As someone who loves Mario, and has played his games since I was a toddler...

I can say that while it has a very trippy art direction, and some of the most creative level design I've seen in years, Super Mario Galaxy does not have good graphics.

This game has SO MUCH going for it, it looks really really fun and trippy, but can we just let the graphics go?

If sheep concentrate on the graphics of this game, they're missing the more important, bigger picture!

Why doesnt it have good graphics.

I sincerely hope that your argument does not revolve around it being not HD and low poly relative to a PS3 or a 360, because if thats the case, even the 360 and PS3 dont have good graphics compared to the PC.

Why doesnt it have good graphics.

I sincerely hope that your argument does not revolve around it being not HD and low poly relative to a PS3 or a 360, because if thats the case, even the 360 and PS3 dont have good graphics compared to the PC.

XaosII

I merely mean to take the focus away from graphics.

For a Wii game, they are good, but only because of the art style.

People should be focusing on the fact that this is going to be the new SM64, and not how good the graphics are.

Its like Gears of War, the game was amazing in every way, but people mainly just focused on the graphics. I know people who were turned off by that, and who thought the game was just about graphics.

And it goes against Nintendo's philosophy; games are for playing, not for watching.

I can say that while it has a very trippy art direction, and some of the most creative level design I've seen in years, Super Mario Galaxy does not have good graphics.

This game has SO MUCH going for it, it looks really really fun and trippy, but can we just let the graphics go?

If sheep concentrate on the graphics of this game, they're missing the more important, bigger picture!

Big_Red_Button

Seriously, what constitutes good graphics? Is it realism? Is it an ultra-bright color palete? Is it cell-shading? Is it sprites? Is it volumetric lighting and particle effects? Is it million-polygon character models?

... Or is it just a matter of opinion?

I merely mean to take the focus away from graphics.

For a Wii game, they are good, but only because of the art style.

People should be focusing on the fact that this is going to be the new SM64, and not how good the graphics are.

Its like Gears of War, the game was amazing in every way, but people mainly just focused on the graphics. I know people who were turned off by that, and who thought the game was just about graphics.

And it goes against Nintendo's philosophy; games are for playing, not for watching.

Big_Red_Button

I really hate when someone lists their gaming history as if they are about to share a valid opinion, but then when you read the post it's the same old lame argument. And this one even assumes that those of us who are looking forward to SMG only care about the graphics.

Listen, the game looks spectacular. And I'm not even going to say for a Wii game. Artistically it's one of the best looking games this generation. However, the look of the game dwarfs in comparison to how excited we Wii owners are about the gameplay. It looks like a return to the roots that were planted by Super Mario 64...only in space. How can we not be interested in that?