New Super Mario Bros.
Moderator: Dream17 Staff
New Super Mario Bros.
Yes, a new Mario topic!
Seems you get differing reviews on it, but I think it's a GREAT, nostalgic throwback to the good ol' NES and SNES days. There were more than a couple of spots where I was thrown into reminiscing about those days of old by the very retro level design, and all the old sound effects really added to it as well. My biggest gripe about the game is that it's a bit on the short side. Oh well, it's great fun anyway.
Seems you get differing reviews on it, but I think it's a GREAT, nostalgic throwback to the good ol' NES and SNES days. There were more than a couple of spots where I was thrown into reminiscing about those days of old by the very retro level design, and all the old sound effects really added to it as well. My biggest gripe about the game is that it's a bit on the short side. Oh well, it's great fun anyway.
- Bring back frog
- THE ONLY ONE HERE
- Posts: 150
- Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 4:32 am
- Location: scotland
but..
yeah i thought it was dissointing,
am a huge nintendo fan (in fact its the only consols i buy)
and i don't normaly stress nintendo games but i think
the new super mario bros wasent very good at all, i
even regrate buying it (and i normaly never regrate buying any game).
am sorry to all those who like the game but i think nintendo should
of never made it.
am a huge nintendo fan (in fact its the only consols i buy)
and i don't normaly stress nintendo games but i think
the new super mario bros wasent very good at all, i
even regrate buying it (and i normaly never regrate buying any game).
am sorry to all those who like the game but i think nintendo should
of never made it.
Thomas sutherland... soz i havent been on for ages be back soon.
- AndrewTaylor
- Regular
- Posts: 157
- Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:01 am
- Location: Leeds UK
- Contact:
- Bring back frog
- THE ONLY ONE HERE
- Posts: 150
- Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 4:32 am
- Location: scotland
- bucky o'hare
- Newbie
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 1:09 am
- Location: Connecticut
- Contact:
But he does not argue against someone's oppinion. He argues that the game is bad, as a fact, while allowing for an oppinion of the opposite to exist. Part of allowing freedom of thought is allowing oppinions that are factually inconsistent. His responce is in no violatioin of that.worMatty wrote:"I respect everyone's opinions, though you must admit they're wrong."
Since an opinion is mainly a person's preference, albeit with many considerations made, they aren't absolutely right or wrong.
Furthermore, it does not even matter if his statement of the game being bad as a fact is well argumented or not. Any argument for or against the quality of the game would ultimately have to hinge on some number of oppinions that each person may or may not recognize as facts. This means that solid fact for one person, would only be recognized as an oppinion by another. And still, his post is in no violation of that, because the very statement that, "everyone has an opinion but come on, it wasent very good," is an oppinion in itself, and anything that is stated as a fact in such an oppinion must be considered as an oppinion of the author of the statement on the arguments that support the said fact, making that fact an oppinion to anyone excluding the author.
With all that in mind, his statment translates into, "I hold an oppinion that the game is bad as a matter of fact, but, recognizing it as an oppinion in itself, I will allow other people to have oppinions that disagree with it." It's hard to argue with such statement.
P.S. I am not even sure what game the discussion is about, much less whether it's actually any good.
None of my projects (Minus One converter, W3D/W4 Map Viewer, and WMapEditor) are endorsed, supported or otherwise affiliated with Dream17. I just find Dream17 forums to be a nice place to share and discuss my work with others.
- Bring back frog
- THE ONLY ONE HERE
- Posts: 150
- Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 4:32 am
- Location: scotland
- AndrewTaylor
- Regular
- Posts: 157
- Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 11:01 am
- Location: Leeds UK
- Contact:
I don't see why. Things that are internally inconsistent are by definition wrong, so I for one would rather not be expected to "respect" such opinions.K^2 wrote:Part of allowing freedom of thought is allowing oppinions that are factually inconsistent.
I mean, I'm quite happy for people to think things that I disagree with, but when people think things that they themselves disagree with if you phrase the question differently, surely that just shows they've not thought things through properly?
But that's the problem. You can't prove that they are factually inconsistent. They might not match with what you think are facts, but that doesn't necessaraly mean that there is any contradiction in another person's oppinion. Any logical argument has to be based on some set of axioms. There are some axioms that we can all pretty much agree on, at least for the sake of argument. Things, like, what we can see and touch is real. That in itself is not a fact, just consider all the crazy people, but we all presume it, because otherwise we have nothing to base our arguments on. The problem is that besides these, everyone's head is filled with a bunch of "axioms" that are somehow based on their own beliefs, experiences, etc, and are often fundamentally different from anybody else's. That causes a problem, because technically speaking, these are no more unprovable than any other axiom, and therefore, you must accept that person's right in believing in these without any reason. It's only when person's axioms are self-contradicting, that is when you have a right to argue that their beliefs are "incorrect". Of course, just like with any set of axioms, the contradictions can be quiet difficult to spot, and can go unnoticed for a very long time.
None of my projects (Minus One converter, W3D/W4 Map Viewer, and WMapEditor) are endorsed, supported or otherwise affiliated with Dream17. I just find Dream17 forums to be a nice place to share and discuss my work with others.