Rumour: Super Mario Galaxy Demo

Kuest - 805 days 10 hours ago

COMPUTER demo!

Doesn't seem right...

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

SlappingOysters - 805 days 6 hours ago

that idiot's opinion is his own and that's fine. But I wouldn't be putting too much faith in the comments of a guy who can't even spell Bioshock properly

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

KeiZka - 804 days 19 hours ago

I won't buy into that one. 120 stars within that time period... Nuh uh.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

Rooftrellen - 804 days 18 hours ago

KeiZka,

I'm sure he means he just did it, but I do agree that you are right.

Mario games can likely be credited with the origin of speed running! Mario Bros. can be a very short, easy game if you know what to do, where to warp, which pipes to go though, etc. However, to get the real experiance, there is much, much more to go though, and it is fairly long and extremely tough without a lot of practice.

Sunshine allows you to beat the game with less than half the shine spirtes, but no one is going to "ooo" and "ahh" at that. Getting all of them is a very time consuming task that takes a lot of skill.

64 allowed the player to win with only 70 stars, assuming they didn't abuse bugs, but that's 50 less than the total number of stars in the game, and many of them were pretty darn hard to get. This one, in particular, made it seem like Nintendo was aware of speed runs, with many of the stars having hidden shortcuts to get to the stars, and all of the shortcuts looking as if they were put there on purpose.

But here's the thing. If you're doing them fast but not 100%, speed running is about as hardcore as it gets. There is no room for error, and if you forget one little jump, hold the button for just a little too long, or hit the flag anywhere but right at the bottom, its over. It's a real test of skill that takes much more than 3 hours to do...heck, it takes much more time than collecting the 120 stars many many times over!

However, if that's now what you're into, it takes days upon days (or no sleep or rest for an unreasonably long time) to get though 100% of the game.

Now,Gamesblow,

As for his arguments in that blog, Mario always has a story, just not a good one outside of the RPGs. I give him that one. He calls Rachet and Clank great but says Mario isn't because of lack of multiplayer. I call him on that one. He also calls the most beautoful game this year a game with sub-par graphics? Mario can easuly stand next to the graphical powerhouses and still look great, so I call him on that one too. He says Mario has cumbersome controls, and must be judging from Mario 64, but Mario 64 only used 3 buttons and a control sick for everything but the camera! I call him on that one, too, unless I can be shown a game made more recently that has easier controls. We've also covered short game length, so I'll call him on that one too, just point me to the youtube video that has you getting 120 stars or shine sprites in less than 3 hours, or going though Mario Bros. world 1-1 to 8-4 without warping in 4 minutes, Gamesblow.

Now, the big one, Gamesblow, if Mario games have no replay value at all, how did you practice so much to be doing speed runs? I know, for a fact, that it takes practice to get good, because I do speed runs for fun, myself, and it can take MONTHS of playing a game to get good enough to complete it in a respectable time, figuring out the best routes and perfecting timing. Yet you claim to have done speed runs, getting though these games quickly. Why, if there is no replay value.

So, 4 of 6 things you said in your blog I've called you out on. One of them I give you. And multiplayer isn't all that important (though if you want to go back to Mario Bros. it did have multiplayer) for a one player experiance.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report