I actually got to play Mario Galaxy at both Gamestops today....I have to say, it's much better looking than it looks in ALL videos and screenshots.

I only played a few minutes so as not to 'ruin' it for me, but what I played was pretty good.  I have to say I must not be easily impressible because I was a little irritated with the controls honestly....it's a little slower-feeling than Mario 64 if you can believe it, and especially not quiiiite as fast as Sunshine - MOSTLY, I mean in the idea of side-flip-jumps....in Sunshine, you only had to tap one direction, tap the other, and in a split-second you were already side-jumping...which was necessary because that game didn't include a back-flip at all and it was the only way to get extra height on a jump.  Mario 64 is a little looser and a little slower than Sunshine in doing a side-flip, and Galaxy feels much slower.  In Galaxy, you don't just push the opposite direction to start sliding, you pretty much have to slide for about ONE second, and then you'll know because you'll hear a faint extra tone to his sliding sound-effect, and then you can jump and do a side-flip.  I think that'll take some getting used to.

I kept jumping from one side of a planet to the other just to get a feel for it...it's a little awkward at first, not so much in a disorienting way as it is in the way of gravity changing the height of your jump once you flip over to the opposite side...almost makes it feel like you didn't jump very high, but really it just feels that way because you were technically already 'descending' from your previous jump.  It still felt weird at first though.

I would ALMOST claim that this game is above 60fps...almost like 68 or mayyybe even 72, at least in appearance(I'm sure it's at 60 however).  This game is FLUID....it really looks like it could almost be an HD game, but with some slight jaggies.  It's weird because I've seen most videos of the game in motion, and I *NEVER* got that impression up until I just seen it for myself, and it really DOES look so very fluid.

The only thing that bothers me is that the game feels.....allllmost embarassingly easy.  It doesn't feel so in a bad way, and there's definately more to it than sayyy...Bob-Omb Battlefield, but I have to say that the smaller planetoids do feel too small for me.  Cassamassina seems to be okay with it, maybe it's just a first impression of things...

The only things I really did was play in that first non-intro level, the Egg Planet or somesuch Galaxy, where I took one way to get to the Petey-looking dinosaur, but I quit and reset the game before I woke him up so as not to make it a chore next time I actually have the game......and the second time, I was playing through the direction that lead to the 'inside' of a planetoid where you have to step on panels to open up an area to a 'Grand Star', which was also too easy, but didn't feel tooo bad really.

---

Anyone else(besides Hen and her contacts.. j/k) get to play around with it?  I think the main reason I'm writing this is just how much I was amazed at how fluid it played... I'd almost start to say that Metroid Prime 3 either ran at 55fps, or was just low-poly, or had Gamecubey-textures....there's just something very different about Galaxy that *really* makes it look almost-HD.  I know other sites keep saying it, but it's an embarassment that no other Wii game has put that much effort into their graphics as much as this game has.  Whew.

That's cool.  Did you get the same kind of feeling then about the whole fluidity and appearance, annnd what kind of set up are you using by the way?

Also, I thought the planetoid thing was kinda cool, but at the same time I was neither disoriented or compleeeeetely entertained by it....I dunno why, I guess I've just gamed so much that I just adjust and continue playing like it was nothing.  I still kinda like it of course, but I wasn't hiiiiighly impressed by it.  Plus the idea ... I still think it's similar to Sonic Adventure 2's Meteor Herd and ...whatever Rouge's level was, Cosmic-something I think...it was roughly like Galaxy, just no where near as smooth and well made(and they were just two levels).  Anyway point being that I got used to it really quick and it didn't become my point of interest.

It's a shame to hear that it's really that easy....but at the same time, when I think about it, Mario 64 wasn't exactly mind-numbingly hard either....well, there were some points, but I think a lot of M64's difficulty came from the point that it was practically the first time you'd played a 3D platformer, and just getting used to the controls and navigating a 3D space was considered 'hard'.  The only real challenges I can think of would be the (nervous)'tick' areas, like....getting on top of the giant snowman, some areas in the clock level, some places in the Blue Switch underground...mostly the parts where you had to take your time edging around small platforms and timed jumps on moving/spinning/seesaw platforms.  Since not a whole lot of levels in SMG have falling-death areas, I guess I can see how it'd be a little easier just in that idea.  *shrug*  Anyway I guess I'll have it in a couple days(hoping that they won't get desperate and sell my preorder or let one of the employees have it), so I'll just be glad for it then... >_>;

Hmmm.  I'll probably try to take it slow and casual if I can....I'd like to, but I think the drive of exploration pushes me sometimes...>_>;  F-Zero GX is pretty much the only F-Zero that I've liked, and I took it back.....was way too 'tick'-esque...like, there was just barely inches between you and death at almost all times, and a lot of steering involved quick-ticks of moving yourself inches to the left or right.  The feeling of speed was GREAT, but the price for it was awful.  *shrug*

And wow, PH over SMG?  I didn't get PH for different reasons, but wow, must be good.  Was PH more of a side-story then, or did it pertain to Zelda much and have much "historical depth" to it?  In a way, I almost wish they had just revived Link's Awakening as a 3D or PH-style-3D game, it's still one of my favorite Zelda games.

(Oh, and by setup I meant TV....I saw it today on a 480p 16:9 plasma at probably 19"...mine's an LCD at 26" so it should be similar at best.)

I probably shouldn't look into it too much....I kinda wish I'd gone the way Kezay kept saying he'd take this game as - media-black-out, not looking into it except for text-based impressions/reviews and some obligatory screenshots and whatnot.......because as of now, even though I don't -think- I've seen the spoiler people were talking about, I think I might have ruined the experience a little bit for myself.   Ah well...but since the game's out in a few days I probably shouldn't worry much.

*nodnods*  Oh no, I wasn't going to take that wrong. :p

Updating from now since I bought it early today, I'm kind of irritated that the game is SHORT.  Just listening to IGN's podcast, they were saying something like a base of 6 hours, Matt says 'No, longer than that', but it probably isn't too much longer.  The game is a perfect Mario game -- Mario games really aren't known for their length or making things terribly different, just mostly good.  It's great, it trashes Sunshine to pieces, but it lacks Sunshine's content and length I think(although part of Sunshine's length was just...navigating the same tropical-themed levels).

I really wish there was more to do....it's true that the hub world isn't as good as the castle in M64, but what hurts it more is that nothing quite feels like 'home' to me(yet).  All of it is good, but I always feel like I'm in a rush, on the move, never in one place for very long.  ALMOST like Super Mario Bros. 3, which I can almost also vouch as 'nothing feels like 'home' like M64 did', but SMB3 was a level-to-level platformer(and you can't even revist old levels you completed) while Galaxy is more of an Adventure game...it just doesn't feel as much like one as M64 did, I guess.

Really, I'm just being terribly picky, and mostly because I like it well enough that I don't mind pointing out the things I didn't like.  But knowing that after day one I'm probably more than half way to the end kind of bothers me.  Also, since most of the levels have only one to three stars in them, you're really not there long enough to feel like you belong I guess.  *shrug*  I'd say it's like having a lot of the single-star levels from M64, like every level being like the Metal Cap Green Switch Palace, etc...they're fun, they're cool, but they're over so fast.

Ahh well, either way, still like it, just kinda bummed on just a few things..

It's really ironic that something they said on G4 while reviewing this game really helped me to see past Super Mario 64 when playing Galaxy.  "Nothing can recreate that first time seeing Mario in the 3D world . . ."

And that's pretty much when I put SM64 to rest.  It's like Ocarina of Time, somewhat, in that new games can't be those games remade.  It's a new game.  Sure, it's a bit short and feels somewhat odd out of the traditional Mushroom Kingdom element, but that doesn't have to be a bad thing.  It's perspective I think.  Or maybe I'm enjoying this game and having a hard time seeing skepticism for it.  Or I'm FAR more able to except a Mario game being "out there" than I can Zelda. 

As for the OoT element, I REALLY don't think TP did as well of a job as being the "spiritual" sequel to OoT as Galaxy did for SM64, as far as I've played of course.  Thought I'd explain that.

I went ahead and beat the game just at 60 Stars, partly because I better liked the idea of having 60 MORE stars to get after beating the game (ok, technically 59), and partly because, as I figured, getting 120 stars and THEN seeing the ending would make the ending feel ... mediocre.  Because while it's kind of cool, it's really not what I was looking for.

I have to say that the game is great as far as Mario games go....there are still some annoyances, but this game accurately conveys the same feeling you get playing Mario games on past systems.  It wasn't as much of a chore as Sunshine felt like, and for what it is, it actually lasted a decent length minus the fact that I beat it as 'early' as you're able to.  It took me and my brothers two weeks to beat Mario 64....this took me only one, but I only had to get 60 stars as opposed to 80, and add to that the fact that I played it a lot more.  It'd probably take me longer to get all 120, especially at a 'casual' pace, which I intend to do as I try to get back to other games, DS games, art-projects, and the like.

I think it really does have a Super Mario Brothers 3 feel to it overall....but it kind of feels random at times, and I'm still irritated at the simple hub design as opposed to the Super Mario 64 castle-hub.  Sort of an anti-spoiler type of spoiler::::

Yeah, I feel the same way Terrisus.  On the one hand, I don't want to sound like a harsh critic.  I think the impact of the first true-3D and truly GOOD 3D Mario game just can't be shaken.....but also, I think there was just more exploration in Mario 64.  There were more ambient moments with just sound effects and no music.  And it felt less confined.  In Galaxy, you're always pointing and picking out what you're going to do, and for the MOST part, you have no choice but to do that.  The level is suddenly switched out in such a way that grabbing any other star is most times impossible...and I think that kind of takes away from things.  Maybe I did usually get those stars in order, but having the ability to do what I wanted whenever I wanted kind of felt more explorative.  It might not look like it, but in a way, this game is more linear than it lets on.

The only truly ambient area I've seen so far is in the 'Garden' secret observatory.  It's one room, but it looks and sounds AWESOME.....and yet, that's all we get of it.  I almost wish the whole game looked like that room does(not the WHOLE game looking like THAT room, but using that kind of style and such).

There are still some things this game does better than Mario 64 of course, and one of those is mostly 'I'm not totally bored with Galaxy like I am with M64'.  Like I said though, if you gave M64 Galaxy's upgrades, minus the gravity, but filllllllled with detail and some control tweaks, I'd buy it.  Not just for the graphical upgrades, but mostly to see a detailed version of the castle...I really would like to see things as they would have been if it weren't a game for just a moment, I guess....see how 'liveable' it is.  Just seeing that area outside of the castle in Galaxy's opening has kind of 'teased' me into wanting it I guess..

That's true.... and good to know I'm not the only one, as well as the game scored(although I do agree with a high score, it's a wonderful game for Wii no matter how many good or 'better' games come out for it in its time).

Another big problem I have with it: That 'Golden Autumn' level or whatever it's called.......it's almost a DIRECT RIPOFF of Honeyhive!  All they did was flip it, exchange a few colors, textures, and objects, get rid of the paths that lead to the queen and put up a few satellites in the opposite direction, and presto, a whole new galaxy!  ...not.  That's my biggest disappointment, that they didn't have enough thought to make a more original stage when there was no real reason, no connection, and no known disc-size problems to force them to do that.  MAYBE because they were running out of time, and possibly, ran out of ideas(how COULD they?  They could have even used this as an excuse to make a completely flat and extensive level).  But to me, that area, while I realy liked what they did with textures and made it look believably autumn-esque, it's just a waste of space.  It's like getting to the final area in Mario 64 and jumping into a mirror-flipped Bob-omb Battlefield that had orange colors instead of green and a slightly altered path.