Super Mario Galaxy 2

[Weegee]

I that proves to be the case, I'll be like X 1000.

[Trainman]

But why would he come out and announce it like that (if it has to do with major spoilers?) If that logic holds true, then why didn't Miyamoto say, "Omg, 240+ stars in Galaxy!!" when Galaxy 1 was in the works?

[FlamingBlueMario]

But why would he come out and announce it like that (if it has to do with major spoilers?) If that logic holds true, then why didn't Miyamoto say, "Omg, 240+ stars in Galaxy!!" when Galaxy 1 was in the works?

The only spoiler I can see is if he told us where every hidden star was located. Since SMG1 was the first Mario game to contain 240+ stars, he was probably trying not to overwhelm the players by telling them that right off the bat. He probably felt that it would discourage the player from finishing the game or something. Now that a sequel is coming out soon (which is more challenging,) he feels that it's okay to announce that there will be a lot more than 240 stars this time around. I'm sure that his announcement of there being more than 240 stars in SMG2 is not to overwhelm the player, but to excite them about the game's difficulty.

[ShadowBrain]

In the same way that NSMBW could theoretically be made to seem harder by having Miyamoto list every single enemy in the game during an interview?

[FlamingBlueMario]

In the same way that NSMBW could theoretically be made to seem harder by having Miyamoto list every single enemy in the game during an interview?

Whether it's NSMBW or SMG2, I think it would take up too much time for Miyamoto to list all of the enemies in a single interview. But if he were to do so, some people could have mixed feelings about how hard the game might be. Because to list every enemy without unveiling to the public any convincing proof or gameplay footage showcasing them being a hefty challenge, would only make us more curious or disappointed about what to expect from that game. Even if there was convincing proof or gameplay videos of NSMBW or SMG2 being a hefty challenge, it still wouldn't mean much unless you were to actually play the games for yourself.

[Trainman]

I don't know. It just still doesn't make much sense to me that Miyamoto himself would artificially make the game seem longer/more challenging for quietly brushing in the "New Game Plus" stars like that. I understand that you can say whatever you want to make your crap seem cooler (see: blast processing), but Miyamoto? I just don't see it coming from his mouth, no matter how senile he may be. He's always been the "here's what you're getting; stfu and don't whine" kind of person.

[ShadowBrain]

My point was that being incredibly specific doesn't necessarily have anything to do with a game's difficulty, unless you want to psyche people out.

[Glitchy]

Let me think...

8 worlds, so each world is one place, but with say, about 10 missions on that. That's only 80 stars. It would take about 24 worlds to get exactly 240 stars. There's bonus levels too, so say 22 worlds, with 20 bonus stars (SM64 had 15.) Give or take, it'll be like that. Of course there will probably be secret stars too...

[hydrakiller4000]

I'm just hoping this game turns out to be as promising as the first one, except more difficult and with cooler features, such as riding Yoshi.

[Turtlekid1]

Not sure why people seem to think that the first one was too easy.  I mean, sure, it was cake to get the required stars to beat Bowser, and there were a lot of 1-Ups to be had, but I found it to be genuinely challenging when I went for 100%.  I suppose I'd be for a more balanced difficulty curve, though - with a less drastic spike after getting the first half of the stars.

Also, I find myself desperately hoping that galaxies with the mechanics of Rolling Gizmo Galaxy and Loopdeeswoop Galaxy do not appear in this game.

[Mr. Wiggles]

Super Mario Galaxy is a masterpiece, but it's the easiest Mario game to date. I managed to beat the entire game in a week and get all stars in less than a month.

In comparison, Sunshine took about 2 months to beat and about 4 months to get all Sprites. Super Mario 64 took a month to beat with 3 months to get all stars.

Please Miyamoto, bring on the masochistic Lost-Levels style difficulty.

[Kimimaru]

I have recently played all of the E-Reader levels in Super Mario Advance 4, and I must say, they are quite fantastic! If Super Mario Galaxy 2 had the same difficulty as them, I'd be happy.

[jdaster64]

@Wiggles: While that may be true, I can clear SM64 in a matter of a mere 6 hours on a good playthrough (got 50 stars in just over an hour and a half recently), and I don't think I could manage even close to that on Galaxy.

[ShadowBrain]

I've said this before, but the topic at hand behooves a restatement: The game itself was not really easy, but the incredible number of coins, 1-ups, extra-health Mushrooms, etc. took away any sense of tension.

[jdaster64]

I've said this before, but the topic at hand behooves a restatement: The game itself was not really easy, but the incredible number of coins, 1-ups, extra-health Mushrooms, etc. took away any sense of tension.

But SM64 had a similar issue, were it to save the number of lives I had, I'd probably be at least halfway maxed at the end of the game. Courses 7 and 12 are notably bad about giving far too many 1-ups, to the point of being able to gain lives twice as fast as you should be losing them.