About Mario

[Rangaman]

Can I just say that...I don't get it? Not the gameplay, I understand that. But I don't get why everyone hails him as the "Hero of Platformers" or whatever. I mean, Mario games aren't awful or unbearable to me but...I just think that there's so many franchises that do platforming better. So what am I missing? I am legitimately confused here.

 

[aozgolo]

Being the first to do something well is often enough to make a footprint in history. The original Super Mario Bros. carries a lot of prestige as one of the first platformers many gamers played. It was bundled with the original NES, and later Nintendo Consoles carried on this tradition all the way up to the release of the Wii U with having bundles that include Mario games. The original game was a big success for Nintendo, so they capitalized on it and made him their mascot. What made him stand the test of time however is consistency. While spin-offs to the series are all over the place as is people's reception to them, the main platformer Mario series has delivered consistently tight controls, well designed levels, and delivered solid gameplay. While a few haven't been as critically well received (such as Super Mario Sunshine), they've all been commercial successes. Being Nintendo's flagship product puts Mario into the limelight quite often and thus creates more buzz around it, hence why people talk about it more.

Proof you don't have to be the best at something to be well received or commonly talked about. Not to mention, in platforming, what makes a game "better" is quite subjective.

 

[Saelune]

Honestly, Mario is by modern standards the King of Platforming still.

Who is there to contest him? The closest to mind is Banjo-Kazooie, but they are not just platformers, and platforming is not the sole focus. But Mario games even at their most complex, like 64 and Sunshine, are almost solely about platforming.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

Because its platforming in its most purest and simplest form.

And it just feels good to play, unlike games like say Sonic where I struggle, or games like Jak and Daxter where I RAGE.

 

[Samtemdo8_v1legacy]

I think Super Meat Boy outdid Mario in pure platforming, but as the name implies, it borrows from that great series. Mario us just fun. I don't regard the 3D games highly, but Mario 1, TLL and 3 are pretty respectable.

Everyone always uses Super Meat Boy as THE example to overshadow Mario.

Never mind any other Platformer in existance

 

[Yoshi178]

I think Super Meat Boy outdid Mario in pure platforming

alot of games probably outdo mario in platforming but none of them have the same reputation, history and contributions towards gaming that the mario series has made.


mario was one of the main reasons the NES did so well and saved the industry from the great video game market crash that was back in the late 70's and early 80's

 

[Silvanus]

The Mario games to my mind are still the purest and most fun examples of platforming I can think of. Super Meat Boy was too speedy, and lacked a lot of the diversity I love in Mario environments and enemies.

 

[Saelune]

I would add that Mario is still being made. I dont see a Super Meat Boy 2.

 

[Igor-Rowan]

What do we know Crash for? Running and spinning
What do we know Sonic for? Running
What do we know Ratchet/Banjo/Jak for? Being an action-adventure disgused as a platformer

We know Mario for jumping, and you might ask: "Is that it?" while the answer is yes, they get surprisingly deep with this mechanic alone with tight platforming, that's why Mario's controls and jump are the most polished out there. Ask any of the above's fans what is the worst part of their games and they'll likely answer: "That one part with precision platforming" because jumping in those game is one branch and in Mario it's the core of the experience.

 

[JUMBO PALACE]

Being the first to do something well is often enough to make a footprint in history. The original Super Mario Bros. carries a lot of prestige as one of the first platformers many gamers played. It was bundled with the original NES, and later Nintendo Consoles carried on this tradition all the way up to the release of the Wii U with having bundles that include Mario games. The original game was a big success for Nintendo, so they capitalized on it and made him their mascot. What made him stand the test of time however is consistency. While spin-offs to the series are all over the place as is people's reception to them, the main platformer Mario series has delivered consistently tight controls, well designed levels, and delivered solid gameplay. While a few haven't been as critically well received (such as Super Mario Sunshine), they've all been commercial successes. Being Nintendo's flagship product puts Mario into the limelight quite often and thus creates more buzz around it, hence why people talk about it more.

Proof you don't have to be the best at something to be well received or commonly talked about. Not to mention, in platforming, what makes a game "better" is quite subjective.

This is basically a /thread worthy post.

The only thing I can add is that there's something about Mario and how Nintendo handles his flagship games that just feels so freaking good. Just the other day it was one of the rare occasions where the girlfriend and I play a game together. I hooked up my Wii U and I asked her if she wanted to play Mario Kart or Super Mario 3D world. She picked the latter and we had a blast. The tight controls, simple but lovely character designs, and beautiful colors make the game easy to sort out visually and understand. We both had big smiles pretty much the whole time we played and that's something special. When she blew on the Wii U tablet after I assured her the game really was asking her to literally do that her reaction was priceless.

It hit me that that is what Nintendo is about. I have a PC for high framerates at 1440p resolution and IPS quality colors. I like Nintendo for how it makes me feel.

 

[Rangaman]

I would add that Mario is still being made. I dont see a Super Meat Boy 2.

Super Meat Boy Forever proves that there's still interest, and the fact that new Mario games are still coming out isn't super appealing to me TBH. I'd rather have a franchise end on a high note than linger on forever. And regarding your earlier post: Rayman and...actually not a whole lot else in 2D, A Hat in Time (if they ever finish it), Yooka-Laylee and Tearaway in 3D.

 

[Saelune]

I would add that Mario is still being made. I dont see a Super Meat Boy 2.

Super Meat Boy doesn't need a sequel. There's so much content and variety that I don't see how they'd improve it. Some of the levels, like the secret stage that rewards you with The Kid, pushed me to my limits, and I don't want anything harder. Maybe that was Mario's problem. It kept going and going even after there was nothing more. I'm talking about the 2D games. I liked Mario 64 when I was younger, but the 3D games don't do much for me.

Sometimes just more is fine, especially for an indie title. Super Mario 2 was mostly just more, and harder levels plus a poison mushroom. And who is to say they cannot improve it in ways you never considered.

I just think you need more than a single game to be "King" of a genre or whatever.

I would add that Mario is still being made. I dont see a Super Meat Boy 2.

Super Meat Boy Forever proves that there's still interest, and the fact that new Mario games are still coming out isn't super appealing to me TBH. I'd rather have a franchise end on a high note than linger on forever. And regarding your earlier post: Rayman and...actually not a whole lot else in 2D, A Hat in Time (if they ever finish it), Yooka-Laylee and Tearaway in 3D.

See above.

 

[09philj]

Mario is accessible, but good, and also properly made the transition from 2D to 3D. A lot of platformers are too easy for experienced players or too difficult for new ones. Mario gets it about right. I think the more recent Rayman games are slightly better than any of Mario's offerings, but he still represents a high quality standard.

 

[kilenem]

For most games in the series the controls are tight, the games are simple but have depth, the games rewards players for Exploring the levels and beating them. You can look at the success of the series with its worst entry and its sequel that improved all of its short comings.

For Super Mario Land 1 on the gameboy, The Controls aren't tight, the game is super hard, the levels are Bizarre and the game looks terrible from Aesthetics. As I kid I didn't understand what the Chinese Zombies were in level 4-1.

Super Mario Land 2 fixes all of these problems with, tighter controls, better Graphics, and alternate paths to Finish the level.

I like to add Super Mario Land is my favorite Mario game because its the first one I played and not that many people can beat it. Also it was like one of the first gameboy games and that's why it sucks.

 

[Rangaman]

This is a bit different than something like "Why is CoD so popular?"

There may be some other platformers that are objectively "better" than Mario in some ways, but it'd be like trying to counter-argue the merits of a Fender Stratocaster in establishing Rock n Roll.

 

[Worgen]

Because there is always Mario. Other platformers have done platforming better, but they don't tend to keep making new games. There is always a new Mario game to play but not often a new Rayman one. Plus there are a lot of bad platformers, Mario is the gold standard, if you can't match Mario then why would someone bother playing it since there is always Mario. Interesting enough though, we don't tend to call platformers 'Mario clones' like we do with 3rd person action games with god of war, fps games with doom, then halflife then cod, or side scrolling adventure games like metroid/vania games.