I think they just need to be more innovative. Like more Mario platformers and less of the dumbass soccer and baseball games.

I am kind of tired of Mario. *ducks for cover* He's such a little stereotype and the recent games haven't been very exciting. He's cute, but that's about it. It just feels like they are squeezing the brand for every last penny, without producing anything worthwhile. I am becoming very cynical.

ebeast, how about Super Mario Galaxy? Did you not like that one? (ooh watch out here comes a vase)

i got nothing against Mario, but the dude is old. i mean really... how can you make games where a plumber and his brother need to keep saving a princess from a dragon in a turtle shell with spikes? you can only spin that story so many times before people wonder if the main character can be put into any other type of scenario.

and ThanksMK: Galaxy was cool, but i would've preferred some REAL 2 player action. 2nd player waving the Wiimote to collect gems was pretty stupid... to me anyway. when i played with a 2nd person to collect the gems for me, they agreed that REAL 2 player action would've been more enjoyable. not a whole lot of people out there wanna be a sidekick. most of the people want to be the hero 2... even if it means being the hero's not so popular, but taller, brother.

I know this is heresy, but I thought Galaxy was really boring.

I dunno if I've said it here before, but here's my take on it:

Back in the early days of motion pictures, that's all they were - motion pictures. People would watch film of trains coming into a station, or of a person sneezing. The whole concept of movies was so new that all that was needed to entertain people was footage of things happening.

Then, when Charlie Chaplin (and to a lesser extent, Buster Keaton and others) arrived on the scene, they started to develop stories with film - narratives that were designed for the medium. Movies now had *meaning* - character, story, themes, the works.

Super Mario Galaxy is like the best version of pre-Chaplin film. Interactivity for interactivity's sake, with no deeper meaning or real purpose. A game like Half Life, on the other hand, is sort of the first post-Chaplin *game*, where the interactivity is done in a context that gives it all meaning, and the methods of storytelling are entirely unique to games - the interactivity itself gives the story meaning.

So, going from not only Half Life, but Half Life 2, or any modern game that does a good job of integrating narrative and gameplay, to Super Mario Galaxy is like knowing Chaplin's out there and watching Keystone Kops instead. Fun, but shallow, and ultimately unsatisfying.

Wasn't enough to hold my interest.

I, er, didn't play it. *ducks futher*

"It's a ME! RACIAL STEREOTYPE! WHA-HAAA!"

Charles Martinett is awesome though. My son is a HUGE Mario fan. I met Martinett at one of the last, good E3s. He called my son AS FUCKING MARIO. My boy was 5 or 6. BLEW HIS FREAKIN' MIND, MAN. He was telling all his friends that his dad knew mario and he called him. They didnt believe him until he showed 'em the polaroid.

Seriously though, they should go revisit the games roots.