I bet if this game would have gotten a 4... you would have all jus dismissed IGN as being stupid.... or somethin like that :unsure:

either way im happy.. i still dont think it deserves a 9.4.. but i havent played it yet... but.. whatever..

you're completely right, everytime a company tries something different with the newest game in an long running series someone will always be complaining that they want it to be the same way it was before. and if the company decides to make the game just like the previous ones in the series someone will then be complaining that the game has nothing new or different. thats why i really respect miyamoto, he doesnt listen to all these people complaining about the new things he tries, and when it comes out everybody likes the new things hes done. if he listened to wut everyone said and made every game the same old thing then that would be boring as hell. rock on shiggy!!

I know IGN's overall score isn't an average but am I the only one who finds it odd that Mario scores just above average in 2 areas and still recieves a 9.4? For some reason, I think some folks are afraid to give Mario too low of a score.

A 9.4 sounds about right from the demo I played. Its not that they gave it to high a score for giving is a 6 in one area. But that they shouldnt have given a 6 at all. And maybe they find presentation to not matter as much as the others.

That's what I was thinking too... I mean even if the game's still really fun and all, with those other flaws and lower scores you'd still think it'd get less than a 9.4 :unsure:

Maybe they were just afraid cuz they knew if they gave it something low Nintendo fans would be like "OMG THAT'S SO UNFAIR! IGN SUX0RZ!" but they could still get off by mentioning the flaws and stuff, but giving it a higher overall score because a lot of Nintendo fans might just look at that and be like "OMG YAY!"

:sneaky:

heh heh...

That may be it, or the game is really that fun that it deserves getting the 9.4.

Remember that graphics are compared to RE and ED, and that FMV are compared to RE, story to ED and so on with the games on GameCube. So presentatio is 6.0 compared to a game like ED or RE, and all, but in the end a game is still as much as you play it, and if it hooks you the right way, you will forget about all the rest and play it like crazy and the give it a 9.4

When we will play the game the only thing will complain will be the camera system. Graphics, FMV's etc will just glaze past with an opinnion but will be back to playing it.

*sigh* If they did keep the classic gameplay, IGN would've complained saying its just the same ol' Mario. Nothing really new here. But **** IGN. Their scores don't affect me one bit. They are biased IMO;):D

Sorry but your starting to all sound like a bunch of fan boys who toy is not the best any more GET A LIFE it's been reviewed and it's not a 10 out of 10 live with it! It’s not like he game it a 5 or any thing you really are starting to sound like the Xbox fanboys bitch about Gamespots reviews

Just to sum it up and show IGN got it right

Genre Games 9.5 out of 10 diff .1
netjak 9.3 out of 10 diff -.1

Get use to it this is no longer the Nintendo generation we all live in the Sony generation now with it’s in depth games with over the top story lines. Sony’s console now set the standards that games have to be marked by and sorry but story line comes into it a lot more nowadays whether Mr Mario had it before or not it is deemed an important part of games to day like it or not.

that's a bullsh*t overall score when looking at the flaws the game has. looks like fran didn't have the balls to give it a 8.5-9...then Nintendo fanboys would be going haywire over Mario not getting l33t reviews.

I mean, it got a 9.4 and people are still complaining about the scores in some areas...sheesh

agreed, 9.4 is nothing to complain about.

I didnt have a problem with the Camera in SM64 at all, but from the time I had with the demo, in SMS the camera seemed much worse than in SM64. Thats just my opinoin. Just thought Id point it out.

That's not exactly the point. The point is that Nintendo fanboys would have been complaining if the game scored any lower than 9.4, that fact that some people are still complaining about a 9.4 is utter bull ****. Even though the final score on IGN's games is not average. If you look at the past game reviews you would find it would fall between or at least close to an average of all the scores. Obviously SMS's score was not. I am still going to buy the game whatever the reviews say. But the fact that reviewers have to give games higher scores to get hate mail and such, is sad. Not saying it was the case here, but it very much could be.

I gues the 9.4 is an example of taking something for the sum of it's parts. I mean you look at the flaws in SMS:

-Bad Camera
-Weak Story
-Bad Textures

And IMO the only one that can truly ruin the game experience is the camera. I mean I don't play a game to just stand there and stare at it and what not.

I'm just so confused at IGN's rating. I mean I understand their faults, but how the indivual sections got such scores while the overall is so much higher is scarying.

You cant expect much of a story. Mario goes on an island, trouble is a bruin, hes sent to a trial, found guilty...he gets out, and goes to clean everything up, and find the imposter...

I mean we all knew that before hand.

Yes, but the point that Mario games in general never have a good story is not an excuse for it having a bad story. Whether or not a game has a good story is something factual to judge a game on. Having bad stories in the past does not justify giving it a high score in that area. If the game has a bad story, it's going to get what it deserves, a bad score on storyline.

By the way, if my Math is right on this odd PowerToy Calc, the average of the scores is 7.8, but of course the overall score isn't an average or whatever IGN says.