New Super Mario Bros. Wii

[speedfreak]

- Full price for what could be released on another console but better and cheaper

- Remixed music (we know it'll use the NSMB main theme from the trailer...)

- Nintendo clearly aren't putting their all into what should be such an important release.

Opinion, I'll gladly pay $50.

Opinion, I really dig the New Super Mario Bros. theme

Speculation

At least the things I listed were facts. I could add a thousand "+" opinion reasons the game could be great.

Edited July 14, 2009 by speedfreak

[SuperLink]

First one's not opinion. This game would be released on XBLA for 1200 MS Points with online modes and achievements.

As for the point of "remixed" music, I'll quote myself:

look at what happened last time we heard "remixed" music at an E3 demonstration.... Animal Crossing Wii.

Not a SINGLE new track. Yes, some of the ACWW tracks were great, but when a NEW game uses NO new music, that's just pathetic, and I can't see how anyone could see it any other way to be honest.

Reusing music is lazy and half assed, no matter how good the music is, especially if it's not even properly remixed/remade (like orchestrated or something...). It would be different if it was the Mario theme, that's recurring, but the NSMB theme is the theme for one game in the series, and if this is Mario Bros 6 and not NSMB expansion pack then Nintendo have to do a better job of showing it.

[speedfreak]

No, it's still opinion. Just because you feel it should cost the same as those games on the PSN/Xbox Live doesn't make it fact. There will be plenty of people willing to pay the full $50 price tag.

[SuperLink]

"Full price for what could be released on another console but better and cheaper"

Seriously, what about that is opinion? It's 100% true, regardless of whether or not people are willing to pay.

People are willing to pay £180 for a Wii even though the technology is outdated and you can get a much stronger machine with a lot more capabilities for a good amount cheaper.... that doesn't mean it's "opinion" that it could have been done better, it's pretty much fact.

Let me put it this way.

If you had both consoles, and the choice between:

- A full priced Wii game with very unimportant/nonexistent motion control

- The same game on XBLA but cheaper, better visuals and online.

Which would you buy? I'm pretty sure I know.

[PSI Wind]

Mario belongs to Nintendo, so stop comparing it to other console games and saying "It should be released on a non Nintendo console.".

[SuperLink]

I'm not saying that at all.

I'm saying other consoles get the better end of the stick.

The situation is better compared with a game like Muramasa, which will probably come out on XBLA with HD.

[speedfreak]

"Full price for what could be released on another console but better and cheaper"

Seriously, what about that is opinion? It's 100% true, regardless of whether or not people are willing to pay.

People are willing to pay £180 for a Wii even though the technology is outdated and you can get a much stronger machine with a lot more capabilities for a good amount cheaper.... that doesn't mean it's "opinion" that it could have been done better, it's pretty much fact.

I was arguing the fact that the game being $50 was not factually a "-". Hypothetically speaking "if" Mario was owned by Sony or Microsoft do you really think they would sell a product for $20 if they KNEW people would pay $50 for it? I don't. Either way you're argument is based on assumptions. Assumptions should never have bearing on whether something is fact or not.

Let me put it this way.

If you had both consoles, and the choice between:

- A full priced Wii game with very unimportant/nonexistent motion control

- The same game on XBLA but cheaper, better visuals and online.

Which would you buy? I'm pretty sure I know.

I'm not going to lie, if it was the same game I'd go for the cheaper, better looking one. However once again this is a hypothetical situation. Mario will not be on the PSN or Xbox Live.

Frankly I'm sick of going to bat for it though. I'm excited for the game. I think it looks great and I don't feel the least bit ripped off having to pay $50 for it. Everyone in here can complain all they want about the cost or the graphics or the lack of online play but in the end their complaints will not matter much because this game WILL sell like crazy this holiday season. I'm going to enjoy the game for what it is instead of complaining about what it could be. I'm done arguing about whether this game is a lazy ripoff or not.

[JezMM]

Just with regards to music remixing again, I'll say the reason I'm okay with this having the same tunes as NSMB even though I think of it as a brand new game, is because it does share most similarities with NSMB, much in the same way I'm okay with Lost Levels having the same soundtrack as Mario 1.

[yUnG MuLa]

i feel bad for the people who are going to buy this game at full price blind nintendo fanboys.

[Conando]

And they'll be enjoying the game.

[Remy]

And they'll be enjoying the game.

But there'll always be that lingering feeling of rip off, as if your very essence has been violated by the blatant rip off in front of you.

Like the various SF2 ports, or the GBA NES games

[SuperLink]

I was arguing the fact that the game being $50 was not factually a "-". Hypothetically speaking "if" Mario was owned by Sony or Microsoft do you really think they would sell a product for $20 if they KNEW people would pay $50 for it?

But that's not what I said. I didn't say the price was a bad thing, I said the fact that you could get better for much cheaper is a bad thing. And yes, they would. People would have bought Portal as a full game, they would have bought Soulcalibur as a full game. Well.. especially if they were Nintendo fans >>

I'm not going to lie, if it was the same game I'd go for the cheaper, better looking one. However once again this is a hypothetical situation. Mario will not be on the PSN or Xbox Live.

OK, but Muramasa will be, and it will be better than the fully priced Wii version.

Frankly I'm sick of going to bat for it though. I'm excited for the game. I think it looks great and I don't feel the least bit ripped off having to pay $50 for it.

I don't get that at all... Not in the slightest?

Everyone in here can complain all they want about the cost or the graphics or the lack of online play but in the end their complaints will not matter much because this game WILL sell like crazy this holiday season. I'm going to enjoy the game for what it is instead of complaining about what it could be.

I'll be enjoying the game for what it is too, but there's no problem with complaining with descrepancies. If noone ever complained then nothing would ever be done. And yeah... the game will sell bucketloads... which is a shame when cheap games like Braid will take you just as long to finish, is a beautiful game and has incredibly poor sales in comparison....

Just with regards to music remixing again, I'll say the reason I'm okay with this having the same tunes as NSMB even though I think of it as a brand new game, is because it does share most similarities with NSMB, much in the same way I'm okay with Lost Levels having the same soundtrack as Mario 1.

That was then. We're in now now. I know what you mean, but that just doesn't cut it for me anymore, especially considering the technology and the skilled people Nintendo have on their team...

[Conando]

But there'll always be that lingering feeling of rip off, as if your very essence has been violated by the blatant rip off in front of you.

Like the various SF2 ports, or the GBA NES games

Not if they don't view it as a rip-off, as a lot seem to think. I myself would prefer that it were 35 or 40, but I'm not going to kick and scream about it being 50 when it's another 2D Mario platformer.

[speedfreak]

Meh, I didn't feel ripped off paying $50 for Zelda Four Swords Adventures and that was basically a GCN game that looked like an SNES game with some extra graphical effects. I don't know why I'd feel ripped off here. I guess I could understand why some people might, but I'm a big Mario fan and stuff like no online, no extra characters, and a similar look to the DS game don't really hurt my interest in the game. I guess the value of the game varies person by person depending on how much they enjoy old school Mario.

Honestly I feel more ripped off paying $35+ for DS games then paying $50 for this. That might just be because I'm not too into handheld gaming though. I much prefer playing games on my TV. That's why I love my GBA player for the GCN. I wish Nintendo could come up with some sort of DS player for the Wii. I guess they couldn't because of the dual screens and touch screen controls though. It'd be neat if you could use the DS as a controller but see the game on your TV, but as I said since the DS uses 2 screens it most likely wouldn't be possible........and I went completely off topic, sorry about that.

[Leon K Fox]

Not if they don't view it as a rip-off, as a lot seem to think. I myself would prefer that it were 35 or 40, but I'm not going to kick and scream about it being 50 when it's another 2D Mario platformer.

But that's exactly my point, so many people are so easily sucked and droned into buying this thing purley because of the franchise it's from, so Nintendo can basically slightly upgrade it and sell it as a full priced Wii title.

It annoys the hell out of me to perfectly honest, if any other studio did that we'd think they'd all gone raving mad.

Again, the game does actually look quite fun, but the business practices involved with it bug me something rotten. If I do buy this game it will be second hand from Ebay, may sound petty but I don't want Nintendo to get my money for this one.

[JezMM]

I'd rather all Nintendo's development time went into fun than have a portion of it dedicated to making it pretty. =\

I think Wii Music is a total rip-off at £40 here in the UK, but I'd pay that much for both this and Galaxy 2 seperately, and gladly.

[Guest Sanic4K6]

This game looks really good, I'm going to get this and Galaxy 2 for christmas if its out by then.

[Remy]

I'd rather all Nintendo's development time went into fun than have a portion of it dedicated to making it pretty. =\

This may be hard to believe, but things can be fun AND pretty!!!

Amazing, right!?

[Candescence]

No shit, but this game already is pretty, tech be damned. Sure, it can be prettiER, but for me, the visuals as they are, well, are more than adequete. The argument could possibly made for the models (but they're nowhere near DS-grade and more than adequete for something you're rarely gonna see close-up), but the backgrounds look lovely and the effects are neat too.

Edited July 16, 2009 by The Sniper

[Remy]

Then why are people bringing it up?

[Candescence]

Then why are people bringing it up?

God if I know. They either haven't looked at the screens properly (who compares it with shovelware? Seriously?), or have high standards. As I said, it could be better, but it's more than good enough for me.

Edited July 16, 2009 by The Sniper

[SuperLink]

Perhaps what annoys me is that it makes no effort to look unique or special. The backgrounds may not look awful, but they look generic as hell, when they could be arty, cartoony, or more dynamic and alive.

As for the character models, no excuse.

What's even worse is that somehow Nintendo insist this takes up all the Wii can do. I have far less respect for the Wii's hardware at this point than I ever have before, but it's more than likely that Nintendo are BSing us in order to stop us complaining about their lazyness.

Heck, if they just went a bit more technical about it (you know, talked to gamers in gamer language, instead of saying things that casuals will believe in an instant) then I'd understand why NSMBWii can't have online play or better visuals.

[Candescence]

Perhaps what annoys me is that it makes no effort to look unique or special. The backgrounds may not look awful, but they look generic as hell, when they could be arty, cartoony, or more dynamic and alive.

Really? I don't think so. Especially not generic.

As for the character models, no excuse.

As I said, could be better, but are they really that bad? They're pretty good to me.

What's even worse is that somehow Nintendo insist this takes up all the Wii can do. I have far less respect for the Wii's hardware at this point than I ever have before, but it's more than likely that Nintendo are BSing us in order to stop us complaining about their lazyness.

Heck, if they just went a bit more technical about it (you know, talked to gamers in gamer language, instead of saying things that casuals will believe in an instant) then I'd understand why NSMBWii can't have online play or better visuals.

This, I can't really argue against. Not that I care for online or better graphics, anyway. Though, it annoys me how people keep using the phrase 'casual'. Isn't it ironic that, that word doesn't even seem to be in Nintendo's volcabulary? I've recently come to a rather new understanding of Nintendo's strategy.

Edited July 16, 2009 by The Sniper

[SuperLink]

Surely you'd prefer it to what we have though? (extra mile argument)

Maybe the models will look better on my TV than they have done in trailers, but so far they look pretty out of place with those flat backgrounds too, it looked fine in the DS version but odd here. They look like Mario Party models... very basic for a mainseries game...

As for the backgrounds, it's hard to describe but yes, they could be much more "alive". Paper Mario games pulled off fun looking Mario Worlds very well.

EDIT: I don't mean to use the word casual, I kinda hate it too, but the point is people know what it means, don't they? Gamers don't want games like Wii Fit, gamers want games like Mario Galaxy, so the target demographic for those types of games are "casual games", they don't care about video gaming, they care about the lifestyle around the Wii and DS that Nintendo advertise.

So yes, hate the word, but it works.

Also, Nintendo use it all the time (look on the Nintendo Channel)

Edited July 16, 2009 by SuperLink

[Remy]

As for the backgrounds, it's hard to describe but yes, they could be much more "alive". Paper Mario games pulled off fun looking Mario Worlds very well.

If you consider Mario's artistic history, with games taking place in coloring books, stage shows, Paper Mario's deal and the crayon aesthetic employed in Yoshi's Island, this is indeed dead looking, and bland.

They've lost their spark, I say!