what did Mario 3d world get? this is more ambitious than that was imo
3D World got a 93what did Mario 3d world get? this is more ambitious than that was imo
93 but that was a 3d mario and this is 2dwhat did Mario 3d world get? this is more ambitious than that was imo
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.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
It kinda does if it's a 2D gameyou don't need to be a revolutionary game to get a 90+ just saying...
so when will we get the score
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.
At this point, short length is the one thing I could see holding it back a bit. It isn’t a long game apparently.
I wouldn't really describe Ori 2 as revolutionaryIt kinda does if it's a 2D game
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.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
Bowser's Fury was a -4 point experience tbh3D World got a 93
3D World + Bowser’s Fury got an 89
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.Bowser's Fury was a -4 point experience tbh
I have not played Bowser's Fury it's on my to do list
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.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.
yup, complete opposite reaction, i would argue BF is better than the base game in many waysYou 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.
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.
Mario 3D World is more ambitious than this gamewhat did Mario 3d world get? this is more ambitious than that was imo
Disagree, especially since 3D Land existsMario 3D World is more ambitious than this game
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.I've been reading it's the longest 2D Mario yet?
Ori2 is a metroidvania thoughI wouldn't really describe Ori 2 as revolutionary
Not really, no. Even if the level design in the 3D World late game is top-notch. It was basically iterating on the 3D Land formula.Mario 3D World is more ambitious than this game
Or Celeste honestlyI wouldn't really describe Ori 2 as revolutionary
This is slander and I will see you in court.Or Celeste honestly
Bro whatthe music was.. not good.
FWIW, NSMBU completionist or 100%, not including NSLU, is 24.5 hours.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.
pretty much this. i’m expecting 88-91, even though i think it’d probably actually deserve around a 95.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.
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.Have folks who played it already said it's 15ish to 100%? (No game content details please, I'm on media blackout ).
I hope because so far some aspects don’t sound as amazing and more of complete letdownsI 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).
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.I hope because so far some aspects don’t sound as amazing and more of complete letdowns
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.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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.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.
But a 9/10 IS a glowing review imo.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)
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?So it feels kind of hypocritical to me that people are now saying that they can't take reviews seriously for mentioning content.
Yeah lol….but all accounts have pointed this game is the best 2D Mario in decadesIt 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.
Yes, 9/10 is great. Doesn't take away that it's a good game.But a 9/10 IS a glowing review imo.
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.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?
It’s one point away from failure so I’m not sure about that.But a 9/10 IS a glowing review imo.
... okay.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.
Maybe it's just me but I kinda prefer this?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.