Mario Vs. Sonic

[Mr Sunshine]

So whatever comes first is always best simply because "it came first"...? Yeah...that's convincing.

I agree. I always come first and I'm not getting any flattering comments at all because of this.

The girl knows what she's talking about

 

[cheezMcNASTY]

Well, even though I created, it's not exactly MY thread lol...This is for everyone to use, whether you're a Sonic fan, Mario fan, or hate em both and choose Luigi and Tails...

Anyway, you're right...Mario did take the world by storm then...But, we actually didn't even know he was Mario...At the time he was just called "The Jumpman"...Even on the original arcade machine it called him that...Mario really didn't take the gaming world by storm as "Mario" until the Mario Bros games...Sonic didn't actually first appear in his game either...Sonic first came in in the game Rad Mobile...However, unlike Mario/Jumpman he didn't star in it...

I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to assert by this. Neither Mario, Sonic, or Micky Mouse were called by the same name when they made their debut... what are you saying that indicates?

This next part is almost completely opinion, however, that's all this really is anyway for MOST people here lol..
To me, video games are only good if they have good stories and great characters...Well...The story isn't MUCH different from Mario to Sonic...They're both usually relatively simple (Though that's not always the case with games like Sonic Adventure and Paper Mario who went a bit further than the basic GoodvsEvil/End of the level story..) but the characters are GREAT characters...Sonic has a few things Mario doesn't though...He has MUCH more friends, giving him more depth and personality because he reacts with each one in a different way...Also, because he can talk, unlike Mario who rarely does (Though I'm not saying he can't physically, it just doesn't happen much) he doesn't noticeably develop as a character as much as Sonic does...Mario is EXACTLY the same as he was back in the day...And Sonic has seemed to grow...Even though Sonic hasn't grown much, other characters like Shadow, Knuckles, Tails, and Amy have all changed MASSIVELY from how they were when first introduced...

If you're stating this as solely your opinion, I'm wondering if you want me to not respond to it as a result...?
I will say that though Sonic is given more individuality as a character from his personality and his relationship with the others, but I think that's apples to oranges compared to Mario. Mario says nothing. Who he is and what he's thinking at all times (except in that AWFUL cartoon) are entirely dependent on who's playing the game.

When I play a Mario game, he seems to always be talking trash and marveling at how stupidly cartoonish everything in the game is. If someone else were to play, he could be entirely different. I would argue that Mario would lose a lot of character if he were more like Sonic simply because of how he is understood by everybody. I'm sure that if he suddenly spoke, a lot of people would go "that's not what I thought Mario would have said..." If you've ever watched someone else play a Mario game and narrate, it's usually pretty apparent that they approach who the main character is very differently. Example.

 

[KennedyKiller]

I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to assert by this. Neither Mario, Sonic, or Micky Mouse were called by the same name when they made their debut... what are you saying that indicates?


If you're stating this as solely your opinion, I'm wondering if you want me to not respond to it as a result...?
I will say that though Sonic is given more individuality as a character from his personality and his relationship with the others, but I think that's apples to oranges compared to Mario. Mario says nothing. Who he is and what he's thinking at all times (except in that AWFUL cartoon) are entirely dependent on who's playing the game.

When I play a Mario game, he seems to always be talking trash and marveling at how stupidly cartoonish everything in the game is. If someone else were to play, he could be entirely different. I would argue that Mario would lose a lot of character if he were more like Sonic simply because of how he is understood by everybody. I'm sure that if he suddenly spoke, a lot of people would go "that's not what I thought Mario would have said..." If you've ever watched someone else play a Mario game and narrate, it's usually pretty apparent that they approach who the main character is very differently. Example.

What I was trying so say was that you said "Mario" took the world by storm pretty much instantly, but at the time we didn't know it was "Mario"...It was just the Jumpman...The Jumpman was taking the world by storm, and not because of his character, but because of the gameplay...Soinic, really didn't add MUCH to gameplay, just the fact that it could be faster than any previous game...

And I agree completely about how Mario is subject to the person playing...But at the same time, he's like Link...Even though he says little, we do know lots about his personality...Just like Sonic before Sonic could talk...Mario has a strong sense of justice, and a deep love for the Princess...He's brave, and KNOWS he is revered, yet he's modest about it...We also know he loves racing and eating pasta, even though it was never VERBALLY said...So, there are some things that are set in stone...I don't think Mario's character would loose much if he talked, but I do think it would disappoint a lot of fans...Exactly why I don't want Link talking...So I agree and disagree ya know...

P.S...I didn't think the Mario cartoon was bad...In fact...I love it...Wait a sec...Which one are you talking about...I love Super Mario Super Show...I didn't like Super Mario Bros. 3 the cartoon series...

 

[cheezMcNASTY]

What I was trying so say was that you said "Mario" took the world by storm pretty much instantly, but at the time we didn't know it was "Mario"...It was just the Jumpman...The Jumpman was taking the world by storm, and not because of his character, but because of the gameplay...Soinic, really didn't add MUCH to gameplay, just the fact that it could be faster than any previous game...

Again, I see what you're saying, but I don't see how it relates to the discussion at hand. If you are trying to assert that because Mario began under a different name that he can't claim the jumpman games under his banner, I would have to respectfully disagree. I'm at a loss trying to interpret an argument from what you said apart from that one.

And I agree completely about how Mario is subject to the person playing...But at the same time, he's like Link...Even though he says little, we do know lots about his personality...Just like Sonic before Sonic could talk...Mario has a strong sense of justice, and a deep love for the Princess...He's brave, and KNOWS he is revered, yet he's modest about it...We also know he loves racing and eating pasta, even though it was never VERBALLY said...So, there are some things that are set in stone...I don't think Mario's character would loose much if he talked, but I do think it would disappoint a lot of fans...Exactly why I don't want Link talking...So I agree and disagree ya know...

It affects more than you know. If you ever played the Fable games, you would be aware that the first two games had no dialogue for the main character. Yes, they presented choice in the plot line, as well as morality to help the player be their own individual, but the story was still set in stone. There was one outcome that was accepted as cannon, so there was a definitive identity for the hero regardless of how you chose to define him. A lot of people complained (I would know, I've been on projectego.net since January 2007) that the fact that the hero never spoke was a negative. Fable III came out a year or two ago with a hero who speaks and all of those critics were very quick to realize how much of the identity was robbed of the protagonist. It eliminates any freedom for the gamer to identify with the protagonist. When they have a definitive voice, only a fraction of people can identify with them.

Even though Mario has definitive goals and likes, there is still wiggle room for creativity and commentary. Maybe what he's thinking when he retrieves the princess from that castle is "if I'm not getting any tonight, I'm leaving her on Bowser's doorstep." Maybe he likes racing because he enjoys hitting that pipsqueak toad with a bolt of lighting whenever he can get away with it. These things provide a framework, but there is a lot that can still be filled in. Also, I think giving Link dialogue would be murdering the Zelda games with a rusty screwdriver.

I think that the primitive plots of the games is irrelevant to what we're discussing. The issue in question is more directed at the power that was born when a video game character was suddenly more than just a faceless stick figure; when it became more than black stick figures jumping over pits or boxing. Without that revelation, I doubt gaming would even be prominent today. It very well could have just withered away and died. After all, in its genesis, it was regarded as a fad and has since become a billion-dollar industry.

P.S...I didn't think the Mario cartoon was bad...In fact...I love it...Wait a sec...Which one are you talking about...I love Super Mario Super Show...I didn't like Super Mario Bros. 3 the cartoon series...

I'll admit that I don't know which one I saw. It was a long time ago when I watched it. So long ago that it was on a VHS tape. I guess I'm not really in a position to critique the show and I concede that point.

 

[KennedyKiller]

Again, I see what you're saying, but I don't see how it relates to the discussion at hand. If you are trying to assert that because Mario began under a different name that he can't claim the jumpman games under his banner, I would have to respectfully disagree. I'm at a loss trying to interpret an argument from what you said apart from that one.

Sorry...I should've made myself clear...I wasn't trying to argue anything in saying that...Just stating a fact...My apologies...

It affects more than you know. If you ever played the Fable games, you would be aware that the first two games had no dialogue for the main character. Yes, they presented choice in the plot line, as well as morality to help the player be their own individual, but the story was still set in stone. There was one outcome that was accepted as cannon, so there was a definitive identity for the hero regardless of how you chose to define him. A lot of people complained (I would know, I've been on projectego.net since January 2007) that the fact that the hero never spoke was a negative. Fable III came out a year or two ago with a hero who speaks and all of those critics were very quick to realize how much of the identity was robbed of the protagonist. It eliminates any freedom for the gamer to identify with the protagonist. When they have a definitive voice, only a fraction of people can identify with them.

Even though Mario has definitive goals and likes, there is still wiggle room for creativity and commentary. Maybe what he's thinking when he retrieves the princess from that castle is "if I'm not getting any tonight, I'm leaving her on Bowser's doorstep." Maybe he likes racing because he enjoys hitting that pipsqueak toad with a bolt of lighting whenever he can get away with it. These things provide a framework, but there is a lot that can still be filled in. Also, I think giving Link dialogue would be murdering the Zelda games with a rusty screwdriver.

I think that the primitive plots of the games is irrelevant to what we're discussing. The issue in question is more directed at the power that was born when a video game character was suddenly more than just a faceless stick figure; when it became more than black stick figures jumping over pits or boxing. Without that revelation, I doubt gaming would even be prominent today. It very well could have just withered away and died. After all, in its genesis, it was regarded as a fad and has since become a billion-dollar industry.

I'm truly confused why you went through the trouble of saying all of this...I agree with it all, and thought I clearly said so in my last post...


But now here is my next question...Sonic and Mario games are more than just Sonic and Mario...They're about the villains just as much...I think that Sonic has had much more memorable MAIN villains...

Besides Robotnik, we have Shadow (Sometimes a villain), Metal Sonic, Chaos (In my opinion the coolest villain of any Sonic game), Scourge, Jet and the Babylon Rouges (Who are more anti-heroes but ya know)...
Mario only really has Bowser as a very MAIN memorable villain...I suppose King Boo was pretty memorable...I will give Mario props for having more memorable NORMAL enemies, like the Koopa, Bob-Omb, and Goomba...

 

[Jay]

Sorry...I should've made myself clear...I wasn't trying to argue anything in saying that...Just stating a fact...My apologies...


I'm truly confused why you went through the trouble of saying all of this...I agree with it all, and thought I clearly said so in my last post...


But now here is my next question...Sonic and Mario games are more than just Sonic and Mario...They're about the villains just as much...I think that Sonic has had much more memorable MAIN villains...

Besides Robotnik, we have Shadow (Sometimes a villain), Metal Sonic, Chaos (In my opinion the coolest villain of any Sonic game), Scourge, Jet and the Babylon Rouges (Who are more anti-heroes but ya know)...
Mario only really has Bowser as a very MAIN memorable villain...I suppose King Boo was pretty memorable...I will give Mario props for having more memorable NORMAL enemies, like the Koopa, Bob-Omb, and Goomba...

With that being said, in the end which of these two will you remember more?

 

[KennedyKiller]

With that being said, in the end which of these two will you remember more?

Sonic...

 

[aintnoscrub]

simply because of super mario sunshine, mario.

 

[cheezMcNASTY]

Sorry...I should've made myself clear...I wasn't trying to argue anything in saying that...Just stating a fact...My apologies...


I'm truly confused why you went through the trouble of saying all of this...I agree with it all, and thought I clearly said so in my last post...

I was suggesting that the identification with the silent main character goes much deeper than you think. Also pointing out that the definitive things about Mario that you mentioned are not as restrictive as all that.

But now here is my next question...Sonic and Mario games are more than just Sonic and Mario...They're about the villains just as much...I think that Sonic has had much more memorable MAIN villains...

Besides Robotnik, we have Shadow (Sometimes a villain), Metal Sonic, Chaos (In my opinion the coolest villain of any Sonic game), Scourge, Jet and the Babylon Rouges (Who are more anti-heroes but ya know)...
Mario only really has Bowser as a very MAIN memorable villain...I suppose King Boo was pretty memorable...I will give Mario props for having more memorable NORMAL enemies, like the Koopa, Bob-Omb, and Goomba...

I can't really argue with that in a logical sense. It's opinion. I think Mario is more memorable and has had more memorable villains. Bowser and King Boo, yes, but also Donkey Kong and Wario. Most of the Sonic villains I did not find memorable because they are mostly just redesigned versions of Sonic himself (except for Robotnik/Eggman and Chaos). Since we're going on opinion here, I also want to add that I haven't enjoyed a Sonic game since it went 3D except for maybe Adventure 2 Battle.

 

[Jay]

Sonic...

For me it would be Sonic as well. Only because I grew up with him more than Mario. Sonic has a better plot while Mario has a better cast of characters. Both are gaming icons though.

 

[KennedyKiller]

I was suggesting that the identification with the silent main character goes much deeper than you think. Also pointing out that the definitive things about Mario that you mentioned are not as restrictive as all that.

No, I know they aren't very restrictive...All the things I've named are basically the traits of MOST famous heroes in gaming...

I can't really argue with that in a logical sense. It's opinion. I think Mario is more memorable and has had more memorable villains. Bowser and King Boo, yes, but also Donkey Kong and Wario. Most of the Sonic villains I did not find memorable because they are mostly just redesigned versions of Sonic himself (except for Robotnik/Eggman and Chaos). Since we're going on opinion here, I also want to add that I haven't enjoyed a Sonic game since it went 3D except for maybe Adventure 2 Battle.

The only redesigned versions I can think of that were based off of Sonic are Metal Sonic and Shadow...But aren't Wario and Waluigi just redesigned versions of Mario and Luigi...And their names aren't even cleverly changed...Not that Metal Sonic is much better, but it describes him cause he's a robot...And what about Baby Mario and Baby Luigi...Just baby versions of the same character that add to the cast...And Daisy is just a redesigned Peach...Bowser Jr. isn't a whole lot different than his father...Yoshi is pretty original, but he's really the only one I can think of in the main Mario cast that is...Sonic had Shadow, who looks like him...But Amy, Knuckles, and Tails all just have the same anthropomorphic style...That's it...Not really the same design at all...

The 3D games were finally able to add a vibrant story and make the characters develop...Before 3D he was just like an animal version of Mario...He really didn't stick out as REALLY different UNTIL the 3D games...