Stupid sites.

Yes my friend. Super Mario Galaxy 2 will be inferior if it is on other system unless the buff up all aspects of the game like audio and visual.
How do you compare a casual game like Mario to a hardcore game, say, Starcraft 2 or Mass Effect 2 for instance?
You can't. Mario Galaxy 2 got high reviews from mostly Nintendo sites/magazine by the way.

Mass Effect 2 on PC is superior to its 360 counterpart but yet the PC version got 94 as opposed to 96 metascore for the 360 version.
Why? Because on PC , Me 2 is judged against PC games out there in terms of visual and replay-ability.
It's amazing for 360 gamers but less amazing for PC gamers.
Look what PC GAMER magazine gave ME 2? 90/100. Look at the 360 magazines/sites gave ME2? mostly 10/10.

 

As has been said countless times, gaming reviews are all about opinions and likes and dislikes. It isn't about anything else.

You find some games stupid, whilst others find them fun. Doesn't make the game good or bad, it just means YOU don't like it. YOU wouldn't give it a 10/10 while others would. It's a PREFERENCE.

Why moan about it?

 

I sort of agree, I think each system should have its own ratings but games should also be compared against all other games too.
This will help sort out the shite. For example a game getting 80% on DS would maybe get 65% overall and you would see its to be avoided if you own more than one system.

 

Nope, it would still be inferior, MG was made with the wii's specific controls in mind. Bumping up the audio/graphics would do nothing to improve it.
And you say most of these are Nintendo based sites/mags, think again.
Also, your definition of casual and hardcore games is seriously flawed, but i won't bother going into that.

In different example though, lets say RE5 was scaled down (in graphics) and got a Wii port. The controls alone would instantly make it superior to the 360/PS3 version. That said, it all depends on the actual game.

I see nothing wrong with comparing different PS3/360 games to Wii games... as long as they're the same fucking genre.

---Btw, i'm not a Mario/Ninty fanboy, I didn't even like the first MG much, bouncing from galaxy to galaxy really restricted things imo, but i did like the controls and the few 'hardcore' elements such as the speed/daredevil runs etc.
I doubt i'll ever bother with the second, but you won't see me being begrudging about it.

(done seph)

 

You are confident that Mario Galaxy 2 will hold up against games like ME 2, Starcraft 2 or God of War 3? No. That is why you don't compare a Wii game to games from other systems.
No game from a system should compared to games from other system unless it is the game game of different versions.
How would Mario Galaxy can be compared to Crysis.
Note why Mario Galaxy 2 got 10/10 in graphics even though it is so outdated by PC/PS3/360 standard?
Because it is being judge according to Wii capabilities.

 

That's the problem. You don't compare ME 2, Sc2, Gow 3 to SMG 2 as not only they are on different system but different genre as well. If you compare then, SMG 2 would probably be like 5/10.

 

So giving mw2 a higher score than starcraft is totally justified because were only comparing it to other FPS, starcraft 2 is a different genre so everything you have said is irrelevant.

 

Awww...that was a rant. An uncontrolled one. Sc2 is a different genre yes and it is above all other RTS in terms of score (at least other strategy games since the last few years).
MW 2 is absurdly high when compared to other FPS in my opinion. Even to MW.

 

I think comparing all games on all systems is still the right way to go.
Dragonquest IX for example, better than FFXIII on an inferior system.
I dont want people saying "this game is FUCKING AWESOME!!! 10/10 on every review!!!" only to get it home and find theres 27 better games on the pc 18 on xbox etc and im £40 down.
Good honest reviews that take into account other systems is the way forward. The problem is finding one.

 

The problem with game review is they take into account graphics as well. That is why you can't compare DQ IX to FF XIII. Like Natalie said, numerical review is flawed at its core. FF XIII is 39/40 from Famitsu (which is not a reliable source anymore) but a lot of people hate it. Plus, FF XIII has not really done anything great among the bastion of 360/PS3 titles and thus it doesn't get a good review score from many websites/magazine from the west.
Super Mario Galaxy 2 is great among the Wii titles but for us who have been spoiled by depth and complexity might say the game is shallow. It's unfair for the game if we compare it to games from other system. The game used a lot of what Wii is capable of. So to the respect of the system, that game had done a great deal which translated into the 97 metascore. (IGN reviewer who review this game is married to a nintendo exec by the way)

 

I disagree, DQ can be compared to FF taking into account the graphics, the system and everything else. I find it a better game, more fun.
I would rate DQ higher no matter what.
I can probably find you a big list of xbox 360 shovelware that would get lower marks than some DS games, nevermind the wii.

 

I find it alright to compare games on other systems nowadays. Considering that consoles and PCs are so close to eachother, spec wise, it's alright and there's not that much of a difference in terms of graphics and gameplay.

Back in the day comparing console to PC is a no no, and deservedly so, as the ports were vastly different. But from SNES to Genesis, well yeah that's good.

For comparing from console to console, especially one inferior spec wise, you have to make it into context. That being a Wii game's score being based on Wii graphics and a 360 game being based on it's own graphic's. Taking into account art styles and technical capability based on the system's hardware. That being said, Mario Galaxy 2 is the best looking game for the Wii in my opinion, both technically and aesthetically, comparing that with a 360 game, say Gears. I prefer the art style of Mario better than Gears, so yeah. I also found Mario to be more fun than a couple of games on the 360, say Fable or some other random game I can't be bothered to think of.

That being said, I'd rank DQIX as being a better game than FFXIII, as it's more fun. And because, as a DS game DQIX looks good.

It's not unfair, it's fair, considering that I find it more fun, and that's what games are all about, being fun.

You're a fun troll though, you say you're not able to compare games from other systems yet you always bring up the Galaxy Editor and LBP2.

 

I like how you always compare stuff to the same games.
You cant compare different games from different genres as said before, they all play differently, and even are on different systems, comparing stuff isnt reviewing, it has nothing to do with reviewing, why are you still trying to prove something you cant prove right?
Starcraft 2 and super mario galaxy 2 are vastly different games, they each got a score already, you cant change that, keep your opinions to yourself insted of forcing them on others.

 

Time to jump on the Bash-Kratos-BandwagonTM
Super Mario Galaxy 2 is automatically inferior to games on PC/260/PS3 because of it's visuals? What about the gameplay, or does that merit no attention? It isn't a "casual" game any more than Mass Effect or Starcraft; any of these games can be played "casually", categories like "hardcore" and "casual" are determined by the person playing them.
Games that barely qualify as games (shovelware) are, I feel, deserving of the collar "casual", as no gamer in their right mind would consider them a descent gaming experience; only "casual" gamers (people who don't know any better) would think them any good (although, even this is open to debate).

The hardware limitations of the platform definitely have some influence on the content of the game (the graphics, the sound, the storage capacity et cetera); but they don't influence the quality of what may be created within the limitations of the hardware.

 

They did. Try play RTS on console and compare it to PC. RAM limitation,controllers.
Try Play a Platformer on PC without controller.

 

They did what?

I think that it would the the periperal used to control the game that would be the problem in those instances.
Not all PCs have better specifications for playing games than the most powerful current-generation home consoles (the 360 and PS3).

 

Your stupidity never ceases to amaze me, first of all, yes, rts arnt so good on consoles because the controls, but the RAM has nothing to do with this.
Platformers still play very well on computers.

 

It has duh.