By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
RolStoppable said:
Khuutra said:

All right. I guess you anticipated a couple of questions.

So. They are the financial backers of games. How does more financial backing make one game more "real" than another?

The answer is simple: it doesn't.

More support from a larger number of people does not define what is real. In order to establish that it does, you would need to define why a certain section of the population gets to define reality for everyone.

You can't.

I think you are completely wrong on what the word "REAL" means in the context of this thread. The context makes it pretty clear that it is about what a main series Mario game is and what isn't.

Your argument has reached a dead end, because it missed the point of this thread. Now it's my turn to ask you a question.

What makes you think that Super Mario 64 and its sequels are main series Mario games?

My argument still adheres strictly to the point of this thread, which is the definition of a "real" Mario game. But my argument boils down to this: you absolutely cannot satisfactorily qualify your reason for choosing console-based 2-D Mario platformers as the "real" Mario games. You have not done it yet. I defy you to do it.

To your question:

I never said they were.