Mario Galaxy Review: “The Worst Two-Player Experience”
Variety.com writer Ben Fritz puts his name on the Nintendo fan blackbook after writing an insanely bias Super Mario Galaxy review attacking not only Super Mario Galaxy, but also Nintendo’s Wii graphic performance and the use of the Wii-mote.
A desperate move to bad mouth what could possibly be “The Best Game of the Year” and most likely “The Best Game for the Nintendo Wii Console” and believe me I’m not a fanboy at all, in fact I own a PS3.
As you read the review you will notice the majority of the effort is concentrated on picking apart the game’s limited two player mode, camara control, storyline and Nintendo’s Wii graphic shortcomings, this at a time when Super Mario Galaxy has received such a high amount of praise across the globe, even getting an unprecedented 11 out of 10 rating! This is simply neglecting to give credit where credit is due.
It’s amazing how this “reviewer” found Super Mario Galaxy “The Worst Two-Player Experience” while at the same time declaring Ratchet and Clank for the PS3 “vastly superior” when it’s close to impossible not to find Super Mario Galaxy objectively groundbreaking and superior to current games in its category.
I have screen saved a copy of the review, just in case they might decide to take it offline, which I hope they do, check out the “Sponsored by Sony” logo on the right top section.
Update: This topic is hot at the NSider forums.
EDIT:
I was recently contacted by Fritz Benjamin and I was asked to edit the title of this article from “Is the worst experience” to what it is now “the worst two-player experiences…” and I also got this quote from Fritz himself: “I stand behind it (my review) 100%”
The title has been edited along with references to a possible Sony conspiracy.
RANDOM QUOTES FROM ACROSS THE NET ABOUT THIS REVIEW:
“So this is what Variety has become – publishing a PS3 commercial disguised as an ‘independent’ ‘review’. Shame on you! You have no longer any right to call yourself a magazine. You have become a sell-out advertising vehicle with no journalistic integrity whatsoever.” – Tuomas Salo -
“Wow, what an excellent and accurate review of the Nintendo Wii Game Supermario Galaxy! I cannot believe I considered buying this console for such a horrible game. Now I can continue saving up for a PS3, Thanks! THIS COMMENT WAS SPONSERED BY SONY ENTERTAINMENT“ – John Hateface -
“Too bad, because at least a couple hundred people probably read his articles with a straight face on a daily basis. Can’t wait for the next one, Mr. Fritz; the internet videogame community is watching with salty eyes and a bucket of popcorn!” - Steve Schardein -
“Credit to Mr Fritz for having the courage to be contrary, but his review doesn’t really carry much credibility.“ – Gus Swan -
“This is probably the single worst (read: misguided, agenda-driven) videogame review I have ever read… as though he could not help himself from injecting his personal delirious opinions into this supposedly professional product review” – Steve Schardein -
Congratulations mr Fritz on a good job ,
As you see you just won the Internet with your review , nice work and Kaz said that the check is in the mail !
http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117934851.html?categoryid=1269&cs=1
Now Sony Loves Halo. Some people are so easy to dupe.
Thanks Gig.
This is seriously a perplexing issue that I think has rumbled throughout the gaming world. You see this isn’t even an issue of fanboyism, but just a witch hunt now… Altering even one word of a title will change the context and message that the author is trying to convey. This recently occurred with Ben Fritz’s review of Super Mario Galaxy. Fansite N-Sider posted this as a headline, "Is The Worse Experience." Wow, and from this headline that was misapproriated cries for Ben’s blood filled the forums – from Digg to N-Sider many are calling for his blood, and some his credibility. Ben’s job is simple, play games and review them. He is giving his honest opinion and comparing the game fairly across the board of systems currently available. It is true that the Wii does lack in power across the current generation, and he voices his opinion. That’s the point, voicing his opinion. I myself have purchased Mario Galaxy, and I do disagree with some of Ben’s criticisms, but that’s the beauty of this country and the beauty of art (though Roger Egber argues constantly on the importance of gaming in the art world) we are entitled to our opinions. Hell, Ben even compliments the game for it’s ASTOUNDINGLY ORIGINAL LEVELS. Hmm… doesn’t seem that biased of a review does it now? After all if he was a Sony drone or Microsoft Lackey, why give any credibility at all to Nintendo’s famed plumber?
The fact is it’s unfair to line up all the hate comments and claiming a witch hunt to this altered headline. Since then, N-Sider has corrected the the headline citing "The Worse 2-Player Experience." That is not to say the damage has been set. Without even reading the actual article, which I do recommend reading, people have chosen to wage war on Ben. He did say it was the worst experience… but referring to the two player mode that does fail to live up to the fun of actually having a REAL co-op mode. I’m the biggest Nintendo fan, and I do feel that this is the LEAST innovating mode of this otherwise brilliant game. In the end of the day though, I choose what to take in. Just because Ben states that this might not be up to par against the graphical powerhouses of other systems, will that really stop you from buying or enjoying the game? Does it even make a difference? When has one review ever dictated the sales of a game?
D.O.A. was one of the most beautiful games of it’s time when it was realeased on Microsoft’s system. It got sub par reviews all across the board, but did that stop all the fans from buying it? Better yet, did any of the crucify the critics? Sure Mario is a symbol of gaming, but at the same time he should not be subjegated to GOD LIKE STATUS. Mario Sunshine sucked…everyone felt it, and even Miyamoto goes on saying it wasn’t as good as he hoped… why no witch hunt there?
Let’s talk about the sponsored by Sony Ad. Just because an advertisement of the competitor appears on a review does not make the individual a plant, or employed said corporate evil. Do you believe Ben actually went out and asked Sony to pay for this advertisement that accompanies his review? If you answered yes, that is just plain ignorance in your part. There is a seperate department that handles selling space for ads, and I doubt that Ben dictates that. EGM, one of the finest publications in gaming (well in my opinion), features a cornocopia of ads from rivaling companies. Does that mean I am not to trust the review for Pokemon if there is a one page ad for Capcom’s MONSTER HUNTER running on the previous page? People, that’s how a lot of these companies make money… Advertisements. You can’t deny them the right to run a business can you?
Read his review. Don’t read a headline and base your feelings towards that. People, let’s shed this nerdy god like alleigance to the brands and be civilized. We are all on the same boat, we just want to have fun playing our games. I’d rather have differing opinions, it’s through these opinions brilliance is birthed.
Although it may be biased, I agree with most everything the article states. The writer clearly says the game is great in design and gameplay and seems to think that game is very good.
But the complaints are completely valid. On a large TV, the first thing that may come to mind when you see it is… hey its like Mario 64 graphics
Sure that is an exaggeration but the difference between the smooth hi-def cartoon that is Ratchet and Clank and Galaxy are night and day.
I just wish Galaxy would get the same graphic treatment as Ratchet. I think the point is, that the game deserves the better graphics because it is so great.
Actually, If you give bad reviews, companies will pull their ads. Not all of them but a lot. read the article on penny-arcade on the assassin’s creed reviews. He mentions about ads. This is old school tactics Nintendo and Sega used to pull off. Comercials attacking each other.
All this is, is a commercial for sony and their ratchet and clank game. If the guy gets paid by Sony of course he will stand by it.
They do not separate sponsors info from reviews. If a company threatens to not by ad space, and that company is a big reason why your able to stay a float, many mags/site will do some butt kissing.
Well, Mark, you must hate good games, then. Oh, and it’s too "kiddy", is it? Then go back to your precious, mature GTA games, and whatnot, and GTFO my internets!
Since I can’t find a link to e-mail the obviously tech-dumb writer of this page– let me explain what exactly happened when one nintendo fanboy hit the link to the Super Mario Galaxy review link on Variety.com.
They got the a(n) (un)lucky link to a page that managed to have Sony’s sponsor link in the top corner. Sony does sponsor Variety in some cases, but this was a complete flaw. If you directly go to the Super Mario Galaxy review from Variety.com’s website, it will most likely not have the Sony "sponsor" image in the top right corner, like in this picture, and on that current link. It was a matter of sheer luck that the user who found this found the sponsored by sony image in the corner.
In short, the badly-designed website created this page, and allowed it to be re-distributed. The website was built poorly, the review was not sponsored by sony.
http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117933493.html?categoryid=1269&cs=1
Of COURSE its a conspiracy! Sony paid the reviewer off the same way they paid the review of Lair off!
…Seriously though. He has a different opinion. Leave it at that. I dont like SMG all that much either.
Well, it looks like a couple people here don’t like fun games.
[...] Mario Galaxy Review: “The Worst Two-Player Experience” Fox’s Family Sans Guy Bunch of people fired from The Office Wii Guitar Hero 3: Mono?! Gene [...]
Repeating what Khane said, above, it’s actually a bit more sinister than that: It wasn’t even unlucky, it appears to have been intentional. Variety’s site uses the categoryid 1269 to actually cover Sony-sponsored reviews (of which there are several of Sony-BGM movies). The only way to get it added to the Super Mario Galaxy review seems to be to intentionally substitute it into the URL.
It would be like posting this link:
http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117935396.html?categoryid=31&cs=1
And saying Variety had an exclusive preview of the upcoming Super Mario Galaxy film. The link doesn’t exist on their site, and the only way to get to this page is to intentionally manipulate the header parameters in the URL.
[...] Super Mario Galaxy "sucks" – Today, 05:55 AM at least according to sony, anyway Mario Galaxy Review: “The Worst Two-Player Experience” | Nintendo NSider2 News and Forum… [...]
As a huge Nintendo fanboy who’s only console is the Wii I have to say SMG is disappointing in a lot of ways. The two play experience is terrible. I would never sit around and help someone jump. Its silly.
The graphics also are a bit clumsy. Many of the environments differ little from SM64 in texture and geometry. Espesially liquid textures with are overly simple and often pixelated.
I also dislike the space ship hub. Its just not as interesting and explorable as the Castle. The levels are also far more linear and strict that SM64. Over all its a fun and satisfying game, but its like Windows Vista. Improved, but in the end only mildly better than the previous installment. Makes you feel "We waited 10 years and this is all they came up with?"
personally I dislike super mario galaxy a lot. But, if I look at it, the only reason why is because the game is WAY too EASY for me… I guess that is arrogant, but games should have more level of difficulty.
I am a huge fan of the mario games, but I didn’t enjoy Galaxy at all. The story was uninteresting, and the controls could be irritating at times. The graphics were quite impressive for a wii title, but couldn’t make up for the extremely linear levels and either generic or ridiculous locales. Three of my friends have played the game and agree completely.
It was a slightly biased review. Clearly, he prefers other consoles. But I’d have to agree with him on a lot of points. Especially, the camera controls. I dearly miss my C-stick from the GameCube days.
Much like the wii-mote, the physics felt gimmicky. At times, it was just annoying – when you walk to the edge of a world and expect to walk around it, only to find yourself falling off.
The constant beeping when your health is low. Who decided that was a good idea? Especially when, most of the time, you only have 3 ‘health bits’.
Mario Galaxy was a good game, don’t get me wrong and I knew it would be. A review like this brings to light the niggling details that will disappoint you when you get the game if you didn’t know about them first. I am far more inclined to read this review than one that gives a game 11 out of 10. You will learn nothing from that review. It’s a confirmation of the hype surrounding the game. THAT, to me, is a biased review.
THAT REVIEW WAS UNBIASED AND GOOD!!!!!!
This comment was approved by Sony Corporation.
To the guy who wrote this article: If the only way you can defend a game is twisting the words of a reviewer, then you aren’t making the game you’re defending look any good.
And the fonts that uses by your web browser sucks ass.
Mario Galaxy is boring. Wii graphics stinks nigger ass.
Mario Galaxy is boring. Wii graphics stinks ass.
hello
im new on this forum….