So mario galaxy 2, a game with the same story as any other mario game for almost the past 30 years( a non-existant one), no online play and horrible graphics, deserves to be scored higher than games like GTA4, red dead redemption, Uncharted 2, Killzone 2, MGS4 etc. all having fairly brilliant stories or spectacular gameplay mechanics or addictive online modes? Theres something called a skew and it has definitely gone on with SMG2 reviews

So storyline and graphics dont matter at all, right? thats why when games are reviewed those are the parts they are rated on right?

Youre telling me milking more than 120 games is supporting a fanbase? no. Supporting a fanbase is bringing out innovative new IPs, something Nintendo has failed to do this gen. You REALLY think its ok to force mario after mario upon people? you must have extremely low expectations.

and @ seferoth clearly you have missed the point. This article is about how the pros have mocked nintendo, I just pointed out why they might. I also said how can mario be groundbreaking after being in 128 games, not how can it be good, now im laughing at you *rolls eyes* and you called me a child... I could add to that by pointing out how you enjoy a mario game that caters for a younger audience but it's really not worth it.

shazui123 -- Seriously?

I mean...really?

You want to knock Mario down because of...story? That's like blaming Madden for not having a compelling narrative.

Some videogames are made with the GAME part in mind. And I'm thankful for that. Not all videoGAMES need to ape movies, fer Chrissakes.

"Forcing" Mario? No more than COD, NFS, Madden, GTA, MoH, FF, etc. are "forced" on gamers. Go ahead and look at the number of actual Mario platformers ever released over the past few decades. Then compare that to the steady churning out of prosaic shooters, sports games, copycat sandbox titles, etc.

And if you can honestly look at either Galaxy game and call the graphics ugly...well, that speaks for itself. It must be very tough to appreciate ANY game's visuals with your head that far up your intestinal tract.

Oh yeah, that makes sense. Why don't all VIDEOGAME developers waste money on an acting crew and scripts for the story everytime they want to make a videogame. :/ Are you kidding? But nevermind, I realize that it's people like you who need stories and graphics to enjoy a game. But I also realize that it's people like you who kill gaming by demanding aspects in games that are only needed in movies.
Yes, it's what reviewers go by. But I'd figure you would consider review scores a joke nowadays becuase of SMG 2's review scores. Think it over.

No I didn't say that. I'm just saying Nintendo making a game of an old franchise shows that they haven't forgotten about their fans. And you're wrong when you say Nintendo has not created new IPs. Look up Disaster: Day of Crisis and also look up Zangeki no Reginleiv, I'd wasted my time listing more but you're just going to post the same old garbage on another Nintendo related article. So forget about the rest of the list.

BTW, FIerce Musashi listed new IPs. By asking for new IPs you admit you didn't read Fierce Musashi's list. All you saw was Mario.

@ your post to Seferoth75:
He's replying to your point about the games Mario has been in. In other words, he's replying to you. What doesn't make it "groundbreaking" after over 100 games (this is something you've yet to explain)?
Lol I asume Seferoth will be all grown up if he played some M rated shooters instead of Mario games, right? 7_7

I'm pretty sure the Mario series is based on gameplay and mechanics, not story and online. Not every game needs to have compelling story. Speaking of which, did you just say that Killzone 2 has good story?? Killzone 2 was a great game, but it nothing too spectacular. KZ2 is a game that is done like any other FPS but done really well, and that's where the review scores come in.

Not every game needs online multiplayer. That's not the game's focus. Honestly, Super Mario Galaxy 2 co-op would be a major disaster considering it's a platformer with more bottomless pits then you could even count.

Sure some games need it (New Super Mario Bros. Wii) but it doesn't have to be necessary for every game. Because games focusing on single player usually have tacked-on multiplayer (F.E.A.R. 2, Riddick).

I love how shazui is just saying its a bad game because its not aiming at certain things it does not require.

People dont put things in perspective here...

These are all nintendo puublished games so, nintendo put up the money or even helped develop these games. These are basicly just like the sony exclusives that sony puts money into. You won't see many of these guys going multiplate ethier because nintendo lets them do their thing for the most part.

So his argument is really strong then when you add the fact that they actualy made even more games that are not even ported yet.

The bitter taste in your mouth is much like you growing apart from a loved one yet you don't want to blame your self. You want that other person to change, wake up you are a PC gamer.

This is console gaming.

Are you talking about Galaxy 2 being more of the same? I think you have to play it to understand why it's awesome. Look, they don't reinvent the wheel every time, but Galaxy 2 is one of those games that improves on a great formula and blows it up for all it's worth.

The important thing about SMG2 isn't that you're doing something new; the important thing is you're doing something that varies greatly and yet stays intuitive and fun. A bit like expanding the old WarioWare concept. It's much less about a change in function and much more about a change in structure.

That, and the friggin' soundtrack. Yeah.

I do understand what you're trying to say, but you shouldn't be worried about Mario. You should be worried about Wii Music. In fact, don't worry at all, it's okay.

Shazui: "Im sorry, but youre list consists of games whose formula have not changed for more than 10 years. I also count 8 mario based games on there, doesnt help support your point..."

Interesting. Looks like you've chose to go after and pick on mainly Mario in some lame attempt to try and disprove my point that Nintendo hasn't abandoned their old audience. Sad thing is.... it got you nowhere. What about the other games on my list? Hm? The fact still remains: Nintendo are giving us more core games than they are casual. Deal with it or leave. And please, oh please, do not use the stupid new IP arguement. That is no longer valid if it ever was at all. Only ignorant people still us that........ *chuckle* Oh, I forgot. Nintendo has teamed up with Monolith Soft and Mist Walker Studios to bring in two new games, which are the last 2 games on my list.

Back to Mario. Let me start off my saying Super Smash Brother Brawl >>>is not<<< a Mario game. I have no idea why it is listed as a Mario game when he isn't even the main character. Mario's role is basically the same as Link, Yoshi, Kirby & Pit story wise. Other than that, he is just a fighter like the rest of the cast. Kirby has a better chance of being the main character in that game, which is funny because the same guy who created Kirby created Smash Brothers.

How do those games not support my point exactlly when they are well-received as good to Game of the Year quality despite their unchanged formula? Oh! Oh! I can answer that. Because they are not the same game. You see, even though their formula is somewhat unchanged that doesn't mean the actual games haven't. Things like new levels, level designs, power ups, etc. change the way the game play is and the experience that is given to player. And I'll go back to bring this point up again: How do they not support my point if they are still good games?

http://i45.tinypic.com/286y...
_________________________
Lightningsax: Third parties? This isn't about third parties. You've came to the wrong argument, mate. I was simply listing the "casual" and "core" games that Nintendo were/are backing. I was merely proving a point.