Talk:Super Mario Bros. 2/Archive 1

IGN has a review for Super Mario Bros. 2[edit]

Since Super Mario Bros. 2 is ready to sale in Virtual Console, IGN made a review to te game, the score was 8.5, a relatively low score because they blame Nintendo for considering American players as players with no skills for harder games (that was the belief when Nintendo decided not to bring the original SMB2).

Even so, they recommend the game. This is the source:

http://wii.ign.com/articles/801/801793p1.html

So, will you add this in the article? 200.71.186.241 16:59, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cut content[edit]

Would someone please explain to me why so much content has been deleted from this article? I tried restoring a lot of the material and I get some message from a person name Rory that I'm trying to vandalize the page. I think this page has already been vandalized and a lot of legetimate content has been deleted. I was trying to restore this content.

Anyone explain why so much has been cut?

Confused Mario Fan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.94.62.221 (talk • contribs) 01:24, 12 April 2006

Need help in game[edit]

i need help! i can't figure out how to pass world 6. i know i've done it before. please help!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.185.235.0 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 7 June 2005

http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/nes/game/525244.html --Carl

The talk page is to talk about the article itself, not the subject. Karjam, AKA KarjamP (talk) 18:25, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshot scaling algorithm[edit]

The screenshot appears to be processed with H2QX, a scaling algorithm which gives the appearence of much higher resolution than the game actually uses. The algorithm also gives images a distinctive cartoonish look. Is this acceptable, or should an unmodified screenshot be uploaded? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.20.177.147 (talk • contribs) 07:11, 7 September 2005

Merging the Subcon article with Super Mario Bros. 2 article[edit]

All of the other characters have their own entries, so, it probably should not be merged.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.6.110.65 (talk • contribs) 18:22, 26 March 2006

We are discussing the setting of SMB2, not the enemy character. Pagra shtak 18:53, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the setting article should be merged, with a redirect from Subcon to this article. It's a short article, and the few bits that refer to other games are either not very important, or can be incorporated into this article. As per the "other characters have their own entries" comment, even if we were referring to characters, each given character article should be viewed on their own merits whether they warrant their own article; if not, the info should be compiled elsewhere (a list of minor characters, for example). --Matthew0028 23:42, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be kept alone. It's a location in the Super Mario universe, just like the Mushroom Kingdom. M2K e 00:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

However, merely being a location in the Mario universe isn't enough to warrant an article. The Vanilla Dome in SMW is a location in the Mario universe, and it doesn't warrant an article. Isle Delfino is a location in the Mario universe, and it redirects to Super Mario Sunshine. Unless there is enough information to warrant it standing on its own (which, IMO, there isn't), I think it should be merged. As an aside, I think the most of the Mushroom Kingdom article is inane and not appropriate for an encycloepedia, but that's only relevant to this discussion in the sense that arguably the Mushroom Kingdom article itself doesn't warrant an article, which if true would imply that your argument is invalid. —Matthew0028 00:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved back[edit]

I've moved this back to Super Mario Bros. 2 (not USA) for a few reasons:

There appears to be no consensus for a move.
This is the English Wikipedia, and in English-speaking countries, Doki Doki Panic/SMBUSA was released as Super Mario Bros. 2.
If there are only two pages to disambiguate between, having a separate disambig page is wasteful. Easier to have one article at the title in question, and the other linked in the header.

Andre (talk) 00:50, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Luigi's looks[edit]

The following sentence neesd to be rewritten but I'm not sure what it's supposed to say.

Luigi is first portraited as not a identical twin of Mario, instead, he is taller and thinner.

Would an accurate rewrite be:

The game established a portrayal of Luigi as taller and thinner than Mario, in contrast with the identical twin seen up until that point.

thanks. Bgruber 01:49, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why just north american?[edit]

Is someone just mistaken? I just changed the article, this game was released in both North America and Europe instead of Super Mario Bros.: The Lost Levels. /81.170.235.234 10:19, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Japan..[edit]

Why is the title for this game Super Mario USA???—Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.200.34.177 (talk • contribs) 16:51, 21 April 2006

As explained in the article, the Super Mario 2 we were given was a reworking of Doki Doki Panic. There *was* a proper Super Mario Brothers 2 released in Japan, but it was much more difficult, and it was felt that players in the USA would be put off by such a hard game, so it wasn't released here. The 'reworked' version, therefore, became Super Mario USA, to distinguish it from the Japanese release. DarkMasterBob 06:47, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reception Section Expansion[edit]

Hi, I think the Reception section needs to be expanded. Currently, it only talks about how the game is seen today. I think it should also mention how the game was received in 1988 as well. Was it a best seller? Was it well regarded? etc. 156.34.219.162 19:53, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is also not NPOV. I am putting a citation-needed disclaimer on this "black sheep" stuff. I'd like to see some references to material which indicates that SMB2's reception was less than stellar. While I was no accountant back in the 80's, I remember all us kids being pretty crazy about it. I think that some people have negative opinions about it now which are ever so slightly shading this part of the article.--QuasarTE 06:24, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added some references. There are plenty more. Andre (talk) 06:38, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for addressing that so quickly, although I still think some of the statements are not NPOV. For example, the article makes it sound as if though the game was not packaged with hardware because it was not successful. This is a cute little catch 22, since if the game had been packaged with hardware, it would have been more successful automatically. A look at the original's 40.2 million units (as well as Super Mario World's later 20) is enough to demonstrate that. Also, while comparing the game's units sold to its predecessor, it neglects to explicitly mention the inflation of that game's sales due to being packed in with what was almost certainly the best-selling game console in history. I don't feel like trying to reword this stuff right now, and I definitely don't want to touch off an edit war or anything of that sort, but I think it needs a little tweaking to be more fair.--QuasarTE 06:46, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's pretty funny you think the reception is coloured to appear rather negatively. You think it's bad now? I actually rewrote some of that section back in December because of how skewed and awful it was. Trust me, it was a lost worst in December than it is now. The original section made a big deal about it being the worst selling Mario from that era, and overall the whole section made it appear as Mario 2 was very poorly received. Nevermind the fact that the original is the biggest selling game EVER, and SMB3 is the biggest selling stand-alone game ever. Nor did the original mention that it sold tremendously well. I did leave the fact in about it not being packaged with a console, not for negative reasons but just as a statement of fact. You want to change that go for it.

Personally, as I remember it SMB2 was HUGE in the late '80s, all the NES fans were very much into it. We didn't know about the doki doki stuff, we just knew it was a great game, and the sales figures back that up. It's one of the biggest selling nes games ever. Personally it's one of my childhood favorites. Wish it would come out on the Wii Virtual Console.

December 14th original

Upon release, the game was not as successful as its predecessor and was never bundled with console hardware. In fact, many sales estimates consider it the worst-selling Super Mario Bros. title. [1] Today, it is often referred to as the "black sheep" of the three Super Mario Bros. games. [2] Despite this, it was popular in its heyday, and many remember it fondly. Due to its unique style of gameplay and set in a completely different world, Super Mario Bros. 2 has made a continuous impact on the entire Super Mario Bros. series. Notable examples include:

December 14th revision

Upon release, the game was very highly successful, and currently stands as the third highest selling game ever released on the Nintendo Entertainment System, with over 10 million copies sold. Only the original Super Mario Bros, at 40 million, and Super Mario Brothers 3, at 18 million, sold more on the original NES. Super Mario 2 was never bundled with console hardware. The game is highly unique in the Mario canon, mostly because its roots as a seperately released non-Mario title. Because it differed so much in the game mechanics and overall feel of the Mario series, some gamers and professional critics have come to regard SMB2 as the "black sheep" of the three Super Mario Bros. games.[3] Overall, the game has retained its popularity, with the rerelease of the title as Super Mario Advance as a Gameboy Advance title became the biggest selling remake of the Super Mario Advance series. MikeLondon

What is this black sheep nonsense? It's the first time I've heard of it. And yes I do see the citation but one article saying it doesn't make it true. Edit: I see from Googling that more than one site are calling the game a black sheep Mario game in retrospect. I still think this assertion is crap.

need help with infobox!![edit]

I want to add Koji Kondo as the musical score composer in the infobox information.

Is he the composer? I was going to ask about that anyway. Do you have a source for this? --Zilog Jones 23:46, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism[edit]

From the article:

Due to its unique style of gameplay and set in a completely different world, Super Mario Bros. 2 has become one of the most popular games for the NES.

But many people hate this game and say that it doesn't follow the mario storylineFrankyboy5 23:57, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on SMB Special in intro[edit]

Please see Talk:Super Mario Bros.: The Lost Levels#Re: SMB Special. Andre (talk) 01:37, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fryguy[edit]

I am suggesting that Fryguy (Nintendo) be merged into this article because his only major appearance is in this game. Per WP:FICT - he has no notability other than this appearance and a handful of cameo appearances in other Mario games. Hbdragon88 23:44, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - But with Mario series enemies though. -- Lord Crayak

Merge - But only on the condition that Mouser and Tryclyde are also merged with it, and that other boss descriptions are made. Hardcore gamer 48 12:06, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, I added mergeto tags on those two articles, let's get some other input. Also, HG48, are you for merging into this article, or to Mario series enemies as Lord Crayak has suggested? hbdragon88 00:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Though I agree with the merge of Fryguy and Tryclyde, I'm a bit debated on Mouser; though a minor character in the Mario video games, he was a fairly major animation character, appearing so often in The Super Mario Bros. Super Show! (atleast half or more of the cartoon's fifty some episodes) that he could almost be considered a main character/villain in it. -- Lord Crayak

Sorry, I should have made myself more clear. My opinion was to merge with SMB2, not Mario series enemies. As for the Mouser argument, I suppose it's possible to keep that article up (not that I'm that fussed about it eitherway), so long as he still got a description here along with the other bosses. ^_^ Hardcore gamer 48 06:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't merge, Mario game pages are gonna become cluttered if you start sticking enemy sections in them. That's why enemy sections were created.--Iamstillhiro1112 13:09, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, we don't need to merge, Fryguy took a major part in the show too...

Not really, Fryguy only really had a major role in the episodes "The Great BMX Race", "Too Hot to Handle" and "Raiders of the Lost Mushroom". -- Lord Crayak

Virtual Console[edit]

When is this coming to Virtual Console? 67.188.172.165 20:48, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's out now. Miles Blues 00:18, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The talk page is for discussing the article, not the subject itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karjam (talk • contribs) 18:32, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Doki Doki Panic as a game engine[edit]

I've now twice reverted the addition of Doki Doki Panic as a game engine. First, Doki Doki Panic is a standalone game in its own right, not merely a game engine. Second, Super Mario Bros. 2 is a straight remake/adaptation of the entire Doki Doki Panic game; by contrast games are built on top of a game engine, not the case here. Third, the concept of a consciously well-defined game engine layer as we know it wasn't a widely discussed concept in the 1980s, so saying that a game from that era used a specific game engine is anachronistic and constitutes original research. — TKD::Talk 22:32, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mama's pregnant?[edit]

Is there any official art of the Doki Doki Panic characters to confirm this? As much as I love the idea of her being the first playable pregnant woman in video games, it seems more like speculation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.187.236.11 (talk) 21:22, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll add a {{Fact}} tag to it. 99.230.152.143 (talk) 19:04, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DiD & "remade versions"[edit]

"SMB2 is the only original Mario game, besides Super Paper Mario for the Wii where Princess Peach is not the damsel-in-distress."

What is meant by "original Mario game" and why is such a recent addition as SPM included (and not italicized nor closed off by a second comma) when even I, a non-Mario player, can think of at least Super Princess Peach as a Mario game under this qualifier? There is also Super Mario Land, wherein Peach, AFAIK, doesn't appear; this may not count for the above statement, but said statement seems very wrong even to a somewhat uninitiated person as myself.

"Enemies in SMB2 reappear even after being "killed"--this was changed in one of the remade versions of the game."

Awkward dash aside, this needs to be specified.

T.J. Fuller, Jr. (talk) 21:45, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

J.J. Abrams and SMB2[edit]

J.J. Abrams (Lost, Alias, Star Trek) has an interesting essay on "mystery" here:

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/17-05/mf_jjessay

His point of departure is that he once spent 22 hours straight playing SMB2, because he was obsessed with finishing the game, and he had the version that lacked "The Ability To Fucking Save (TATFS)". Worth working into this article, and not as a trivia item. Isaac R (talk) 16:18, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What about the Story[edit]

How about a section on the Story? Wart was never mentioned. --75.187.32.194 (talk) 18:13, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't the "official" title Super Mario Bros. 2: Mario Madness?[edit]

I know no one calls it that, but the cover of the game seems to indicate this as the official title. Should the Wiki article reflect this? KyuzoGator (talk) 13:53, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's called a tagline. Many boxarts have them. You must think the "official" title of Super Smash Bros Melee is "Super Smash Bros Melee: Nintendo's Best in 4-Player Action!" with that logic, no offense intended. Kiwisoup (talk) 05:11, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Release date[edit]

Is there any citation for the release date in North America? I am certain I got Super Mario Bros. 2 as a present for my 10th birthday, which was the third week of September, 1988. I was in fifth grade. I had already played the game a few weeks before my birthday at my friend's house, which would have been late August or early September, 1988. I know for certain I owned a copy of this game before October 10, 1988. 68.255.7.236 (talk) 06:50, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It would appear that there is no source on the date; that needs to be fixed. We'd appreciate if you could find one. Larrythefunkyferret (talk) 07:24, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The "Nintendo Chronicle" in my NA copy of Super Smash Bros. Brawl gives the release as 10/1988. I've updated the article accordingly since it's the only sourced date we've got. For what it's worth, SMB2's page on the Wii Shop Channel also lists the original release as 10/1988. I don't doubt what you say is true, but we have to go with what the source says. -sesuPRIME 16:49, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi guys. Why is there an apparent controversy over the release date? I have seen it edited to some different months in 1988, but I can't find any definitive record online of an exact release date. Why has it changed in the article, and how can it be ascertained? Or shall we just put a month range, or just the year? Thanks. — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 20:01, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The lack of a reliable source, combined with people's doodle memory, is likely the root cause of the disagreement. If you can't find an online source anywhere, then maybe someone has a copy of Nintendo Power or something that has the release date. Larrythefunkyferret (talk) 05:46, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I come back to this wikipedia entry nearly 13 years later to eat my serving of crow. I'm the one who "knew for certain" that I owned and played Super Mario Bros. 2 prior to October 1988. I was wrong--absolutely wrong! I stopped by my parents' home with my kids earlier today and we went through some photo albums that were in storage in the basement. We got to one album of my brother's, sister's, and my birthdays. September 1988 was my 10th birthday. And what was I holding up in the picture at my birthday party? The Track & Field NES cartridge by Konami, of course. Right in the midst of the 1988 Sumer Olympics. Imagine that!

It wasn't until my 11th birthday in September 1989, where I was holding up Super Mario Bros. 2 in a picture. I almost immediately remembered this very page and felt it necessary to set the record straight. I put a reminder in my phone to update this page as soon as I got home.

More proof of why "Trust Me, Bro" is not a valid source. 2600:1700:1CC0:74E0:1EC:5DB4:24F0:4606 (talk) 23:16, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just remembered, I have a 2010 calendar from Nintendo Power that lists the release dates of various Nintendo games, including Super Mario Bros 2 (Oct 10, 1988 if you're interested). I'm 90% confident that this would be acceptable as a source in the absence of a regular issue of Nintendo Power. Now how do I go about sourcing a publication like this on Wikipedia? It's bound like a magazine issue, not a traditional calendar. Larrythefunkyferret (talk) 06:01, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mean to state it as a wishy-washy question. I meant to request exactly what you just provided, thanks. I formatted it as a citation, and you can add more if you lay hands on that magazine. Cool. Good job. It'd be nice if there was a way to have additional citations for corroboration, not that it necessarily matters, and not that I have any clue how to find them. I think I've been steeped in this material so long that I am now afflicted with Mario madness and I just need to go and play the game. — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 12:05, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think this should be enough, unless the wise ones can tell us why not. I did notice, though, that the citation isn't showing up well in the references section; I think there's a syntax error in the citation. Larrythefunkyferret (talk) 03:52, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well. I am a wise one, so let me know if you happen to get any more specific metadata information on that particular publication, like an exact title or issue number or whatever. ;) I fixed the error you mentioned; it was the rare case where I didn't skim the whole document preview, and I have done a ton of Mario editing in the last several days. Thank you. — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 08:29, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

on the cover of first Nintendo Power[edit]

This game was featured on the cover of the first Nintendo Power. I think that's notable due to the importance of the magazine in that era of NES games. I'll add a note on that if there are no objections. UselessToRemain (talk) 19:41, 23 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Doki Doki screenshot[edit]

Anyone willing to take a screencap of DDP that shows approximately the same action performed in SMB2? - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 09:30, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Willing, but not able. Where would one get a PC copy to get a screenshot of it? Larrythefunkyferret (talk) 05:49, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking more emulation. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 08:25, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Prince Haru's appearance in the game[edit]

Prince Haru however doesn't appear in this game at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.75.245.226 (talk) 04:14, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Doki Doki[edit]

Shouldn't "Doki Doki" have it's own article. It was after all what "Super Mario Bros. 2" outside of Japan was based on. Unless there is an article, I can't find it. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 21:31, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Super Mario 3D World mentions are unnecessary[edit]

I think it is worth noting how the game influenced later Super Mario titles - picking up items, ability to play as other characters with different attributes, etc. - but the mentions of Super Mario 3D World for Wii U unnecessarily detract from the flow of the article about the original game. A new section should be added that solely addresses the game's influence on later Mario games, which would include SM3DW. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Urbster1 (talk • contribs) 15:11, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Super Mario Bros. 2. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:52, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Super Mario USA(Japan)/Super Mario Bros.2(West)" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Super Mario USA(Japan)/Super Mario Bros.2(West) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 10#Super Mario USA(Japan)/Super Mario Bros.2(West) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 12:35, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]