Because this is your thread, Rol, and I know you have an affinity for Malstrom, I'll hold my tongue regarding my opinion of him. I will say, however, that in typical Malstrom fashion, he again proves why he's like the worst kind of politician: Off to one side with ridiculously extreme views.
First, what I agree with: Pretty much everything he says about Super Mario Bros and the influence it has had on all of gaming, just as Pac Man did before it and Wii Sports did after it.
What is completely biased and one sided, however, is that he refuses to give 3D Mario, particularly Super Mario 64, its due credit with how much it too has influenced gaming. Mario 64 obviously wasn't the very first 3D platform game ever created (Jumping Flash, anyone?), same way SMB wasn't the very first 2D platformer, either (that would be Pitfall). What both of those Mario games in fact did, was show us how these genres could be incredibly fun and amazingly well done. And while I will be the first to agree that SMB has had more influence on gaming than SM64, there are plenty of examples, from basic clones like Banjo Kazooie and Conker's Bad Fur Day, all the way to other 3rd person, camera controlled games like Uncharted, Metal Gear Solid and Assassin's Creed, that have come to be simply because of how successful an endeavor SM64 was in 3D game design.
Basically, it just comes down to the fact that Malstrom prefers 2D Mario to 3D Mario, and continues to quickly point to sales every time to back up his argument of why one is right and the other is wrong. If it came down to it, I'd side with 2D Mario as well, as SMW 1 & 2 and SMB 1-3 are my favorite platformers of all time. But as long as Nintendo continues to give us excellent entries like the Galaxy games (both of which I prefer to NSMB Wii, by the way), there is no reason why we can't have both.
