Variety says Mario Galaxy shows Wii's weaknesses
by Kyle Orland 
{ Nov 14th 2007 at 11:24AM }
Here at Joystiq, we like to have some fun with our Nega-reviews. When the critical apparatus tells us almost unanimously that a game is undeniably good, we like to pick apart their words and find out what small negatives can be found in the overwhelmingly positive whole. This was a bit tough for Super Mario Galaxy, a game that got high praise all around. It wouldn't have been nearly as tough if we'd had access to Variety's review of the game, which went up on Monday.While the Variety review praises the game's original level design and gravity-based gameplay, the majority of the writing picks apart the game's weak story, limited two-player mode and awkward camera controls. What's more, a large portion of the review seems targeted at the Wii itself, from blanket condemnation of the two-handed controller ("Holding the nunchuk, ... and the Wii-mote ... in separate hands, is an awkward arrangement") to criticism of the system's graphical prowess ("Fans may claim that the graphics are good 'for the Wii,' ... but given the vastly superior quality of the graphics in a game like Ratchet and Clank: Tools of Destruction ... Galaxy looks old fashioned and lifeless.")
While we can't say we agree with all the criticisms, it's always interesting to see a major outlet going against the tide of positive opinion to create a negative review. You know, a real one.
Previously:
Variety praises writing in The Simpsons Game
Variety takes flak for negative Metroid Prime 3 review
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
Superstar90 @ Nov 14th 2007 11:27AM
variety are n00bs!
LOL :P
AirIntake @ Nov 14th 2007 11:29AM
Nintendo may be in for some trouble if non-gamers think the Wii looks like crap. Oh well, I'm sure MG is fun enough.
F. Rocker or Fernando R.? @ Nov 14th 2007 12:02PM
Yes, they are noobs.
The real question: In who I need to trust... in a mediocre publication, or in real videogames reviewers?
http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/wii/supermariogalaxy
plyx @ Nov 14th 2007 12:05PM
So THAT'S where the term 'noobs' went.
Noshino @ Nov 14th 2007 12:25PM
Fernando,
Variety is mediocre for us, but so is metacritic for the "casual-gamer", yes, that group that Nintendo is betting on.
If a gaming mag was to say that, there wouldnt be much trouble since we'll, the gaming crowd just likes Mario because its Mario, and it always brings something new to the table, but that is something that most if not all of the casual crowd don't notice, if you ask an average joe what looks better and what he would like to play, and you give him Galaxy (good game, altho IMO its average) and Lair (somewhat average game altho I did like it, shuddup >_>;), I will assure you that they ll go for Lair...
B1gC72 @ Nov 14th 2007 6:14PM
yea they don't have a clue what they're talking about. i mean, ok, the Wii doesn't have the power of the PS3 or 360 but Super Mario Galaxy is a dammed fun and different game, and that's what it's all about in my eye.
hvnlysoldr @ Nov 15th 2007 2:41PM
Holey Moley! The Variety author got bribed(sponsored) by Sony!
http://nsidernews.com/sony-sponsored-mario-galaxy-review-is-the-worse-experience/
flameofdoom666 @ Nov 14th 2007 11:28AM
They are just haters.
PSN: Ummfada @ Nov 14th 2007 11:52AM
A rather Inciteful comment
Ethan @ Nov 14th 2007 1:21PM
Rather insightful spelling. I think variety are rather shallow here (though I dislike the term 'hater' in any context), working off old habits. Firstly, I'd like to hear a more in depth explanation of why the ability to move both hands independently makes it awkward.
I'd say he's actually trying to cement his position as a games expert by talking about the graphics that his audience probably don't care about. And he says Mario looks lifeless, which is not exactly accurate.
Mr Khan @ Nov 14th 2007 4:17PM
I may sound like a fanboy (although i am, i try not to let that blind me) but i like using the Wiimote and nunchuk in that manner, i feel it allows for more freedom, especially when i want to lounge in my chair, i can play with my hands spread to rest on both legs, spread wide apart
The camera i'll give them, it's certainly a step back from the perfection of Sunshine's camera, but this game fixes most of what Sunshine got wrong (mostly, how "wrong" sunshine felt, in Sunshine it was like you were in "real" worlds, filled with NPC's and "believable" locales, while Galaxy goes back to Mario traversing worlds that are more "fantastic")
xXFenixKnight13Xx @ Nov 14th 2007 11:28AM
Variety can go suck a nut!!!
flameofdoom666 @ Nov 14th 2007 11:29AM
By now, people know the Wii is not a graphical powerhouse- so when the best looking game comes along, its a big deal. It is probably the best looking game of last gen and on the Wii.
The game play is fantastic (I am 26 stars in), and the control scheme is amazing!
spoo @ Nov 14th 2007 11:52AM
I would agree but as the new gen graphics are getting better and Nintendo over stating the Wii's gfx you can't help being disappointed with the Wii in the gfx department. Fanboys can claim "art style" until the cows come home but the fact is it is only a year into the Wii's life and many are already disappointed with the gfx and sound quality in best looking (flagship) game.
When Super Mario World came out I was in awe of the games gfx, the same for Mario 64 and Mario Sunshine was smooth and crisp... Hell I was amazed at the New Super Mario Bros GFX. But Galaxy looks awesome if it was made a couple years ago in a Kingdom Hearts meets Sunshine kind of way. Today SMG looks dated on day one. It disappoints me because I wanted to be proved wrong :(
With that said I will be picking it up later today.
Clack @ Nov 14th 2007 2:04PM
Yep, the controls are way better with the split controllers as opposed to the classic style. I was just playing it for the first time last night and thinking to myself how great the wiimote/nunchuk combo lends itself to playing a game like this. Then again, I'm highly ambidextrous, so it may be easier for me than for others.
Burnt Meatloaf @ Nov 14th 2007 11:32PM
People complain so much about the graphics that all the other deficiencies are completely overlooked, and even one quip about a stray pixel will make every fanboy come running.
Marketing a system as being "intentionally" underpowered was a stroke of genius... unfortunately.
Personally, I could care less about HD. It's the lack of anti-aliasing and texture memory that drives me nuts. It doesn't matter how many pixels you can throw on the screen, it's how WELL you can render them. The Wii does neither well, so it is total fail in my book.
Oh, and stop saying that graphics and style are different. They are the same!
John @ Nov 14th 2007 11:31AM
I played through the first 30 stars yesterday...I have no hangups about Mario Galaxy at all. It's fantastic.
Now, something that trips up the wii? Mario Party 8 - The ONLY time I've ever seen a frame rate hiccup was with the duelo candy during the game... a flame effect engulfs your character, and there's a frame rate skip every time...and the game isn't even widescreen!
Galaxy? Problems? Variety is full of crap.
samfish @ Nov 14th 2007 11:33AM
So they dis Metroid for being to hardcore but then compare Mario to Ratchet & Clank, a hardcore game on the PS3 that has absolutely no appeal to the audience they're trying to appeal to.
I'm starting to think they're not sure they know how to review the Wii, either. I'm kinda wondering if they have a "hardcore" gamer doing these reviews who's trying to look at these games through a "casual" lens.
Vidikron (FU) @ Nov 14th 2007 11:34AM
How is R&C hardcore?
samfish @ Nov 14th 2007 11:40AM
Just because you're not spilling buckets of blood and showing tits doesn't mean it's not "hardcore".
Especially when it comes to the Wii.
Galaxy is "hardcore", too, I'd say.
Vidikron (FU) @ Nov 14th 2007 11:43AM
But you didn't amswer the question. I didn't ask what it didn't use to make it hardcore, I asked what does it have that makes it hardcore? And since you mentioned it, what makes Galaxy hardcore? Neither of these games seem very "hardcore" to me.
mccomber @ Nov 14th 2007 11:52AM
Apparently anything that has a plot, controls that go beyond swinging your arms around and any section that lasts more than 5 minutes, is hardcore.
FidliousWong @ Nov 14th 2007 11:52AM
Both have a "Hardcore" side to them. Ala Skillpoints in R&C and Challenge Mode (it makes the Cragmites... tougher? *squee*) and getting everything in SMG. But both are also accessable to casuals as well with things to such them in.
So let's end this particular arguement before it attracts other, less reputable posters.
Deuz Augustine @ Nov 14th 2007 11:53AM
Can we stop using the phrase "hardcore game"? Am I the only person who realizes how silly it sounds?
fawazr @ Nov 14th 2007 11:57AM
nice icon--much better than the old one with the grandma cleavage.
And SMG and R&C are hardcore because of the skill required. Both titles rely on tactile, old school twitch dexterity and coordination. In the case of SMG, the white knuckle platforming required to get all 120 stars is by no means intended for casual or even moderate gamers.
hegemonyhog @ Nov 14th 2007 12:00PM
Hardcore is literally meaningless when it comes to games at this point.
You can play virtually any game in a casual or hardcore fashion - the difference is how you approach it, not the game itself.
spoo @ Nov 14th 2007 11:59AM
I'm confused, you are upset that the compare SMG to a so called "hardcore" game (R&C) then claim that SMG is "hardcore also? If you read the article they only compare the graphics to R&C and nothing else.
Sorry but I don't understand your reasoning.
mccomber @ Nov 14th 2007 12:10PM
I've got another question to add to this; do we only haver hardcore and casual games now? Isn't there some "middle-class" of gaming? Because most discussions seem to polarize games between these two groups.
Vegeta (aka Ska Oreo) @ Nov 14th 2007 12:10PM
@vidi
Because it has guns. And as we all know, all hardcore games must have a gun.
samfish @ Nov 14th 2007 12:13PM
Well what would you consider "hardcore"?
I would consider R&C hardcore, especially by the Wii's standards, because the people who have never really played games before would find it difficult and frustrating, most likely.
It barely meets my PERSONAL definition of "hardcore", admittedly, but that's because I kind of go by what I've always understood the old-school definition to be, still.
But I've actually died in Galaxy. It's...actually kind of hard when you can only take 3 hits and there isn't an abundance of ways to replenish yourself. It's considerably harder that R&C in that sense.
Negativecool @ Nov 14th 2007 12:17PM
Samfish-
Do you even know what "hardcore" is?
why not the LS2/LS7? @ Nov 14th 2007 12:25PM
I'm playing R&C right now. And I am a hardcore gamer in that I buy and play a lot of games, although I don't play Halo and call other people names.
R&C isn't really hardcore. For a hardcore gamer, its only real flaw is it's too easy.
I was going to say it's probably more hardcore than SMG, since you have to aim guns in R&C, but in Mario you have to aim your pointer at stars too, so they really are on a similar level.
samfish @ Nov 14th 2007 12:55PM
"Do you even know what "hardcore" is?"
Do you know what "hardcore is, too?
Is Twilight Princess hardcore? Is Ratchet & Clank hardcore? Is Okami hardcore? Is Halo 3 hardcore? Half-Life? Portal?
It's a stupid definition that varies from person to person, especially these days.
I now consider there to be 2 main definitions.
The first is that the Wii has so split everything that games like Wii Sports, Rayman, Carnival games, etc is "casual" while everything else is "hardcore".
The other main definition is if it's bloody, violent and you're shooting, killing, blowing things up and possibly seeing some boobage (oh, and cursing), it's "hardcore".
And if you like playing those kinds of games often, you're a "hardcore gamer".
The old definition was a game that was brutally difficult. That's hardcore in the truest sense, I think. Games like Viewtiful Joe, Ninja Gaiden and God Hand could also fall under that definition today.
Back then, though, a "hardcore gamer" wasn't a person who enjoyed only brutally hard games, but someone who played a lot of games often, since MOST of them were pretty hard back then.
Collectively speaking and all subject to quibbles, of course.
why not the LS2/LS7? @ Nov 14th 2007 1:20PM
I think Hardcore is any game that in order to enjoy/succeed, you need to bring significant gaming-tailored skills with you.
That doesn't necessarily mean the game is incredibly difficult (but often it is), it might just mean you need to know how to circle-strafe, or aim a weapon while dodging missiles.
If someone can just pick this up as their first video game ever and jump right in, it's not hardcore.
I guess my definitions don't match my opinion though, since you really need to be able to fire aimed weapons and dodge in R&C.
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Nov 14th 2007 1:58PM
"If someone can just pick this up as their first video game ever and jump right in, it's not hardcore."
So "accessible" is mutually exclusive from "hardcore". Gotcha.
Even more reason to ignore you now.
why not the LS2/LS7? @ Nov 14th 2007 2:13PM
Yeah, why wouldn't they be opposites? This isn't the first use of "hardcore". Remember the hardcore punk scene? It wasn't accessible because the music was not enticing to newbies and if you went to a concert, you could get broken bones if you tried to stand in front and didn't know to be prepared for moshing.
Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Nov 14th 2007 4:27PM
Well mario 64 and mario galaxy prove that, at least for games, hardcore does not mean inaccessible. There are damn hard levels in mario 64 and damn hard levels in galaxy thats meant to be a challenge, and unless you bring your A game, you won't be passing them. Hardcore.
When you say hardcore, what you really mean is elitist.
why not the LS2/LS7? @ Nov 14th 2007 6:05PM
Well, yes, it's partially elitism. That comes with the territory. It's also just an admission that some of these games are designed in a way that if you didn't bring a gaming skill set with you, you're not going to finish them.
I don't know why you're getting worked up over this. Even if hardcore is the opposite of accessible, there's no reason a seasoned gamer can't play casual (accessible) games. I know I sure enjoy Peggle, and it hardly gets more casual or accessible than that.
Burnt Meatloaf @ Nov 14th 2007 11:35PM
Hardcore is a term of polarization used by fanboys. There is no such thing as hardcore or casual -- only points in between.
Sidepocket @ Nov 15th 2007 1:24AM
@ hegemonyhog
So you are saying that my grandma can play Ninja Gaidan no problem?
Shagittarius @ Nov 14th 2007 11:33AM
Can't say I disagree with some of those points. I have a 42 inch LCD so I'm not surprised the game looks bad, I'm sure it looks better on a standard def TV but it sure does show the graphical limitations of the platform. Not everything is graphics with games of course but the game certainly would have been more pleasing to the eye on either of the other next gen platforms.
The waggle controls don't really add anything to this game so far, Its sort of less fun collecting the star pieces by pointing at them rather than running over them, but I'm sure some people will disagree. Why do I have to shake the controler to launch from a star? There are some mechanics that seem to be just there beacuse they had to work it in.
These are just initial observations after only finishing the first galaxy so maybe the mechanics will get more in depth but I'm thinking the differnce between SMG and R&C is not as great as reviewers or fanboys would lead you to believe and the game itself so far doesn't seem to be as great as all the gushing reviews I've read about it.
Lets be fair Halo 3 didn't live up to the reviews either so its to be expected that this game as well would recieve scores probably higher than it actually deserves. Like I said though, I'll hold off final judgement until I get to play it longer but the reviews I've been hearing say its beeter than Mario 64 and that is certainly not true, Mario 64 was a true innovation for platformers , SMG is just evolution of a lot of the same concepts.
Adam @ Nov 14th 2007 11:46AM
I'm sorry, I'll have to disagree with you about pointing at things to collect them as opposed to running over. I think this is a great feature. I'm not very far in either with 10 stars, but there are TONS of those little bits, and running over them would be pretty time consuming and break up the game too much (i'm something of a perfectionist so I'd HAVE to get them all)
fawazr @ Nov 14th 2007 11:49AM
So do you own a Wii or not? Your past comments on this site indicate that you don't (or have long sold your Wii), but now you're not only implying that you currently own a Wii (as well as a 42-inch LCD), but that you also bothered to purchase SMG for what you consider the most underwhelming system of the last gen.
What are you playing at? And comments like, "Its sort of less fun collecting the star pieces by pointing at them rather than running over them," don't help your credibility any (star pieces aren't collected by pointing at them).
And kudos on mentioning Ratchet and Clank in there. It really is a remarkable game, but you don't need to work so hard at shilling it.
samfish @ Nov 14th 2007 11:51AM
"The waggle controls don't really add anything to this game so far, Its sort of less fun collecting the star pieces by pointing at them rather than running over them, but I'm sure some people will disagree. Why do I have to shake the controler to launch from a star? There are some mechanics that seem to be just there beacuse they had to work it in."
Are you koo-koo bananas? Would you really rather press a button to launch from a star? Galaxy is a good example of "what makes the most sense for the controls". It wouldn't be as fun, I'd say, if you didn't have to shake to launch. It's more "immersive" because you're preforming a physical action to execute one of the most physical actions in the game.
I'm still having a bit of trouble, admittedly, gathering up star pieces and not having to slow down or stop moving for a second, but I've only got a few stars and it's gotten easier the more I played, so I'm assuming I'll get over that soon enough.
And nothing will EVER be as innovative as Mario64 (at least not until VR) because
1- Mario64 took the series into 3D and
2- literally set the standard for ALL 3D games.
What Galaxy clearly has done is reinvented the platformer, though. While not innovative on the level of Mario64, it is an amazing feat in it's own right.
Jerk Face @ Nov 14th 2007 11:52AM
Shags, that was actually a pretty honest and non-wii-hater post from you. I'll give you a plus! Good job, buddy!
John @ Nov 14th 2007 11:53AM
I'm on a 27" LCD and I have no issues with the graphics of Galaxy...granted you're some 15" bigger, but nonetheless, Mario looks terrific.
Shagittarius @ Nov 14th 2007 11:55AM
Are the called 'Star Bits', there are lots of star words in this game so I don't remember. And I meant a 40" LCD, not 42", I have a 42" rear projection as well as the 40" LCD but I game on the LCD. I have taken a picture of my rig in the past and posted on here so here it is again:
http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/7426/dscn0870ze3.jpg
Only diffference now is that I have a surround sound system and an Eternal Sonata Faceplate on my 360, and the 360 sn't the same one cause it RROD' but you cant tell that from a picture anyways.
Vidikron (FU) @ Nov 14th 2007 12:03PM
@samfish
"It wouldn't be as fun, I'd say, if you didn't have to shake to launch. It's more "immersive" because you're preforming a physical action to execute one of the most physical actions in the game. "
That's a bit of a stretch. I mean, the star's just launching you to another section of a level. Shaking the Wiimote doesn't really add any sort of immmersion, IMO. I don't mind it being that way, but I would be equally fine with a simple button push. It's just a hurry-and-get-to-the-next-section break in the action anwyay.
I will say that I like picking up the star bits with the pointer. I'd be damned annoyed if I had to pick them up directly since there are so many of them. It would too much like a collect-a-thon. Picking them up with the pointer removes some of that feeling.
plyx @ Nov 14th 2007 12:10PM
Nice TV Shag, XBR2? I also like how you have all of the consoles and your opinions get blasted by people who don't. I got all of 'em, too, and I just like my PS3 a little more than the other two.
Karen @ Nov 14th 2007 12:13PM
How good Mario Galaxy looks may depend on your TV and how SD well looks on that TV. I'm playing on a 50" Panasonic Plasma that does SD very well. The game looks good a lot better the Mario Sunshine, the vibrant colours ar impressive. I do see jaggies on the edges of textures but I play usually 10 feet away don't notice them too much.