Mario Madness
Chris Suellentrop takes a gander at Super Mario Bros: The Lost Levels.
For those not in the know: this game was intended to be Super Mario Bros. 2, but was rejected for American audiences in favor of the loopy version we got instead. "Lost Levels" bears a superficial resemblance to the original game, but is much more difficult. It's an interesting bit of video game history, but not one I particularly care about.
But Suellentrop's piece annoyed me for a couple of reasons. I know, I'm not much a video game connoisseur, but I do have opinions, bitches!
1. This sentence: "The American version of Super Mario Bros. 2 is an odd duck of a sequel that isn't really reviled but also isn't really remembered at all." Is this even close to true? I don't know any Nintendokids who don't remember Super Mario Bros. 2. Indeed, almost everyone I know professes to love it more than any other Mario game. Suellentrop talks about how "Lost Levels" "turns [the original] on its head," which I won't argue, but isn't SMB2 itself a massive overturning of video game convention? How many sequels then, or now, play so little respect to the original game? Virtually nothing in SMB2 resembles SMB1. There is no stomping, no coin boxes, no Bowsers. It doesn't even have a reasonable, save-the-Princess plot that future Mario games would revert to. It's this perversity that makes SMB2 such a charming game. And it's also part of the reason that I have called the game "one of the great artistic achievement of our time." So, I certainly haven't forgotten the game -- but I still don't think that anyone who has made "Lost Levels" part of "schoolyard legend" actually forgot this game, even if they didn't like it.
2. Why does Suellentrop, who links to a Wikipedia article on the subject that explains the game's history, make no reference to the fact that various versions of "Lost Levels" have been available for more than 15 years, 75% of Suellentrop's "20 years of legend"? It first appeared in "Super Mario All-Stars" in 1993. That's when I played it. Admittedly, it appears that this new Wii version is the first time the game has come to America exactly as Shigeru Miyamoto designed it and as it appeared in Japan, so it's fair to say that few people in our country have played the game in its full form. But to make that argument one has to actually acknowledge that this game, under this title, and closely following the original design, has been around for a long time. Instead, Suellentrop acts as if he has only heard dim, excited whispers of the game's existence until it suddenly popped into his Wii-life. Don't video games deserve decent journalism?
For those not in the know: this game was intended to be Super Mario Bros. 2, but was rejected for American audiences in favor of the loopy version we got instead. "Lost Levels" bears a superficial resemblance to the original game, but is much more difficult. It's an interesting bit of video game history, but not one I particularly care about.
But Suellentrop's piece annoyed me for a couple of reasons. I know, I'm not much a video game connoisseur, but I do have opinions, bitches!
1. This sentence: "The American version of Super Mario Bros. 2 is an odd duck of a sequel that isn't really reviled but also isn't really remembered at all." Is this even close to true? I don't know any Nintendokids who don't remember Super Mario Bros. 2. Indeed, almost everyone I know professes to love it more than any other Mario game. Suellentrop talks about how "Lost Levels" "turns [the original] on its head," which I won't argue, but isn't SMB2 itself a massive overturning of video game convention? How many sequels then, or now, play so little respect to the original game? Virtually nothing in SMB2 resembles SMB1. There is no stomping, no coin boxes, no Bowsers. It doesn't even have a reasonable, save-the-Princess plot that future Mario games would revert to. It's this perversity that makes SMB2 such a charming game. And it's also part of the reason that I have called the game "one of the great artistic achievement of our time." So, I certainly haven't forgotten the game -- but I still don't think that anyone who has made "Lost Levels" part of "schoolyard legend" actually forgot this game, even if they didn't like it.
2. Why does Suellentrop, who links to a Wikipedia article on the subject that explains the game's history, make no reference to the fact that various versions of "Lost Levels" have been available for more than 15 years, 75% of Suellentrop's "20 years of legend"? It first appeared in "Super Mario All-Stars" in 1993. That's when I played it. Admittedly, it appears that this new Wii version is the first time the game has come to America exactly as Shigeru Miyamoto designed it and as it appeared in Japan, so it's fair to say that few people in our country have played the game in its full form. But to make that argument one has to actually acknowledge that this game, under this title, and closely following the original design, has been around for a long time. Instead, Suellentrop acts as if he has only heard dim, excited whispers of the game's existence until it suddenly popped into his Wii-life. Don't video games deserve decent journalism?
Labels: Culture
posted by Joshua at 12:25 AM
5 Comments:
i am a great admirer of SMB2 -- for whatever reason, i absolutely loved that game.
for some great video game journalism, check out pieces by Kieron Gillen (also a comic book writer). they are pretty spectacular and even if you don't know the game, you'll get the entire sensory experience of what it's like to play the game from his writing.
pl
This post has been removed by the author.
I don't know any Nintendokids who don't remember Super Mario Bros. 2. Indeed, almost everyone I know professes to love it more than any other Mario game.
For real? I mean, I love SMB2 and all... but my favorite Mario? Er, no. Three words for you: TANOOKI SUIT, MUTHAFUCKA.
I 100% agree with you -- SMB 2 is one of the greatest artistic accomplishments of our time. It's a fantastic exploration of imagination. In fact, it may bridge the psychedelic 60's with the modernist 80's. Or something like that.
"The Lost Levels" were stupid. I only played them on the "All Stars" package (I love that thing and wish I had a Super Nintendo for the sole purpose of owning that cartridge), but c'mon: all it was was the first game, but harder. Lame! The first game was terrible.
And video game culture definitely deserves good journalism, and it definitely gets it, too. This guy has no idea what's up.
Yeah, SMB2 is all good and fun--you get to be the Princess! And like, pull up turnips!--but SMB3 is pretty much universally recognized as the greatest Mario game of all time...and if there is a close runner up, it's Mario 64.
Oh shit, Mario Galaxy drops next week. Will I have the strength to resist?
Post a Comment
<< Home