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

What is your opinion on the Mario animated series by DiC (Super Show, Bros. 3, World)?

  • I love the animated series for what they are.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • There are things I like about the animated series, enough for me to like them.

    Votes: 5 50.0%

  • Even though there are some things I like about them, I still don't care for them.

    Votes: 2 20.0%

  • I like the animated series only for its cheesy value.

    Votes: 3 30.0%

  • I consider the animated series to be a waste of time and energy.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    10
  • Poll closed .
Baby Mario's eyes tho

They do be like 👀
 
I find it amusing that the baby bros eyes also serve as pupils.

386px-Baby_Luigi_Artwork.png
410px-Babymariositting.png
 
Like most people here I don't mind their existence, and I do feel Baby Mario and Luigi made the Yoshi's Island series and Partners in Time more interesting, but some of them are just like why? Especially Baby Rosalina, though there's not much left to say about her. Just if they really wanted yet another baby, I would have definitely preffered them bringing Baby Wario or DK back over making another completely pointless variant.

Though that being said, I actually kinda wonder what a Baby Waluigi would look like.
 
Last edited:
1593508213039.png

With that, we got our results:
  1. I don't mind baby characters. Votes: 8 (42.1%)
  2. There are certain baby characters that I am OK with, but not others. Votes: 8 (42.1%)
  3. The addition of younger versions of Mario characters is very much welcomed. Votes: 2 (10.5%)
  4. I didn't really enjoy them but I can live with it. Votes: 1 (5.3%)
  5. These additions felt extraneous and unnecessary. Votes: 0 (0.0%)

There is a split between two groups who either don't mind the existence of baby characters and another who have certain biases against certain babies, with Baby Rosalina being the most disliked. At the very least, nobody objects to babies, probably because Yoshi's Island handled it quite well that it affected the opinions of many, in addition to how well the baby characters are handled in the various Mario spin-offs.

The next poll will be a shorter one, and it's about the choices of certain names. The US used certain names for a couple of characters for a time but the usage of names became more unified as time goes on, but perhaps a few people might still prefer the older names. If you know a little bit of Mario history, you might know which characters it's being referred to. In the meantime, I will elaborate when the poll comes up.

Thank you for reading.

EDIT: The poll is up! The names are based on what you prefer, even if the names are already established to be Peach and Bowser respectively. This is in essence similar to the Robotnik and Eggman name debate, where some fans preferred the former even though the latter is more widely-used in Sega.
 
Last edited:
For simply calling them by their names, I'm fond of Peach and Bowser, though, that's partially because I appreciate having full, formal names to call them by. Being able to say Princess Peach Toadstool, of the Mushroom Kingdom or King Bowser Koopa, of the Koopa Kingdom when you want to use those full names and titles for formality or emphasis is a fun option to have.
 
I see no reason to be stubborn and use the old, outdated names for these characters when they have their modern, more recognisable names that have been used for far longer now.
 
ill just generally refer to characters how the wiki itself does cause honestly most of my info on the mario series comes from there. cant think of any examples but ya!
 
Literally no reason to use the other names. The only that'd be good for is confusing people who don't know these names and also just changing things for the sake of change. It's unnecessary and cumbersome and Peach/Bowser are names we've been using since the dawn of time.
 
i feel like nintendo stopped calling bowser "king bowser" and just calls him "bowser" now. however they still refer to peach mostly as "princess peach" sometimes. that's kinda odd ngl
 
Definitely more used to the modern names, but I definitely like how they combined the Japanese and English names for both characters into their formal full names. I'll always call them Peach and Bowser but it's nice that they kept Princess Toadstool and King Koopa as part of their names for the traditionalists.

Although...I can't hear "King Koopa" without thinking of the DIC cartoons.
 
Part of the inspiration of this topic is due to how the topic on Eggman's name change is quite popular among Sonic fans that it's still going on today, and it basically made it a necessity to reconcile those names in the games. Even then there are still fans that prefer to use the name Robotnik as opposed to the commonly-used Eggman. Because I have a feeling that Mario fans are not opposed to the current names (Peach's name transition went really smoothly), I opted for a poll with a shorter time-frame.

Although Bowser's an all right name, I am personally fond of the name "King Koopa".

Kersti said:
Although...I can't hear "King Koopa" without thinking of the DIC cartoons.
Click to expand...
The way they handled Bowser in the cartoons is interesting. There's hardly a moment when he isn't referred to as "King Koopa", which I imagine goes a long way in making it easy to associate that name with the cartoon version, which is fine because when you search for "King Koopa", you are very likely to find the cartoon version of Bowser. Moreover, he's designed quite differently.

Personally, this is akin to how I associate the "Robotnik" name with the Western redesigns of Robotnik, namely the ones used in the Sonic cartoons and Western Sonic comics, while the Japanese-designed ones are Eggman, including the older design of the character despite being called Robotnik in the West at one time (helped by the fact that Eggman was retroactively named properly when older Sonic games were re-released).

Thank you for reading.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zel
King Koopa is a good name but Bowser will always be the best.
 
1593684778607.png

The results are in, and the results are unsurprising:
  1. Princess Peach & King Bowser Votes: 18 (90.0%)
  2. Princess Peach & King Koopa Votes: 1 (5.0%)
  3. Princess Toadstool & King Koopa Votes: 1 (5.0%)
  4. Princess Toadstool & King Bowser Votes: 0 (0.0%)
Because of how long it has been when the name "Peach" was used, in addition to how much better it is in the opinion of many, Peach unsurprisingly took the lead in terms of preference. Bowser is similar although the name was used longer. Interestingly, the earliest usage of the names (Toadstool and Bowser) had not been agreed, even though some games used it at one time, including Super Mario RPG.

Next poll will be related to 3D Mario.

Thank you for reading.
 
iTAPckh.jpg


Poll is up! This time, we are looking at which type of 3D Mario platformer is preferred. This topic is notably brought up when Super Mario Odyssey was announced, in which the game to explicitly take after Super Mario 64 and Super Mario Sunshine, in which both games allowed Mario free movement and has an overall flexible moveset, as he has more freedom on achieving his goal to collect things.

By contrast, Super Mario Galaxy (both games) and 3D Land/World featured a squarely course-based structure in which the goal is clearly defined and the player is given a path to go to the goal.

So, which is the preferred type of 3D platformer for you?

Thank you for reading.
 
i haven't played odyssey, but out of the ones so far i think i kinda have mixed feelings. i do kinda like the idea of being free and doing whatever and exploring. but to me, super mario 64 never really felt like it achieved that completely, it was just one level with several stars thrown in there in a way that i guess i kind of liked but never felt to me like the open world idea was used to it's full potential.

sunshine didn't feel that impressive to me either, it's my least favourite of the 3d marios by a longshot and being forced to do the shines in a certain order just feels like a huge step back and a lot of the missions are just not interesting to do, like the watermelon one, and it was too hard and the game punishes you too harshly for messing up which is especially painful with the game's less than perfect controls.

and then the two galaxies are wonderful. to me, a lot of the ways in which sunshine failed (not that i dislike that game in its own right, but feel a lot of its fun ideas didn't turn out as well as they could have) the galaxies suceed, i love knowing what i'm doing and not spending ages figuring out what i got to do, there's plenty of galaxies and in galaxy 1 they feel like you can select what you want when you want, but i do like the world map too. the levels still have multiple goals, and i like that, and the green stars in galaxy 2 are in my opinion a positive addition. this also applies to other things i feel were suboptimal about sunshine like graphics, music, theming, and story, but i guess this discussion is just gameplay.

3d land and 3d world are also great, although this time i feel a bit negative about the linearity, i guess there were green stars and star medals but they were always on the path to the main goal, and yes they get remixed in the late game but overall i do wish there was more in the way of multiple goals per stage. but there's still plenty of them. i also overall feel both of these games are too easy, especially 3d land, but they're still great.

overall i'd rank them galaxy 1 > galaxy 2 (incredibly close tho) >> 3d world > 3d land > 64 >>>>> sunshine

however it's worth mentioning i played them in this order galaxy 2 -> galaxy 1 ----------> sunshine -> 64 -> 3d world -> 3d land

in terms of the open world vs linear style i feel that with the games i've played i prefer the more linear ones, and that maybe if a game pulled off the open world better (hopefully odyssey will) i could prefer it, but in 64 and sunshine it just never got as enjoyable as the linear ones to me.
 
Super Mario Odyssey's design is exactly what I've been wanting from Mario games for a really long time. I really feel Odyssey is a step up from the collection mechanics from 64, Sunshine, AND Galaxy because they can both do some goal-related design AND do some more open-ended stuff as the Power Moons are treated more of the Stars you get after 100 coins in 64 (where you don't get booted from a level and have to reenter it). Galaxy 1 was fine and dandy but it had some concepts that definitely could've been explored better. I don't think a linear format ultimately went for Galaxy's favor as the idea of space, to me, invites a big world to explore, not go on a launch star railroad that Galaxy often does.

Galaxy 2 is *the* most overrated Mario game of all time and probably among the most overrated game of all time. I still cannot grasp why people heap so much praise for it when it's just Galaxy but with a 2. Honestly I feel funny that I'm more enthusiastic for Odyssey 2 but more compared to Galaxy 3 (which my sister had nightmares of it being revealed years ago lol) probably because I just love the capture mechanic, the costumes, and the way most kingdoms are set up.

To hone in the point I don't like Galaxy's design that much, the people that made Odyssey explicitly said they designed Bowser's Kingdom to be like a Super Mario Galaxy level, and that kingdom is one of my less liked kingdoms whose theming is the only thing I like about it. Bowser's Kingdom looks kind of ugly when looking at large. I like some locations of some secrets but I am really not a fan of little landmasses being strung together that makes up a level. It's fine as a platforming segment, just don't like it as a kingdom.

However Sunshine is still the worst designed one in the series, having too much painful levels and the unfortunate excruciating blue coin mechanic which all can be addressed in a hypothetical remake. I wouldn't be opposed to Sunshine 2, though, and that'll be hype if Sunshine 2 played more like Ratchet and Clank with its emphasis on weapon combat.

I still hate Galaxy 2 more than Sunshine though despite Sunshine being a worse game.
 
This is literally a comparison between 64 and Odyssey, and 3D World for me. One of those is a game I'd consider one of the worst Mario games I've played alongside SMB2, meanwhile I consider Odyssey to be one of the greatest game I've ever played, and while I've said that 64 is overrated and not as good as people make it out to be, that in no way makes it bad, and I thought it was an enjoyable game, just not one that has aged well.

An open-world collectathon design suits a 3D platformer better in my opinion, Banjo-Kazooie is another one of my favourite games. Also correct me if I'm wrong here, but wasn't the collectathon style of 64 done because they thought a linear platformer wouldn't work in 3D, if that's the case, then that also helps to prove that making linear 3D platformers was a bad idea in the first place.
 
Paper Mario the First said:
Galaxy 2 is *the* most overrated Mario game of all time and probably among the most overrated game of all time.
Click to expand...

ttyd is more overrated than Galaxy 2 will ever be

I personally kinda lean towards the more linear structure? And that's not just because Mario Galaxy's part of that group. I just find the prospect of just going back into a level over and over to get everything in it kinda... repetitive if you ask me? It's true that galaxy does that too but I feel like the general level geography changes enough to make things interesting, so most missions feel like their own level. There's also the fact that it's more straightforward, something I came to appreciate in the last couple of months in games in general.

That said, Mario Odyssey is the perfect example that future "open-world" Mario games should follow and expand upon. Like LGM already said, collecting a moon doesn't make you exit the level not only that but the vast amount of tools at your disposal make navigating the place a breeze and rewarding, whether it's its own reward or not. Odyssey deserves absolutely all the praise it gets, it's a good game that does many things right (probably a better game than galaxy too but you know how I am)
 
Paper Mario the First said:
I still cannot grasp why people heap so much praise for it when it's just Galaxy but with a 2.
Click to expand...
well if i'm giving my personal opinion, i absolutely adore the game because it was my first 3d mario so i have a lot of nostalgia, and i feel that even now it still has plenty of positive qualities that make it enjoyable to come back to all these years later
 
[QUOTE="Paper Mario the First, post: 2182031, member:
I still cannot grasp why people heap so much praise for it when it's just Galaxy but with a 2.
[/QUOTE]

Probably because it's exactly that: an expansion to something that many consider a great game, myself included. If you liked a game so much, wouldn't you want more of it?

Yeah it's a tad frustrating that Galaxy 2 doesn't acknowledge the first game at all, but it doesn't detract from the experience. Koizumi pls give us Galaxy 3.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back