Gaming "Paper Mario Sticker Star"

[pokefloote]

It does feel very similar to M&L, just without Luigi.
I like this game, and I liked Super paper Mario. I liked all of the Paper Mario games. It's different, but nice.

AND INCREDIBLY EASY LIKE WOW

 

[gamefan5]

Playing it as I type. It's a good game.
Game of the century Jiehfeng?
Yeah... Far from it.
It's a good game don't get me wrong, but I'll be honest, It's not the best Paper Mario game.
I can't believe I'm saying it but IGN's score of 8.3 sounds just about right. It's a good game but it has a few noticable flaws.
The battle formula is sorta good but it's not the usual formula:

1. U battle with stickers... I really MEAN stickers. And nothing else... You don't have basic skills, Your sticker album is your repertoire of skills.
2. Because of that, u must take account the number of stickers you got. Which one you use, etc. Why? Because once that sticker is used. it is PERMANENTLY lost.
3. There are no badges. (Huge downer for me) Again , that's because the battle formula is different, as there are no FP. Stickers are basically your badges.
4. Sure stickers are everywhere. But does that mean there are an unlimited amount? Not exactly.
With that said, it will make bosses more challenging and you'll definetely need a strategy in how to use your stickers to beat them.
(I'll make a simple example, if you don't have any jump stickers and only hammers, it'll make battles with flying enemies a lot tougher. (Better save up your coins kiddies for the battle spinner or else you'll die.)
5. You cannot choose who to attack. It's first enemy to last.
6 There are no XP points. Stickers you use determines the power of your attacks. How do you increase your health? By solving puzzles with stickers. (I kid you not) BTW your stickers are also lost when used outside battles.
If there's a certain sticker you need that happens to be all the other side of the map in a freaking hidden place in order to solve a puzzle, then you WILL need to get it in order to advance. Oh and guess what? Your Partner is useless in that aspect. So good luck hunting for those playing without walkthrough. XD
7. Partners in battles are non-existent.

What's interesting with this battle formula is the fact that it makes everything you do a huge gamble. I think it adds a certain challenging aspect to it. But it feels different, and it's not something I like actually. BTW, the game has that 'challenging aspect I mentionned. But so far, the game is incredibly easy.
That's the overall gist of it. It feels like the formula has differed too much from the other series... (not counting Super Paper Mario)
Is it the best paper mario I've ever played? So far, it's a good game but it's not the best. TTYD is still the best imo.
If you want a certain... something you find in a paper mario game, I'll be honest... it's not the game you want as the formula differs greatly than the previous one.
I would give it an 8 and not higher than that.

 

[ShadowSoldier]

I'm only on 1-1 but so far I really like the game. It's a nice change up. Don't get me wrong, I would have loved it if it was traditional Paper Mario, but as long as it's better than Super Paper Mario (which sucked not only as a game, but as a bad paper mario game too), then I'm happy. Graphics really bright and beautiful and I like it. 3D could be a little bit better, but it's not as bad as New Super Mario Bros. 2

 

[gamefan5]

I think the main problem is putting Paper Mario on a handheld. Before this, it was simple: You had Paper Mario as the RPG on consoles, and Mario&Luigi as the RPG on handhelds. Once those lines began to blur, what differences needed to be made between Paper Mario and Mario&Luigi?

You see what I'm saying. Sure, M&L has more of an emphasis on action commands, and Paper Mario has more of an emphasis on party members, but overall they're very similar turn-based RPGs, albeit with different art styles. So of course, they saw a necessity to change the play style of one of them.

That said, I really wish they just either made this an M&L game instead, or else saved Paper Mario for the console. That would've fixed things better.

I'm not sure I agree with that statement.
Yes there are similaries and they are both turn-based RPG games but they are different enough to not be the of the same. I think Paper Mario was put on a 3DS only because it could handle it (It's quite a beefy game). That and the fact that making a paper mario game with 3D would be interesting (But I think they failed that aspect.) XD. The main problem isn't because it's on a handheld, but it's the fact that it was done differently. M&L games has a certain charm that can easily be recognized in all of their games but that simply isn't found in paper mario games.
As for that particular paper mario game, that series's charm isn't simply recognizable, because the important aspects of the game were either not found or done completely differently.

 

[TripleSMoon]

I'm not sure I agree with that statement.
Yes there are similaries and they are both turn-based RPG games but they are different enough to not be the of the same. I think Paper Mario was put on a 3DS only because it could handle it (It's quite a beefy game). That and the fact that making a paper mario game with 3D would be interesting (But I think they failed that aspect.) XD. The main problem isn't because it's on a handheld, but it's the fact that it was done differently. M&L games has a certain charm that can easily be recognized in all of their games but that simply isn't found in paper mario games.
As for that particular paper mario game, that series's charm isn't simply recognizable, because the important aspects of the game were either not found or done completely differently.

The way I see it, Paper Mario and M&L on the same platform would be too much of a similar thing, even if there are still some differences. Kind of like how Mega Man got oversaturated with both X AND the classic series having games made for consoles at the same time, for example. But then you had the Zero series being made at the same time as the X series even though they were very similar, which worked great since one was on a handheld and one was on a console.

Imagine if Mega Man Battle Network and Starforce were both made for handhelds at the same time (as opposed to one being a successor). Or Zero and ZX being made for handhelds at the same time. It would make the fact that they're different series redundant, and they would might as well just drop one of the series and focus on the other.

Anyway, thanks for the rundown on Sticker Star. based on what you're saying, I think I'm gonna skip this one... at least until I find it cheap or used, somewhere down the line. besides, I need to beat TTYD first.

 

[gamefan5]

The way I see it, Paper Mario and M&L on the same platform would be too much of a similar thing, even if there are still some differences. Kind of like how Mega Man got oversaturated with both X AND the classic series having games made for consoles at the same time, for example. But then you had the Zero series being made at the same time as the X series even though they were very similar, which worked great since one was on a handheld and one was on a console.

Imagine if Mega Man Battle Network and Starforce were both made for handhelds at the same time (as opposed to one being a successor). Or Zero and ZX being made for handhelds at the same time. It would make the fact that they're different series redundant, and they would might as well just drop one of the series and focus on the other.

Anyway, thanks for the rundown on Sticker Star. based on what you're saying, I think I'm gonna skip this one... at least until I find it cheap or used, somewhere down the line. besides, I need to beat TTYD first.

Point taken. But I don't think this'll be a problem for both of those series. Far from it to be honest.

The series you've mentioned are good examples but I think they just recycled stuff from an older series. (Both the X and classic megaman series as you say.)
As for starforce... same reason.

But for Paper Mario and M&L, the key is the fact that that even the similarities in the game can make 'em so different.
I won't list the differences because you probably know what I'm talking about.
That being said, I think those two series in one console will not be a problem at all.

 

[TripleSMoon]

Point taken. But I don't think this'll be a problem for both of those series. Far from it to be honest.

Exactly, because they completely changed the Paper Mario formula. It's different enough from M&L now to not be a problem.

 

[gamefan5]

Exactly, because they completely changed the Paper Mario formula. It's different enough from M&L now to not be a problem.

That is not what I meant at all. And It made this paper mario game worse than expected. I edited my posts.

 

[TripleSMoon]

That is not what I meant at all. And It made this paper mario game worse than expected. I edited my posts.

Your post seems to imply that it's extremely different in a lot of ways. That's what I see, anyway.

 

[gamefan5]

Your post seems to imply that it's extremely different in a lot of ways. That's what I see, anyway.

Ok I'll dissect it for you. Here's mainly why I see the PM series existing with the M&L. And yes to answer your question, I do see it different enough.

The paper mario series is a turn-based RPG game that stems from the Super Mario RPG origins.

1. The battle system is one proof of that.

In most games, you basically attack using your weapon (well in this case your attack actions (Jump, hammer whatever) and hope that you inflict enough damage.
However, you must also expect to be attacked at all times and hope that your defense is high enough for you to survive (as you cannot dodge but only defend)

The partner systems stems from that too. They have their own basic attacks and special attacks that uses FP.

The way the story is made also stems from SMRPG. Haven't you wondered why in the PM series, you always have to catch seven stars, or something similar to that extent? Yeah...

Now here's the funny part. The M&L series completely throws that formula out the window.

1. Sure the battle system is turned based and has the action commands and whatnot. But the fact that makes it different is how the battles are handled. It's innovative.
Basic commands requires timing to perform like the PM series but advanced action commands requires more skills to perform as you must imput the right button combinations AND time to get it right. If you miss, you can completely miss a whole attack. It's more of a gamble.
Furthermore, you can dodge. Completely dodge and/or even counter-attack attacks which makes you feel like you're more in control of the situation, while in the PM series, you're not.

2. Oh yeah, some of the battles also completely break away from it's formula, (The giant bowser battles are examples of that.)

3. What also makes this game rather known is it's completely humerous storylines. It makes the series less stale and it can become quite unpredictable. The characters are rather lovable and they actually have more personality. You may think that it doesn't matter but it's what makes this series rather unique and different and it's also what makes the experience rather different than the PM series.

The series that you've shown me are barely different. That's true. But do not consider the same with the PM and M&L series as while they are RPG games, they are different enough.
Tbh, If the SMRPG continued with the PM series, I would have agreed.

 

[YoshiKart]

I actually loved the shit out of Super Paper Mario. Every review I'm seeing of the Sticker Star is relating the game to the first two releases while throwing some criticism towards SPM. Any of you love SPM and love Sticker Star?

Don't get me wrong; I actually like SPM too. It was a good game. It just doesn't fare well in comparison to the Paper Mario series in whole.
Don't forget how easy SPM was. It was a great tribute to the Bowser segments in TTYD (which were my absolute favorite), but the overall gameplay in SPM became easy and stale.

I'm trying to like PM4 right now, but the sticker gimmick is annoying to get used to. Of course it'll be a good game, but I hold TTYD above the rest.

 

[Jiehfeng]

Too much of text to read
Well, paper mario sticker is a good game. Fun and hilarious.

But it is not great nor one of the best games of the century.

 

[The Milkman]

I think you guys are making the sticker system sound worse then it is, especially you GamFan, for shame , honestly, the combat system seems fine to me, I like how stickers completely eliminate grinding and all and I think its a great idea. My main problem is how fucking stupid some puzzles are, I mean, I'm the kind of person who will walk past everything that's not blatantly obvious to me so I have more to do after I beat the game. This game says fuck you for trying that. You needONE SPECIFIC GODDAMN STICKER FOR EVERY PUZZLE. That's what pisses me off, its like they tryed scribblenauts style solutions but fucked up.

 

[Jiehfeng]

I think you guys are making the sticker system sound worse then it is, especially you GamFan, for shame , honestly, the combat system seems fine to me, I like how stickers completely eliminate grinding and all and I think its a great idea. My main problem is how fucking stupid some puzzles are, I mean, I'm the kind of person who will walk past everything that's not blatantly obvious to me so I have more to do after I beat the game. This game says fuck you for trying that. You needONE SPECIFIC GODDAMN STICKER FOR EVERY PUZZLE. That's what pisses me off, its like they tryed scribblenauts style solutions but fucked up.

Yeah, that sucks

 

[DSGamer64]

Personally, I'm a bit apprehensive since it's so far-gone from the past Paper Mario games. I guess the best I can hope for is that it's a good game, but I can assure you it won't be "The Thousand Year Door 2."

It is a good game, not spectacular but it's fun none the less. I am having a good time with it despite the faults it has at times.

 

[gamefan5]

I think you guys are making the sticker system sound worse then it is, especially you GamFan, for shame , honestly, the combat system seems fine to me, I like how stickers completely eliminate grinding and all and I think its a great idea. My main problem is how fucking stupid some puzzles are, I mean, I'm the kind of person who will walk past everything that's not blatantly obvious to me so I have more to do after I beat the game. This game says fuck you for trying that. You needONE SPECIFIC GODDAMN STICKER FOR EVERY PUZZLE. That's what pisses me off, its like they tryed scribblenauts style solutions but fucked up.

Well let's see...
Am i the only one that thinks that the sticker battle system is sort of a miss?
Nope, check the other reviews. And what's worse, the criticism comes from Paper Mario fans.
You know what would have been better for me? If stickers only replaced badges. As in they do not replace the basic commands and items. Limited badges instead of using FP would have been better. And another thing to add, I would have preferred the grinding to still be there. Why? To increase HP.I can see newcomers finding it more difficult because it is more puzzle oriented and u must search everywhere to find HP blocks. I also find the fact that I have to attack the first enemy instead of choosing who do I want to attack, completely preposterous.
We actually expected something much better from this game.
Is it a bad game though? No, but it's certainly not what die-hard PM fans waited for. It's still a fun game though and I would only consider it as a loan.

 

[TripleSMoon]

I never really felt the first two Paper Mario games were very grind-heavy at all.

 

[gamefan5]

I never really felt the first two Paper Mario games were very grind-heavy at all.

They never were. I found the XP system rather balanced.

 

[gamefan5]

Unlike M&L where you must truly grind. XD
Complexity (M&L) vs Simplicity (PM). XD

 

[TripleSMoon]

Unlike M&L where you must truly grind. XD
Complexity (M&L) vs Simplicity (PM). XD

I've never really felt the need to grind in either series, personally. That said, I've only played through the first M&L game, not the sequels.