My favorite bit of trivia about Mario Brothers is that apparently Mario surviving from falling from the platforms was considered a “super power.” I don’t know, I think it’s just charming that their line of logic in that period of time and development followed that dying from missing a jump was the assumption. Miyamoto thought the game would be too easy and had to be convinced otherwise.

Thank god he was, because fall damage on top of the awkward controls and slippery momentum would have made this already very frustrating game unplayable.

Donkey Kong could have been so good had it been born on NES. As it stands it comes off as a really awkwardly ambitious arcade game that really wants to be something more. Compared to Namco’s early 80s classics Pac-Man and Galaga, which are as fun now as they were when they came out, Donkey Kong is a neat novelty that wears off quickly. It’s all Shigeru Miyamoto’s fault, visionary and genius that he is.

Miyamoto’s name these days is associated with a strict dedication to formula and emphasizing gameplay over story, and I find that ironic: Miyamoto is essentially the man behind contextualizing and integrating story into gameplay in the first place! Miyamoto developed Donkey Kong from the perspective for an artist, not a programmer.

And it’s pretty obvious that game mechanics were based on the story concept, not the other way around. For a 1981 arcade game, the characters and the construction site setting are coherent and identifiable. To this day I don’t know who Pac-Man is or what he’s supposed to bring doing, but DK himself sure is a big scary gorilla who wants to kill you. Jumpman is virtually identical to the Mario we know and love today.

It’s not as though the concept is wholly original: King Kong is obviously a massive influence, and originally it was going to star Popeye, Bluto, and Olive Oyl. Donkey Kong as I know is the first game that tells a coherent story. The context of Donkey Kong dragging Pauline to the top of the construction site is animated and even the level design layout is contextualized when he stomps his feet and sets the girders to a slant. The gameplay mechanics are intuitive too: climb the ladders, jump over the barrels that are rolling down, on the now slanted girders, save cute girlfriend. The fourth stage involves removing the (nails? stakes?) that support the platform, and bring Donkey Kong crashing the game.

Miyamoto wanted his players to focus their goal on completing the story instead of chasing a high score, a philosophy that he used to guide development on Super Mario Brothers and The Legend of Zelda a few years later, on the NES.

Maybe you can see the problem. The Donkey Kong levels do loop, but the same four stages made more challenging just does not make for the addicting formula other arcade games have mastered by this point. Donkey Kong was of course obviously a massive hit, of course, it pulled Nintendo out financial troubles after all, but I suspect this was for the ambition and gravitas of the project: judging by the four-man team of programmers who gave a lot of blowback for Miyamoto’s design ideas, it was a technical marvel.

To give credit where credit is due, Donkey Kong is more than playable, and as I said earlier, intuitive and easy to pick up. As someone who’s introducing to platformers was New Super Mario Brothers for the DS, however, I have completely different expectations for how Mario should move and control. To me Mario feels too slow, the response to my to my input a little laggy, and much to prone to dying when I fall any vertical distance. From a modern perspective it’s very easy to judge, however. And it’s not as though it isn’t easy to adapt: play Donkey Kong for longer than five minutes and you’ll get used to it.

My one major criticism is the hammer, which in my opinion badly disrupts the flow of the game. The ability to destroy obstacles is nice in concept, but when it robs you of the ability to climb ladders and locks you in the same animation for the duration you’re holding on to it. Also, at least for me, it created a Mandela effect where I made a leap in logic and assumed the way you defeat Donkey Kong is beating him up with a hammer. I think this one of those “cool” “cinematic” concepts that just didn’t translate well to the game.

Donkey Kong falls awkwardly between the couch cushions of too cinematic and ambitious to be an arcade game and too short and simple for an NES game, while games like Pac-Man, Galaga, Frogger and Super Mario Brothers and The Legend of Zelda sit comfortably on either side. It’s loved as a novelty and a stepping stone, at best a distraction for a few minutes before playing a more enduring game.

Some are content to leave it there but I’m really disappointed that Donkey Kong has been pigeonholed like this. I think of future entries of other NES games that modernize their original concepts and fully realize them: Super Mario Bros 3, A Link to The Past, Super Metroid, Castlevania IV, Mega Man X… the list goes on.

Donkey Kong had two arcade sequels, but Donkey Kong Jr changes quite a bit about the core gameplay 3 is barely recognizable. I’ve heard Super Mario Bros called a spiritual sequel to this game, and it is to an extent, but I’ve always seen them as two sides of the same coin: vertical vs horizontal. I love Donkey Kong Country, but let’s be real: Rare used Donkey Kong’s name and virtually nothing else from the game they’re using to market it. Donkey Kong himself is redesigned and declared their original character, before being shoved aside in favor of Diddy, their real main protagonist.

Donkey Kong never got to grow up with all those other crusty old Nintendo games, and I’m pretty disappointed with all the ports and rereleases it got, no effort was made to improve or modernize it. I can do is recommend Donkey Kong ‘94 for the gift of god it is, and lament what could have been.

Punch Out’s gameplay design is nothing short of brilliant, and it is tragic that nothing has ever really come of it. So much untapped potential.

Also if you’re a normal human being you’re never beating this lmao

This game is tragic, because it should be a 5. It's an improvement from the OG in almost every way. The new content added, including the very tasty ability to built an entire narrative out of a set of levels, should make this game a no brainer purchase. And it is. Buy it. It's great.
But the magic is gone. The level designer was just first and foremost a perfect fit for the Wii U gamepad. So no matter how many super bells and whistles and Links are added, I can't help but feel an empty feeling in my gut when I play this one.

sorry for bringing down the curve cuz y'all seem to like this game but i'm sorry pavlov's a bitch and so am i.

Looking at all of Nintendo's franchises, the Yoshi series has the most flops. From Yoshi's Story to Yoshi's New Island to Yoshi's fucking Topsy Turvy, it's evident that Nintendo doesn't understand how best to utilize their dino darling.

I'm firmly of the belief that so many Yoshi games have missed the mark because Nintendo perfected it the first time around.

If I had a nickel every time a Super Mario game received a sequel that not only overshadowed its predecessor, but served as the catelyst for a new spin-off franchise starring the breakout new character...

I'd have two nickles. But it is weird that it happened twice.

Unlike Yoshi's Island, SML2 is a classic 2D Mario game at its core. Mario has the same kit he had in SMW, and the game follows the usual formula of platforming for the sake of reaching the goal.

Yet it remains without a doubt the most inspired and wacky 2D Mario experience, in no small part to the developer's creative freedom in desigining the world map and the six zones.

2D Mario is guilty of formulaic world design, especially in the more recent NSMB entries. The usual Green, desert, beach, ice enviroments have become so repetitive and devoid of life that you not only can anticipate the nature of each world, but the exact order you go to each.

In this regard, Super Mario Land 2 makes Odyssey look like New Super Mario Bros 2. And that's not a diss on Odyssey. ML2 has a world consisting of a giant Mario robot piloted by the three little pigs. Each level is a secret compartment on robot Mario's body.

The world design extends past the aesthetic as well, as the level make-up and even enemies are integrated well with the theme, for example, enemy bees flying in from honeycombs to attack you from inside the tree hollow world, or giant ant enemies in the macro world. The world map gives you complete freedom to take on each zone in whatever order you like, a first and only for Mario, and even the way Mario enters each zone is novel (for example getting eaten by a giant turtle, or being enveloped in a giant bubble to take him to space.)

The elephant in the room of course is the debut of Wario, who serves as the main antagonist. I'll admit that the final boss fight against him isn't as mechanically impressive as SMB3 or SMW's, but the concept of battling against a foe who uses your own power ups against you is awesome. If nothing else, this game canonically has a duel between Mario and Wario in bunny suits.

Plus Wario is just. The best video game character ever made. And I'll die on that hill.

I really, really want to give this game a 5 star rating for its embrace of the bizarre and it's comittment to its concepts. On a personal level it's without a doubt my favorite 2D Mario. Unfortunately, unlike, say, Link's Awakening, the Game Boy limitations do hold it back an unfortunate amount, enough to keep it from sharing in the limelight with SMB3 and SMW.

While a fully realized Mario game, it's a mite too short, the controls don't feel quite as smooth as SMW's, and the occasional lag when too many objects are on screen can be frustrating. Hit-boxes can be slightly unfair as well. The music here isn't very special either. A personal love of mine, but by no means the definitive 2D Mario experience.

Still a game I thoroughly recommend: it's well designed and especially refreshing if you find recent Mario games to be stale. The antithesis to New Super Mario Bros for the DS, in my opinion.

Imagine how good a Switch remake could be, though. Get on it, Nintendo!





This game is so good that I don’t know how Nintendo can even progress 2D Mario without a massive change in its formula. Another NSMB just won’t fly anymore.

While it doesn’t have all the bells and whistles of its sequel, I believe this version of the game is superior because of its accessible level maker. The Wii U tablet did this one right.

If you were to ask me whether I’d recommend playing a New Super Mario Brothers game, I’d say “Sure! But once you’ve played one, you’ve essentially played them all.”

Were you to choose only one to play, I suppose the best choice is New Super Mario Bros U. Not because it’s particularly interesting, but because these games have become so samey that U is the best because these games improve incrementally.

Personally I prefer NSMBW because of the better endgame, but U had the HD graphics, a few more fun(? Is Nabbit fun?) mechanics, and the level design is probably a smidge better. The acorn power up is one of if not the lamest, but it’s not like all the other ones from Wii’s aren’t there as well, and variety is the spice of life I guess?

I have not played the Switch port, but with the inclusion of Luigi U and the new playable characters, I’d assume this version of the game is the definitive one and probably a more memorable experience than the rest of the NSMB games.

Honestly just play Mario Maker. Mario Maker makes these games very redundant.

This game is not bad. It’s good, even. But I can’t bring myself to like it.

Virtually every aspect of this game is derivative of NSMB and NSMBW, so it’s hard to talk about its merits without coming off as repetitive. If you’ve played NSMB, you know exactly what you’re getting.

Ironically, despite being the least memorable NSMB game, it is the most consistent in its theming and style: the gimmick being coins this time around. Coins have always been a fairly archaic and even pointless aspect of Mario games, and this game does nothing to change this. Instead of currency serving a potentially engaging purpose, the coins just wind up a stylistic gimmick, one that does not improve or freshen the existing, bland, NSMB art style.

The level design may still be solid, but the lack of identity or ambition in comparison with the rest of the family make me question whether it’s worth even worth the purchase. It’s not even a good choice for “baby’s first 3DS game” like NSMB is for the DS as Super Mario 3D Land fills that role far better.

I’ve looked back at this game fondly over the years in comparison to the rest of the NSMB family, and upon reflection I don’t think it deserves the rose tinted glasses. Much of the novelty comes from the inclusion of multiplayer, and it’s fun in a chaotic, friendship-ending way, but certainly not in a way that illustrates NSMBW’s quality in terms of level design or collaborative gameplay. I’d compare the experience as more akin to a Mario Party than TMNT SNES. This is to say, it’s still fun, but perhaps not in the way the game designers had in mind.

The NSMB series is known for being uninspired and unambitious, and this one is no exception. The art style is fine, the music is fine, the power ups are fine, etc. the boxes are checked, but certainly not enough effort is given to put NSMBW on the same level as Mario’s best.

I remember beginning the game, Christmas morning, and being delighted that the koopalings were returning after a fairly long hiatus. Now I wish we I could go back to those days without them, as the versatility of NSMB’s unique bosses is no more. On top of the repetition, each koopaling is fought twice, making them an already tired concept in their own re-debut.

Bowser Jr, however, apparently got the hint that his boss battles were boring, as now they are the most unique and fun boss battles in the game (Kamek is fun too, and thankfully only fought once.) The final battle also stands as the first one to match 3’s in gameplay, and surpass it in intensity and gravitas.

I like this game, but it’s not easy to ramble about adoringly. A tragic fact because I love rambling adoringly about Mario.

The very first video game I’ve ever owned! Definitely the most interesting of the NSMB games.

Mechanically and visually I do believe this game is a step down from SMW, though a fun Mario game is still a fun Mario game. The level design is solid and the controls are good. I could end the review there.

When it comes to power ups, Mega Mushrooms are boring, exist exclusively as a marketing gimmick, and are only impressive on a visual level. In fact, I remember specifically that the Mega Mushrooms can screw you out of getting star coins by destroying the warp pipes you’re supposed to enter, so I’d argue that they’re more of a vice than an asset.

The blue shell is ridiculous, boring at the best of times, and potentially nausea inducing.

The Mini Mushroom, however, (with the exception of Yoshi, who in all honesty is more of a unique playable character) Is my favorite power up in 2D Mario. As a double edged sword, its awkward physics and vulnerability are contrasted by superior vertical and horizontal movement and the ability to reach inaccessible zones. NSMB uses the Mini Mushroom’s less desirable attributes to its advantage by making certain worlds only accessible through its usage, creating an unofficial challenge mode.

Finally, a notable element exclusive to NSMB are the unique enemy boss fights at the end of each world, offering versatility to the gameplay that usually isn’t present in 2D Mario. The battles against Bowser and Jr, however, are the exception. Each of these encounters are uninspired, and this unfortunately makes the final boss battle one of the least memorable in the series.

Fun game that unfortunately can’t reach the series’ highs.

This game has Yoshi.

In seriousness, Super Mario Worlds does what SNES games do and perfected the 2D Mario formula. Mario’s controls felt good before, but now he feels perfect, like an extension of your hand. This game adds a spin jump as well that benefits more skilled players willing to take risks.

SMB3’s influence is strong, though the technical advancements of the SNES allow great improvement to the visuals. The map becomes a sprawling, immersive landscape, more versatility is given to the design of the boss fights (nothing as elegant as 3’s battle with Bowser though, unfortunately). SMW introduced the more puzzle designed, atmospheric ghost houses, and the star world: fun, off kilter levels that serve as a reward for completion.

There may be fewer power ups, but Yoshi and the cape flower are far better designed and incorporated into the levels than most in the series’ history, so it really doesn’t matter.


Easily the best NES game, it is astounding how well SMB3 has aged. While I believe SMW is the superior game and the epitome of 2D Mario, 3 stands as the most innovative and leaves the grandest legacy.

Excellent level design! Powerups that add versatility and depth to Mario’s existing kit, bosses that to this day stand out as creative, fun, and satisfying to defeat (the last Bowser battle is specifically genius).

Literally the only thing this game is missing is Yoshi.

A remarkable achievement, and a fun game, but you won't get much more than that besides novelty if you play it now, as every Super Mario game to come out since is far superior.