are examples of that). so using story as a necessary part of a review is a bad idea I think. The different forms that video games can take make a movie-like review impossible: video games do not need a story per se, while a movie does. Creating a review system that takes story as a requirement for video games is therefore bound to unfairly treat certain games. That's why imo it is best not to let your review system go up to the score denoting perfection, because at that point things get very nebulous and question like "why doesn't this thing that is otherwise 'perfect' not have a story? Can it then be perfect?" A review system that goes up to "uniquely high quality" allows for an interpretation of a game without story as being so great in the gameplay department as to still warrant a 10 even without a story.

See above.

I remember seeing people getting called pretty bad names for preferring a singleplayer game to that currently popular MP game. I think your statement is the polar opposite of that: not enough story makes a game not good enough.

Both camps are utterly wrong, too.

A game would not be penalized for not including SP or MP unless, for example, there were issues actually finding people to play against online. I personally did not bother to play Titanfall 1 because of lack of SP, but I did not review that game either.

Likewise, if a game offers an average story, it gets an average score. Expectations increase with every generation, every iteration. See the example where PSX-era graphics are mentioned. In the era of HZD, is that acceptable? Bare-bones story isn't either.

This kind of approach would also mean you have to judge the platforming in the Witcher 3 in comparison to genre pinnacles like Mario Galaxy 2. I don't think that's where you wanna go.

Incorrect. Genres are different. I could have used Shadow Warrior or Mark of the Ninja or Psychonauts and the expectations of good story would still apply.

Just use your gut. Boom, 'review system' solved.

This is an ineffective methodology for applying a uniform standard.
 

Zedark

Member
Little story from last night.

I was at target with my daughter she is 5. She has played Super Mario World, Mario Brothers, Mario run etc.. she’s as never played a fully 3D Mario game.

I handed her the controller at Target and let her experience it. My heart was melted as I noticed her figuring out the camera and moving Mario in a 3D Space I was imedialty transported to Toys R Us when I was kid exploring that kiosk with Mario 64. She giggled and gasped and cheered.

It was a special moment I thought you guys would enjoy.

10/10 from me already :)

Cool, but did she think it was a 10/10? And did she define a 10/10 as perfection or as a uniquely high quality? We need to know such details!!!1!!!1!

Sorry about that. Nice to hear little kids are enjoying the game as much as we likely will!
 

Raven117

Member
Noone is doing that for the whole company. The only games I saw this GOAT mention for are BotW and Odyssey in the recent years. For good reason, at least in case of BotW.
I know you don't share that opinion, but that doesn't make the people who think of it that way Nintendo fanboys or the reviewers who thought that way biased and/or paid off.

The problem is that those two games are exclusive to Nintendo so you mind automatically jumps to rabid NIntendo fans. When GTA5 got the same reaction in your mind it's normal PS4/Xbox fans.

Bloodborne got the same reaction. Are those Sony fans that scream GOAT as soon something comes out for Sony or do they just legitimately think it's that good? If you think it's the latter while thinking of Nintendo fans in case of Zelda and Mario then I'd reconsider how you perceive things if I were you.

When it comes to review scores, I think it's just people who want a game to be good, and the more entities share a positive consensus before launch the more hype is generated for that person. What I think is way more sad is when people want a game to be bad or insinuate those entities who found a game good are payed off or biased or something. That's just console wars. Obviously the positive reception can be used for that as well but it's not it's sole purpose.
Its just anecdotal. From my seat, Nintendo fans tend to be the most vocal against criticism, but meh.

You are right...its just a different aspect of "console wars." Its a childish way to go about consuming entertainment, but hey...if some people like to get hyped and argue with people who make them not hyped, then rock on I guess.

IMO, the only time reviews matter is when there is different concept being implement, it gets reviewed poorly, leading to lower sales...and then developers not taking more chances to deliver a different kind of experience. This is about the only time I care about a number on a review scale.

Games = Entertainment...Games that make me more entertained score higher than the games that dont (personally). Zelda didn't entertain me much. Lower score. Other games this year entertained me a great deal...higher score.


So long as games aren't technically falling apart, then the rest is preference.
 

Anth0ny

Member
Little story from last night.

I was at target with my daughter she is 5. She has played Super Mario World, Mario Brothers, Mario run etc.. she’s as never played a fully 3D Mario game.

I handed her the controller at Target and let her experience it. My heart was melted as I noticed her figuring out the camera and moving Mario in a 3D Space I was imedialty transported to Toys R Us when I was kid exploring that kiosk with Mario 64. She giggled and gasped and cheered.

It was a special moment I thought you guys would enjoy.

10/10 from me already :)

cute story :)

I tried to teach my younger family members how to play Mario and Banjo Kazooie... they couldn't grasp the concept of analog sticks, controlling a camera and pressing buttons at the same time :(
 
Biased nostalgia paid off sentimental review absolutely disgusting corrupt game journalism it should be me

Just kidding of course, that is awesome to hear :) I think it will bring those memories for me too

Cool, but did she think it was a 10/10? And did she define a 10/10 as perfection or as a uniquely high quality? We need to know such details!!!1!!!1!

Sorry about that. Nice to hear little kids are enjoying the game as much as we likely will!

Yes to both, she looked me right in the eyes and said “10/10” I hope the meta stays high enough for us to purchase this game when it comes out.
 
Yes to both, she looked me right in the eyes and said “10/10” I hope the meta stays high enough for us to purchase this game when it comes out.
lololol. The amount of salt in this thread, just reminds me the BOTW 10/10 Edge review threat, but this time is bigger and more salty. 98 MC incoming.
 
Little story from last night.

I was at target with my daughter she is 5. She has played Super Mario World, Mario Brothers, Mario run etc.. she's as never played a fully 3D Mario game.

I handed her the controller at Target and let her experience it. My heart was melted as I noticed her figuring out the camera and moving Mario in a 3D Space I was imedialty transported to Toys R Us when I was kid exploring that kiosk with Mario 64. She giggled and gasped and cheered.

It was a special moment I thought you guys would enjoy.

10/10 from me already :)

Awww, that's incredibly sweet to hear!

It was in a 'Comet' (UK electrical chain) for me around late 1996. I will never forget controlling Mario in 3D for the first time as long as I live. Probably the most stand out gaming memory I have.
 

Wamb0wneD

Member
Bloodborne is actually a more complicated situation, even. I would reckon a decent part of its hardcore fanbase originated from Dark Souls, a multiplatform game series. There is of course a case to be made that it in fact originated from Demon Souls, and that therefore the original "soulsborne" fans were in fact Sony fans, but I think Dark Souls itself has quite some influence in this as well, quite possibly more than Demon Souls did.

Anyway, I agree with your assessment that there is some narrative going on about fanbases whenever an exclusive game is great and fans say it is (and possibly say it's GOAT). To automatically declare that fanboyism is just too reductive to be reasonable imo.

Yeah you might be right about Bloodborne, we can't really tell i guess.

The thing when it comes to those fanboy accusations is that most of the time it's brought up against Nintendo. That's just a fact, the Belda memes and whatnot don't come from nowhere, and I've never seen something similar for the other two console manufacturers. (To be fair I've also never seen something like Reggie my body is ready memes for another console manufacturer.)

That NIntendo fanbase is consistently perceived as the most rabid/unreasonable one. Even if that's true, some people then seem to use that narrative to include reviewers who found a Nintendo game good, which makes no sense, especially if 90% of them share the same opinion.

And sometimes like in the Zelda/Horizon situation it gets ridiulous. At one point I went into a Horizon thread and saw 4 people complaining about "inb4 Zelda fans" on the first page while not a single person outside of them even mentionend the word Zelda, not then and not later. That whole thing was the most ridiculous console war nonsense that went on here, and it still does.
 
If you focus on the scoring rather than the actual quality of the review and what you have you have to say, maybe you shouldn't be doing any reviewing.
 

Gartooth

Member
lololol. The amount of salt in this thread, just reminds me the BOTW 10/10 Edge review threat, but this time is bigger and more salty. 98 MC incoming.

Mario and Zelda have gotten 10/10s for most of their existence and will do so for a long time to come. People really need to let it go. lol
 
Some people are so ate up over these scores that they need to come up with any excuse to invalidate it. Just enjoy it man. It's gaming. It's a hobby. Just be happy and enjoy all the great games we get to play.
 
So then the other two categories are averaged together? This just sounds like a transparently terrible system.

Not any more terrible than any other review system where the rubric is "hidden," and not explicitly outlined, I don't think. If Jim Sterling gives Zelda a 7, that's a "good" under both his grading system and mine.

At any rate, this is a derail. Perhaps we can pick this up in another topic concerning methodologies of industry review scores. Cheers!
 
Little story from last night.

I was at target with my daughter she is 5. She has played Super Mario World, Mario Brothers, Mario run etc.. she’s as never played a fully 3D Mario game.

I handed her the controller at Target and let her experience it. My heart was melted as I noticed her figuring out the camera and moving Mario in a 3D Space I was imedialty transported to Toys R Us when I was kid exploring that kiosk with Mario 64. She giggled and gasped and cheered.

It was a special moment I thought you guys would enjoy.

10/10 from me already :)

Aww that's a sweet story :)

I didn't even think about that. This is going to the first big 3D Mario game for a whole generation of kids. That's something pretty special.
 

Raven117

Member
Some people are so ate up over these scores that they need to come up with any excuse to invalidate it. Just enjoy it man. It's gaming. It's a hobby. Just be happy and enjoy all the great games we get to play.

BUT BUT BUT other peoples enjoyment of a game directly affects my enjoyment of the game and further calls into question my gaming connoisseur status. </sarcasm>

Its only when some folks want to discuss the game in a critical manner and are shutdown by the mob (ie, Hey, I don't like the Zelda weapon breaking system...Nope you are wrong, its perfect, its game of the forever, sorry your opinion on it is invalid...just look at the MC), is when its irritating.
 
Mario and Zelda have gotten 10/10s for most of their existence and will do so for a long time to come. People really need to let it go. lol
This thread is very important for the salty people because they can focus in just 1 review/media and argument all that non sense theories. But with the review thread and tons of 10s dropping... is going to be more hard to fight... almost imposible. Still a really enterteined thread.
 
Not any more terrible than any other review system where the rubric is "hidden," and not explicitly outlined, I don't think. If Jim Sterling gives Zelda a 7, that's a "good" under both his grading system and mine.

At any rate, this is a derail. Perhaps we can pick this up in another topic concerning methodologies of industry review scores. Cheers!

They have a rubric, it's called the review.
 

Kurt

Member
Unless Mario Odyssey all of a sudden has a story like Witcher 3, it can't score a 10/10...I'm not sure if any game can. And that's a problem.

My chess game has no cars in it. 0/10.

I mean its a game, not a movie. Wacht movies if you want stories. Or buy the related game genres if thats your thing.

Damn i would even give it min points for having to much cutscenes or story in it.
 
I am just going to throw this out there, but what if Mario Odyssey's story is more appealing to someone than Witcher 3

Who are you to say "Actually, you're wrong, change your score?"
 

Wamb0wneD

Member
Its just anecdotal. From my seat, Nintendo fans tend to be the most vocal against criticism, but meh.

You are right...its just a different aspect of "console wars." Its a childish way to go about consuming entertainment, but hey...if some people like to get hyped and argue with people who make them not hyped, then rock on I guess.

IMO, the only time reviews matter is when there is different concept being implement, it gets reviewed poorly, leading to lower sales...and then developers not taking more chances to deliver a different kind of experience. This is about the only time I care about a number on a review scale.

Games = Entertainment...Games that make me more entertained score higher than the games that dont (personally). Zelda didn't entertain me much. Lower score. Other games this year entertained me a great deal...higher score.

I guess we just have a different perception of things then regarding fanbases, yeah.

When it comes to reviews though i have to disagree as well, at least to an extent. You spoke of reviews as a whole and not only the scores. I think the socres are the main ammo for console wars, but if I know that I shared the opinion on a game with the reviewer in the past then It's a good indicator whether I should buy the game he's reviewing or not. I know for a fact I can't give a rats ass about Jim Sterlings reviews even though I like most of his other stuff.
When Ben Moore from EZA reviews something and finds it good the chance I might enjoy it is way higher. Obviously I listen to what he actually has to say rather than just deciding on the score he gives the game.

Zelda reviews are a good example. I didn't give a damn about Jim's number. What I gave a damn about were the parts where he wrote about having to do shrines as soon you see them because you might forget it's there or that it takes too long to get back to them, like there isn't a way to mark them on the map or a fast travel integrated in every single one of them. I read the review before I saw the score and I already knew I can't agree with him.
The amount of times online that review's score got brought up in an argument how everyone but Jim is biased for Nintendo was hilarious and sad. I have plenty of criticism for BotW as well, but that's actual criticism and not this crap.

Another point I already brought up was that if I look forward to a game and see more and more magazines sharing the same positive vew that generates hype for me. It seems to me that you think hype is something useless or that generating it has no merit. You might be right on that but all in all It's still a cool thing for me
 

Vlade

Member
This is an ineffective methodology for applying a uniform standard.

I think your premise on what I want from a review is flawed beyond having any value. I'm not buying a car or a hammer, which I need to function in certain ways.

I am just going to throw this out there, but what if Mario Odyssey's story is more appealing to someone than Witcher 3

Who are you to say "Actually, you're wrong, change your score?"
exactly
 

Raven117

Member
Its just anecdotal. From my seat, Nintendo fans tend to be the most vocal against criticism, but meh.

You are right...its just a different aspect of "console wars." Its a childish way to go about consuming entertainment, but hey...if some people like to get hyped and argue with people who make them not hyped, then rock on I guess.

IMO, the only time reviews matter is when there is different concept being implement, it gets reviewed poorly, leading to lower sales...and then developers not taking more chances to deliver a different kind of experience. This is about the only time I care about a number on a review scale.

Games = Entertainment...Games that make me more entertained score higher than the games that dont (personally). Zelda didn't entertain me much. Lower score. Other games this year entertained me a great deal...higher score.

I guess we just have a different perception of things then regarding fanbases, yeah.

When it comes to reviews though i have to disagree as well, at least to an extent. You spoke of reviews as a whole and not only the scores. I think the socres are the main ammo for console wars, but if I know that I shared the opinion on a game with the reviewer in the past then It's a good indicator whether I should buy the game he's reviewing or not. I know for a fact I can't give a rats ass about Jim Sterlings reviews even though I like most of his other stuff.
When Ben Moore from EZA reviews something and finds it good the chance I might enjoy it is way higher. Obviously I listen to what he actually has to say rather than just deciding on the score he gives the game.

Zelda reviews are a good example. I didn't give a damn about Jim's number. What I gave a damn about were the parts where he wrote about having to do shrines as soon you see them because you might forget it's therecor that it takes too long to get back to them, like there isn't a way to mark them on the map or a fast travel integrated in every single one of them. I read the review before I saw the score and I already knew I can't agree with him.
The amount of times online that review's score got brought up in an argument how everyone but Jim is biased for Nintendo was hilarious and sad. I have plenty of criticism for BotW as well, but that's actual criticism and not this crap.

Another point I already brought up was that if I look forward to a game and see more and more magazines sharing the same positive vew that generates hype for me. It seems to me that you think hype is something useless or that generating it has no merit. You might be right on that but all in all It's st

By review, I meant number. There is value in someone saying "ugh, game plays at 10 fps, or some other critical feature is important to whether the game justifies a purchase." And even then, that can be wrong (Alpha Protocol...technical mess, still awesome).

Oh hype is fun, I recognize that. But (to no one's surprise) a gaming website can really swallow hole the hype train.

This thread is very important for the salty people because they can focus in just 1 review/media and argument all that non sense theories. But with the review thread and tons of 10s dropping... is going to be more hard to fight... almost imposible. Still a really enterteined thread.
Case and point.

Both series are the pinnacle of gaming.
and another
 

WestEgg

Member
I am just going to throw this out there, but what if Mario Odyssey's story is more appealing to someone than Witcher 3

Who are you to say "Actually, you're wrong, change your score?"

It probably will be to many to be honest. I have Witcher III on PC but it just hasn't gripped me yet. But small things like Rosalina's backstory in Galaxy have stuck with me. Story is so ridiculously subjective that saying one story is the definitive good one is ludicrous.
 

Zedark

Member
I guess we just have a different perception of things then regarding fanbases, yeah.

When it comes to reviews though i have to disagree as well, at least to an extent. You spoke of reviews as a whole and not only the scores. I think the socres are the main ammo for console wars, but if I know that I shared the opinion on a game with the reviewer in the past then It's a good indicator whether I should buy the game he's reviewing or not. I know for a fact I can't give a rats ass about Jim Sterlings reviews even though I like most of his other stuff.
When Ben Moore from EZA reviews something and finds it good the chance I might enjoy it is way higher. Obviously I listen to what he actually has to say rather than just deciding on the score he gives the game.

Zelda reviews are a good example. I didn't give a damn about Jim's number. What I gave a damn about were the parts where he wrote about having to do shrines as soon you see them because you might forget it's therecor that it takes too long to get back to them, like there isn't a way to mark them on the map or a fast travel integrated in every single one of them. I read the review before I saw the score and I already knew I can't agree with him.
The amount of times online that review's score got brought up in an argument how everyone but Jim is biased for Nintendo was hilarious and sad. I have plenty of criticism for BotW as well, but that's actual criticism and not this crap.

Another point I already brought up was that if I look forward to a game and see more and more magazines sharing the same positive vew that generates hype for me. It seems to me that you think hype is something useless or that generating it has no merit. You might be right on that but all in all It's still a cool thing for me
If you only have a quoted text, then it is too short. You can solve that by adding one character, like a dot, after the quote.
 

Wiped89

Member
I'm so sick of the 10/10 reviews debate

A 10 doesn't mean perfect, it just means it's exceptionally good and a standout of its genre

Look at 5/5 star films. They're not perfect films. They're just exceptionally good examples of the genre.

You can have issues in a 10/10 game, but they don't detract from its magnificence.

Super Mario Galaxy is a 10/10 for me. Is it perfect? No. Is it exceptionally good? YES.

Looking back at the Edge 10s, it is also worth noting that many were revolutionary in some way at the time, even if they seem average now - see GTA IV, LittleBigPlanet, etc. Every review is a time capsule, and doesn't necessarily hold up years later with gaming advances etc.

Anyway, my OT suggestion is: Super Mario Odyssey OT | Hats off to Nintendo
 
This is more or less basically what i said. The key point of my post was that Capy and Luma are the similar mechanics and not Fludd.

With that said the power ups in Galaxy and 64 basically are really close in the way they work. As a tangent Sunshine is kind of a missed oportunity here because the nozzles should have been permanent power ups to Fludd, it would have made exploration more open instad of controlled like any other power up in 64 or Galxy.

I agree that Fludd is the odd man out here when it comes to mechanics, which is why I feel like this is far more of a 64 successor than Sunshine successor. But it still seems a lot closer to 64 than Galaxy, including in the use of power ups. I believe Galaxy uses power ups/transformations in one of two ways (based on memory): required power up in order to open up the path to the goal, or optional power up in order to make the path less difficult or allow the player to move through it more quickly.

64 and Odyssey do not seem to use power ups as gate keys for the rest of the level. Rather, the power ups allow you to explore the same level and same areas in a new way, thus opening up more potential branching pathways. It's a subtle distinction but I feel like it has a large effect on how the player will play through each level and how the levels are designed.

You are omiting something here. Both 64 and Sunshine have hughe emphasis in it's Hub worlds: Peach Castle and Island Delfino.

As far as i know, in Odyssey Mario just fuels the ship with Moonshines so it can reach new levels, just like in the Galaxies (2 specially with it's SMW like overworld map) Mario fueld the Starships with Power Stars so it can reach other Galaxies.

Well yeah, but this is more of a thematic difference than a gameplay/structural difference that I thought we were discussing.

because saying that it's "similar to 64" doesn't mean much when 64 DNA is across all the 3D games in the series[/b] (arguibly the entire industry XD) except for the 3D Land mold that aspires to be a hybrid of the 2D and 3D games.

Another thing: Galaxy did have open explorable levels like the ones in 64. i don't understand why this is usually brushed over. One of these "Open Levels" that might have Mario collecting star shrads, ends up working more or less like any traditional Mario 64 level. Not to mention these levels also housed secret stars so that took them even closer to the traditional 64 stapple.

Funny enough, a significant amount of Odyssey Moonshines work like 3D World's green stars, it's basically fusing those collectibles with the more structured Stars of 64, Sunshine and Galaxy.

It's absolutely true that Galaxy had several worlds that worked like 64's levels, but the general point here is that most of them were not like 64's levels. On the other hand, based on what we've seen at least, all of Odyssey's worlds work like 64's levels, minus the being kicked out after acquiring a moon. I certainly agree that 64's DNA can certainly be seen in all of the 3D Marios, but I'm just trying to say that in this case, Odyssey's levels appear to be much closer in structure to 64's levels' base structure, rather than the various evolutions of it found in Sunshine, Galaxy or 3D World/Land.

Yeah I agree somewhat with this. Mario's moveset appears to be much more expanded than in Galaxy, and closer to that of 64 (minus the punching and kicking) but the addition of the helper character could make it a bit more similar to Galaxy in how you move around.
 

boiled goose

good with gravy
Not any more terrible than any other review system where the rubric is "hidden," and not explicitly outlined, I don't think. If Jim Sterling gives Zelda a 7, that's a "good" under both his grading system and mine.

At any rate, this is a derail. Perhaps we can pick this up in another topic concerning methodologies of industry review scores. Cheers!

A rubric for games would be absurd. Games are so different that a standard rubric would be absurd. A spectacular puzzle game doesnt need to be evaluated 0/10 on story.

It doesn't make sense for movies or any artistic medium. It's not a fucking test with a specific goal in mind
 
Little story from last night.

I was at target with my daughter she is 5. She has played Super Mario World, Mario Brothers, Mario run etc.. she’s as never played a fully 3D Mario game.

I handed her the controller at Target and let her experience it. My heart was melted as I noticed her figuring out the camera and moving Mario in a 3D Space I was imedialty transported to Toys R Us when I was kid exploring that kiosk with Mario 64. She giggled and gasped and cheered.

It was a special moment I thought you guys would enjoy.

10/10 from me already :)

My wife and I are expecting a girl (our first child) and this is almost making me cry haha

Such a nice story, thank you for sharing.

I am just going to throw this out there, but what if Mario Odyssey's story is more appealing to someone than Witcher 3

Who are you to say "Actually, you're wrong, change your score?"

There's something to be said for simple "fairy tale" like stories. I know it was referenced as a joke earlier but Odyssey's story is somewhat reminiscent of the Princess Bride, a very beloved movie with a very simple story.

It's the execution of the story that should matter far more than how deep it is, or how many branching paths it has.
 

weltalldx

Member
Both series are the pinnacle of gaming.

It is quiet astonishing that both series are able to adapt, reinvent, and innovate their respective genres and the whole industry as well. Can't say many other franchises has the creative talent and vision to consistently release great entries for over 30 years.
 

brad-t

Member
I mean, perfect, unless you're talking about God, is sort of a nebulous term. It's up for interpretation of the reviewer.

In the rubric I developed for my team (abridged):

I am brainstorming how to revise our methodology because if we just scored with one overall score, this rubric would be perfect. But we assign individual scores based upon three categories, and they are averaged into an overall: story, gameplay, and presentation (graphics/music/sound).

Unless Mario Odyssey all of a sudden has a story like Witcher 3, it can't score a 10/10...I'm not sure if any game can. And that's a problem.

What are you talking about, "our" methodology? Who's "us"?

Reviews of media are inherently subjective and I doubt that most of the people that actually enjoy reading reviews of games would be very happy to see them stripped of their voice and impact in favour of a bland "rubric" (and enforcement of such a rubric is obviously impossible anyway). Furthermore, I don't see how such a system improves anything for ... well, anyone.
 

The James

Neo Member
Oh, man. And this game could be even better if Nintendo just shoehorned some complex story and character development into it.

So. Much. Better.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom