Mario galaxy vs. Zelda twilight princess

My choice would have to be twilight princess that game is just very, very fun. Here are my reasons...

1. Zelda is a much longer game even though mario is a 25 hour game in its self Zeldas average seems to be around 60.

2. More motion, you get to swing using the wii remote of the sword and using it as the wolf to bite

3. Creative story line, unlike Mario its very deep maybe too deep for me to understand lol.

4. Not repetitive because you get to switch back and fourth from Link and the wolf. Mario was really fun but i found myself getting bored a lot in it.

These are two very different games. Mario I would have to say is a more fun game. You can pick it up and play, like all Mario games. It is challenging, but not hard. Levels have amazing detail.

Zelda was an awesome adventure game. But you have to be more patient. I have to play only a game like Zelda until I beat it. It has an awesome story, Great graphics, and it is tons of fun. But you can;t put it down for a week and play for an hour and not touch it again for a week.

Both of these games set the bar for the genre they in, but you cant compare them to each other. They are easily some of my fav games, but compare Mario to Nights, and Zelda to something like Prince of Persia...and they both come out on top(even though i loved the Prince of Persia series)

Zelda is a Gamecube game with tacked on waggle controls for the most part. Aiming is fun though.

Mario Galaxy is a Wii game that really does show what a platformer should be in this day and age with the sheer amount of diversity and extras.

It comes down to the same old thing since OOT. Mario is still the king of his genre while Zelda is just one of a number of good titles.

Super Mario Galaxy is one of the most original games I have ever played in terms of gameplay concepts. Nintendo really outdid itself on that one. Having said that, I am a long-term Zelda fan, who fell in love with the series back in 1987 when I played the first game. The gameplay formula really showed me where games are going. And to me, Twilight Princess was such a full expression of that gameplay formula, that I have to give the win to that game on a personal level.

So I guess I have two answers: For originality, I gotta give it to Super Mario Galaxy. But for being such a full expression of a classic formula, I give it to Twilight Princess.

SMG is a much superior game. TP is alright, but was a letdown in a lot of ways. Nintendo should've stuck with the Windwaker visual presentation. It was so much more appealing and it looks better on HDTV's. TP just looks a tad bit muddy.BioShockOwnz

Yeah I don't agree with that at all. Wind Waker was one of the more disappointing Zelda games for me. The visual style is nice and I certainly enjoyed Phantom Hourglass better, but I preferred that of Twilight Princess. It doesn't look bad at all on my 56 inch 1080p HDTV.

60 hours? did we play same game in less then half beat it with side questazorath44

?? in english?

It all depends on the gamer and how they feel about each game.

I for one enjoy them both, but in different ways.

I like Super Mario Galaxy because of the gameplay.
I also enjoyed it because of the incredible graphics it had.
I mean it's not your typical 360 graphics, but for Wii, it was amazing.
It really reminded me of the good old days of playing Super Mario 64.
It's like it took that game and made it a thousand times better.
The Wii motion controls were also inputted very well.
You use the remote to collect star bits and to attack as well.
The story was not so great because it was very hard to follow.
But in the end, Mario games are not really for their story anyways.
It's all about the gameplay that make Mario games what they are today.

Now for Twilight Princess.

I enjoyed The Legend Of Zelda: Twilight Princess for many reasons.
One reason is that the story was absolutely incredible!
Though some may not agree with me, I found it really enjoyable.
The graphics on the other hand, were really great for a Wii game.
But for a Nintendo Gamecube game, they were outstanding.
Everything was so detailed, crisp and clean.
The Nintendo Wii motion controls were also inputted very well.
You could use the Wii remote to shoot, swing your sword and so much more.
This was a great way to show to capabilities of the Nintendo Wii.
Overall, I really enjoyed this game because of it's storyline and gameplay.

Zelda is amazing, but Galaxy is a bit better.

i enjoyed both but i was more hooked to Twilight Princesselvato87

Yea same here but I found Galaxy more fun in gameplay wise. Maybe that was cause I played the gamecube version. :shock:

Mario Galaxy is a Wii game that really does show what a platformer should be in this day and age with the sheer amount of diversity and extras.

It comes down to the same old thing since OOT. Mario is still the king of his genre while Zelda is just one of a number of good titles.

Jaysonguy

i agree... except that can't mario be king of his genre... and link king of his?

it could happen...

Galaxy

But only because I love Mario games more

Both titles are awesome

Galaxy is amazing, and every level seems like something new. But, I eventually got bored with it and have yet to finish it.

I felt like the Zelda formula was getting noticeably repetitive in TP, but the dungeons were still great and because it has a strong story it still motivated me to play it to the end.

Neither one is my favorite game on the Wii (that would go to Pro Evo at the moment) but between the two I'd have to pick Zelda.

Super Mario Galaxy is the better game in my opinion. Twilight Princess is a good game, but it's too much like Ocarina of Time. Plus, the lenght of the game is too long, which made the game feel tedious when you were around 20 hours in. A Zelda game should not be over 30 hours long (that's just my opinion though -- I'm sure many people don't agree with me). There was also too little to do in Twilight Princess. Every character in Castle Town feels just like something that fill out the space, they don't have anything interesting to say...they just walk around. In Wind Waker, almost every character had a sidequest for you, and that made the people in the town feel more alivelike.

@ BioShockOwns- The main problem I had with the WindWaker graphics was the fact that the characters were all out of proportion, for instance Links head was almost twice the size of his body, and his arms were longer than his legs(but other than that I liked the graphics), so yes I prefer TP graphics. But maybe they could do a combination of the graphics, TP for characters and items and such, and WW for the landscape or something of that nature.

@m0zart- Wind Waker was a great game worthy of the title Legend of Zelda.

@acsguitar- I can't respect not finishing a game, nothing against you, just don't like it when people start something and don't finish it.

@ presto7640- The Zelda formula is getting a little repetitive, that said I love the formula, the combat and the dungeons and the sidequests. I don't think I actually want them to CHANGE them formula, so much as REVISE and IMPROVE upon the formula.

@Dion4ever & Reggie 31307- All I can do is restate my earlier comment, if you have NOT played both, either DO NOT vote or vote for "Haven't played both yet" like I did.

@OniStrat- I thought about what you said and decided that I like Zelda long (and it only took me about 45-50 hours to beat TP with all the sidequests the 2nd time around), but I agree with you there needed to be more character involved sidequests like Majora's Mask and Wind Waker. (hated having to restart everything every three days for LoZ:MM, but still thought it was great) They could make it so the main Quest only takes 20-30 hours if you skip most of the sidequests, but takes anywhere from 40-50 hours to play with all the sidequests, or they could make it so there is a first quest and second quest, and the second quest could have alot more sidequests and stuff that makes it longer, that might satisfy both the majority that likes Zelda to take a long time, and the minority that likes a quicker game.(I say the majority likes Zelda to take a long time because that is my assumption based on the comments I have read)

Alright almost done sorry this post is so long but I had alot to say. Did anybody else dislike the fact that you coudn't control your camera in Castle Town? I would have prefered to free roam a little while in the city. Use clawshots to climb on top of buildings and stuff like that, that's definintely something to think about, adding some freeroaming and platforming to the Zelda formula (just a thought). And my final point. I hated the magic armor sucking my precious Rupees, it should have just halfed your damage and not eaten your Rupees, instead of making you invincible and eating your Rupees (I know that alot of people are gonna say the game is so easy you don't need to take half damage, but to that I say, if that is your opinion then you don't need to Invincible, LOL:D) Again, sorry this was so long, thank you for reading.:)

EDIT I had an after thought, maybe someone (not me I'm not very Internet savvy) should start a forum where we can discuss some of our ideas about how we would like the next Zelda to be improved.

I haven't played Galaxy yet (next week) but I've played all the Zelda games..

I found TP to be forggetable to be honest, I didn't enjoy playing as the wolf, level design was ok in places but the dungeons were not a patch on Zelda OOT, bosses were to easy, story line dragged and I found it had nothing to surprise me as it was so similar to Zelda OOT it felt like a expansion. Plus the controls were just wrong, leave it on gamecube where it belongs. I actually agree with Jeff's score of 8.8 it just wasn;t AAA to me. Games like Link to the past, Majora's mask,Ocarina of time are all better games.

I really don't like bashing Zelda games as they are one of my favourite series of all time, but I hope the next one is a lot better, feels fresh. It's time to change the formula Nintendo...reinvent Zelda.

I like them both. Why does one have to better than the other? They both offered amazing game experiences. And for people to comment on Zelda's "tacked on controls" sound like people just regurgitating something they read in a review online. Honestly, I didn't think Galaxy's motion controls added that much to the game in the core area. There were some neat parts, like the stars that you grabbed to pull mario toward them, but the core controls could have easily worked without motion. Shaking the wiimote to throw a fireball or spin is not intuitive by any means. It simply replaces a button press.TheLordMagnus

No it's not something people read in a review, the Wii controls were tacked on for TP, it was a Gamecube game up to the last minute.