This thread is about marginalizing the existence of and quality of Mario games that are not "REAL" Mario games; in this context, "REAL" is referring to a measure of legitimacy as much as adherence to core principles. Saying "that's not a REAL Mario game" is, in this context, also synonymous with reducing the game's worth.

(your own definition of "real" Mario games is problematic, but for a different reason, namely in that Super Mario Bros. is a spin-off of Mario Bros.)

There is no absolute metric of quality outside of personal experience; other people's metrics of quality should not matter to you, nor do they to me, but on that same token one should not shit on what other people care about.

I don't believe in using analogy when I can just say what I mean to say.

"Worth" in this case is not a measure of financial value.

I can safely ignore the thread - the first post, anyway. But no, when he presses the point on other people and insists that their own value metrics are invalid? THat's ridiculous. You'll notice that my first real reply to him was essentially the same - the others before that only outlined my own value metric.

I have no shame in coming in here and saying this whole exercise is intellectually bankrupt. Trying to rile people up is a shitty thing to do.

No. People are not at fault for being victims, because not all of them hold that other's value sets for video games don't matter. He doesn't have the power to control their reactions, but he does have the power to reasonably expect that their reaction will take a certain form, which would mean he's trolling.

So which is it, Rol? Is he trolling, or is he just attacking other people's ways of thinking? Which option should he be called out on? Which not?

In that case I apologize for nothing that I have said, and hold that the intent of this topic was underhanded and wrong-headed, and that it is up to no one person to try to detract from what other people like.

@ Khuutra

I didn't force my views on anybody, I just corrected their uninformed opinion. Don't blame me if they're wrong.
I knew the dates MK7 and 3DSLand released, I just couldn't pass up that opportunity. Don't get pissy just because I think mobile ports are drastically inferior to the home console versions.

EDIT: You have a cheek to accuse me of trolling when using your logic CD-i Hotel Mario is as much a real Mario as SMB3. Nicely done.

@Rol
It's a tough question to ask. Can't say mainline or main series because these days they aren't. Can't say Mario Bros because that includes the singlescreen original. Can't say Super Mario Bros because that excludes SMW whilst wrongly including SMB2. Had to have a way to exclude Lost Levels and Allstars because they aren't REAL Mario games, just as a minor update including Miis or a HD Allstars collection for Wii-U wouldn't be a REAL Mario game. I don't like using '2d' because it isn't. It's the REAL Mario so it doesn't need a prefix, it's the spinoffs that do. I also wanted to intentionally point out that there has only been 3, maybe 4, yet it's the most successful game ....er.....ever.

Yeah, I think we'll see one on Wii-U. If it's a launch game using some screen gimmickry and hurting local multiplayer then it should be put in the same box as Lost Levels. The real Mario game will probably come much later after several 3D spinoffs.

Rol are you telling me you think that is tongue-in-cheek?

Sales numbers don't prove something is not a legitamite entry in a series. Plenty of series have a lack of sales depending on the film, song or game. If Rihanna's song doesn't sell as many copies as one of her singles is it any less a Rihanna song? In technology their are products like Virtual Boy or many of the Apple products during their struggling period that failed to deliver large sales. Were those products any less legit?

In fact the 3D Mario's still sold fabulously and the difference in sales does not equal a difference in franchise. I'll use Metal Gear Solid again on the NES it didn't sell well at all compared to its later 4 titles on the last three generations consoles. Does that mean the earlier games were not Metal Gear games?

Another example would be the upcoming Bourne movie, it doesn't feature Jason Bourne but its from the same writer set in the same Universe with a similar plot line. It is part of the same series yet takes the series in a slightly different direction. Does that mean that the new Bourne movie isn't a Bourne Movie?

Also yes I am aware that the Mario franchise has evolved big time ever since DonkeyKong, but every game adds something new and 3D just helped revolutionalize Mario games. It did not change their essense and many aspects remain the same despite any changes. The gameplay while it did change with 3D it still remained essentially the same (Platforming) it didn't go into a different genre.

P.S- I know you don't agree with Pyro's stance so I don't know why you'd make a big deal of it. Fact is Super Mario World is no less a legit Mario entry then SuperMarioBros, MarioBros is a Mario game just as much as any other. If you think 3D is essentially an entirely different franchise (Spin off) I guess that is your personal opinion but by that logic the majority of franchises have spun off. Almost every game that has evolved is a spin off. If you can't evolve a product and improve it without being called a spin-off how could you possibly maintain the core franchise?

My head hurt after I read this... not sure if serious, or if just trying too hard to be like Rol.

In any event, there are 4 main Mario games in the original series... Super Mario Bros., SMB2 / Lost Levels, SMB3, and SMW, which was also subtitled SMB4 for the Japanese release... so the question should be when will the 5TH real SMB game be released, as there has never been a direct sequel to the original 2D Mario series beyond World.

@ Pyro as Bill I get what you're trying to do in your recent threads and respect it, but you really need to come up with better ideas.