I am personally not suffering from Mario fatigue if we're talking about the franchise general, but if we're talking about the NSMB sub-series specifically, I think that, with the recent release of NSMB 2, I might have hit that point where I'm a little ambivalent to the direction these games have gone. I fairly enjoyed the DS game, really liked the Wii game, but for this 3DS game, there does appear inarguably to be strong financial motives rather than a powerful creative drive, and I've heard conflicting responses to it overall. I'll still play it some time soon, but it's just little things that have me less enthused. It's much like what you guys said: it's weird to be hung up on presentation stuff when 2D Mario is all about the level design, but the fact that NSMB 2 looks exactly like a game from 6 years ago and has identical music to a game from 3 years ago is kind of disappointing. NSMB U has the potential to bring me back around though, based on my gut reaction from E3.

On a completely unrelated note, I read about the whole Apatosaurus/Brontosaurus confusion ages ago, but most people I tell think I'm talking out my arse, simply because Brontosaurus seems to be one of the most well-known dinosaur names, despite never having been a proper taxon. According to the book I read, the reason Brontosaurus is so commonly known and the reason people still use the name now is because supposedly, at the time when American palaeontologists were making the connections that the two skeletons were the same species, the complete specimen was being assembled for display in the American Museum of Natural History. Apparently, for a significant period of time, the exhibit for the specimen was mistakenly labelled as 'Brontosaurus', so I guess that name caught on before the mistake was rectified.

They also gave it the skull of Camarasaurus. And the name Brontosaurus ("thunder lizard") at least has an interesting ring to it.

Loved the dinosaur segment. Great show as always.

but the fact that NSMB 2 looks exactly like a game from 6 years ago

I don't know, I think the Wii game looks a good bit better, and I've seen reviews that say it basically looks like the DS game but with a blurry 3D effect.

And to be clear, I'm not attacking Mario - as a matter fact, every Mario game I've played I hold at least some fondness for, and in nearly all cases, I'm really fond of them. But if we're specifically referring to the New Super Mario Bros. brand, I think what creates a sense of fatigue in some people is that when the visual style remains the same and the soundtrack has nothing added to it, it suggests a reduced effort in the product. Again, I've not played the newest title, so I can't make any judgement on stage design. It's just that it doesn't feel as much of a creative endeavour as even some of the other upcoming titles in the Mario franchise, like Paper Mario: Sticker Star and Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon (which I don't believe should factor into any discussion of fatigue, as they are different kinds of games.)

Any reviewer that says that NSMB2 just looks like NSMB with a blurry 3D effect has likely not played NSMB in six years. It's not a ridiculous increase, but it's noticeable.

"But if we're specifically referring to the New Super Mario Bros. brand, I think what creates a sense of fatigue in some people is that when the visual style remains the same and the soundtrack has nothing added to it, it suggests a reduced effort in the product."

One damn game did that!

In a series that only appears once a console!

"NSMB is getting milked because this one game borrows NSMBW (or for the blind, NSMBDS) graphics and music!"

Yeah, no, and you're even more full of bull especially when you look at NSMBU.

Do you really, REALLY think that there's no difference between this artstyle:

http://www.mariowiki.com/images/c/c4/Castle_investigate.PNG

And this one:

http://www.mariowiki.com/images/b/b6/Mario1.jpg

Or this music:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odDwOPNuclM

And this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0ea0B4rYgU

Sorry that every Mario game isn't a super-special awesome mega cool original innovative title, but when you're in the business for 30 years, and you give the development of NSMB2 to a literal group of newbies, yeah, you're going to get a game similar to another.

You need to calm down. First of all, you've quoted something that I did not say. I never asserted that Nintendo is milking NSMB - all I did was explainwhy some people have become a little weary.

Secondly, I have said both in this thread and many other threads that I have much more interest in New Super Mario Bros. U and feel that this game has the potential to make some good advances on the ones that came before it.

Thirdly, the examples you've used regarding the graphics and the music are for the Wii U game, when the game I'm talking about is the 3DS game. The environmental themes and general look for NSMB 2 are very similar to what came before and the soundtrack for NSMB 2 is, in most cases, not even remixed - they are literally the same tracks that the Wii game had. Again, I can't comment on the level design because I haven't played it. I'm just saying that this is why some people think this product is less inspired than what they're used to with Mario games.

In short, you don't need to be so defensive. Once again, I'm not attacking Mario. If you're reading it that way, you're misinterpreting me. As a matter of fact, anyone you hear who has expressed concerns about the New Super Mario Bros. brand is doing so because they have a lot of love for Mario games of years gone by. The Mario Galaxy duo are two of my favourite games of this generation. The franchise as a whole has always been the embodiment of imagination and creativity, so I hope you can understand why, for some people, it doesn't seem so creative when a game looks and sounds so similar to it's immediate predecessor. I will make my own judgement when I play NSMB2 later this year.

Honest question, Neal: why are you looking forward to playing Mass Effect 3 on Wii U?  Haven't you already had the opportunity to play it on another console for months?  I could understand if you didn't have another console, but you do. 

Easy: I am a Nintendo gamer, whether it's a personal choice or because of NWR. Games appeal to me more when they are on a Nintendo system. It's weird and kind of dumb, but it's true.

Also, specifically regarding Mass Effect 3, I played part of ME1 and disliked it because of the jank. I wanted to play ME2, but it was dirt cheap on 360 and the PS3 had that interactive comic summary of ME1 that I would have preferred but the PS3 version was still around $50/60 while ME2 360 was $15/20.

With ME3 on Wii U, I get to experience a game in the series while also getting that interactive comic experience that I'd prefer to do. Also, there is a snowball's chance in hell that I'd ever be able to play all three games completely. I don't have the attention span or time.

I don't mean to sound cynical here, but then why even buy another console if you're going to wait for everything to come to Wii U?


I mean, I guess I get it, you'd rather play it on Wii U than on PS3 or Xbox 360, but if that's the attitude you have then why bother with other consoles?


I genuinely don't understand it.  If I'm interested in a game, I don't care what platform it's on. I'm much more likely to play a game on the platform it was developed FOR, personally, simply because there's a better chance it's been properly vetted for bugs on the lead platform than 9 months later on an alternative platform.

If I could go back in time, I wouldn't get a PS3. When I bought it, I was in a different place gaming-wise. Now I'm more of a portable gamer. I use my PS3 as a Blu-Ray player and my PlayStation Plus device. I use my 360 as a media hub and a downloadable game/Rock Band player.

And I think I expressed this in the episode, though I might not have actually verbalized it. I'm excited to potentially play the review copy of ME3. I don't think I'd drop full price on it.

Anyone interested in adding to the paleo-discussion is welcome to do so in the General Chat thread. I can always use more questions!

One thing that no one seems to mention when talking about the original run of 2d mario games:  They were all top-tier games.  No game before SMB was like SMB--nothing was that big, or had that kind of dynamic gameplay, or had that kind of variety.  The sequels just kept adding to that very impressive base.  SMB2 was not only the better mario game when it came out, it was better than everything else at the time, too.  Same with SMB3.  I know 3 had help from an onboard chip but it still shows the care (and money) Nintendo was willing to invest in their games.  World didn't add as much to the base as 2 or 3 did, but it did have Yoshi, a more dynamic world, new skills to master, and a lot of new enemies.  The Land games weren't instantly impressive but stood on their own and were definitely some of the best made games on the gameboy.  Prior to NSMB, all SMB games were the very, very best games of their time.  The NSMB series doesn't even come close to achieving that--they don't even come close to trying to achieve that.

First:  supposedly. 

Second: Having skipped all the others (didn't have a DS, was sick of Wii by the time NSMBWii was released) NSMB2 may actually be the first NSMB game I own.  So I'm not fatigued - but I still wish they would refresh what the New in NSMB means - the art style and music has something about it that is less desirable then the 3D Mario's.

Third: Back to SML3D.  Probably a bad idea, but I've been replaying it for the elusive 5 shiny stars.