Topic: Why Super Mario Galaxy 2 would be better on 360

http://www.x360magazine.com/360-is-better/why-super-mario-gal...
But that's just my opinion.

Or even better yet the PS3.
(Oh no I dident)

Let's see ...

Graphics don't make the game. GAMEPLAY does. The graphics are quite lovely, thank you.

Achievements? Those are called STARS. You get one every level. Sometimes more than one.

Co-op play? Yes, this has been a hallmark of the Mario franchise.

In short, no to all three. "Better graphics" won't make the gameplay any better, achievements are completely unnecessary, and if I want a co-op game, I'll play a co-op game. I play Mario for MARIO.

You took the words right out of my mouth...

i think it would be best on the PS3.
because how would you control the pointer? with the PS3, you can use the Sony move _{or whatever it's called now}
but with the 360, you would have to use either dual analogue, or Natal, which i dont see how it will work.
im happy with the Wii version thank you
EDIT: basicaly what everyone else said

I would think the Zelda series would be better suited for HD consoles...

Oh wait!

lol

Go to the FAQ page and read the last two!

It's a secret to everybody.

Kind of ridiculous to mock the desire to play Mario in co-op when NSMBW's biggest feature is co-op. The achievements point is surely pointless, as achievements are by definition, but co-op would undoubtedly be fun. Playing together is always fun unless you're anti-social, and saying we play Mario for Mario is just blind traditionalism that would serve nothing but to keep the series from moving forward. There's nothing un-Mario about co-op anyway, as NSMBW has already proven.

And I think it's funny that despite how much the game is praised for its graphics, suddenly graphics aren't important in this thread because someone said the 360 could make the game look even better. Last I checked, improving graphics is not a bad thing. Sure, they're good enough, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't be nice for them to look better.

Not the greatest article, but not completely baseless either.

Totally agree. Also, why would it being on 360 mean there'd be full fledged co-op? It'd still be up to Nintendo to decide on that.

This.

They're just saying it'd be possible and likely on 360 as that is popular on the service, not that it'd be forced, obviously.

1) It would be better, but it's nothing necessary.
2) Still completely unecessary. Why does everyone obsess over achievements?
3) Why does being on the 360 make it have full Co-op? If Nintendo thought it would have been good, they would have put it in, online or not (as NSMBW proved).

I'd say that they're doing this for the laughs if it weren't for the fact that THEY HAVE A WHOLE SECTION ABOUT HOW GAMES WOULD BE BETTER ON THE 360.

I agree with the article. I would rather press a button for using Mario's spin move, the motion sensing mini games like the bird flying and ball rolling would be easier and less frustrating to control with an analog stick, and having something like achievements to show off to other people how many stars you've gotten would be pretty sweet. Oh yeah, it would look far better too.

But I think it's fine how it is now. It's already one of the best platformers ever, so why even bother touching it? It would be useless, well, besides the people that cant play it because they don't own a Wii—but seriously, who doesn't?

I don't get how it would be better than it already is. Sure, it might look slightly better in HD. Who cares? It already looks amazing. The second point is just stupid. Why would we want achievements in the game? There's 242 f*cking stars! And while co-op would be interesting, they'd have to format the whole game to accommodate that addition, and we'd end up with a vastly different game. Maybe next time.

But then again, why mess up a good thing?

I don't want to sound like a douche so excuse me if I do, but if two games are exactly the same except one game has slightly better graphics, doesn't it make it slightly better?

Hi guys!

Welcome to the site