I did.
I'm not really seeing how that relates to your argument. If anything, he's largely in support of the mechanic that SMB/HLM use; you die, you restart back at the level and go through the good and bad parts. It's just that they are tuned to be highly punishing (you have to move fast or one wrong move is death), yet highly forgiving (you restart immediately if you do die) to balance it.
Mario is going for an entirely different pace.
I don't care too much about insta-spawn, checkpointing etc. It can be used effectively, as can having death act as a punishment.
What I care about is how good is core gameplay and how much of the game is actual gameplay.
In the SMB example, yes you immediately restart, but you still increase you sill level even if the pentaly for death is almost zero. Moreover, there is no other focus in the game except gameplay and the mechanics are tuned very well, so it really is a core gamer's game. Demon's Souls takes another tack, where death is punishing. But it also is almost entirely focused on actual gameplay, and mechanically excellent. It's a core game too.
Then you have a game like AssCreedIII, where the focus isn't on gameplay and the mechanics are poor. It is more of an adventure/movie/game hybrid. Gameplay, in and of itself, is not rewarding. Which is why any punishments death impose in that game are annoying.
So, for me, insta-spawn-no-punishment-for-death games and the opposite are both fine, if the game mechanics are top notch, and the game is 99% gameplay.
