I'm acclimated to Mario 2 better than most, and after finishing it(bears saying with a healthy use of the rewind feature now and then) it really doesn't deserve the sour reputation it got. And people might hate that it includes very little in genuine graphical updates or mechanical additions but a sequel/expansion of this nature wasn't unknowable back then, and so many pivotal games had sister variants that expanded it or made its gameplay more difficult(like "Championship Lode Runner" or "Ms. Pac-Man"), but SMB2 still strikes and makes its way with a lot more originality and grace than those two games.
For me, the Japanese SMB2 is kind of like "The Stanley Parable" of Mario. I'm always the first person to bemoan over a difficult game but I was astounded how much enjoyment and connection I've managed to make with SMB2 - especially after going through what seemed like an interactive meta-commentary in every single stage. Playing "Lost Levels" feels like engaging a really intimate dialogue between the developer and the player, who are both well aware of the design nuances of the first SMB. Every level becomes a meta commentary subverting or examining core features of the first game.
Every stage the developer engages the player by asking: "Ok, but what if SMB did THIS? [presents]", and it becomes a novel thing where you are allowed to see Mario's gameplay features presented and experimented on in a different light, giving you an amazing shift of perspective: What if we included the water level enemies in the land levels? What if we can make a spring that launches you super super high up? What if we made a level entirely out of those springs? What if we gave you mushrooms that were an obstacle instead of a power up?. But crucially, you also get areas and experiments that give you a lot of clemency, like: "What if we gave you a starman at this particular spot where you need to jump over a bunch of piranha plants?". It's a brilliant, shocking insight into the nature of game development and it is superbly wonderful how this is a game that allows you to be on equal footing with a developer's headspace. That point about the starman and the piranha plants is exactly one of the many points in this game where the player's power just soars: you feel like you've gained the system and that the developer made this so you could feel a rush. It's a roller coaster. The highs of it are moments that I'm much fonder of than in Mario 1, and even the ending feels much more congratulatory, celebratory and welcoming of the player.
Every single addition here was an idea extrapolation and an experimentation of SMB1 that is akin to thought experiments and mental gymnastics and for me it is more quizzical than trying. Because of this, I've never seen the "Lost Levels" as cruel or tough, aside from the really inconvenient oversight that there is no way to save progress in the game, but instead you'll have to leave your NES powered on overnight. There are far crueler games on the NES: The basic "Mega Man" games will give you tons of unnecessary stress and I'm convinced "Zelda II" is for utter masochists. To say nothing of "Battletoads", or kusoge like "Spelunker", "Atlantis no Nazo", or the kaizo Mario hacks.
Without exaggeration: Mario 2 is hard, but not in a way people would imagine. People would imagine rows of enemies coming at you at once, shooting a swath of bullet hell pellets or having to spend an entire level just bouncing upon enemies like in the kaizo hacks, when really the difficulty is more based on placing key obstacles or enemies in testy places that are immediately observable. They are singular trick-shots, very naturally evolved from Mario 1, and not insurmountable challenges that require use of superhuman ability. Very often the tools to make it are right at your disposal.
Obviously "Lost Levels" hinges on the fact that you're familiar with the first SMB1 and that's a great backdrop to have to make an amazing exploratory meta-game of. After all, Nintendo would only do the exact same thing with Mario Maker, and hint at it in a no-small number of modern 2D Mario games. People would say that there are instances where the devs "troll" the player, but they are never cruel jokes and are just very light gotchas and temporary illusions, where usually the tools to solve it is right at your disposal. Like for example, there will be moments when you'll come across a huge dead end or a huge pit you can't leap over, but the solution it turns out is just to knock an invisible block right above you. There might be a row of spinies crawling on the floor, but you can use a koopa shell to knock an entire row of them. Plenty of these gotcha moments and gimmicks would be perfectly recycled for SMB3. Other NES games would be much more disrespectful to the player and deliberately punish them for innocent transgressions, but Mario 2 just isn't that. Not even the notorious poisonous mushrooms are that abundant - after its initial use in the first couple of levels, I've noticed that they just become quickly forgotten and discarded. They get used so rarely after World 1 and I swear that over 90% of the mushrooms in the game are normal, legitimate power-ups. Even world 8 in this game feels much fairer and more palatable than SMB1's world 8, and so many people are giving SMB1 a pass despite it being a very difficult game in its own right.
As a last point I need to mention just how utterlfy fantastic world 9 is, which you get as a reward for beating the game without using any warp zones. World 9 especially cements that it's a fun meta-commentary on Mario instead of aspiring to be the ur-kaizo. There's a whole lot of difference in intent, meaning and language used in Mario 2 that sets it apart from the kaizo community or the genre of immensely challenging games. It has more in common with developer commentaries in Valve games than "Cuphead".
If you consider yourself an enthusiast of SMB1 do give it a fair shake and get rid of the biases you might have heard. It's a great love letter and companion piece to Mario 1, but otherwise very inaccessible for casual Mario players, who have no shortage of introductory Mario games anyway.
Why yes, I did beat this game with Luigi! 💚
(Glitchwave project #016)
For me, the Japanese SMB2 is kind of like "The Stanley Parable" of Mario. I'm always the first person to bemoan over a difficult game but I was astounded how much enjoyment and connection I've managed to make with SMB2 - especially after going through what seemed like an interactive meta-commentary in every single stage. Playing "Lost Levels" feels like engaging a really intimate dialogue between the developer and the player, who are both well aware of the design nuances of the first SMB. Every level becomes a meta commentary subverting or examining core features of the first game.
Every stage the developer engages the player by asking: "Ok, but what if SMB did THIS? [presents]", and it becomes a novel thing where you are allowed to see Mario's gameplay features presented and experimented on in a different light, giving you an amazing shift of perspective: What if we included the water level enemies in the land levels? What if we can make a spring that launches you super super high up? What if we made a level entirely out of those springs? What if we gave you mushrooms that were an obstacle instead of a power up?. But crucially, you also get areas and experiments that give you a lot of clemency, like: "What if we gave you a starman at this particular spot where you need to jump over a bunch of piranha plants?". It's a brilliant, shocking insight into the nature of game development and it is superbly wonderful how this is a game that allows you to be on equal footing with a developer's headspace. That point about the starman and the piranha plants is exactly one of the many points in this game where the player's power just soars: you feel like you've gained the system and that the developer made this so you could feel a rush. It's a roller coaster. The highs of it are moments that I'm much fonder of than in Mario 1, and even the ending feels much more congratulatory, celebratory and welcoming of the player.
Every single addition here was an idea extrapolation and an experimentation of SMB1 that is akin to thought experiments and mental gymnastics and for me it is more quizzical than trying. Because of this, I've never seen the "Lost Levels" as cruel or tough, aside from the really inconvenient oversight that there is no way to save progress in the game, but instead you'll have to leave your NES powered on overnight. There are far crueler games on the NES: The basic "Mega Man" games will give you tons of unnecessary stress and I'm convinced "Zelda II" is for utter masochists. To say nothing of "Battletoads", or kusoge like "Spelunker", "Atlantis no Nazo", or the kaizo Mario hacks.
Without exaggeration: Mario 2 is hard, but not in a way people would imagine. People would imagine rows of enemies coming at you at once, shooting a swath of bullet hell pellets or having to spend an entire level just bouncing upon enemies like in the kaizo hacks, when really the difficulty is more based on placing key obstacles or enemies in testy places that are immediately observable. They are singular trick-shots, very naturally evolved from Mario 1, and not insurmountable challenges that require use of superhuman ability. Very often the tools to make it are right at your disposal.
Obviously "Lost Levels" hinges on the fact that you're familiar with the first SMB1 and that's a great backdrop to have to make an amazing exploratory meta-game of. After all, Nintendo would only do the exact same thing with Mario Maker, and hint at it in a no-small number of modern 2D Mario games. People would say that there are instances where the devs "troll" the player, but they are never cruel jokes and are just very light gotchas and temporary illusions, where usually the tools to solve it is right at your disposal. Like for example, there will be moments when you'll come across a huge dead end or a huge pit you can't leap over, but the solution it turns out is just to knock an invisible block right above you. There might be a row of spinies crawling on the floor, but you can use a koopa shell to knock an entire row of them. Plenty of these gotcha moments and gimmicks would be perfectly recycled for SMB3. Other NES games would be much more disrespectful to the player and deliberately punish them for innocent transgressions, but Mario 2 just isn't that. Not even the notorious poisonous mushrooms are that abundant - after its initial use in the first couple of levels, I've noticed that they just become quickly forgotten and discarded. They get used so rarely after World 1 and I swear that over 90% of the mushrooms in the game are normal, legitimate power-ups. Even world 8 in this game feels much fairer and more palatable than SMB1's world 8, and so many people are giving SMB1 a pass despite it being a very difficult game in its own right.
As a last point I need to mention just how utterlfy fantastic world 9 is, which you get as a reward for beating the game without using any warp zones. World 9 especially cements that it's a fun meta-commentary on Mario instead of aspiring to be the ur-kaizo. There's a whole lot of difference in intent, meaning and language used in Mario 2 that sets it apart from the kaizo community or the genre of immensely challenging games. It has more in common with developer commentaries in Valve games than "Cuphead".
If you consider yourself an enthusiast of SMB1 do give it a fair shake and get rid of the biases you might have heard. It's a great love letter and companion piece to Mario 1, but otherwise very inaccessible for casual Mario players, who have no shortage of introductory Mario games anyway.
Why yes, I did beat this game with Luigi! 💚
(Glitchwave project #016)