-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Kyle Orland of Ars Technica asks: What do you consider a "core" Mario game?
- Thread starter Glass Shark
- Start date
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Mario Run? List disqualified.
Prof. Bathtub
Member
This is my list as well. I guess I hewed to mostly the output of the Miyamoto/Tezuka/Koizumi teams, which is why Yoshi's Island gets in. (I mean, Captain Toad is a spinoff by the main team as well, but a non-platformer as a main entry feels off.) SMB2USA is a little tougher to justify under that criteria, but so much of it was soon incorporated into the series, so whatever. The parameters become fuzzier for SM64DS, but it's not a drastic reimagining, so it can be folded into 64 in general. The New series, I suppose you can easily make the case for them being valid, but their treatment feels different. Tough to make a conclusive case for or against their inclusion.
LegendofLex
Member
Are the other games Waluigi showed up in other core Mario games?
I don't think Waluigi appeared in Sunshine, either Galaxy game, any NSMB game, either 3D ____ game, Run, or Odyssey. In Maker you can bring him in via amiibo functionality, but you can also bring in tons of characters from outside Mario, so I don't really use the amiibo stuff as part of my calculus.
No one's trying to argue that Mario Kart/Party/Sports/RPG games are core Mario games, and those are the games Waluigi is relegated to. Not to mention that those games fail under other criteria besides just whether they add anything of importance to the other core titles (like not being platformers).
Weilthain
Banned
This is the correct answer.
QuixoticNeutral
Member
The poll is pretty inconsistent in asking about ports. I don't see it as that informative to ask about 64 DS but not about All-Stars or the Super Mario Advance line (e-Reader stages included).
For me it's unambiguous: Super Mario refers to the platformer lines, 2D and 3D, ports included. There shouldn't be any argument about these:
- 2D (classic): SMB, SMB2 (JP), SMB2 (USA), SMB3, SMW
- 2D (new): NSMB, NSMB Wii, NSMB2, NSMBU + NSLU
- 3D: 64, Sunshine, Galaxy, Galaxy 2, 3D Land, 3D World, Odyssey
SMB2 USA was completely absorbed into the heritage and identity of the series regardless of its origins, while Lost Levels now looks kind of like the New Super Luigi U of its day. The content added in 64 DS qualifies for the same reason.
I personally count Maker but I can see why not everyone would. More on this below.
Agreed on SML, YI, and Mario Run. I think Yoshi's Island is disputable despite its SMW2 branding (and I adore Yoshi's Island), but it plays so distinctly that from the perspective of 1995, when 2D platformers were still plentiful enough that we had no trouble telling series apart, it was clearly its own thing (and to a far greater degree than SMB2 USA).
Maker is an interesting borderline case in that it certainly plays like a premier 2D platforming experience with a lot of mechanics to call its own, all of which are distinctly Mario. I included it, but I can see the argument against it from the perspective of level design, even with the (sloppily) designed event or challenge stages included. We'd be singing a different tune if we really did get a main trunk of Nintendo-designed stages that exploited Maker's mechanics/interactions to provide an out-of-the-box, single-player experience that held its own, with or without the editor.
Absolutely disagree on NSMB, which is as main-line as they come. To say that NSMB isn't a continuation is tantamount to saying Samus Returns isn't a Metroid game or ALBW isn't a 2D Zelda. You don't get to pick and choose based on feelings towards the art style, music, or the repeated design elements across instalments that unify NSMB as a sub-series, which are the typical complaints. It's distinct, it's a revival, and it's unambiguously a straight-up successor to the main-line format. There isn't a case against it.
I do feel a little bad about leaving the original Donkey Kong and Mario Bros. out of the picture, given their seminal influence in inextricably marking Mario as the icon of the jump mechanic, but I think we can all agree that "Super Mario", as a platforming line, begins with SMB1. You jump, and the screen moves with you: those are the fundamentals. As far as the requirement for Mario to be the featured character—well, there's still a world of separation between, say, Super Princess Peach and New Super Luigi U (even if the latter were wholly stand-alone like SMB2 JP was back in the day).
I realize this makes my own exclusion of SML look arbitrary, but a lot of that may come from the inertia of how they were perceived in the early 1990s when they were current, and portable games were overwhelmingly regarded as inessential spin-off reductions. It was a totally different context from the DS era when the portable hardware line was seen as a viable home for main-line software (in large part because NSMB said so).
The thing about the identity of a series is that sometimes, it's something that emerges retroactively depending on where the series goes. It does in fact matter that SMB2 USA was afterwards woven into the fabric of main-line Mario, while Yoshi's Island wasn't. It's exceptionally clear now, for instance, that Yoshi is its own branch. We'd probably have no trouble conceiving of 64 as a spin-off if 3D design went nowhere and it was just a one-off experiment before we went back to 2D business as usual. In many respects the 3D games are a separate series, their status cemented by how it was given the royal treatment as the face of Super Mario at the exclusion of new 2D games. Same story as Zelda. They're too important to regard as anything other than part of the core, but it took a while for them to have much in common with Mario as we knew him, and would look awfully different with a different coat of paint.
This is not unreasonable.
Hell, if we want to pick fights over the relative strengths of claims... 3DL/3DW belong here more securely than 64 and certainly more than Sunshine. (And I'm not suggesting there's any question about any of these.)
For me it's unambiguous: Super Mario refers to the platformer lines, 2D and 3D, ports included. There shouldn't be any argument about these:
- 2D (classic): SMB, SMB2 (JP), SMB2 (USA), SMB3, SMW
- 2D (new): NSMB, NSMB Wii, NSMB2, NSMBU + NSLU
- 3D: 64, Sunshine, Galaxy, Galaxy 2, 3D Land, 3D World, Odyssey
SMB2 USA was completely absorbed into the heritage and identity of the series regardless of its origins, while Lost Levels now looks kind of like the New Super Luigi U of its day. The content added in 64 DS qualifies for the same reason.
I personally count Maker but I can see why not everyone would. More on this below.
Agreed on SML, YI, and Mario Run. I think Yoshi's Island is disputable despite its SMW2 branding (and I adore Yoshi's Island), but it plays so distinctly that from the perspective of 1995, when 2D platformers were still plentiful enough that we had no trouble telling series apart, it was clearly its own thing (and to a far greater degree than SMB2 USA).
Maker is an interesting borderline case in that it certainly plays like a premier 2D platforming experience with a lot of mechanics to call its own, all of which are distinctly Mario. I included it, but I can see the argument against it from the perspective of level design, even with the (sloppily) designed event or challenge stages included. We'd be singing a different tune if we really did get a main trunk of Nintendo-designed stages that exploited Maker's mechanics/interactions to provide an out-of-the-box, single-player experience that held its own, with or without the editor.
Absolutely disagree on NSMB, which is as main-line as they come. To say that NSMB isn't a continuation is tantamount to saying Samus Returns isn't a Metroid game or ALBW isn't a 2D Zelda. You don't get to pick and choose based on feelings towards the art style, music, or the repeated design elements across instalments that unify NSMB as a sub-series, which are the typical complaints. It's distinct, it's a revival, and it's unambiguously a straight-up successor to the main-line format. There isn't a case against it.
I do feel a little bad about leaving the original Donkey Kong and Mario Bros. out of the picture, given their seminal influence in inextricably marking Mario as the icon of the jump mechanic, but I think we can all agree that "Super Mario", as a platforming line, begins with SMB1. You jump, and the screen moves with you: those are the fundamentals. As far as the requirement for Mario to be the featured character—well, there's still a world of separation between, say, Super Princess Peach and New Super Luigi U (even if the latter were wholly stand-alone like SMB2 JP was back in the day).
I realize this makes my own exclusion of SML look arbitrary, but a lot of that may come from the inertia of how they were perceived in the early 1990s when they were current, and portable games were overwhelmingly regarded as inessential spin-off reductions. It was a totally different context from the DS era when the portable hardware line was seen as a viable home for main-line software (in large part because NSMB said so).
The thing about the identity of a series is that sometimes, it's something that emerges retroactively depending on where the series goes. It does in fact matter that SMB2 USA was afterwards woven into the fabric of main-line Mario, while Yoshi's Island wasn't. It's exceptionally clear now, for instance, that Yoshi is its own branch. We'd probably have no trouble conceiving of 64 as a spin-off if 3D design went nowhere and it was just a one-off experiment before we went back to 2D business as usual. In many respects the 3D games are a separate series, their status cemented by how it was given the royal treatment as the face of Super Mario at the exclusion of new 2D games. Same story as Zelda. They're too important to regard as anything other than part of the core, but it took a while for them to have much in common with Mario as we knew him, and would look awfully different with a different coat of paint.
This is not unreasonable.
Hell, if we want to pick fights over the relative strengths of claims... 3DL/3DW belong here more securely than 64 and certainly more than Sunshine. (And I'm not suggesting there's any question about any of these.)
This is what I selected as well.
Taliban Stan
Member
Scratch off Mario 2 and you have my list.
Glass Shark
Banned
You fucking jokers
Kyle Orland said:
hikarutilmitt
Member
So, more or less, I am spot on with NCL with this, with the exception of Mario Maker. I did the poll before even reading the thread.
I guess there are a few ways to define this. One could argue that the NES Trilogy (Quadrilogy?) are the "core" series and everything else is a growth from that. Or any Mario Platformer is a core title, including the non Mario-Team ones.
I'd say it should be the games with the most gravitas to them in terms of being the face of the franchise for the public:
Donkey Kong
Donkey Kong Jr.
Mario Bros.
Super Mario Bros.
Super Mario Bros. 2 (JAPAN)
Super Mario Bros. 2 (USA)
Super Mario Bros. 3
Super Mario World
Super Mario World: Yoshi's Island
Super Mario 64
Super Mario Sunshine
Super Mario Galaxy
Super Mario Galaxy 2
Super Mario 3D Land
Super Mario 3D World
Super Mario Odyssey
I considered the "New" series, but consider it a side "throwback" series that compliments and celebrates the main series, but doesn't advance it. The Gameboy games also don't have that needed gravitas in my opinion.
I'd say it should be the games with the most gravitas to them in terms of being the face of the franchise for the public:
Donkey Kong
Donkey Kong Jr.
Mario Bros.
Super Mario Bros.
Super Mario Bros. 2 (JAPAN)
Super Mario Bros. 2 (USA)
Super Mario Bros. 3
Super Mario World
Super Mario World: Yoshi's Island
Super Mario 64
Super Mario Sunshine
Super Mario Galaxy
Super Mario Galaxy 2
Super Mario 3D Land
Super Mario 3D World
Super Mario Odyssey
I considered the "New" series, but consider it a side "throwback" series that compliments and celebrates the main series, but doesn't advance it. The Gameboy games also don't have that needed gravitas in my opinion.
Now, if you wanna see people get up in arms, ask what the core Zelda titles are...
Glass Shark
Banned
Kyle published the results of the quiz at Ars. Over 1,800 responses.