Yuku free message boards

I've come before you in hopes of shinning some light on a question that has plagued mankind for years. It's a question of finding the better of the two choices available and much like the wars of the past, battles have broken out when tensions between each supporting side have reached the boilling point. The questions I speak of is such: Who's better? Mario or Sonic?*

Now you may be asking "Hey Slim, why bother trying to answer this question? Gamers have spent countless years trying to come up with an answer and they still haven't come close. Furthermore why should be care about the Mario and Sonic conflict when we're in the middle of a dangerous war? It's pretty meaningless at this current time." Well for starters, your right. Secondly, Im one to think that if you solve all the little problems first you're ready to tackle the biggest ones. Lastly, sorry to say this but im ready to move on with my life and carry on my normal routines... just like after 9/11.

Okay let's get this over with.

Back in the early 80's a new hero emerged from the depths of the darkest arcade, his name was Jumpman, unlike other popular games at the time Jumpman could do other things than just walk wherever you tilted the control stick. He could jump, climb, use hammers and above all, keep a crowed wanting more. It wasn't long before Jumpman (Later renamed Mario) found his way into our homes and our hearts. Mario's game tested our hand-eye co-ordination, our reflexes and our use of the jump button. Jam-packed with power-ups and secrets the Mario bros were the first true video game characters and the pinoneers of thousands to follow.

Of all the other characters to emerge as a result of Mario's influence none of them came close to beating him. Than came the nineties. More accurately here came Sonic. The Sonic team (3 members) pointed out the two flaws in Mario that others couldn't see: Mario moved really slow and his environments were pretty simple to get around. Sonic the hedgehog took away Mario's exploration and replaced it with huge levels that could be covered in mere seconds. Sonics games sold quickly and soon enough it was a race between the portly plumber and the speedy rodent.

So whose the better of the two? If you think the only way to solve this would be to have them duke it out in a battle royal we'll have to size them up. Sonic definetely has the speed advantage over Mario, so logic would suggest that Mario is physically stronger than Sonic. It's probably true since Mario can jump higher and run further than any normal human (Especially at his age and weight) not to mention he can smash boulders with his butt and toss huge monsters by their tails. Back to the battle, Sonic has always had two primary attacks (Jump and spin) while it wasn't until 1996 when Mario could do other things (Other than jumping) without the help of items. Sonic could probably get in more hits on Mario but Im guessing Mario would be able to endure much longer than Sonic, and for Sonic to keep that runners build in tip-top shape im guessing he'd be pretty frail.

Moving on to round two: Their success at advancement. By that I mean each of their transaction from 2D to full 3D (Note that Mario RPG won't count because that was a collaboration between Square and Nintendo... not just Nintendo). Mario 64 was the amp for the Nintendo64 and remains today the 11th best selling game on the system aswell regarded as one of the finest platform games around. Keep in mind that was Nintendo's first attempt at a fully 3D game and it was a huge success. What most people don't know is that Sonic's 3D outtings didn't start of the Dreamcast but rather the ill-fated Sega saturn and the PC-CDRom. Sonic 3D blast and Sonic Jam were the first attempts and neither of them were very successful. Sonic 3D blast was a top-down look on a 32-bit game (Much like Banjo-Kazooie: Grunty's revenge will look like) the only problems was that the levels design looked like Sonic was on a giant staircase wich meant Sonic only got so far before he had to trudge up a ramp to reach the next area. This kept Sonic from reaching top-speed and thus wasn't even half the fun. Sonic Jam came close but since it was on the Sega saturn most people didn't play the game anyways. Sonic got is big break on the Dreamcast. Sonic Adventure remains the best selling DC game on the system as well as one of the best looking. With beautiful textures and amazingly constructed levels Sonic went above and beyond what Mario began to do in Mario64. Not to mention Sega achieved what it set out to do: Make a faster Mario, and man oh man did they ever. You never got a full apreciation of how fast Sonic is until you've played him in a good 3D adventure game.

Round three: Appeal. Sonic's 'tude embodies everything I hate about modern pop culture and his story writters dig too deep into the campy side of todays youth. You know what im talking about: "Talk about a bad flight, no food or movies. Im outta here. I like running better" "Im just a guy who loooooves adventure." "Time to return to the planet that's as cool and blue as I am." Sonic may have more in common with todays youth but he talks like he should be hosting TRL or presenting an award at some tween celeberty awards show. And is it just me or is Sonics constant attempt to be in the public eye seem more like selling out? I mean what with the Macy's parade float, the issues upon issues of comic books and the numerous cartoon series? Well I guess nobodies perfect, Mario's had two or three cartoon shows and even a bad movie starring credible actors. Mario likes to stay close to his roots wich is why you'll mostly find him in video games and spinoff games. Why the good Mario spinoff games outweigth the bad ones there are some prime examples where diehard Mario fans would rather they stayed on the cutting room floor. Games such as Mario math, Mario in time and the dreaded, tereble game Mario is missing. Sonic's no better, I've pointed out his horrible first tries at 3D games but then there's that Dr. Robotnik tetris-style game and the Mario party knock-off that was Sonic shuffle.

End results: So who's the clear cut winner? Neither of them. Neither one is the greater or the lesser. Sonic and Mario have fine attributes and have both contributed greatly to the business of video games. Mario heralded the exploration and creative original elements involved in overall gameplay and Sonic gave us the excitement and visual splendor involved with the playtime...all of wich we take for granted in todays games. We shouldn't be choosing sides on who's better we should be praising them both for representing the best parts of game fundamentals common in our modern favorites. There like primary colors, alone they make a solid color but mixed together and they make something completely new and never before seen. Or in the case of Mario and Sonic, red and blue makes purple.

Of course if you absolutely must have a winner remember than Mario games have been around a lot longer than Sonics and ever since Mario's been a firts party character he hasn't moved from the spot... unlike Sonic...who works for Mario now.




*Psyched!

Respond to this and other Editorials in the discussion forum.
pub37.ezboard.com/fnextgenerationconsoles80644frm15.showMessage?topicID=3.topic

Where does Spike TV (AkaTNN, Aka The NEW TNN, Aka cable access channel 32) get off boasting that it has what it takes to host a video game awards show?

I mean first of all, How can a channel that runs old Star Trek episodes and reruns of Blind date possibly be reffered to as "The first network for men"? Men don't watch Star Trek and no one watches God-awful reality shows. Oh but they have wrestling and every show that ever listed Pamela Anderson in the credits...that MUST mean it's a channel that appeals to men. Of course it applies to the lower-end spectrum of men. You know, it's lucky that men can have relationships at all when trash TV treats us like we have nothing better to do than gawk at over-the-hill moms with breast implants.

And Second, why do they keep reffering to this as the first Video game awards show? It's not the first awards show for video games...it's the first awards show for video games that's going to be televised. And there's reasons why such awards shows aren't televised.

1st: It's borring. It's bad enough to watch the pre-show special before the Oscars, and the live bands in between awards (Delaying what we all came to see) without the overly long acceptance speeches for awards no one cares about. That's why in the world of video games, there's the nominees and the awards...that's it! Acceptance speeches are given in press releases maybe two weeks after. There's no live bands or pre-show coverage for video game awards shows because it's purely business and it's nothing to get excited about. With live bands and celebrity presentors, it turns the awards ceremony into a farce and wastes the time of the game developers; who are only there to see if they did a good job or not. Movie and music awards shows need live bands and actors to take part of the ceremonies because they make up a large part of the movie and music medium...video games not as much. Video games can survive without celebrity influence or live bands...as such, so should the awards shows.

2nd: It's unfair to the past. If you wanted to make an awards show for video games you'd have to credit this overall year of video games...well what if this year sucked? Many hardcore gamers truley believe that the best games were always the 2D ones...Like Super Metroid or Sonic the hedgehog 2. So where's their recognition? Imagine years from now when we go over the records of past Spike TV VG awards...Hmm, game of the year 2003 was Madden 2004...but video games have been around since the seventies...are we to believe that for two-and-a-half decades there were no good video games? If we thought that how do you think the makers of Resident evil or Crazy taxi would feel? Now games of the past have gotten awards and credit...but those are from the awards that aren't televised. What's on TV has a direct impact on our memories...everyone remembers Seinfeld's last episode because they SAW it. Everyone knows we landed on the moons because we've SEEN the footage. In short, if we start broadcasting video game award shows now then the past, credible, awards for past games will be overlooked and overshadowed by the coveted, well sought-after, Spike TV VG award.

3rd: It's based on votes of non-hardcore gamers. A movie like A beautiful Mind didn't win the oscar for best picture because it made the most money at the box office (Because it didn't) but because it stirred emotion into some of the people who watched it. Now Madden 2004 is the best selling game of 2003 so far...so when it came time to vote on best game and Madden was nominated, it's a surefire bet that the fans of the game gathered in numbers. I could argue that a larger fanbase persuaded the vote. Taking into account that even thought the general public loves GTA: Vice city, there was simply more people to vote for Madden 2004. There are no awards given out for the best selling game every time an earnings report is given out at the end of the month, but when consumers are asked to vote for their favorite game the highest vote will probably be for the game that sold the most. It's likely that the game sold so well because it was fun...but I highly doubt that the average gamer thought that GTA wasn't as as fun as Madden 2004. Talk to any game reviewer and they'll tell you that the best games are the ones that standout from the pack...not the ones that improve themselves from the first game.

I think video game award shows are a bad idea. It's nice to be recognized for your talents...but when the awards are based on the votes of the general public then you better be ready to have some things overlooked. I mean the awards are so shallow: Best graphics, best action game, best fighting game etc...how do the sound engineers or the motion-capture engineers feel when their work isn't even mentioned...they're part of a team. Look, if every possible award for film goes out at the Oscars then at least give the guy who programmed the easter egg no one cares about should get an award. But if regular gamers had to vote for best lead animator it would become too complicated for them and they wouldn't bother...explaining why the old video game award ceremonies weren't televised either.





Respond to this and other Editorials in the discussion forum.
pub37.ezboard.com/fnextgenerationconsoles80644frm15.showMessage?topicID=3.topic