Famitsu gives Super Mario Galaxy 38/40

by Kyle Orland { Oct 24th 2007 at 12:52AM }

The first Japanese reviews of Super Mario Galaxy are trickling in in advance of the game's Nov. 1 Japanese release, and so far they're looking pretty good. Venerable game rag Famitsu's four reviewers gave the game two nines and two tens for a total score of 38/40. This puts the game just under Super Mario 64's 39/40 and just above Super Mario Sunshine's 37/40 from the magazine. Overall, the score puts it behind just 22 games in the magazine's history.

A partial review translation by 1UP reveals nothing but praise for the new Mario game, calling it "a game anyone can really play" and urging that "every game fan should play this game." Of course it's hard to imagine Famitsu giving the high-profile game a bad review -- the magazine has been accused of doling out scores based mainly on hype and sales expectations. Despite this, there's a part of us that just wants to believe that the high praise is based on genuine enjoyment and not marketing dollars. We'll find out for ourselves when the game reaches our shores Nov. 12.

Tags: Famitsu, Galaxy, mario, MarioGalaxy, SuperMarioGalaxy, wii

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

E.J. @ Oct 24th 2007 11:50AM

Looked really good at E4A. Good to know that the rest of the game is on the up and up.

Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Oct 24th 2007 12:05PM

OMGNOV12WTF

dies

Most anticipated game for me.

WiNG @ Oct 24th 2007 12:15PM

I heard the two reviewers that gave it a 9 were:

"Deeply offended to be called Mr. Gay" right off the bat.

Geist @ Oct 24th 2007 12:34PM

Somewhere in the world, a Mr. William Richard Gay is going to look at the box and think "Well shit, this is the game for me."

Sean @ Oct 24th 2007 12:15PM

This game is going to be sweetness.

Psaakyrn @ Oct 24th 2007 12:40PM

Too bad that chart didn't help Okami much..

dan stabbingworth @ Oct 24th 2007 12:46PM

Okami ftw. I hope a Wii port makes massive sales and the planned sequel is actually made.

Of course, in reality, none of that will happen.

Skeffington @ Oct 24th 2007 12:45PM

Not as good as Super Mario 64 but better than Super Mario Sunshine. From the previews, that certainly seems about right.

Raikage (NDF - PK THUNDER RING) @ Oct 24th 2007 12:56PM

Hey, maybe I'll like a 3D Mario to go along with my new found love... 3D Zelda!

*dodge projectiles*

I always thought Mario was meant for 2D and got too complicated once it got to 3D. Hopefully this will prove me wrong, like OoT just recently did for Zelda:D

Zsavior @ Oct 24th 2007 12:58PM

See this post is a perfect example, if you go back and check the post of when Famitsu gives Halo 3 all nines and tens the scores are immediately acccepted as truth.
Yet here for some reason a shadow of doubt is suddenly casted on famitsu saying they give out scores to high profile games. Taking a wait and see attitude towards the game on this occasion.

http://www.joystiq.com/2007/09/19/famitsu-gives-halo-3-a-37-40/

Of course the writers of the article are different I am not trying to attack joystiq just wondering why do they seemed to take Famitsu's word as law for some games and yet on others Famitsu is a gaming rag that is easily bought. Just wondering, if one hyped up game is good when it gets nines and tens isn't another hyped up game just as good even though it is on a different console?

Joystiq isn't the only one I have seen this from I just remembered this argument before for other games and it came to me while reading the comments. In the end the opinion is your own but really should gamers give any faith in gaming critics and press? Just wondering does anybody actually listen to them out there or do we just read sites, mags, and blogs to pass the time at work and such.

Geist @ Oct 24th 2007 1:10PM

Because Microsoft's Hype Machine (MHM(t)) is the best in the goddamn world and could make people eat poop if it wanted. I mean, I can't stand the goddamn Halo series, but with their marketing for Halo 3, I really wanted to play it, if just to finish the fight, believe, etc.

Also, because many people are Halo-loving fantards. But my opinion is slightly biased.

Just slightly.

SoulBlade @ Oct 24th 2007 2:07PM

They all were given lifetime supplies of Mountain Dew Gamer Fuel and gift certificates to their local 7-11s

VampireHunter Z @ Oct 24th 2007 1:03PM

Wow FFXII received a perfect score from Famitsu. It's a great game but not Ocarina of Time great.

bm @ Oct 24th 2007 6:04PM

FFXII is a huge pile of fucking trash, Famitsu only gave it a perfect score as to say "look guys we score high if you do something new with your game series!" But they shouldn't have. A shit game is a shit game no matter how you look at it.

And besides, I found the mindnumbing dungeons actually a throwback to oldschool boredom instead of an innovation, so in that regard it's not even really warranted either.

Purple Haze @ Oct 25th 2007 4:26AM

@bm

I agree with most of what you say, but it isn't a pile of fucking trash. I was just dissapointed when I found out I bought Vagrant Story 2 and not Final Fantasy XII.

bm @ Oct 25th 2007 7:56PM

Hmmmmz no.... I stand by my comment. I won't put up a long rant, but let's say that just about the only thing I DID like about the game was the art. That qualifies as "trash" to me.

WiNG @ Oct 24th 2007 1:04PM

I really only trust IGN ratings. I have found them to be spot on for 90% of the games I've played.

Raikage (NDF - PK THUNDER RING) @ Oct 24th 2007 1:13PM

I've heard they are good, usually I check Gamerankings or GameInformer.

Mr Khan @ Oct 24th 2007 4:24PM

Nope, don't trust ratings, ever

I have an uncanny ability to know what i'll like, even when i'm venturing into something completely new (like when i bought Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance, and it became my personal GotY 2005) and i'll generally know what i'm buying ahead of time

Now, something that comes out of left field and gets great reviews (and great consumer reviews) i may pick up later

Nessuno @ Oct 24th 2007 1:39PM

Let's face it, EVERYONE gets sucked in by the hype. For instance, I think Halo 2 is the game with the most widely regretted review scores, based on comments I've read from various reviewers. Why? Hype over substance of course. Reviewers got so caught up in how much they enjoyed the first Halo and the hype of the second, they never seriously doubted Halo 2 the way they should have.

Look at Bioshock. Great game, yeah yeah, but it wasn't until a couple weeks after the 10s and 9.9s were out that people started realizing that the last third of the game was utter mediocrity. Anyone else think a lot of reviewers didn't even play through the whole game?

But here's a question for Joystiq.... Why on earth single out Mario for hype and advertising dollars? Nintendo's advertising for anything but the console itself (and wii fitness and wii sports) has been just this side of non-existent. In fact, Wii tittles across the board are slammed for just for having waggle or for being on a "casual console".

If anything, Wii games suffer from a sort of anti-hype.

arrrgh @ Oct 24th 2007 2:37PM

word for word truth. good man

Zsavior @ Oct 24th 2007 2:55PM

I totally agree /salute.

gonk @ Oct 24th 2007 2:03PM

didn't famitsu give lair like 9/10? when everyone else gave it 5/10? hahahaha

i wonder how many japs returned lair the day after they bought it

Neebs @ Oct 24th 2007 2:23PM

"Japs."

Nice racist comment, you pig.

arrrgh @ Oct 24th 2007 2:38PM

yanks and canucks are racist terms too then? 'cause they get thrown around an awful lot

Neebs @ Oct 24th 2007 3:30PM

Yanks and Canucks are actually used by their respective peoples - "Japs" has and always will be a derogatory, racist term.

WiNG @ Oct 24th 2007 3:39PM

as an Asian-American I do not find the term "japs" racist since it does not carry an inherent comment on the japanese.

Unlike calling someone a wetback or something, which is in part mocking a real or perceived component of that person.

Mr Khan @ Oct 24th 2007 4:27PM

And, of course, "Jap" is also the easy way out for the typist, probably why it originated during world war II, lazy newspapers didn't want to cram headlines with "Japanese declare war" so it became "Japs declare war" and as the enemies, they were deemed derogatory

It is hard to tell when people mean racist intent or are just being lazy, which makes it such a tricky word in any racial lexicon