Gauging Popular Opinions (Current: DiC's Mario Cartoons)

[Ray Trace]

Thing is, Mario does have a personality, but the defining parts are positive traits, while characters like Wario, Waluigi, Bowser, and Luigi have negative ones that simply make them more interesting to me. I guess you could also make the case with Peach, Toad, and Yoshi also having positive traits, and while I do despise the latter a lot more (that I find Yoshi's personality incredibly saccharine rather than endearing, basically a worse Mario by being nothing but cheerful, bland, and he eats a lot), I wouldn't say neither Peach nor Toad's traits are what make them stand out unlike the former ones.

Can it be argued that Mario is a Mary Sue? He might have traits of one, with him not having much character flaws. Though people think Mario is impossibly talented in many areas when...that applies to practically every character in Mario; in games with multiple characters like SMB2, even someone like Toad is just as talented as Mario, and when we say, oh Mario's a doctor and he plays golf and sports and whatever, every other Mario character is able to do the same too, I don't get why we ascribe those talented traits to just to Mario when it is shown that a random Koopa Troopa can perform these tasks just as well.

 

[Mount Wario]

He was the pioneer everyman character in the games, designed to be one and all that. I also mentioned some examples of jobs none of the other characters have had (even if they could. Whatever). I think the credit given to him is justified enough.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

Mario taught them those skills so that's why can do them

 

[Ray Trace]

What negative traits does Mario have? Why wouldn't Mario be described as a Mary Sue?

Peach and Toads tend to be submissive and helpless as well as captors.
Luigi is self-explanatory.

The only other character who doesn't seem to have negative qualities is Yoshi and you know my feelings on him as a character.

 

[Czario]

You need only look at my normal username to guess my preference, though I realize that has been made difficult with Xenoforo. I don't have particularly specific reasons for preferring Luigi tbh, or at least not without performing some light psychological analysis on myself.

I think the reason why people find Luigi more relatable indeed boils down to his lack of confidence and less impressive nature. Mario is a very accomplished guy with many positive attributes, which makes him a good role model to aspire to but not necessarily relatable. Luigi seems less sure of himself and a lot of people can relate to that.

I think having more vulnerabilities would be an interesting angle to explore for Mario, albeit a very un-Nintendo-like one. Maybe he often feels stressed and pressured to maintain the hero image all the time. I can imagine his busy life and the lofty reputation he has to keep can wear him out and make him frustrated at times. Unfortunately, I wouldn't get my hopes up for this or similar character-deepening vulnerabilities to surface since Nintendo is Nintendo. Though who knows, there is that Mario movie coming out in a couple of years...

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

What negative traits does Mario have? Why wouldn't Mario be described as a Mary Sue?

Peach and Toads tend to be submissive and helpless as well as captors.
Luigi is self-explanatory.

The only other character who doesn't seem to have negative qualities is Yoshi and you know my feelings on him as a character.

Mario is impulsive and brash, likes food, is gullible, is quite vulnerable in the main games, very pushy and insistent in Super Mario Odyssey (the ending). he shown jealousy and being overbearing in Mario & Luigi and the Mario Power Tennis Luigi trophy cutscene. Physically, he's not attractive by conventional standards. He's fat and has a big nose and sizeable ears, and his voice is silly.

that's how I see it

I think having more vulnerabilities would be an interesting angle to explore for Mario, albeit a very un-Nintendo-like one. Maybe he often feels stressed and pressured to maintain the hero image all the time. I can imagine his busy life and the lofty reputation he has to keep can wear him out and make him frustrated at times. Unfortunately, I wouldn't get my hopes up for this or similar character-deepening vulnerabilities to surface since Nintendo is Nintendo. Though who knows, there is that Mario movie coming out in a couple of years...

that'll be great; maybe games aren't a good medium especially if they keep doing the usual rpg Mario-is-silent-and-listening route but i can see that happening with the show, comic, movie, etc

 

[Ray Trace]

The only thing I see that actively negatively impacts him as a character is his impulsive and brash nature and being overbearing to his brother, but unlike Luigi's cowardice in Luigi's Mansion games, I don't think it heavily impacts the plot? None of these traits are consistent (you only get pushy Mario in Odyssey) and some of these (such as liking food) isn't something I'd quite describe as a character negatively in the context of Mario games. And the part about being gullible isn't unique to Mario, Luigi, Peach, and Toads are just as gullible as he is.

Physically, he's not the most attractive, sure, but he's still designed to be an appealing character. It's not like, say, Wario. His voice being "silly" isn't a character flaw in my eyes.

Keep in mind that I'm not a fan of Luigi's inconsistent portrayal in the Mario RPGs anyway. I don't like Luigi being a buttmonkey in Mario & Luigi nor do I like Luigi being this confident, egotistical man in Paper Mario.

 

[Mcmadness]

I always lean towards the red man myself but the difference between the 2 on my like scale is microscopic.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

I don't think it heavily impacts the plot

there's little plot to begin with

also being overbearing is what we see in mario & luigi and mario power tennis: they're little character moments and they don't discredit mario's flaws because they don't affect the nonexistent plot; those little stupid luigi story telling dialogue in thousand-year door or his letters on how jealous he is of mario in paper mario adds nothing to the plot either but they're a legitimate character flaw for luigi

as for mario being pushy in only odyssey it's blatant but there's other instances like mallow restraining mario to prevent mario from brawling (according to the wiki anyway)

mario's gullibility got him trapped in a painting and shrunk to the size of a potato chip

and you didn't ask for what traits are unique to him, just what traits doesn't make him mary sue

he's not attractive and his voice is an extension of his attractiveness; a mary sue likely won't be overweight or have a silly voice. they aren't inherent character flaws but they're not mary sue traits either

 

[Ray Trace]

No, what I mean by plot is that Luigi's cowardice impacts how the game goes, which is heavily apparent in the Luigi's Mansion games. Mario's doesn't, really, and if it was, it's not really unique to him: in New Super Mario Bros. Wii for example, all characters jump into rescuing Peach as soon as she gets kidnapped. Same thing with him getting trapped in a painting (Luigi was pretty gullible too, and in the 3rd game, Mario, Peach, and Toads all got captured, again, not making this a unique trait) and him getting invited to a party (there were I think 5 other characters who attended as well who also got shrunk because free eats can't be beat, this isn't a trait unique to Mario)

And although Mario does have little character moments, they don't stand out to me as much as the other characters do, they're nearly negligible and to me, uninteresting and not defining of Mario.

Again, Mario's voice isn't something I'd call "silly", especially not in the context of Mario games where you have smoker Toad voice and overly high-pitched girly Peach or nasally Waluigi.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

luigi's mansion 3, luigi successfully escapes but i don't see that as cowardice

luigi's mansion, luigi isnt equipped and runs away from ghosts but again, it's not really cowardice, he's in legit danger

throughout those games however luigi's cowardice don't directly affect the plot. they do make it seem more satisfying to capture bosses but i don't see them directly affecting the plot direction or the gameplay significantly?

the mario & luigi series are actually way better examples of cowardice and clumsiness affecting the plot though like during gwarhar ruins trek or the star gate incident in partners in time (but you see mario does also participate in those moments too, it's not just luigi)

i guess for you mario moments don't stand out but that's just a matter of opinion and i think mario moments are as apparent as luigi ones especially in mario & luigi games

yes other characters have cartoon voices but mary sues are like perfection fantasies and i'd disagree that a character with that sort of voice fits the mary sue mold. like if you're bringing up characters to highlight shared qualities with mario, it'll make mario less special and unique and amazing and more in-line with his friends, which doesn't sound much mary sue to me.

again i didn't say his character voice is an inherent flaw, it's just not a trait i think perfect characters have

 

[Ray Trace]

The thing with Mario is that I often see him struggle to stand out in the Mario cast. You've asked the question, "Well, how come Mario doesn't get credit where it's due unlike Luigi?" and that's for the things I've mentioned above. Luigi's started out as fairly bland himself, but he became a subversive trope to the whole brave hero thing, that's another thing that makes Luigi stand out as an interesting protagonist compared to Mario. And again, Luigi's lucky enough to receive games like Luigi's Mansion under his name that helps him display his character in a more colorful portrayal, which Mario has failed to have, and while I do think Mario and Luigi are stronger together than they are separate as the Mario & Luigi games have shown, I think Luigi is more receptive to the Mario fan audience than Mario himself is, not just because of the relatableness (after all, Bowser, Wario, and Waluigi are pretty entertaining characters and they're the least relatable of the cast) but because of Luigi's subversion.

I could argue that Mario should be given credit for Luigi's foil but then again, it's the reason comic relief in movies are incredibly popular for better or for worse.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

perhaps luigi is more popular than mario but you notice that mario is more popular than bowser wario or waluigi overall; mario comes in third in a lot of character polls usually trailing luigi and yoshi i guess but he beats out others. a common excuse i see is that mario is just a mascot but i think it just a cop-out that overlooks his merit as a character

 

[Blue]

One emote then I gone: :weege:

 

[Ray Trace]

perhaps luigi is more popular than mario but you notice that mario is more popular than bowser wario or waluigi overall; mario comes in third in a lot of character polls usually trailing luigi and yoshi i guess but he beats out others. a common excuse i see is that mario is just a mascot but i think it just a cop-out that overlooks his merit as a character

Character polls tend to have a lot of confounding factors that I don't take all that seriously when gauging a character's popularity. It is true that Mario is hugely popular and would score highly on polls that ask a general audience, but it's also possible is because they're most familiar with Mario. When you ask Mario-centric forums such as this, you may get a different result than you would when you ask a general audience.

I think it's a nice discussion to have on, anecdotally speaking, why I see Luigi usually beating out Mario on polls.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

mario also does relatively well in these forums too. not just me, winstein, nanophoenix, alex95; and there's more than a few that have him as a strong follow-up like zelen, long john spaghetti, fawfulthegreat, jazzi, mcmadness. people just generally like him for their own reasons. something is clearly working i think. apologies if i missed any.

i don't take character polls seriously but overall it's accurate to say mario is pretty well-liked in communities, just not as much as luigi

 

[winstein]

Given that the poll results and discussion have slowed down, I am going to prematurely end the poll soon (around an hour) and post the results, and a new one will be posted soon (with help of a moderator; why can't polls be changed on our own now?).

Thank you for reading.

 

[winstein]

Results:

Who do you like more: Mario or Luigi?

• Mario Votes: 6 (25.0%)
• Luigi Votes: 18 (75.0%)

So as you can see in the results, Luigi is clearly the more popular of the brothers, by a wide margin! It's unfortunate that there aren't enough results, but I suppose that since there aren't any more votes, it has to end. The next poll will be about 2D and/or 3D platformers (this will be a multiple choice poll, as you might be able to tell from the wording), so stay tuned for the upcoming poll!

Thank you for reading.

 

[winstein]

Sorry for the triple post, but the abrupt change of plan calls for it. In fact, a new poll is up, and it's about the preference between 2D platformers and 3D platformers! This is NOT restricted to the Super Mario games, because it also includes the Donkey Kong, Yoshi and Wario games, so you don't have to base your preference on just Mario. Moreover, you can choose both if you so wish to!

The poll will last for 4 days this time, and might possibly be shortened to 3 days if activity is similarly sluggish by the 3rd day.

Thank you for reading.

 

[LeftyGreenMario]

I think the 3D platformers are Mario's biggest strengths in the franchise, at least with Super Mario 64, Super Mario Sunshine, Super Mario Galaxy, and Super Mario Odyssey. I think 3D platformers always felt like they had a far grander scale to them, something more dramatic and triumphant. At least that's what I got from the grand space exploration from Galaxy and Odyssey. From my memory, I don't think any 2D Mario game has generated so much hype as Galaxy and Odyssey and delivered what they advertised. I didn't get that feeling with Super Mario 3D Land or Super Mario 3D World, however, maybe because they were released in a time where the Mario formula was getting tiresome.

But the 3D platformers aren't a perfect line-up. Sunshine is ridiculously flawed with its collection aspect and repetitive filler missions but had a nice concept that I think a remake will be appropriate to address. Super Mario 64 aged poorly but it's a revolutionary game and kind of odd due to the new ground it tread. Galaxy 2 is just a rehash, a sequel that didn't really develop the interesting stuff Galaxy offered while just rehashing the uninteresting stuff and putting in a lot of filler, though it achieved critical acclaim.

Anyway while in the 2D department Mario has a lot of contenders such as Kirby, Donkey Kong, Yoshi, Wario Land, Rayman, and more which Kirby and Rayman I've enjoyed more than the Mario games, Mario is unrivaled in the 3D department. Still, Mario works best with the Odyssey format as it differentiates with the other Mario platformers, though I think Super Mario 3D Land is a nice spin on the formula, but not enough to be with the likes of Galaxy or Odyssey.

Whereas Mario has a lot of really good 2D games but they don't seem to wow me as Galaxy and Odyssey did. Like I don't see why people like Super Mario World so much even though it's a solid game. The 2D games come off as sameish to me as an extent, and while I think a Mario fan should play all the 3D games maybe choosing between Galaxy 1 or 2, there's a few 2D games a Mario fan should skip such as Lost Levels, New Super Mario Bros. 2, and arguably New Super Mario Bros. U.

Super Mario Maker games are an interesting spin on the 2D Mario but they cannot substitute for full Mario games as players are left to the whims of an incoherent mess online, from the lack of curation of what levels you play.

The best thing about the 2D platformers is that it has multiplayer options after New Super Mario Bros. Wii while only 3D World has a full multiplayer (an extension of the main player isn't multiplayer), so that's a point going for it. 3D World is not as good as New Super Mario Bros. Wii in terms of favorite multiplayer Mario experiences, though, but it's still fun nevertheless.

 

[Goombuigi]

I definitely prefer the 3D platformers because of their freedom and variety, and because the 2D platformers (the New Super Mario Bros. series in particular) are quite similar to each other.

 

[Koops]

Honestly, for me, it's both.

2D platformers I feel embody the essence of Mario better. Straightforward, typically good level design, and just an all around simple and enjoyable experience. 3D games are inherently more in-depth and allow for more exploration and potential for bigger better levels, but it doesn't feel as Mario-y as 2D games do and they fail to capture some of the charm. They are the objectively better games but subjectively I prefer 2D.

Ironic considering my favorite Mario game is Mario Galaxy.

 

[Ray Trace]

3D platformers would be my vote. In the 2D segment, I felt Mario's been outclassed by better titles such as Rayman Origins/Legends and Kirby's Return to Dreamland, while the games in that time period (New Super Mario Bros. 2 and U) feel like they have the DNA of a 20 year old game (with points, lives, 2D tiles meshed with 3D tiles, blocky inorganic levels, timers, and regurgitating the same ideas and level concepts again and again). Whereas, even today, 3D Mario hasn't really been outdone. Even something unoriginal and dumb like Super Mario Galaxy 2 is still a great 3D platformer that isn't really matched.

Also, I like 3D World a lot.

 

[MiracleDinner]

mario is BY FAR the biggest experience i have with platformer games so i'm almost exclusively basing my answers off that.

3d. when i played galaxy 2 for the first time it was above and beyond, it felt perfect, and its predecessor was just fantastic. sunshine dissappointed me and to this day is my least favourite 3d mario by a longshot, but, i don't actually dislike it, i still consider it a nice game which i enjoyed at least a little bit. then there was mario 64 which was pretty good but not phenonemal. 3d world was next, which was great, and then 3d land which i also loved but not quite as much as its sequel. i've not played odyssey

overall i'd rank them (personally) as follows:
galaxy 1 > galaxy 2 >> 3d world > 3d land > 64 >>>>> sunshine

as for 2d well i liked the first two soup games as a child and i still haven't played the last two. it wouldn't be until i played mario land 1 and 2 that would be my next: they were both alright. smb1 was nice to play as a classic experience but extremely outdated and too difficult. smb:tll i've hardly gotten to experience due to its incredibly high difficulty level. smb2 i guess is pretty cool but i'm not too big on the screen scrolling thing and i also find it quite hard. mario maker 1 is incredible, but i don't think i should count it for the sake of this poll, because i only love it so much for its ability to make and share levels, rather than 2d platforming, which is something nintendo hasn't done with the 3d games, but that being said if they did i would be so happy

nsmbw > nsmbds >> sml2 > smb2 > smb1 > sml1 > smb:tll

so yeah i just like 3d mario more, they feel more immersive and impressive platforming experiences and just feel a lot cooler and more polished than the 2d games.

 

[winstein]

In case it's not immediately clear, it's about not just Mario platformers, but also the related Mario franchise platformers like Donkey Kong (both Mario style and Country style), Yoshi and Wario platformers (Donkey Kong and Wario do have 3D platformers, although not as significant as Mario's).

Thank you for reading.