[Wii] Mario Strikers Charged

[emwearz]

When Super Mario Strikers came out on the Gamecube in 05/06 it was hardly a 'must own' title with many people either not buying or not even knowing it was out. It was a plan arcade style soccer game with the normal Mario world twists such as using powerups ,etc. Wifi is something that every Wii user has been waiting for since they unrapped there little white box. This year Europe's first game to make use of the system Wifi capability's, falls somewhat short in both single and online play. Read on to find out why.

- System Tested On
Played on a PAL Wii with a PAL version of the game at 480p over component cables

Gameplay (Score 6 of 10)
Well I don't really know what to say about the gameplay, its a simple 4 a side soccer team with one of the Mario world stars as captain. There are powerups such as shells, hammers,etc. And every character has there own unique special attack and special defense move, but in reality thats where the games depth ends. Once you have played through your first match, you will feel like you are watching a video on repeat. With a wide range of levels I expected they would hold my interest for slightly longer however it was not the case, its pretty much a simple swap of the background and course and a change of the levels hazard and you have a new level. The game just lacks the depth of some form of leveling system, you end up playing the same levels multiple times over to win a new trophy for your cabinet, when it comes to rewards I find trophies to be somewhat lacklsuter. There are some new additions to the game which make it a big up from the GC original such as super shots and the new and improved control of the goalie where you control the goalies hand as balls fly towards you. As for the super shots once you have them mastered and figure out all you have to do is shoot a shell then a super shot form anywhere and your pretty much guaranteed a goal the game becomes somewhat boring. Well with such a average single player experience I was expecting the online to make up for it, it seems the Wii's first online title is a fairly big let down, even by Nintendo's standards of poor online interactivity. There are also single player challenges that place you in situations where you are a man down or 2 goals down and you must try to win the game, honestly I found this to be the most entertaining point in the entire game.

Sound (Score 8 of 10)
Good sounds that suit the game well, theres really not much to be said about it.

Graphics (Score 6 of 10)
Now some people might say I have been harsh only giving a 6 out of 10 for graphics. While they do what they are there for, its graphics we could have expected on the GC. Theres only so many times we can see Mario and his friends on new systems looking slightly 1 up'ed from there last gen counter parts. Graphically its nothing special, but does it job.

Replay Value (Score 6 of 10)
First the single player, with the amount of trophies and challenges you can do the game should keep you playing for awhile, that is of course if you can stomach playing it that long without being bored to tears. Now onto the online play, the thing many people bought the game for. Well in 1 word. Disappointment. Being on a Nintendo console no one expected voice chat or even talking via a on screen keyboard, but this game has no interaction at all. You can either play with your friends, or a random stranger (Who you can't talk to or play again or add as a friend), the only community feeling it has is where you score points and go on a scoreboard. The online in reality feels like you are just playing a harder version of the CPU, I really hope future Wifi titles are not this much of a let down.

Overall (Score 6.5 of 10)
While it is a step up from the Gamecube outing Mario and his friends still deliver one of the least entertaining ways to play soccer, with the single player portion of the game feeling like a broken record repeating itself and the online play feeling barely online I would suggest you not to waste your hard earnt dollars on this unless you either are a soccer fan or just want to play your Wii online. Perhaps after some price drops and you find it in your local targets bargain bin would I suggest this.

[Hard core Rikki]

What happened to paragraphs? Also, a youtube video wouldnt be out of place.

Nice enough review, but I'm sticking with Smash Bros Melee. Weee!!

[Samor]

It sounds like they implemented an online system just like on the DS.
That might work for a handheld, but in this day and age of Xbox Live! for a regular console that doesn't suffice.

[emwearz]

@Samor we can only hope future titles have a more in depth online service.

[hushypushy]

6.5/10 seems like a pretty good score after your bad review

[Cid Highwind]

6.5 isn't a game I would buy unless extremely interested in it. It's mediocre at best in my book, and that probably sums up his review as well. It's nice, and probably fun, but even the selling points are flawed a lot.

Does it also lack a lot of depth in skills required? As in, you don't really improve anymore after you've played the game for 2 hours?

[hushypushy]

Well maybe we have different scales, 5 is in the middle and thus is average to me. Mediocre would be a 4 for me.

[Cid Highwind]

We've been raised with scales to 10 at school, so that's kinda what I base my score on. This means a five is clearly insufficient, since anything over 5.5 passes. If you've got any lower, you'll be doing the same class again.

In gaming terms this would mean that a 7 means it's solid, yet not groundbreaking at all. One might even say average, but that already has a pretty negative sound to it, more reserved to a 6. Still passing, but missing something. Anything lower than a 5.5 would mean there's some game or fun breaking flaws in it, which the good aspects can't really make up for.

Seeing how many good games there are and how small my budget is compared to the good games released, it won't be hard to see that anything that gets a 7 on average or lower gets the label "fans only" because otherwise there's plenty of other games in the genre that have much more appeal. The only thing that might save it could be a unique selling point making it addictive, such as great multiplayer fun. So a game that gets a 5 will automatically be skipped.

[hushypushy]

Pardon my French, but comparing school grades to review scores is bull****

A 6.0 is a 60%, and that's a D-. Anything below 59% is an F, it's a failure. Which is fine when you're grading school things---you have to get at least 2/3 of the things correct (roughly) in order to pass.

But when it comes to games, there is no objective "passing". You're just looking at a number on a scale. When you have a 1-10 scale, it helps to use all the numbers. 1 is atrocious, 10 is a masterpiece. When you're going on the school scale, even though it's 1-10, you start out with 5 being a failure and then going upwards from there. Then you are effectively only given 6 scores max, because what's the point of going lower than 5? If you're gonna do it like that, why not do a 1-5 scale and use all the numbers?

My point is that you need to forget what you have in your mind, unlearn what you have learned (as Yoda said). We have this 1-10 scale for a reason, treat it like you would any other sort of linear scale and use all the numbers

IMO, of course.

[Cid Highwind]

Well, I do use a linear scale. The thing is, there's so many good games out there, and countless of crappy games, that even a 6 is "meh" to me, simply because there's at least 5 other games in the genre that score at least a point higher.

A 5 means it's not good enough, but perhaps you can look further than that. While a 1 is more like "WTF where they thinking!"

[emwearz]

I do my scoring like hushypushy, 5 being average, 10 being great (Monkey Island haha) and 0 being horrible. The game got the marks it did becasue while it is a lack luster title it still does have heaps to do and its a sports game so It wouldn't be fair me marking a title extreamly low just because I dont like soccer ,etc. I try to give reviews that anyone can pick up and not just a perosnal opinion on a game. The game is just above average, it has an all right control scheme and features, could of been great had it not been so repetitive.

Anything from 4-6 to me is its 'ok' but its not worth a full priced game when there are better titles out there, wait for a price drop to pick it up.

[Aided Onslaught]

Knowing how people score helps a lot. That's how gamespot does it I believe. Since school has been in my head, and has had little time to escape (a lot has gone, don't get me wrong) I also believe that 7 or higher is passing...I understand how that can be wrong though.

[hushypushy]

Originally Posted by Cid Highwind

Well, I do use a linear scale. The thing is, there's so many good games out there, and countless of crappy games, that even a 6 is "meh" to me, simply because there's at least 5 other games in the genre that score at least a point higher.

A 5 means it's not good enough, but perhaps you can look further than that. While a 1 is more like "WTF where they thinking!"

Well, your scale is based on negativity (lots of points for sucky games...1-6 is suck) and my scale is based on positivity (more points for good games...5 is ok and from there it goes to good).

This is the main reason I don't put numbers in my review, it's just too confusing.

[emwearz]

This is the main reason I don't put numbers in my review, it's just too confusing.

This is actually the first time I have seen someone think a 6/10 is a fail, 6/10 is what it is its 60% on the 'Gee Wizz' factor. Well if you read the review you can think to yourself how well it did if the number confuse you as I try to be informative.

[Cid Highwind]

They don't necessarily suck, they're just not instant classics or the best titles in the genre that everyone needs to have. Then again, I am picky about my games, can't buy them all, can I? So the ones I'd give a 6 on average are titles I'll probably pick up from the budget bin if I'm interested, just not for the full price. And I think this discussion also points out that the numberin can even be misleading due to interpretation of the grades given. Which is also a reason why I tend to ignore them at review websites and try to look at the reasons why they give props to a game, or why they think it falls short. Which is the reason why it's great to see reviews that touch every single aspect of the game

[hushypushy]

Cid only buys the 8, 9, and 10 ranked games, I see where this is heading

[Cid Highwind]

Well, that's probably one thing, then again, if there's a game that others would rate as 6 or 7, but I find it interesting and the reasons why they didn't give it an 8 are irrelevant to me, I can see me pick up one of those as well.

[Samor]

I probably have tons of games that others would rate as mediocre or poor.

[Cid Highwind]

I have a Dreamcast with lots of games >_>

[Samor]

so... they're all top-rated?