• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

Predictions Super Mario Bros. Wonder - Review Prediction Thread

Predict Super Mario Bros. Wonder's Review Score!

  • 96+

    Votes: 11 3.2%

  • 91-95

    Votes: 188 54.8%

  • 86-90

    Votes: 129 37.6%

  • 81-85

    Votes: 13 3.8%

  • 76-80

    Votes: 1 0.3%

  • 75 or less

    Votes: 1 0.3%
  • Total voters
    343
Status
Not open for further replies.
Truno said:
Great game, but it doesn’t do anything revolutionary, nor is it as ambitious as some might’ve hoped. It’s a fun Mario game through and through, lots of 8s and 9s being tossed around
Click to expand...
I still think it's gonna get in the early 90s. Don't think it needs to be a revolutionary title for reviewers, just a proper evolution for the series.
 
Last edited:
Cheetah6442 said:
I still think it's gonna get in the early 90s. Don't think it needs to be a revolutionary title for reviews, just a proper evolution for the series.
Click to expand...

I agree. However, from what I’ve heard, it’s more of an interative evolution, not the ambitious evolution for 2D Mario that some might’ve hoped for
 
I'm locking in my prediction at 88-92, a five point range. Any higher would make it probably the best-reviewed 2D platformer of all (metacritic) time, and any lower is outside of the usual range of scores a new Mario gets (except for NSMB sequels, but well, this isn't that).
 
0
Truno said:
I agree. However, from what I’ve heard, it’s more of an interative evolution, not the ambitious evolution for 2D Mario that some might’ve hoped for
Click to expand...
It seems to be a way more ambitious evolution than any of the previous New Super Mario games were imo. I think it will get a 91.
 
BassForever said:
Bowser's Fury was a -4 point experience tbh

I have not played Bowser's Fury it's on my to do list
Click to expand...
You joke but this is kinda true in my experience. But I know I’m an outlier. There’s a lot of praise for BF among Nintendo fans for sure. I thought it was okay, but the Fury Bowser element ruined the entire experience for me. I didn’t love the open world, and the music was.. not good. Again, I know my opinion isn’t the majority though.
 
Red Monster said:
You joke but this is kinda true in my experience. But I know I’m an outlier. There’s a lot of praise for BF among Nintendo fans for sure. I thought it was okay, but the Fury Bowser element ruined the entire experience for me. I didn’t love the open world, and the music was.. not good. Again, I know my opinion isn’t the majority though.
Click to expand...
I love 3D World, and I've seen enough online 4 player runs of the Switch version to know it's a great port. I just knew better then to spend full price on a port of a game I wasn't replaying anytime soon just for the 3-4 hour mini campaign.
 
0
Red Monster said:
You joke but this is kinda true in my experience. But I know I’m an outlier. There’s a lot of praise for BF among Nintendo fans for sure. I thought it was okay, but the Fury Bowser element ruined the entire experience for me. I didn’t love the open world, and the music was.. not good. Again, I know my opinion isn’t the majority though.
Click to expand...
yup, complete opposite reaction, i would argue BF is better than the base game in many ways
 
You shared ideas too, Kondo-san?
Kondo: Yes. I shared the idea of an eight-heads-tall, life-sized, live-action Mario humming along with the background music as he goes along.
Click to expand...

bros, we were so close to greatness

 
Leo said:
I've been reading it's the longest 2D Mario yet?
Click to expand...
Doesn’t really change my point. Longest game in a series of very short games will still be pretty short, sounds like it’s only 15ish hours to 100% everything.

Not that that’s inherently bad, I love that shit personally, but it could absolutely bump an otherwise perfect score down to a 9/10 for some critics.
 
Thunder84 said:
Doesn’t really change my point. Longest game in a series of very short games will still be pretty short, sounds like it’s only 15ish hours to 100% everything.

Not that that’s inherently bad, I love that shit personally, but it could absolutely bump an otherwise perfect score down to a 9/10 for some critics.
Click to expand...
FWIW, NSMBU completionist or 100%, not including NSLU, is 24.5 hours.

howlongtobeat.com

HowLongToBeat.com | Game Lengths, Backlogs and more!

How long are your favorite video games? HowLongToBeat has the answer. Create a backlog, submit your game times and compete with your friends!
howlongtobeat.com howlongtobeat.com

Have folks who played it already said it's 15ish to 100%? (No game content details please, I'm on media blackout 😃).
 
Gartooth said:
I mean I'd love for this to break 90+, but I imagine regardless of the game's quality there will be enough reviewers who aren't enthralled by a 2D platformer that they will settle at a 9/10 for most outlets, giving weight to the 7/10's from contrarians to drag it down to between an 85-89 average.
Click to expand...
pretty much this. i’m expecting 88-91, even though i think it’d probably actually deserve around a 95.
 
0
Nabbit said:
Have folks who played it already said it's 15ish to 100%? (No game content details please, I'm on media blackout 😃).
Click to expand...
That’s what I’ve seen, yes. Whether that’ll hold for the majority or not is unknown, but Wonder seems to be pretty similar in length to other modern 2D Mario games.
 
If mario bros wonder reviews in the same ballpark as sonic superstar (75/80) should the next 2d Mario be made in collaboration with Arzest?
 
0
I find impressions from people who got a game early not necessarily the best barometer for the critical reception of a game honestly (and also other details).
 
Thunder84 said:
Doesn’t really change my point. Longest game in a series of very short games will still be pretty short, sounds like it’s only 15ish hours to 100% everything.

Not that that’s inherently bad, I love that shit personally, but it could absolutely bump an otherwise perfect score down to a 9/10 for some critics.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't worry too much about that. A good reviewer will not penalize game for being 100%-able in 15ish hours, especially if taking into context the average length of other 2d Mario games.

Metroid Prime Remastered, while clearly not a platformer, as an example show approx 17 hours to 100%, have an aggregated average score of 94 on OpenCritic. If you look at the review scores list, there's a bunch of 10/10's.
 
AngryAlchemist said:
Like what? Genuinely asking. Feel free to spoiler tag it. I know of a few of them but I'm just making sure I know what you mean exactly.
Click to expand...

The big thing I read is the bosses. Someone who finished the game said there’s very few of them and they’re not good. I don’t see how they can be wrong on number of bosses, but I hope their opinion is different than mine on the quality. I’ve been thinking this whole time the reason Nintendo hasn’t shown the bosses was because they’re so cool and creative they didn’t want to spoil them.

Very few bosses is already a letdown when I heard they had no deadline. I’m used to every Mario game having a good amount of bosses. Quality has varied, but I had high hopes for this one. They said music was mid. Lots of atmospheric or ambience stuff, but I’ll hear it when I play the game.
 
darthdiablo said:
I wouldn't worry too much about that. A good reviewer will not penalize game for being 100%-able in 15ish hours, especially if taking into context the average length of other 2d Mario games.

Metroid Prime Remastered, while clearly not a platformer, as an example show approx 17 hours to 100%, have an aggregated average score of 94 on OpenCritic. If you look at the review scores list, there's a bunch of 10/10's.
Click to expand...
Metroid Prime is also one of the highest regarded games ever created, had lower expectations due to being a surprise $40 remaster, and doesn’t have to fight against the same stigma that a 2D platformer does.

I’m not saying Wonder will review poorly, just don’t be surprised if a few glowing reviews still give it a 9/10 in part due to the shorter length.
 
Thunder84 said:
Metroid Prime is also one of the highest regarded games ever created, had lower expectations due to being a surprise $40 remaster, and doesn’t have to fight against the same stigma that a 2D platformer does.

I’m not saying Wonder will review poorly, just don’t be surprised if a few glowing reviews still give it a 9/10 in part due to the shorter length.
Click to expand...

If a reviewer actually does something like that, then it's difficult for me to take that review seriously, particularly considering it's very within norms compared to other 2D Mario games.

That's why I prefer to look at OpenCritic and MetaCritic in combination. Two sets of aggregated review scores. For the most part that has worked well for me so far (I tend to stick to buying games with 85 or above on OpenCritic)
 
darthdiablo said:
If a reviewer actually does something like that, then it's difficult for me to take that review seriously, particularly considering it's very within norms compared to other 2D Mario games.
Click to expand...
Ehhhh. People were hyping up this game by counting the amount of levels in world 1, theorizing if there would be an extra world, and talking about how much content it was going to have. Thinking that it would have tons of content was a big part of the hype cycle in the fandom.

So it feels kind of hypocritical to me that people are now saying that they can't take reviews seriously for mentioning content. I mean, I like short games and wouldn't necessarily care. But then again I was never counting the amount of levels and hyping up the content of the game lol. Not saying you were doing that, but it's pretty normal nowadays for people to hype up how much content a game has, and as such it shouldn't be surprising when people complain about it either.
 
darthdiablo said:
If a reviewer actually does something like that, then it's difficult for me to take that review seriously, particularly considering it's very within norms compared to other 2D Mario games.

That's why I prefer to look at OpenCritic and MetaCritic in combination. Two sets of aggregated review scores. For the most part that has worked well for me so far (I tend to stick to buying games with 85 or above on OpenCritic)
Click to expand...
But a 9/10 IS a glowing review imo.
 
It would be kind of funny if after all the hype, c-team, the “no deadline” and all the talk of the team many ideas the game came out and it was worse than new super mario bros U.
 
AngryAlchemist said:
So it feels kind of hypocritical to me that people are now saying that they can't take reviews seriously for mentioning content.
Click to expand...
So you think it's not hypocritical for reviewers to penalize SMW for being 100%-able in 15ish hours, when other 2D Marios are roughly the same length?

Have the other reviewers for past 2D Mario also penalized 2D Marios for being short in length? If they have been, that's news to me. then. If they haven't been, and if a reviewer today does exactly that (penalize review score slightly due to length of game which was the context/discussion I was responding to) then I would find that odd. I guess some wouldn't, so ehh.
 
Kartina said:
It would be kind of funny if after all the hype, c-team, the “no deadline” and all the talk of the team many ideas the game came out and it was worse than new super mario bros U.
Click to expand...
Yeah lol….but all accounts have pointed this game is the best 2D Mario in decades
 
0
darthdiablo said:
So you think it's not hypocritical for reviewers to penalize SMW for being 100%-able in 15ish hours, when other 2D Marios are roughly the same length?
Click to expand...
No. Standards change with time. Content is a big deal nowadays. It's a silly comparison anyways, most of these reviewers were babies or not even born when Super Mario World was out. Lol. It's not like they were reviewers on Super Mario World.
 
I don't think NSMBU was a game hurting for content despite its perceived length, say what you will about the games themselves but the franchise has rarely ever felt like it wasn't content complete. We're talking 8+1 worlds having an average of eight levels per world if you account for the castles. That's plenty of game, most 2D platformers don't peak beyond 15 hours of main campaign play. Even the UbiArt Rayman duology were around that ballpark in length, and the sequel was universally acclaimed despite doing a lot of things worse than the first.

The only 2D platformers you see ever going beyond 20 hours in length are the Metroidvanias, and even that can vary; Hollow Knight is 40+ hours for a postgame run, while both Ori games are estimated to be around same length as the modern NSMB games. Not to say length can't have an impact on reception, but I'd place that as a minor hiccup at most, especially if the game has additional replay value or bespoke bonus content.
 
AngryAlchemist said:
No. Standards change with time. Content is a big deal nowadays. It's a silly comparison anyways, most of these reviewers were babies or not even born when Super Mario World was out. Lol. It's not like they were reviewers on Super Mario World.
Click to expand...
... okay.

Edit: Speaking of reviews.. someone earlier asked if anyone know when the embargo on reviews would be lifted. I'm curious about that myself.

I recall SMO being sent to select streamers who were allowed to stream gameplay on Twitch a few days before official release date - wonder if they'll do the same with Super Mario Wonder.
 
0
Dark Cloud said:
The big thing I read is the bosses. Someone who finished the game said there’s very few of them and they’re not good. I don’t see how they can be wrong on number of bosses, but I hope their opinion is different than mine on the quality. I’ve been thinking this whole time the reason Nintendo hasn’t shown the bosses was because they’re so cool and creative they didn’t want to spoil them.

Very few bosses is already a letdown when I heard they had no deadline. I’m used to every Mario game having a good amount of bosses. Quality has varied, but I had high hopes for this one. They said music was mid. Lots of atmospheric or ambience stuff, but I’ll hear it when I play the game.
Click to expand...
Maybe it's just me but I kinda prefer this?

2D Mario bosses are always just press the big button/axe or jump on the dude's head 3 times. There's outliers, but most of them are very similar. I'll take levels with crazy Wonder effects over a boss which I jump on 3 times any day.
 
I mean if super mario wonder really takes 15 hours for a 100% completion it would be a much shorter game than new super mario bros U which clocked at like 25 hours for a 100% completion. And let’s not forget about the deluxe edition with super luigi U.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Back
Top Bottom