Is street fighter II the best sequel EVER?

[Soulis]

For the reasons i already explained in my four or five paragraph post.

[MrMatthews]

I'll help you then.

It was different. It's a good game, but in the grand scheme of things, it's just too different from all the other Mario games. And people don't like stuff that's different.

[Soulis]

It was too different for a sequel. So different that it didn't feel at all like the first game (it was Doki Doki Panic after all). Some people don't like that. Especially those who pay to have a similar, but upgraded experience that will remind them the previous game, thus buying the sequel and not something else.

By saying that "people don't like stuff that's different" in general, well, its not the same thing because you are generalizing.



Anyway, Mario 3, now that was a great, upgraded Mario experience.

[Cucollins12]

It was too different for a sequel. So different that it didn't feel at all like the first game (it was Doki Doki Panic after all). Some people don't like that. Especially those who pay to have a similar, but upgraded experience that will remind them the previous game, thus buying the sequel and not something else.

By saying that "people don't like stuff that's different" overall, well, its not the same because you are generalizing.



Anyway, Mario 3, now that was a great, upgraded Mario experience.

to me mario 3 is the REAL sequel of super mario bros 1 ( smb "the lost levels" or smb2 in japan doesnt count for me)

[MrMatthews]

a flippant comment I made that was not meant to be taken seriously.

By saying that "people don't like stuff that's different" in general, well, its not the same thing because you are generalizing.

Please don't waste my time like this again, okay?

[Soulis]

I wanted to but...

2. The comment was, in fact, perfectly valid. You managed to take what I said in about 8 words and stretch it out over four or five paragraphs.

3. When Super Mario Bros 2 came out, there was no established franchise. You can compare Mario 2 to Other M, I'm sorry.

And why is that?

I'll help you then.

It was different. It's a good game, but in the grand scheme of things, it's just too different from all the other Mario games. And people don't like stuff that's different.

[sheath]

I'd say that sequels across generations like Metroid and Super Metroid are acceptable because they look totally different even if they play nearly identically plus some new moves. I would not be okay with an NES Metroid that looks and plays virtually the same as the first, but has different levels and a handful of new weapons. See Megaman.

Also, it has already been established that "Doki Doki Panic" was in fact started as a legitimate Mario game. Like the Alex Kidd and Wonderboy series, I see no reason why Mario can't branch out from its roots. That is, in fact, what Mario 3 did with it's more varied multi-tiered levels. Meanwhile Mario World barely meets my criteria for acceptable sequels for having significantly different looking graphics, otherwise it and Mario 3 might as well be the same game with different power ups.

[MrMatthews]

I know we have dissimilar tastes in games, Sheath, and that's fine. I personally found that Super Mario World was radically different from any of the preceeding games. As different to Super Mario 3 as, say, New Super Mario Bros is to the original Super Mario Bros. With the exception of the direct sequels (the two "New" Mario games and the two Mario games), I think that Nintendo does a brilliant job of mixing up the formula with each new game.

[tomaitheous]

I'm willing to wager a bet that most people that played SMB1 back in the day, did so because it was the pack-in for the system. Either way, it was fun... for about a month. After you played the crap out of it and beat it tons of times, there wasn't much to go back too. You just moved on to looked forward to the next good game. SMB1 had this stigma about it. Maybe 'cause it was mostly a pack in game, I dunno. It didn't have this huge cult following that it was today. Actually, many things were different or viewed differently back then. When SMB2 came out, it was popular as all hell. I think it was the 2nd or 3rd highest grossing game for the NES at that time. Nobody I knew complained that it wasn't like the original SMB1. It was better in soooo many aspects, arguing otherwise back then would have definitely made you look like an idiot ('cause SMB1 was old and tied and... limited in graphics and design,etc). SMB was new and fresh, and soo much better looking graphics as well as variety. Sound and music as well. And the gameplay was more advanced (you could do more things, pick different characters with different gameplay characteristics). I mean, it was soo much more of a game. It was a real game; not a simple (albeit fun) packin like SMB1. SMB3 just continued the evolution. Matter of fact, SMB3 feels like a correct evolution of SMB2 than it does SMB1 (SMB2Japan *IS* basically SMB1... you can't deny).
/rant off

[sheath]

I know we have dissimilar tastes in games, Sheath, and that's fine. I personally found that Super Mario World was radically different from any of the preceeding games. As different to Super Mario 3 as, say, New Super Mario Bros is to the original Super Mario Bros. With the exception of the direct sequels (the two "New" Mario games and the two Mario games), I think that Nintendo does a brilliant job of mixing up the formula with each new game.

It's true, that's why Miyamoto is one of the best developers of all time. He's generally stuck with franchises, but manages to make new enough games all the time anyway.

[MrMatthews]

I'm willing to wager a bet that most people that played SMB1 back in the day, did so because it was the pack-in for the system. Either way, it was fun... for about a month. After you played the crap out of it and beat it tons of times, there wasn't much to go back too. You just moved on to looked forward to the next good game. SMB1 had this stigma about it. Maybe 'cause it was mostly a pack in game, I dunno. It didn't have this huge cult following that it was today. Actually, many things were different or viewed differently back then. When SMB2 came out, it was popular as all hell. I think it was the 2nd or 3rd highest grossing game for the NES at that time. Nobody I knew complained that it wasn't like the original SMB1. It was better in soooo many aspects, arguing otherwise back then would have definitely made you look like an idiot ('cause SMB1 was old and tied and... limited in graphics and design,etc). SMB was new and fresh, and soo much better looking graphics as well as variety. Sound and music as well. And the gameplay was more advanced (you could do more things, pick different characters with different gameplay characteristics). I mean, it was soo much more of a game. It was a real game; not a simple (albeit fun) packin like SMB1. SMB3 just continued the evolution. Matter of fact, SMB3 feels like a correct evolution of SMB2 than it does SMB1 (SMB2Japan *IS* basically SMB1... you can't deny).
/rant off

Well, yeah... I don't remember any of that going through my head when I was eight years old, but no one I knew was complaining that the second game was different from the first one. You're right about one thing, though: people certainly didn't view games the same way back then as they do now (probably because the industry as a whole was about the same age as the target demographic).

[Guntz]

I'm a bit late to the party, but I'm voting for Sengoku 3. The first two were quite honestly very average, nowhere near as good as Capcom and Konami beat em ups. Sengoku 2 does have it's fans though. Sengoku 3 though, really does feel like a Street Fighter II. If it wasn't called Sengoku 3, you'd never know it was a sequel to the first two, it's that much better.

[jerry coeurl]

I love SMB2. Can't really say the same for SMB. It's ok.

[MrMatthews]

I still love the original Super Mario Bros. I'm not ruling out the fact that, when I play it, I'm tapping in to that long-dormant sense of wonder of playing the game for the first time at the local drug store (they had a TV and a NES set up at the photography counter), of ripping open my first NES and spending hours in front of the game, of playing hot-seat two player when friends came over, or the endless schoolyard conversations about its seemingly infinite secrets.

Eventually, yes, once I beat the game it was left to pretty much gather dust in lieu of games like Mega Man 2 & 3 and Super Mario Bros 2. But think about it: in 25 years or so, I haven't really stopped playing games. I've played a lot of bad games, and a lot of painfully mediocre ones. Gimmicky side-scrolling platformers that tried to stretch an already-thin gameplay hook over an entire game of boring level design, uninspired music, and finicky controls.

So imagine 8 year-old me standing on one end of a bridge, and 33 year-old me standing on the other side. And that bridge represents not only my video game experience, but the experience and maturity of the medium in general. 8 year-old me falls in love with SMB's excellent control, insanely catchy music, and challenging gameplay. 33 year-old me remembers every game he's played on the way over that bridge, and waxes philosophical about Super Mario Bros and how, dated or not, the fundamentals of the platformer genre were all in place right there, and they were (and still are) rock-solid. It's amazing how important these things are, and how many times they have been fumbled by "superior" games.

Yeah, if given the choice between the two, I'd probably play Donkey Kong Country Returns. But I'll be honest; Mario controls quite a bit better than DK.

[StarMist]

I'm willing to wager a bet that most people that played SMB1 back in the day, did so because it was the pack-in for the system. Either way, it was fun... for about a month. After you played the crap out of it and beat it tons of times, there wasn't much to go back too. You just moved on to looked forward to the next good game. SMB1 had this stigma about it. Maybe 'cause it was mostly a pack in game, I dunno. It didn't have this huge cult following that it was today. Actually, many things were different or viewed differently back then. When SMB2 came out, it was popular as all hell. I think it was the 2nd or 3rd highest grossing game for the NES at that time. Nobody I knew complained that it wasn't like the original SMB1. It was better in soooo many aspects, arguing otherwise back then would have definitely made you look like an idiot ('cause SMB1 was old and tied and... limited in graphics and design,etc). SMB was new and fresh, and soo much better looking graphics as well as variety. Sound and music as well. And the gameplay was more advanced (you could do more things, pick different characters with different gameplay characteristics). I mean, it was soo much more of a game. It was a real game; not a simple (albeit fun) packin like SMB1. SMB3 just continued the evolution. Matter of fact, SMB3 feels like a correct evolution of SMB2 than it does SMB1 (SMB2Japan *IS* basically SMB1... you can't deny).
/rant off

\rant on
You'd probably win that wager on sheer economical grounds: console + free game > console + nothing - x {{ x being the attraction value of every other game on which money might be spent rather than SMB }}.
After one has played the crap out of and beaten a ton of times any game there isn't much to go back to.
Stigma? Sure, it was a stigma something like this "Ha ha, you're still playing the game that came with the system" meaning "you're poor, out of the loop, &c".
Well, you and I didn't know each other, and I'm sure you were all the happier for that, but I complained about SMB 2. It was barren, slow, and clumsy. SMB was fast (which made it effectively more populous since one ran across the next enemy quicker) and handled perfectly. I played through it w/o warping, sometimes twice at once to replace the gumbas with the beetle enemies. I also resented head carrying wooden toadstools and giant keys for what seemed like half the game. I missed the vines that grew from copper blocks and the underwater sections with their stupid tune. Eventually it grew on me, and I think it great now, but I wished and still do that the first game had been expanded upon in a recognisable manner. Of course 2's successes are magnified now that everybody and his dog has seen what a miserable chip of shovelware the Japanese got for their second game.
Matter of fact, SMB 3 feels like an ideal synthesis of 1 and 2; it couldn't have been born w/o the preexistence of both. -- And I don't miss playing as other characters w/ other attributes, I only wish Nintendo had gone that route for SMW rather than Yoshi.