Jump to content

Talk:Paper Mario (video game)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 24.91.155.164 (talk) at 19:48, 19 May 2007 (Paper Mario). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:NESproj

WikiProject iconVideo games B‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on the project's quality scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:
Peer review This article has had two peer reviews which have now been archived (2) (3). They may contain ideas that you can use to improve this article.

Update

I thought Paper Mario: the Thousand Year Door wasn't the sequal to Paper Mario. I thought Superstar Saga was the true sequal. If you play the games, Paper Mario: TYD is more of an update.

Considering the original (and still commonly used) name for this game was Paper Mario 2, I think it's safe to say it is the official sequel. Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga wasn't even made by the same company as the Paper Mario games. -Luigi2 | Talk 22:05, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

Picture Comment

I think the picture is from Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars. The isometric view wasn't in Paper Mario. Mred64 05:12, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

Reverted the vandal's work. -- A Link to the Past 05:18, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
The SMRPG picture is back, and the original is now gone from Wikipedia. -- VederJuda 16:56, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way administrators can lock pictures? I would like that picture to be replaced with the real boxart that used to be there and not have it taken off again. -toastypk

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Peer_review/Paper_Mario This got me to think, maybe he's right... having this as a featured article doesn't sound like a bad idea. I did a little reviewing to make sure nothing was glaringly wrong, and fixed a mistake in Watt's species, she's a Lil' Sparky.

Why do I think this is a good featured candidate? Have a look: there are almost no typos in this article, the game mechanics are explained wonderfully, the characters are listed in an ideal intensity, not too much and not too little, and the article just looks plain professional. I think with just a little more fixing and tuning, this should be a candidate for a featured article!

I hope that's not unreasonable, I say we should look into it. -toastypk

(I'll probably register a wikipedia account in the future, I just haven't been motivated enough to yet.)

Sorry, but this not not nearly featured article quality. Compare it with Katamari Damacy, a featured article on a game. - A Link to the Past (talk) 01:37, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well what do you mean? That article looks great, but this one seems around the same length as a normal featured candidate, at least from my perspective. I tried to look at the guidelines, and I didn't notice any POV stuff, it was a good length, just gave me good impressions. What is it that needs improving? I'd love to pitch in more. Toastypk 02:05, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
There is content for the plotline, but it shouldn't be in the lead, but in its own section.
It has no references.
It has no discussion on its critical acclaim, its sales figures or the Mario RPG series as a whole.
Characters section is too excessive. All NPCs should be merged into the plot section.
No mention of Princess Peach's playability. The playable characters should be unlistified, and made into a section about the partners and talk about how they work in and outside of battles.
No discussion about audio, and barely anything discussing the graphical style.
No discussion about the varying enemies, such as how a flying enemy is immune to most hammer techniques, or that spiked enemies will injure Mario or anyone who jumps on them when they attack. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:34, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
There's actually mentions of the hammer on flying enemies and spiked hurting enemies, and I was going to make a change to the article to add that but it looks like it's already there. o_O I'll see what I can do about the rest though. Toastypk 03:03, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, I thought we were trying to improve this article, and it was starting going well, why did you end it? EDIT: Ok, yes I'm still a newbie at this system but I guess I've just been trying to put good faith into the nomination, which I'd really love to see one day. Toastypk 15:27, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if we need all of those boss stats

Isn't there a wiki that deals with indepth stuff like that? I think it's called Wikibooks. Toastypk 22:46, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I don't think we need all the stats on there. I'm going to add a little note on the top of the edit page saying please don't put any boss stats on. Toastypk 05:32, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I saw somebody added a link to a review and then someone else took it away. I didn't see anything wrong with that, or is there something I'm missing in the rules?

What should we do about the NPC list?

Frankly, it looks like something you'd see on GameFAQs, and I somehow doubt it belongs in this article. I was just going to delete it, so if anyone has any better ideas about what to do with it, please post them here. --82.7.125.142 19:30, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bosses

I've decided to add the bosses section. I'm quite new so I'm sorry for any errors I've made. First off, the bosses can be tied in with the Star Spirits, and the main point of the game is to collect the Star Spirits. Also, the aritcle Lava Pirahna can be merged. I also plan on making a mini boss section, for bosses like King Goomba or Jr. Troopa. 0Z0N3

I don't know if extensive boss data is really worth it.

It's nice and all but doesn't suit wikipedia for some reason. Anyone have similar objections/comments?

Deserves more than this

Paper Mario is a fabulous game (more so than its successor) and deserves more than this. Clean-up is going to be enforced and the development history needs to be included. —Eternal Equinox | talk 15:26, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, agreed, and right off the bat I should say that boss stats and descriptions are too specific for a wiki aritcle's taste, and really shouldn't be on this page. That's more for wikibooks. Toastypk 03:17, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Precisely. All right, it's time for the FA promotion to begin. First, I'm submitting this to peer review and like Toastypk noted, the boss stats are going to be removed. A "storyline" section containing few spoilers and the {{spoilers}} and {{endspoilers}} tags need to be included. The development and history will follow, and sales figures also require ciations and references. —Eternal Equinox | talk 14:51, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
When I begin work on the article, the review from Famitsu should be collected. Does anyone know how to access the website? —Eternal Equinox | talk 01:21, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
How about this? --Pagrashtak 01:30, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"..Famitsu scored it equally as high." While the link is useful, it is kind of disappointing that it doesn't hold the actual review score (out of 40). —Eternal Equinox | talk 02:48, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CVG peer review actions

So far, I have added a source for the badge screenshot, shortened the story, and removed some of the subsection headers in preparation for rewriting the sections to flow better. This was all per the CVG peer review. Log any other CVG peer review-related changes you make here as well. --Danaman5 21:55, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Despite submitting the article to numerous peer reviews, I'm actually very lazy to research the topic and improve the current quality. I'm not sure as to why though. The image of the badge needs to be replaced since it possesses a logo, which is not allowed per the fair use guidelines. —Eternal Equinox | talk 14:48, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Enemies that can attack party members

What enemies can attack Mario's party members?

Offhand, I know Tutankoopa, Big Lantern Ghost, and Kent C. Koopa can. I think Bowser's fire breath can hit them too. Agent CH 15:26, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Enemies that attack party members

Buzzar- A giant bird found on Mount Rugged. Uses a wind attack that hits party members. Stuns them for up to three turns.

Tutankoopa- The second boss. Uses a magic spell that causes rocks to fall from the ceiling. Stuns them for two turns.

Big Lantern Ghost- A mini-boss found in the Shy Guy Toy Box dungeon. He attacks by shining light from his lantern. This stuns party members for two turns.

General Guy- The fourth boss. He rides in a tank, which has a light bulb on the back. During battle, he may use the light bulb and shoot electricity at you. This stuns party members for two turns. However if Watt is your partner, she will not be affected by the attack. The light bulb on the tank can be attacked, and when you break it, General Guy cannot use this attack anymore.

Lava Bubbles and Embers- Fireball enemies. Lava Bubbles are red and are found in the volcano area; Embers are blue and are found on Star Way. They attack partners by stopping in front of them and spitting fire at them. Lava Bubbles stun them for two turns, while Embers stun them for three turns. They are the only minor enemies that can attack party members.

Kent C. Koopa- A large Koopa Troopa who guards Pleasant Path after chapter 5. He is an optional boss, which is good, because he is very tough. In battle he will often use a spinning shell move that hits Mario as well your party member. They will be stunned for three turns if they get hit. When this happens, Mario will not be able to inflict damage to Kent C. Koopa because of his very high defense. This is what makes Kent C. Koopa a "superboss."

Bowser- In the last two battles with Bowser, he has a special attack. He pulls out his star wand, it glows and releases a giant yellow energy wave that hits party members, stunning them for up to three turns.

No other enemies attack party members directly, but if the partners try to jump on a spiked or fiery enemy, they will be stunned for one turn.

Three black Shy Guys

In Bowser's Castle the second Bowser door makes you take a quiz and if you get three wrong answers it says "Now you meet your doom!" and makes you fight three Black Shy Guys. Is this true?

I've never tried this, but I've heard of many cases so it's safe to assume it's true. Blue Mirage 08:45, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's absolutely true. ... I still haven't beaten them. :( Toastypk 02:18, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, I remember that. I was able to beat them, but I had used up so much of my inventory that I decided to restart from my last save afterwards.--Conrad Devonshire Talk 19:45, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is true, and IF you defeat them (very difficult) it supposedly makes bowser harder.

New sections

I have added two new sections: an "overworld" section and a "locations" section. As of now they are very short, but I will probably add more to them later.--Conrad Devonshire Talk 00:51, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New images available

I have uploaded several new screenshots which can be viewed here. Feel free to use them as you wish.

Locations section

I really don't think this is necessary, in my opinion. --The Great Llama(speak to the Llama!) 23:04, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Virtual Console

Is this game going to be able to be purchased for Wii's Virtual Console? The Swagga 17:49, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet, but that will very likely happen, as most Mario games will probably be open for download on VC eventually. –Llama man 18:14, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Making a clean up

As with most video game articles on Wikipedia, there are too many things listed in this article that are only necessary for walktroughs and FAQs. I will delete them as such. --Soetermans 19:41, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Sequel

Is there anyway we can prove that it is a sequel? ~ A Concerned Wikier.

Paper Mario

Even if theres been debate above to whether the other Paper Marios are sequels, shouldn't the article at least link to them for being under the same title?