It is currently Thu Nov 14, 2019 8:07 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 3:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 07, 2013 2:59 pm
Posts: 1907
I've got a question about a text passage in the manual of "Super Mario Bros."

Unfortunately, Legends of Localization skipped this very part in their comparison:
https://legendsoflocalization.com/super ... s/manuals/

So, if anybody is able to read Japanese, can you please tell me the following?

Attachment:
Text.png
Text.png [ 338.43 KiB | Viewed 6146 times ]
(Click image to view it in its full resolution.)

What is the exact wording here in comparison to the English version? Does the Japanese tell exactly the same or are there little nuances that differ?


I'm asking because I'm not sure how exactly I have to imagine this scene:
Quote:
If you come across mushrooms who have been turned into bricks or made invisible, they reward you by giving you a power boost.

Does this mean that the Super Mushroom itself is the citizen who has been turned into a brick and who is now freed and therefore turns Mario big via magic?
So, the "power boost" would be the effect it has on Mario.

Or does the mushroom who has been turned into a brick give Mario a Super Mushroom?
I.e. the citizen is a mushroom who would look like Toad, with arms and legs. And the Super Mushroom is a distinct item that's in his possession and the words "power boost" refer to the item itself.

I'd like to know if the Japanese text is a bit clearer here.

_________________
Available now: My game "City Trouble".
Website: https://megacatstudios.com/products/city-trouble
Trailer: https://youtu.be/IYXpP59qSxA
Gameplay: https://youtu.be/Eee0yurkIW4
German Retro Gamer article: http://i67.tinypic.com/345o108.jpg


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 6:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2016 6:16 pm
Posts: 734
It's essentially the same.

マリオのパワーアップ
Mario's powerups

パワーをくれる仲間達
The allies who give you power

レンガに変えられたり、消されたりしたキノコを見つけて助けると、彼等からパワーをもらって、次々と変身します。
If you rescue the mushrooms that have been turned into bricks or made invisible, you will receive power from them and transform (into various forms).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 07, 2013 2:59 pm
Posts: 1907
Thanks for the translation.

Looks like the Japanese version isn't that much clearer.

So, what do you think:

Was the original idea that the Super Mushroom, the Fire Flower and the Starman are sentinent beings who inhabited the kingdom and they are the ones who got turned into bricks? And if you transform them back, they give you some power?

Or was the Super Mushroom always just supposed to be an item and the "mushroom that got turned into a brick" is separate from the "Super Mushroom"/"Magic Mushroom" that he throws at you when you find him? (I.e. the block is supposed to be a transformed Toad. And the transformed Toad gives you a Super Mushroom as a present, but the Toad isn't supposed to be the Super Mushroom himself.)

_________________
Available now: My game "City Trouble".
Website: https://megacatstudios.com/products/city-trouble
Trailer: https://youtu.be/IYXpP59qSxA
Gameplay: https://youtu.be/Eee0yurkIW4
German Retro Gamer article: http://i67.tinypic.com/345o108.jpg


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 2:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 7:56 pm
Posts: 218
This part of the manual might not be clear, but the story in the manual (which is covered on the page you linked) more specifically mentions the "Mushroom People"/"キノコ一族" being transformed into bricks. This is almost exactly the term used today for Toad's species in Japanese.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 2:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 28, 2013 5:49 am
Posts: 1226
Location: Hokkaido, Japan
Yeah there is no problem with the original translation besides the names of the three power-ups themselves. They are kinoko (mushroom), flower and star respectively in Japanese.

Quote:
This part of the manual might not be clear, but the story in the manual (which is covered on the page you linked) more specifically mentions the "Mushroom People"/"キノコ一族" being transformed into bricks. This is almost exactly the term used today for Toad's species in Japanese.
Yes there is no doubt that the bricks are supposed to be the mushroom people according to the story.


Regarding DRW's question, as I kid I also thought the item was the petrified mushroom kingdom denizen himself turned back to normal, but nowdays I think the power-ups are probably supposed to be separate from the denizen (but it is very unclear). I mean the brick and invisible blocks sure, but what about the much more common ?-blocks? Are they also transformed denizens? It doesn't really explain why the block turns brown either, if Mario's punch really is lifting the curse on them. Then there are coins, are coins also the true form of certain transformed denizens?

I believe that the development went something like this: they just thought it would be cool if power-up items came up from blocks when they're punched from below, borrowing the same mechanics from Mario Bros. Then later someone thought that the presence of blocks like this have to be explained somehow, and they added it to the story (although missing to address some details) and then forgot about it. In later Mario games no one thinks twice about floating blocks containing items, it's just a natural part of the Mario world.

In other words, I think that part of the idea MIGHT have been that the item should be the actual denizen and part probably not as this idea was added much later and not really thoroughly thought over. Not everyone in the team might have had the same idea how things was supposed to be (the guy writing the story and the guy coming up with the item idea might have been different people for example and had different ideas how it works). In later games this idea was totally scrapped, which is why it's so mysterious.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 3:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 7:35 pm
Posts: 4231
Note that in some games, you collect *other characters* for points and health and such.

_________________
Here come the fortune cookies! Here come the fortune cookies! They're wearing paper hats!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 1:08 pm
Posts: 599
Location: United States
I like to think Mega Man collects extra heads because those are what get destroyed when he 'dies.'

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2019 1:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 07, 2013 2:59 pm
Posts: 1907
I have found one difference between the Japanese and the English version:
The English version merely says "If you come across mushrooms". The Japanese version, according to the translation above, says "If you rescue the mushrooms".
This seems to be more in favor for the idea that the Super Mushroom is the mushroom person itself. Otherwise, in which way would bumping against a transformed mushroom and taking his item constitute as rescuing?


But then, on the other hand, you have the following arguments:

The mushroom retainers at the end of each level look like actual people. Are we supposed to believe that the rest of the population is just a bunch of walking mushroom heads?

Likewise, the manual talks about mushrooms that have been transformed. But the items are also stars, not only mushrooms. But nobody ever said that living starmen are part of the people.

Even if Super Mushrooms and Starmen can, in theory, be thought of as sentinent beings who inhabited the kingdom, it's hard to believe that the immobile, faceless Fire Flower is supposed to be a person in the same way.

Even the Japanese "Super Mario Bros." anime, which came out in 1986, makes a distinction between the mushroom people and the Super Mushroom.

And in light of the other games, only the distinction makes sense, otherwise you have a pretty strange plot error: "Super Mario Bros. 3" shows Toad in his house who has a bunch of chests that contain Super Mushrooms and other stuff, so they are definitely distinct here.

Pokun wrote:
I mean the brick and invisible blocks sure, but what about the much more common ?-blocks? Are they also transformed denizens? It doesn't really explain why the block turns brown either, if Mario's punch really is lifting the curse on them. Then there are coins, are coins also the true form of certain transformed denizens?

I assume the transformed people are specifically all the different blocks that contain Super Mushrooms, Fire Flowers and Starmen, not the coins. Because that's what the manual says: It refers to the transformation specifically in regards to the three "power boost" items.

So, coins are probably not part of it.

And regular blocks that you can smash and that don't give you anything are definitely not part of it.

By the way, there's something I always hate with theorists on the internet:
Pretty much everybody who mentions the SMB1 story also says that Mario is killing the mushroom people because he smashes bricks.
"Huh huh huh, Mario is a mass murderer. Mario is the bad guy."
I'm so sick of it. The manual clearly states that the transformed mushrooms are the ones that give you the power boost, not every block, especially not the ones that you can destroy.
(Just because a witch turned a prince into a frog doesn't mean every frog in the world is a transformed prince.)
These people come up with those theories, but don't bother to read the whole manual instead of just the intro page.


Pokun wrote:
(the guy writing the story and the guy coming up with the item idea might have been different people for example and had different ideas how it works)

This could actually be a resonable explanation. I encountered this myself when I had a plot in mind and someone else wrote a summary and completely misrepresented what I intended. In my case, I simply rejected the summary, but yeah, stuff like this probably happens in actual game companies.


I have one last idea how it might have been intended:
Maybe the Super Mushroom really is just an item. And bumping into the block frees and retransforms the actual citizen, only that the game doesn't show this due to it wasting game code and graphics resources. So, you have to imagine that Mario is encountering a mushroom person who gives you the item, even though the game doesn't show the mushroom person.

_________________
Available now: My game "City Trouble".
Website: https://megacatstudios.com/products/city-trouble
Trailer: https://youtu.be/IYXpP59qSxA
Gameplay: https://youtu.be/Eee0yurkIW4
German Retro Gamer article: http://i67.tinypic.com/345o108.jpg


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2019 6:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2004 11:12 pm
Posts: 21688
Location: NE Indiana, USA (NTSC)
DRW's explanation makes sense in light of a later game series by Sega. You know how popping a badnik in Sonic the Hedgehog for Sega Genesis releases a bunny or chick or whatever that hops off, and then there are a bunch more of those in the cage that Sonic opens at the end of the zone? I'd like to think that popping a ? block containing a powerup was supposed to release a Toad who drops the powerup and runs away, but it wouldn't fit in 40K.

_________________
Pin Eight | Twitter | GitHub | Patreon


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2019 9:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2004 7:35 pm
Posts: 4231
I think the simple answer is that they weren't actually planning anything long term, and just came up with some flimsy explanation of why the world looked the way it did. It would be retconned away soon enough.

_________________
Here come the fortune cookies! Here come the fortune cookies! They're wearing paper hats!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 22, 2019 2:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 28, 2013 5:49 am
Posts: 1226
Location: Hokkaido, Japan
Yeah that's pretty much what I mean. And DRW's explanation about the denizen just doesn't appear in the game could explain the brown box as well. Maybe they were simply trapped in that box when petrified, and it's all that's left when they leave.

Dwedit wrote:
Note that in some games, you collect *other characters* for points and health and such.
Yeah but in this case I really doubt the power-ups are supposed to be characters.

Jedi QuestMaster wrote:
I like to think Mega Man collects extra heads because those are what get destroyed when he 'dies.'
I just think they are whatever spare parts that Dr Light can make him out of scrap parts. An extra life (or "spare body") symbols enough spare parts to replace about any and all part of his body that goes bad when he is defeated. As long as his heart/programming can be rescued he will be fine.

DRW wrote:
I have found one difference between the Japanese and the English version:
The English version merely says "If you come across mushrooms". The Japanese version, according to the translation above, says "If you rescue the mushrooms".
This seems to be more in favor for the idea that the Super Mushroom is the mushroom person itself. Otherwise, in which way would bumping against a transformed mushroom and taking his item constitute as rescuing?
Yes the Japanese version definitely says "if you find and rescue..." while the English version seems to omit "rescue" (but it could be argued that it's clear from the context since you are "awarded" power). On the other hand the English version has the Starman which I as a kid thought it meant that the Star was more like a person than an item. But since SMB2j even mushrooms has eyes and the new poisonous mushroom (which even have an evil grin in the manual) strongly suggests that they are supposed to be eaten. That's another reason I think they weren't meant to be denizens from the start. Another reason is that the mushrooms were inspired by the mushrooms in Alice in Wonderland that makes Alice grow or shrink when eaten, so the mushroom were definitely supposed to be food items from the start.

DRW wrote:
But then, on the other hand, you have the following arguments:

The mushroom retainers at the end of each level look like actual people. Are we supposed to believe that the rest of the population is just a bunch of walking mushroom heads?

Likewise, the manual talks about mushrooms that have been transformed. But the items are also stars, not only mushrooms. But nobody ever said that living starmen are part of the people.
I think that the term mushroom people just is a general term for people living in the mushroom kingdom where the kinopio/toads are the most representative race. Much like the turtle tribe consists of many kinds of turtles and non-turtles. On the other hand the manual clearly says "if you find and rescue a mushroom" so no mentioning of rescuing flowers or stars there.

DRW wrote:
Pokun wrote:
I mean the brick and invisible blocks sure, but what about the much more common ?-blocks? Are they also transformed denizens? It doesn't really explain why the block turns brown either, if Mario's punch really is lifting the curse on them. Then there are coins, are coins also the true form of certain transformed denizens?

I assume the transformed people are specifically all the different blocks that contain Super Mushrooms, Fire Flowers and Starmen, not the coins. Because that's what the manual says: It refers to the transformation specifically in regards to the three "power boost" items.

So, coins are probably not part of it.
Yeah they didn't mention the coins but I don't see a reason why they would be an exception. They also comes from the exact same types of blocks. If the denizen and item are separate it makes sense though because the denizen just gives Mario an award (coin, power-up or beanstalk) and runs away like you said.

DRW wrote:
And regular blocks that you can smash and that don't give you anything are definitely not part of it.

By the way, there's something I always hate with theorists on the internet:
Pretty much everybody who mentions the SMB1 story also says that Mario is killing the mushroom people because he smashes bricks.
"Huh huh huh, Mario is a mass murderer. Mario is the bad guy."
I'm so sick of it. The manual clearly states that the transformed mushrooms are the ones that give you the power boost, not every block, especially not the ones that you can destroy.
(Just because a witch turned a prince into a frog doesn't mean every frog in the world is a transformed prince.)
These people come up with those theories, but don't bother to read the whole manual instead of just the intro page.
Yes bricks that are destroyed must be just regular bricks. If not, why doesn't Mario's punch turn them to normal like the others?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 23, 2019 7:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 07, 2013 2:59 pm
Posts: 1907
tepples wrote:
DRW's explanation makes sense in light of a later game series by Sega. You know how popping a badnik in Sonic the Hedgehog for Sega Genesis releases a bunny or chick or whatever that hops off, and then there are a bunch more of those in the cage that Sonic opens at the end of the zone? I'd like to think that popping a ? block containing a powerup was supposed to release a Toad who drops the powerup and runs away, but it wouldn't fit in 40K.

Yeah, the "Sonic" games are a good comparison for this.

If that was their intention, though, I don't understand why they didn't simply display the Toad/Mushroom Retainer sprite for two seconds before switching it with the powerup.

Because I have my issues with playing make believe in a video game.
Sure, a game on such an old console is usually an abstract depiction of what's going on in-universe. But there are some limits to this abstraction.
In my opinion, if the block is supposed to be a mushroom that gets transformed back, they should at least do a simple way of showing this to us. But if there's no mushroom person whatsoever, I cannot just imagine:
"Yeah, even though we only see the block and the powerup, a Toad-like person is totally standing there, giving Mario the powerup. You just don't see him due to Technical Limitations™."

If I don't see it on the screen in any way, not even in an abstract way, then it didn't happen, so to say.
So, either the mushroom is still in the block and he merely provides you with an item for your further quest. (After all, doesn't it require Princess Toadstool to reverse the magic? Why can Bowser's magic be undone by punching against the blocks?)
Or after rescuing him, the mushroom rematerialized elsewhere and Mario didn't see him in front of him anyway.

Pokun wrote:
On the other hand the English version has the Starman which I as a kid thought it meant that the Star was more like a person than an item.

It's probably both: The star is a living being in the same way that you also have hills and clouds with eyes. But the star is not like a citizen who walks around in the castle and talks with the princess and is a person that Bowser would target during his invasion etc.
More like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkWYP95WbbY&t=45s

Pokun wrote:
But since SMB2j even mushrooms has eyes

They also have eyes in the first game. It's just that their faces are shown from the side instead of the front.

Pokun wrote:
and the new poisonous mushroom (which even have an evil grin in the manual) strongly suggests that they are supposed to be eaten. That's another reason I think they weren't meant to be denizens from the start. Another reason is that the mushrooms were inspired by the mushrooms in Alice in Wonderland that makes Alice grow or shrink when eaten, so the mushroom were definitely supposed to be food items from the start.

That's another thing that is always strange to me: Does Mario actually eat the mushroom or not? It might be inspired by "Alice in Wonderland", but this doesn't mean that it has to work exactly as in that work.

Mario has a bunch of powerups: Does he eat the Fire Flower? The star? Or does he eat the raccoon leaf? Does he swallow the feather? Probably not.
So, there are many items that Mario only needs to touch. But this one item that coincidentally is also something that can be eaten in real life, this one automatically is something that he eats?

Also, how is the poisoned mushroom supposed to work then? If Mario only needs to touch the items, we can imagine that he accidentally runs into a poisoned mushroom the same way he can also run into enemies. But if he needs to eat it: "Oh, a poisoned mushroom that is clearly visually distinguishable from a Super Mushroom. Let me pick it up and put it in my mouth. Oh no, I just got hit."

Besides, there are some indicators that Mario doesn't eat the mushroom:

First, the game's original artwork where he walks around, holding the mushroom in his hand:
http://www.nes-classic-mini.com/wp-cont ... 10x456.jpg
I strongly assume that this Goomba-punching version of Mario is supposed to be a conceptualized depiction Super Mario and not "small Mario about to eat the mushroom in a few seconds".

Second, the ending from the Game Boy version of "Donkey Kong": You encounter poisoned mushrooms throughout the game, but no Super Mushrooms. In the end, in a cutscene, Pauline throws a Super Mushroom at Mario and he gets frightened (because he thinks it's a poisoned mushroom), but as soon as the mushroom touches him, he grows into Super Mario:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJXLrNYms9c&t=3m28s
I don't think the intention was: "Mario was frightened, but still caught the mushroom with his mouth and swallowed it."

Also, somebody correct me if I'm wrong: But in the latest "Smash Bros." games, which display character actions in a very detailed way, whenever there is an eatable item that a character can use, the character is actually seen eating it. However, a Super Mushroom only needs to touch a character and turns him big:

Eating:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCM-6ydLRrQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qgr0GoRYcE

Super Mushroom:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIqgMVN6gog

Pokun wrote:
Yeah they didn't mention the coins but I don't see a reason why they would be an exception. They also comes from the exact same types of blocks.

Because coins are also lying around outside of blocks, so they aren't magical items, but stuff that simply exists in this world anyway.
Likewise, you mentioned beanstalks: I don't think that those are also rewards by freed mushrooms: "Thank you for saving me. Here, have a beanstalk." I would say that they also grow "naturally".
So, Bowser transformed the mushroom people into blocks and hid them among the blocks that are floating around anyway.
At least that's how I imagine it. Especially in light of the later games where the blocks are not transformed mushrooms anymore, so it makes sense that there are also already items in SMB1 that are separate from the transformed people.

_________________
Available now: My game "City Trouble".
Website: https://megacatstudios.com/products/city-trouble
Trailer: https://youtu.be/IYXpP59qSxA
Gameplay: https://youtu.be/Eee0yurkIW4
German Retro Gamer article: http://i67.tinypic.com/345o108.jpg


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 23, 2019 9:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 28, 2013 5:49 am
Posts: 1226
Location: Hokkaido, Japan
DRW wrote:
I don't understand why they didn't simply display the Toad/Mushroom Retainer sprite for two seconds before switching it with the powerup.

Because I have my issues with playing make believe in a video game.
Sure, a game on such an old console is usually an abstract depiction of what's going on in-universe. But there are some limits to this abstraction.
In my opinion, if the block is supposed to be a mushroom that gets transformed back, they should at least do a simple way of showing this to us. But if there's no mushroom person whatsoever, I cannot just imagine:
"Yeah, even though we only see the block and the powerup, a Toad-like person is totally standing there, giving Mario the powerup. You just don't see him due to Technical Limitations™."

If I don't see it on the screen in any way, not even in an abstract way, then it didn't happen, so to say.
So, either the mushroom is still in the block and he merely provides you with an item for your further quest. (After all, doesn't it require Princess Toadstool to reverse the magic? Why can Bowser's magic be undone by punching against the blocks?)
Or after rescuing him, the mushroom rematerialized elsewhere and Mario didn't see him in front of him anyway.
I agree, and this is why I don't think the whole mushroom-people-turned-into-bricks-thing was supposed to be from the start. It was a last minute addition to the story trying to explain it or something. Also good plot hole find about the princess being the only one that is supposed to be able to lift the curse. Isn't that why Mario is trying to rescue her in the first place? If he can rescue everyone himself he could build up an army of mushrooms and storm the turtle clan without the princess.

DRW wrote:
Pokun wrote:
On the other hand the English version has the Starman which I as a kid thought it meant that the Star was more like a person than an item.

It's probably both: The star is a living being in the same way that you also have hills and clouds with eyes. But the star is not like a citizen who walks around in the castle and talks with the princess and is a person that Bowser would target during his invasion etc.
Yeah I believe so too. Just because they are items doesn't mean that can't be living things with eyes.

DRW wrote:
Pokun wrote:
But since SMB2j even mushrooms has eyes

They also have eyes in the first game. It's just that their faces are shown from the side instead of the front.
I had no idea they were just shy! And I forgot about the mushroom on the boxart which do have a face, so it's not a new idea in SMB2j after all.

DRW wrote:
Pokun wrote:
and the new poisonous mushroom (which even have an evil grin in the manual) strongly suggests that they are supposed to be eaten. That's another reason I think they weren't meant to be denizens from the start. Another reason is that the mushrooms were inspired by the mushrooms in Alice in Wonderland that makes Alice grow or shrink when eaten, so the mushroom were definitely supposed to be food items from the start.

That's another thing that is always strange to me: Does Mario actually eat the mushroom or not? It might be inspired by "Alice in Wonderland", but this doesn't mean that it has to work exactly as in that work.

Mario has a bunch of powerups: Does he eat the Fire Flower? The star? Or does he eat the raccoon leaf? Does he swallow the feather? Probably not.
So, there are many items that Mario only needs to touch. But this one item that coincidentally is also something that can be eaten in real life, this one automatically is something that he eats?

Also, how is the poisoned mushroom supposed to work then? If Mario only needs to touch the items, we can imagine that he accidentally runs into a poisoned mushroom the same way he can also run into enemies. But if he needs to eat it: "Oh, a poisoned mushroom that is clearly visually distinguishable from a Super Mushroom. Let me pick it up and put it in my mouth. Oh no, I just got hit."

Besides, there are some indicators that Mario doesn't eat the mushroom:

First, the game's original artwork where he walks around, holding the mushroom in his hand:
http://www.nes-classic-mini.com/wp-cont ... 10x456.jpg
I strongly assume that this Goomba-punching version of Mario is supposed to be a conceptualized depiction Super Mario and not "small Mario about to eat the mushroom in a few seconds".

Second, the ending from the Game Boy version of "Donkey Kong": You encounter poisoned mushrooms throughout the game, but no Super Mushrooms. In the end, in a cutscene, Pauline throws a Super Mushroom at Mario and he gets frightened (because he thinks it's a poisoned mushroom), but as soon as the mushroom touches him, he grows into Super Mario:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJXLrNYms9c&t=3m28s
I don't think the intention was: "Mario was frightened, but still caught the mushroom with his mouth and swallowed it."

Also, somebody correct me if I'm wrong: But in the latest "Smash Bros." games, which display character actions in a very detailed way, whenever there is an eatable item that a character can use, the character is actually seen eating it. However, a Super Mushroom only needs to touch a character and turns him big
I'm really not so sure I buy that. The only reason I see Mario wouldn't eat the mushrooms would be if they are denizens, which we don't believe anymore. I mean what do you do with a mushroom? Put it in your pants? It's food! The flower doesn't really look like an edible herb though and you don't normally eat stars (although the star bits in Super Mario Galaxy apparently tastes like konpeito). For the leaf I get the feeling you'd put it on your head to transform, and the feather doesn't look very tasty either and is probably used in another way. Also good point about the SMB artwork where Mario seems to become stronger by merly holding the mushroom, that's definitely one reason I thought the mushrooms was supposed to be the denizen as a kid.

But no matter if mushrooms are eaten or not, I don't believe all items give Mario powers by being touched just because that's what you do in the game. In most games you pick up items or instantly use them by just colliding with their sprite, so it makes sense if that applies to Mario games as well. He probably needs to wear them or use them in some way to transform. Just because the player can tell the difference between poisonous and normal mushrooms doesn't mean anything to the gameplay. I mean logic doesn't always apply if it comes in the way of gameplay.
The only reason the mushrooms are taken in Smash Bros by touching them is most likely because they mimic the way the same items are taken in their original games. For the mushrooms they especially try to mimic the way mushrooms and poison mushrooms in SMB2j are treated where you need to avoid the poison one and even made it harder by making it almost impossible to tell the difference of them. Same thing can be said about the star which works like in the Mario games. The flower on the other hand works more like a flame thrower because the fire ball ability is already Mario's and Luigi's special abilities, and because it would be lame otherwise. The Smash Bros food items are consumed in a different way because they have different origins and usage in the game (they are used the same way as heart containers and maxim tomatoes).

DRW wrote:
Pokun wrote:
Yeah they didn't mention the coins but I don't see a reason why they would be an exception. They also comes from the exact same types of blocks.

Because coins are also lying around outside of blocks, so they aren't magical items, but stuff that simply exists in this world anyway.
Likewise, you mentioned beanstalks: I don't think that those are also rewards by freed mushrooms: "Thank you for saving me. Here, have a beanstalk." I would say that they also grow "naturally".
So, Bowser transformed the mushroom people into blocks and hid them among the blocks that are floating around anyway.
At least that's how I imagine it. Especially in light of the later games where the blocks are not transformed mushrooms anymore, so it makes sense that there are also already items in SMB1 that are separate from the transformed people.
I think both coins and beanstalks that leads to coin-heavens would be fine rewards given by rescued denizens, I don't see why coins needs to be magical or unique to blocks to apply for this.
But yeah since transformed denizens only exists in the first game, I think it's safe to assume that floating blocks containing power-up items, coins and beanstalks are naturaly existing in the world, even if it's ret-conned. But the whole point about mushroom people being transformed into bricks is to explain the existence of the blocks. Wouldn't that explanation be moot if blocks already existed in the world? As far as SMB1 goes, I think all the blocks was probably (from the story writer's point of view) supposed to be petrified denizens and the fact that some of them gives coins suggests that the reward is separate from the denizen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 23, 2019 12:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 07, 2013 2:59 pm
Posts: 1907
Pokun wrote:
I mean what do you do with a mushroom? Put it in your pants? It's food! The flower doesn't really look like an edible herb though and you don't normally eat stars (although the star bits in Super Mario Galaxy apparently tastes like konpeito). For the leaf I get the feeling you'd put it on your head to transform, and the feather doesn't look very tasty either and is probably used in another way.

Well, it's food in the real world. But in the games, all of these things are magical items.

You touch a Fire Flower and your clothes change colors and you can shoot fireballs.
You touch a Super Star and start blinking and become invincible.
You touch a leaf and you grow a raccoon tail with which you can fly.
You touch a feather and a flying cape suddenly teleports onto your neck.

After having so many objects of so many different types (a plant, a symbolic rendition of a planet/sun, a piece from a tree, a piece from a bird's dress), why should the one object that coincidentally happens to be something eatable in real life, why should this be the one object that Mario literally has to eat to activate his power, even though every other object is implied to work by simply coming into contact with it?

Besides, the ironic thing is: The Super Mushroom resembles the very real-life mushroom that stands as the symbol for mushrooms that you should not eat: The fly agaric.

Pokun wrote:
But no matter if mushrooms are eaten or not, I don't believe all items give Mario powers by being touched just because that's what you do in the game. In most games you pick up items or instantly use them by just colliding with their sprite, so it makes sense if that applies to Mario games as well. He probably needs to wear them or use them in some way to transform.

Well, the thing is: In Mario games, the item usually doesn't reseble the superpower. There are exceptions, like the various suits in SMB3 (raccoon, hammer and frog suit). But other than that:

A fire flower isn't a flower with a mouth, so that you can imagine Mario using the flower like a gun.
The feather doesn't make you fly in a way so that you can imagine that Mario needs to wave the feather around like a bird moves its wings. The feather is just an icon and the actual object that you gain is a piece of cloth, i.e. something completely different.
Likewise, you don't find raccoon ears and a tail. You find a leaf that makes the tail magically appear.

So, unlike in other games, the items aren't really something that you apply and "use". In "Zelda", sure, you buy a bow and suddenly, you can shoot arrows, even if the sprite only shows the arrow itself. And a bottle of potion is obviously something to drink.

But in the Mario games, you have a magical object that gives you a completely different object as your actual superpower:
Flower --> Fireballs
Leaf --> Tail
Feather --> Cape
The powerup itself isn't actually the one that gets used. The powerup is the one that transforms Mario himself into another form.
That's why there's no real point in trying to come up with ways how the items are actually applied. They are magic. Their special ability isn't accomplished by using the item, the special ability is accomplished by the item having transformed Mario into a stronger form.

That's why the most likely explanation is that Mario simply touches each item for the transformation to occur. Since the items are so abstract, there's no need to assume: "The Super Mushroom has to be eaten, the Super Star is used as an earring, the feather needs to be put under your gloves."

But then again: If there's no real explanation of how Mario actually uses a Fire Flower or a feather, but if the most straightforward explanation is that Mario touches the item and then transforms, why should this one item that happens to resemble an eatable real world object be something that Mario actually eats? Why should the Super Mushroom be the one big exception?

Pokun wrote:
Just because the player can tell the difference between poisonous and normal mushrooms doesn't mean anything to the gameplay. I mean logic doesn't always apply if it comes in the way of gameplay.

Sure, but it's not necessary that this remains an illogical detail. You simply have to drop the idea that Mario eats the mushrooms and it suddenly makes sense: Just like the Goombas have the touch of death, so does the poison mushroom. It's put into the question mark blocks to trap Mario into a corner or to let him accidentally jump against or fall onto it.
Having the mushrooms being the only items that Mario needs to eat, you just introduced a plot issue with the poison mushrooms: How would you, for example, show its effect in a cartoon based on the game?

And as I said: "Donkey Kong 94" has a cutscene that literally shows how Mario gets hit by a Super Mushroom after thinking it's a poisoned mushroom. That's not gameplay anymore, that's story. He clearly isn't eating it there, yet it transforms him.

Also, those poison mushrooms are even thrown at him as obstacles, which makes the eating idea even less likely: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpY3KI5FQTQ&t=4m15s

Pokun wrote:
The only reason the mushrooms are taken in Smash Bros by touching them is most likely because they mimic the way the same items are taken in their original games.

But that's just conjecture. Let me ask you this:
"Super Smash Bros." has Simon Belmont now. If they include a wall meat item into the game, would Simon
a) simply touch it to mimic the way the item is taken in its original games
or
b) eat the meat because it's clearly supposed to be something that he eats?

Pokun wrote:
I think both coins and beanstalks that leads to coin-heavens would be fine rewards given by rescued denizens, I don't see why coins needs to be magical or unique to blocks to apply for this.

I'm not sure if it's one way or the other. Coins lie around anyway. They are not exclusive to blocks. That's why I think if you find them in blocks, it's just a natural occurence.
Likewise, the beanstalks are actual passageways to secret locations, based on old fairytales.
But my main reason to believe that coins aren't items from the transformed mushrooms is because the manual only mentions the mushrooms in regards to the powerups. Coins are mentioned one chapter earlier.

Pokun wrote:
But yeah since transformed denizens only exists in the first game, I think it's safe to assume that floating blocks containing power-up items, coins and beanstalks are naturaly existing in the world, even if it's ret-conned. But the whole point about mushroom people being transformed into bricks is to explain the existence of the blocks. Wouldn't that explanation be moot if blocks already existed in the world?

Well, yeah, the explanation is surely moot. In light of the other games, "Super Mario Bros." would also work if we scrapped the whole transformation stuff and simply assumed that Bowser just captured the princess and that's it.

But now that it is in the manual (and was even repeated in "All-Stars"), it is canon, even if "transformed mushrooms that give you items" is redundant to the fact that blocks containing items also exist natively.

But it actually fits with the rest of the stories: In all the classic "Super Mario Bros." games, besides capturing the princess, Bowser always did a second, magical thing:
SMB1: Transforming all mushroom people into blocks (and horsehair plants).
SMB3: Transforming the seven kings into animals.
SMW: Trapping Yoshi into an egg and, interestingly, trapping the egg into a question mark block. (I.e. using a mechanism that is already existing in the world for his advantage.)

In one of the newer games, I have even seen question mark blocks that, when bumped against, actually reveal a complete Toad who then walks along the way. So, Nintendo still acknowledges this storyline detail.

_________________
Available now: My game "City Trouble".
Website: https://megacatstudios.com/products/city-trouble
Trailer: https://youtu.be/IYXpP59qSxA
Gameplay: https://youtu.be/Eee0yurkIW4
German Retro Gamer article: http://i67.tinypic.com/345o108.jpg


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 23, 2019 1:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2004 11:12 pm
Posts: 21688
Location: NE Indiana, USA (NTSC)
DRW wrote:
"Super Smash Bros." has Simon Belmont now. If they include a wall meat item into the game, would Simon
a) simply touch it to mimic the way the item is taken in its original games
or
b) eat the meat because it's clearly supposed to be something that he eats?

The convention in Smash is to use a food item by standing over it and pressing the attack button. There's a chicken drumstick in Brawl only, which resembles the meat item from at least one CV game, and there's a steak in Brawl and later.

_________________
Pin Eight | Twitter | GitHub | Patreon


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], MSN [Bot] and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group