lol 3D gimmickry? i cant take this thread seriously or even you for that matter,

Oh God, that makes it worse. At least Kart is a good Mario game even if it isn't a real one.

A gimped Galaxy with gimmicky 3d is a real Mario game?? Isn't that trolling or something?

That would be all fine and dandy if not for the fact that it's all fictional and Peach didn't asked anyone for help. It's a play remember, not a game, no one's in danger, no heroics are performed and the player was always deceived. For that fact alone is a spin-off, since Mario doesn't do anything other than being an actor, and we all know the true Mario isn't an actor. 

And going from a kingdom to a world is only natural progression if you consider that in order for that to happen, the mushroom kingdom had to go on a conquering rampage, since in that frame of mind, all other kingdoms are subjugated to the will of Princess Peach. Since the peaceful Mushroom Kingdom of the first games isn't likely to go on conquering rampages, it makes no sense to go from kingdom to world. Thus that argument is invalid in the spectrum of Mario lore. 

Again, there's just no more reason to call SMB3 a "true" Mario game as SMW in the "rules" that Pyro as Bill created, that oh-so-supreme knowledge lord.

Let me be perfectly clear about something.

When it comes to the merits of what makes a game worthwhile, you are establishing yourself as the bottom of the barrel in terms of reliability on VGChartz. It's one thing to have a narrow value set that you use to determine what you like. That's fine. Some folks only play Madden, some folks only play Call of Duty, some folks only play NES games. Whatever. You're free to like what you like and it's not for anyone to begrudge you what you like.

The inverse, however, should also be true; it is not for you to disparage what other people like. You're the worst on the site as of this writing when it comes to this sort of thing (though Rol is happily doing his best to walk in your footsteps for the past while), but worse than that disparagement is that you're trying to put this forth as an objective scale by which games should be measured. No. Screw that idea, and I will actively reject the entire discourse leading up to and surrounding it. Congratulations, you are the mirrored reflection of the cartoonish fourteen-year-olds who insist to me that Batman: Arkham City "can't be that good because it's rated T" (real quote), or the ones who insist that "Nintendo doesn't make real games and never has" (real quote). You have lwoered the quality of the discourse with this topic and continue to contribute to the deterioration of discussion on these matters.

The worst part is that you're close to the gem of an idea that's actually sensible - that Super Mario Bros. games are inherently different from other Mario games - but even that idea is cribbed from other sources and shouldn't be used as fuel for the disparaging of other ideas or other value sets.

Is Super Mario 3D Land a Super Mario Bros. game? No, of course it isn't. Is it an actual Mario game? Yes, of course it is. The problem with the distinction here is that you're equating all of Mario with Super Mario Bros., when there's no longer any reason to do so. Mario Kart is just as big as Super Mario Bros., nowadays; the other Mario games experiment much more with the formula but they are still Mario games, just not Super Mario Bros.

There is nothing wrong with liking games or not liking games. What's wrong is that you're contributing to the stereotype of the retrocore gamers who insist that the old values are the only values that matter, pigeonholing Nintendo fans even as you antagonize the rest of us by insisting that the games we like aren't real games. THen you ask me if I'm trolling? You have the gall to suggest that I'm trolling when you've spent two dozen posts in this topic alone insisting that some of the best games of the past three decades aren't real Mario games?

This discussion is born of a false assumption, an erroneous set of principles by which to measure a larger set according to the standards of a smaller one. Your entire thesis - that only Super Mario Bros. games are real Mario games - is flawed at its core, and smacks of the kind of elitism whereby all different tastes are marginalized and respect, on the whole, is degraded.

So, you know, nice job there. That's what I wanted to see today: somebody trying to shit all over the things that other people like by being dismissive of their tastes. THat's something you can be proud of right there.

so basically a "real" mario game needs to be one of those pathetically easy 2d platformers, that was somewhat difficult when I was 5, but now I could easily beat with my eyes closed if given a few hours to memorize the very repetitive levels? But if a mario game requires skill beyond that of what a 5 year old can handle, it is automatically a lame spinoff, and obviously doesn't sell as well because it doesn't get heavily bundled and bought by the massive population of gameboy/wii/ds owners that cannot play a game that might actually be challenging at times.

All the floating platforms are stapled against the background, all the backgrounds are painted on a flat wall. Visual cues to it being a stage production are all over the game, just like how Super Mario 64 was a documentary of Mario's adventures.

There weren't any "plain" Mario adventures - which is to say Mario just running off and saving the Princess in the Mushroom Kingdom without having the paparazzi following him - on consoles between Super Mario Bros. and New Super Mario Bros. Wii.

You are being exactly as constructive as he is, cut that shit out.

Let me be perfectly clear about something.

When it comes to the merits of what makes a game worthwhile, you are establishing yourself as the bottom of the barrel in terms of reliability on VGChartz. It's one thing to have a narrow value set that you use to determine what you like. That's fine. Some folks only play Madden, some folks only play Call of Duty, some folks only play NES games. Whatever. You're free to like what you like and it's not for anyone to begrudge you what you like.

The inverse, however, should also be true; it is not for you to disparage what other people like. You're the worst on the site as of this writing when it comes to this sort of thing (though Rol is happily doing his best to walk in your footsteps for the past while), but worse than that disparagement is that you're trying to put this forth as an objective scale by which games should be measured. No. Screw that idea, and I will actively reject the entire discourse leading up to and surrounding it. Congratulations, you are the mirrored reflection of the cartoonish fourteen-year-olds who insist to me that Batman: Arkham City "can't be that good because it's rated T" (real quote), or the ones who insist that "Nintendo doesn't make real games and never has" (real quote). You have lwoered the quality of the discourse with this topic and continue to contribute to the deterioration of discussion on these matters.

The worst part is that you're close to the gem of an idea that's actually sensible - that Super Mario Bros. games are inherently different from other Mario games - but even that idea is cribbed from other sources and shouldn't be used as fuel for the disparaging of other ideas or other value sets.

Is Super Mario 3D Land a Super Mario Bros. game? No, of course it isn't. Is it an actual Mario game? Yes, of course it is. The problem with the distinction here is that you're equating all of Mario with Super Mario Bros., when there's no longer any reason to do so. Mario Kart is just as big as Super Mario Bros., nowadays; the other Mario games experiment much more with the formula but they are still Mario games, just not Super Mario Bros.

There is nothing wrong with liking games or not liking games. What's wrong is that you're contributing to the stereotype of the retrocore gamers who insist that the old values are the only values that matter, pigeonholing Nintendo fans even as you antagonize the rest of us by insisting that the games we like aren't real games. THen you ask me if I'm trolling? You have the gall to suggest that I'm trolling when you've spent two dozen posts in this topic alone insisting that some of the best games of the past three decades aren't real Mario games?

This discussion is born of a false assumption, an erroneous set of principles by which to measure a larger set according to the standards of a smaller one. Your entire thesis - that only Super Mario Bros. games are real Mario games - is flawed at its core, and smacks of the kind of elitism whereby all different tastes are marginalized and respect, on the whole, is degraded.

So, you know, nice job there. That's what I wanted to see today: somebody trying to shit all over the things that other people like by being dismissive of their tastes. THat's something you can be proud of right there.

I guess someone didn't see the truth behind SMB3.

The curtains, the fact that each stage is just props (being on stage held by strings), the ending sequence being the same as an encore from a play, the list goes on.