The thing about Giana Sisters on DS is that it's easy as far as platformers go (I wouldn't say that it sucks). If you just want some easy playing instead of fullblown hardcore that's probably ideal though.
Printable View
The thing about Giana Sisters on DS is that it's easy as far as platformers go (I wouldn't say that it sucks). If you just want some easy playing instead of fullblown hardcore that's probably ideal though.
So... it's not a flawed game then? http://storage.proboards.com/6576594...AdabuZaauf.gif
They're two different games. Why not play both?
I think the problem with overrated classic games is that most rely on nostalgic memories when praising games instead of replaying them more recently. I mean come on, replaying games. Gross, who does that?
Lol.
But you gotta admit. One thing is to replay a 30 minute one go game versus a 100 plus hour game.
The problem for a while now is there are more people than not who adopt opinions from others, often without ever touching a game and still go around preaching "everybody knows". When asked to quantify anything, the most they come up with is that any one aspect of such games are just "the best". If you dare to press further, asking how a "legenedary" game is better in that aspect than a particular game, they just revert back to "everbody says so".
When most people who praise a game have never actually played through it, no matter how good it may or may not be, it's overrated.
It's led to all of these catchprases such as "Zelda good", which work as disclaimers to game playing enthusiasts.
I feel like that applies to a number of Nintendo and RPG games, especially on SNES. It's a bandwagon thing, much like the people who list certain games as the worst ever without playing it. Personally, I could come up with a list of games that I feel like people just say they really like in order to fit in with the bandwagoners. Even ones I really like such as Tecmo Super Bowl.
That being said, I'm not too surprised Mario World and 64 are leading the way in votes. Would have thought Mario 3 would have gotten some votes by now.
The first SMB finally has two votes. Is it deserved?
Maybe to the extent that Nintendo fans act as if SMB was the video game equivalent of the big bang rather than an evolutionary step in the genre? That sentiment is the only related thing which bugs me about the game, but the game itself is solid. Not crazy about how slippery Mario is or the emphasis on secrets myself -- I bought my NES for Duckhunt :) -- but it's definitely a good game.
Easy, dude.
You have to give the original Super Mario Bros. some credit for reviving the American market. That being said, I feel it falls into that area where its overpraised. It's still good, but it's not like Japan or Europe was faltering in 1985. That's my issue. Some think it was a worldwide crash of gaming when it wasn't.
I'd advise people to check out the Game Boy Color port of it (Super Mario Bros. Deluxe). An excellent version with additional features and options, something you won't see from a Nintendo game or port now these days.
Seconded.
This was out kinda/sorta around the same time that as the NES Classics version of SMB for the GameBoy Advance. Everyone went crazy for the GBA version, but I always maintained that Super Mario DX was the superior game. Both games are compromised, visually, but I had a lot of fun with DX's bonus features.
I'm pretty sure this gave way to the "Advanced" ports of Super Mario 2, 3, and World we got later on.