New Super Mario Bros. Wii

[SuperLink]

You know what else is on Wii? Wario Land and Muramasa, both look far better than this, even in screenshots.

It's not hate, it's "They could have done much better".

Which they could have. Does anyone seriously want to deny that? If this is the first console Mario since forever, why aren't they making it something to remember? Why are we getting remixes of music from a DS game? Why are 2 of the only 4 playable characters pretty much the same?

What should be quite a special occasion is turning out to be quite a laze-fest from Nintendo.

Edited July 3, 2009 by SuperLink

[Sean]

On the subject of the game's graphics, every time I see that trailer, I think about how it looks just like a DS game. Almost swore that it was a port since I didn't even finish the DS game out of annoyance.

Edited July 3, 2009 by Jake

[yUnG MuLa]

this games graphics look worse then a dreamcast game.

[Candescence]

You compared this game and Imagine: Babies? Really? This game still looks loads better than that. Sure, it could be better, but you guys seem to be heavily exaggerating it, the original NSMB has nothing on this game in terms of visuals, as far as I'm concerned, the game looks very nice indeed.

Also, SKIDS, enough trolling already.

Edited July 4, 2009 by The Sniper

[Rm88]

It looks DS-ish. But that's not my main problem with the game; I think it's way too multiplayer oriented to be a good 2D Mario game. Of course I'll have to play it before judging, but that's my impression so far.

[Sean]

There's obviously going to be a single player mode, the stuff in the trailer's just the coop they're showing off.

[Ming Ming Hatsune]

Yay for more people saying the graphics are totally rubbish. XD

This looks like obviously a port from the DS to the Wii, nothing else. If it's $50 in price, then forget it this will not be day one purchase for me. I'll wait until 7 months and it (hopefully) will come down in price. I can send $50 on a better game. =/

[Phos]

What makes this game ugly isn't low resolution textures or anything like that, it's how empty the backgrounds are. It looks like Mario is running along the edge of a giant wall in some kind of nondescript void.

Edited July 4, 2009 by Phos

[Leon K Fox]

You compared this game and Imagine: Babies? Really? This game still looks loads better than that. Sure, it could be better, but you guys seem to be heavily exaggerating it, the original NSMB has nothing on this game in terms of visuals, as far as I'm concerned, the game looks very nice indeed.

I'm not exagerating, NSMB Wii does look like ass to me, and it's barley above that Imagine game, just look at it, seriously. (it's just a bit more crisp)

Games like Super Mario Galaxy and its sequel are proof the Wii can do so much more than this, so there's no way around the fact that Nintendo are being lazy and taking advantage of a fanbase that will buy any game with Mario in the title, something SEGA always get so much heat for from both critics and gaming fans alike (as they should too when their games do this, but so should Nintendo)

[Candescence]

I'm not exagerating, NSMB Wii does look like ass to me, and it's barley above that Imagine game, just look at it, seriously. (it's just a bit more crisp)

I did. And I came to the conclusion that we must be looking at completely different images, because, frankly, the models don't look like shit, and the level itself looks very good indeed. So it's not Galaxy level. It wasn't meant to be. The 2D portions of the visuals are far, far better quality than the original DS game, and the 3D models definately aren't DS quality either.

[Blue Blood]

I want to rant, too! But unlike all you little irks, my problem doesn't come from the graphics. No, no, no. Instead it comes from the presence of the Koopalings. Never liked them, and was pleased that Sunshine seemed to retcon them. Boo! Boo all you ugly freaks!

[speedfreak]

Yay for more people saying the graphics are totally rubbish. XD

This looks like obviously a port from the DS to the Wii, nothing else. If it's $50 in price, then forget it this will not be day one purchase for me. I'll wait until 7 months and it (hopefully) will come down in price. I can send $50 on a better game. =/

Don't hold your breath. This is Nintendo after all. Zelda TP, a launch game for Wii, is STILL $50. Well sure if the game bombs you'll be able to get a good deal for it, but I can say with 100% certainty that this game will NOT bomb. In fact I'm pretty sure it will end up as one of the best selling games on Wii.

How come people didn't make such a big deal about Animal Crossing looking like ass? It was a GCN game that looked like an N64 game, and then the Wii version looked just as crappy. Or did they make a big deal of it? I'm not a fan so I didn't really follow it.

Anyway the game will be great and the people who aren't going to buy it because of the graphics are a very small minority. Yes it could look better but I think that screen shot comparison I did proves it looks a lot better then the DS version.

[SuperLink]

How come people didn't make such a big deal about Animal Crossing looking like ass? It was a GCN game that looked like an N64 game, and then the Wii version looked just as crappy. Or did they make a big deal of it? I'm not a fan so I didn't really follow it.

I sure as hell made a big deal about it, and I made sure that everyone who spoke about it knew how disgusted I was with the lazyness of the game. Not only did it look like the DS game, it was also exactly the same, with the addition of a miniscule city area. Reused music, the whole lot.

So, as I've said before in the thread, the lazyness here is nothing compared to then, but it's still lazy and I don't like that at all.

Edited July 4, 2009 by SuperLink

[JezMM]

I sure as hell made a big deal about it, and I made sure that everyone who spoke about it knew how disgusted I was with the lazyness of the game. Not only did it look like the DS game, it was also exactly the same, with the addition of a miniscule city area. Reused music, the whole lot.

So, as I've said before in the thread, the lazyness here is nothing compared to then, but it's still lazy and I don't like that at all.

Actually, it readded a ton of stuff missing from the DS version, plenty of new events, the graphics had MUCH higher polygon counts than GCN and DS, so it did look nicer, new clothing features, voice chat...

Are you a big Animal Crossing fan? If so then that's fine if that's how you feel. But if not, I think you really need to be one to appreciate all the new features of the Wii version.

Though I will agree the reused music was kinda lazy. The DS redid it all so I don't understand why they couldn't have again. Besides, apart from a few select tracks, the GCN had the better soundtrack... why couldn't they have reused that one? D=

[SuperLink]

I used to be a really big Animal Crossing fan... I was really looking forward to the Wii version, new tools, more full customisation, much more to do, etc. I didn't want "Wild World Wii Edition", which is pretty much what we got.

I pretty much facepalmed the whole way through the E3'08 demonstration >.<

[G-Force]

You know what's frustrating? Reading through a topic about a game you find interesting, looking for interesting posts to respond to, and finding several pages devoted to a bullshit graphics argument that you've seen, like, a million times before. And it's always the same deal. It's either...

"THESE GRAPHICS ARE BULLSHIT!"

"NUH-UH!"

"UH-HUH!"

"NUH-UH!"

or it's...

"THESE GRAPHICS ARE AWESOME!"

"NUH-UH!"

"UH-HUH!"

"NUH-UH!"

Quite frankly, who gives a fuck? What matters is whether the game is fun or not. The only truly important graphics question you need to ask is, "Can you tell what's going on? Yes or no." And before anyone starts accusing me of being naive or whatever, I'm fully aware that the graphics could be better, I just don't think it matters nearly as much as some of you seem to.

Now, I actually wanted to make some points that don't involve me acting like an asshole, so I'm switching gears here. Just a heads up.

The reason that this game is being put on the Wii is to enforce the cooperative gameplay they're going for by requiring all of the players to share a single screen. If this were on the DS, everyone would have their own screen, and there wouldn't be any reason to work together. Thus, whatever cooperative elements are intended would get lost in the shuffle of "OMG GOTTA GET TO THE END FIRST." Likewise, Online Play could present the same issue.

This isn't a multiplayer-focused game, it's a single-player game that's tweaked so that it can be played mutliplayer as well, if you so choose. I just felt that someone needed to say this.

The lack of extra playable characters is lame, but not unreasonable. If other characters were in, people would naturally expect them to have special abilities and/or whatever, like Wario throwing his super strength around, or Peach floating, or what have you. Chances are, though, that any extra characters would have exactly the same skills and abilities as Mario and Luigi, thus making them simple reskins, and that's pretty hard to get away with.

The Toads, in contrast, don't have this problem. As far as the series as a whole is concerned, the entire Toad race is plagued with Chronic Useless Syndrome, so we never really expect anything from them. In fact, we usually expect nothing from them, so having a couple of them be on par with Mario and Luigi for a game is a pretty big step up for them. Anyway, since we don't have any expectations about what they could do, having them do nothing particularly special works out fine.

[Leon K Fox]

*post*

You just don't get it do you? The problem isn't the game looking bad, it's the fact it looks like no effort is going into this game at all, just a slight graphics improvment and they're copy pasting a DS game, and people are gonna buy it anyway.

THAT is my and several other people's point here.

Edited July 4, 2009 by Leon K Fox

[SuperLink]

Like Leon said, Nintendo are making somewhat of a track record for lazy game development. Animal Crossing, Play on Wii, Metroid Prime Trilogy, this, they're all lazy rehashes or re-releases, but the sad thing is that they'll sell by the shitload anyway, and Nintendo will use them as an excuse to say "oh we release plenty of core titles! Look how well these sold!"

The more people eat up stuff like this the more Nintendo will think "being lazy is OK!"

"Going the extra mile" in gaming development has become increasingly rare as of late =_=

[PSI Wind]

Chrono Trigger and Kirby Super Star Ultra had SNES graphics. Barley anything was tweaked but did people complain, no. Online play would possibly have lag and people would complain.

[Leon K Fox]

Chrono Trigger and Kirby Super Star Ultra had SNES graphics. Barley anything was tweaked but did people complain, no. Online play would possibly have lag and people would complain.

Dude, those were Nintendo DS games, not Wii games, so I truly do fail to see what your point is there alot of games on the DS have SNES visuals, it's a handheld unlike the Wii which is a home video game console. Therefore the standards are (or should be) much higher.

[PSI Wind]

^ What i was meaning was that no one complained about those graphics and we've seen better graphics on the DS. Besides, this is a 2D Mario, do we really need good graphics when all your going to do is run, jump, defeat enemys, collect powerups, watching out for obsticles, and get to the goal.

[SuperLink]

We're saying we want them to atleast show some effort, if not with graphics then with game content? So far like I've said before, it just looks like rehashed worlds, music, graphics, everything from the DS game, and on a completely different system!

And, the point of ports is that they're the same game. Chrono Trigger IS a SNES game, so noone complains about the graphics because they get what they expect. With NEW games like NSMB Wii and Animal Crossing, we don't want ports of games from a far weaker console with bare bones changes (atleast in Animal Crossing, NSMB Wii has everything a good sequel needs other than the "lazyness" factor, we could do without that)

[Sean]

^ What i was meaning was that no one complained about those graphics and we've seen better graphics on the DS. Besides, this is a 2D Mario, do we really need good graphics when all your going to do is run, jump, defeat enemys, collect powerups, watching out for obsticles, and get to the goal.

Why is it such a taboo for people to actually care about graphics? Maybe we should stop bitching about things like music too.

Edited July 4, 2009 by Jake

[speedfreak]

What about the game having four player co-op?! Is that not a big change? They could have just given us the same exact game with no co-op you no.

I guess I'd rather just get something familiar that I know is awesome then something risky/new that might not be as good. It's the reason why I loved TP and don't think Zelda needs a big change and why I prefer seeing new Mario, Zelda, or Metroid game over a new IP.

It's the same thing with Mario Galaxy 2. I couldn't be happier to get a second Galaxy but everyone else seems pissed about it.

Fans: "Mario Galaxy is great! We love it! Thank you Nintendo!"

Nintendo: "Well then here have another!"

Fans: "What a direct sequel to a game I loved?! Fuck you Nintendo!"

Nintendo & Me: " ? "

[SuperLink]

Actually I think Galaxy 2 will be awesome and I'm perfectly happy with it.

- Galaxy 2 shows the product of a large amount of effort, will likely have a new orchestrated soundtrack too

- This is a Wii sequel to a DS game we're talking about. Not a Wii sequel to a Wii game. Is it so hard to believe that I want it to actually look like it's taking advantage of the Wii's hardware?

- Why make a focus on CoOp if 2 of the only 4 characters are the same damn character? It's just pathetically lazy.