Super Mario Bros is too papery

[Zing]

I had initially planned to get the Mario All Stars release for the Wii. After realizing it was simply the SNES ROM on a disc, I decided I would pass on it and just grab the games from the Virtual Console.

My five-year-old daughter has always loved to watch me play games. Everything from Wind Waker and Mario Galaxy to the original Spyro the Dragon and Klonoa. Today I downloaded the first Super Mario Bros and she watched me play. I thought she would enjoy seeing the origin of the Mario she knows from New Super Mario Bros Wii and Mario Galaxy.

She said it was "boring" and "too papery". I guess she doesn't like the 2D Mario. I assume the "papery" idea is from Super Paper Mario (she enjoyed that one), where Mario is also flat.

Oh well. I guess I will keep the game to myself!

[Emperor Megas]

Has she actually played it, or just watched? She might feel differently about it if she were actually playing it herself. Five is old enough I think for the average kid, I believe.

I feel the same way about FMV games, like Dragon's Lair. I wouldn't get much out of watching them (not that I'm all that crazy about them even when I'm playing).

[chrisbid]

sounds like the kids that grew up on the nes when they play the 2600

[Emperor Megas]

Yeah, but even people who weren't gamers thought the same thing about 2600 games, where as NES games just weren't their thing (and my 'NES games', I really mean video games period).

Very few 2600 games had any sort of depth in game play, or even a fun factor that kept you wanting to play. Couple that with the fact that you had to use your imagination to even figure out what was going on onscreen, and yeah, those games were pretty terrible. And I grew up playing them.

[joshnickerson]

I love that. I need to use the term "too papery" sometime. Awesome.

[Mobius]

My girlfriend loves Mario 64 and 3D platformers in general, but has no interest in any of their older 2D incarnations because "they're too flat".

[Leo_A]

Has she actually played it, or just watched? She might feel differently about it if she were actually playing it herself. Five is old enough I think for the average kid, I believe.

5 is old enough where with some struggle and a lot of attempts, someone can get past level 1-1, but I've yet to see a 5 year old that loves videogames that plays them often that is able to even do level 1-2.



Very few 2600 games had any sort of depth in game play, or even a fun factor that kept you wanting to play. Couple that with the fact that you had to use your imagination to even figure out what was going on onscreen, and yeah, those games were pretty terrible. And I grew up playing them.

Nonsense

[buzz_n64]

5 is old enough with some struggle and a lot of attempts to get past level 1-1, but I've yet to see a 5 year old that loves videogames that is able to even do level 1-2.



Nonsense

I think I beat the game when I was 5.

[Leo_A]

I think at beat the game when I was 5.

Maybe you were an exception (Although you quite possibly didn't and aren't remembering it correctly now as an adult since it's a memory from when you were only 5). But from my experience, most sure can't get very far in Super Mario Bros (Let alone actually beat it).

We often babysit for a 5 year old right now that loves videogames, loves Mario, plays games constantly at home on his Wii, and owns a NES and Super Mario Bros. And it takes him quite a bit of persistent trying just to survive 1-1 when he plays it here. He sure loves the game and has invested a lot of time in it and in other Mario sidescrollers, but he can't get very far and I doubt very many 5 year olds could do any better. His experience seems to have been pretty typical over the years from the young kids I've been around.

I imagine when he's an adult and looks back upon these days, his memories will have probably have changed and reaching level 2 when he's been over here playing games with me will be remembered as having beat the game when he was just 5.

[Cobra Commander]

That's why I'm going to start my kid off with the NES and let him work his way up.
I sometimes hang out with a friend of the family's son(too complicated to explain the actual relationship) who is 7. The kid loves Mario like no one I've ever seen. He beat Super Paper Mario, then proceeds to tear up some SMB1. He has an old soul. He prefers old school NES Mario to Super Mario Galaxy every time.
That kind of attitude is a breath of fresh air from a young kid like that.

[Leo_A]

I'm looking forward to seeing the young boy we babysit for playing games two years from now.

He's better everytime he visits here, I wouldn't be surprised if he's able to complete most of Super Mario Bros. in two years time.

He even loves the Atari 2600 games I've exposed him to. We spent an hour one time playing Outlaw together and he loved it.

[todesengel]

She said it was "boring" and "too papery". I guess she doesn't like the 2D Mario. I assume the "papery" idea is from Super Paper Mario (she enjoyed that one), where Mario is also flat.

Oh well. I guess I will keep the game to myself!
You should try letting her play it to see if her opinion changes about the game. I was 5 when I first played Super Mario Bros. and it took me at least 1-2 months to beat the game.

[Gameguy]

She said it was "boring" and "too papery". I guess she doesn't like the 2D Mario. I assume the "papery" idea is from Super Paper Mario (she enjoyed that one), where Mario is also flat.

Oh well. I guess I will keep the game to myself!
Maybe she would like Mario games better if she played them herself, I was 4 when I started playing games. If not, try some Sonic games instead.

[Gentlegamer]

Reminds me of Star Wars according to a 3 year old (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBM854BTGL0)

[retroman]

kids say some funny things..i love it..i have 5 and 8 year old, and they could give rats ass about anything other than DS, Wii, or PS2...They dont even care about Ps3 or Xbox 360..i guess to grown up for them..

[exit]

Have you tried showing her SMB2? I always preferred it to SMB when I was her age, I always thought that it was more fun since you had a variety of characters to choose from.

On an unrelated note, suddenly I feel like an old man.

[gatti]

Newer and younger gamers nowadays tend to have a level of aesthetic expectations that need to be met in order to capture their attention. If things seem too flat and don't have visual effects and secondary animations/sparkles appearing all over the screen, it may not be appealing enough to capture their attention.

A similar audience will also perceive the original Super Mario Bros as being way too hard. The gameplay is much less forgiving when compared to current iterations/versions of the game. When a player jumps nowadays, they can always change their direction or reverse to a degree. But in the past, once you jump, you are committed to the jump :-P It was a matter of accurate and precise timing.

[Enigmus]

This reminds me of how the people I see every day (exams tomorrow) think that anything either before the Xbox or anything Nintendo sucks because of either:

A) Call of Duty
B) No inane, unrealistic amounts of violence
C) Graphics
D) Somehow understanding how to hold down RT, LT, X, and the left thumbstick down yet can't hold B and press right.

This is also why I can't go into the local Gamestop, or any GS in general.

[thom_m]

That's funny, because the game that actually got my daughter to enjoy playing was SMB, when she was 6. She had access to her uncle's PS2, and to my ps1 and other systems, but never bothered. SMB got her to actually enjoy playing, even the other consoles. Like some of you said, it's kinda hard for her; she's just turned 7, and struggles to go past act 1-2.


I'm looking forward to seeing the young boy we babysit for playing games two years from now. (...) He even loves the Atari 2600 games I've exposed him to. We spent an hour one time playing Outlaw together and he loved it.

My kid LOVES to play Freeway on the 2600. My Dactar is broken now, and she keeps asking me to get it fixed soon so we can play "the chicken game".

[Icarus Moonsight]

Very few 2600 games had any sort of depth in game play, or even a fun factor that kept you wanting to play. Couple that with the fact that you had to use your imagination to even figure out what was going on onscreen, and yeah, those games were pretty terrible. And I grew up playing them.

While I find myself agreeing with this, I can't make it without Yar's Revenge ever now and then.

If I get to introduce a youngling into gaming, I'm not even going to mess with pixels. We're going Vectrex, Atari Star Wars, Tempest, Asteroids and Star Castle first. Then they get to rock Space Invaders. Increment it up until they're playing duel ship combo runs in Ikaruga... Problem is, I'm still incrementing up to that.

[tom]

Very few 2600 games had any sort of depth in game play, or even a fun factor that kept you wanting to play. Couple that with the fact that you had to use your imagination to even figure out what was going on onscreen, and yeah, those games were pretty terrible. And I grew up playing them.

Actually that's more true for the NES, I remember a guy on some Nintendo site saying they were playing NES games during the early 90s, games like SMB, Zelda, etc...you know the deal.
Then they kept renting more (other) NES games from Blockbusters, they were tried out for 5 minutes, but truthfully most of them didn't play well or weren't much fun; only to be put on the kitchen table to be returned to Blockbusters later. And back we went playing SMB.

[Leo_A]

While I find myself agreeing with this, I can't make it without Yar's Revenge ever now and then.

You're not playing the right 2600 games. There are no shortage of quality games like Yar's Revenge, Solar Fox, and River Raid on the 2600. Granted the ratio of junk to quality games is pretty high, but most of the common games someone is likely to stumble across are common for a reason.

To listen to some of you, it sounds like you've never played any 2600 game that wasn't developed by companies like Froggo. Most of the software from Imagic, Atari (Granted, they also published their fair share of junk), Activision, CBS, Parker Brothers, and several others routinely produced excellent games that stand the test of time.

Something like River Raid hardly matches his description of what gaming on the Atari 2600 was all about.


If I get to introduce a youngling into gaming, I'm not even going to mess with pixels. We're going Vectrex, Atari Star Wars, Tempest, Asteroids and Star Castle first. Then they get to rock Space Invaders. Increment it up until they're playing duel ship combo runs in Ikaruga... Problem is, I'm still incrementing up to that.

Those are some pretty difficult games there to start out with. I can't imagine someone being introduced to Asteroids when they're 4 or 5 ever developing into a gamer. They quite possibly would be bored and frusturated by the difficulty after a while and turn away from videogames long before they ever fell in love. Asteroids used 5 buttons, and even in compilations that allow three of those to be handled by the d-pad or analog stick, it's still a very tough game.

[Aussie2B]

5 is old enough where with some struggle and a lot of attempts, someone can get past level 1-1, but I've yet to see a 5 year old that loves videogames that plays them often that is able to even do level 1-2.

Heh, that's my childhood experience exactly. It was quite the momentous occasion when I finally reached 1-2. That age was when I developed my love for gaming, but, honestly, most of it was watching. I didn't have the ability to play most games. I sure loved watching Castlevania and Metroid and such, though.

[Icarus Moonsight]

Those are some pretty difficult games there to start out with. I can't imagine someone being introduced to Asteroids when they're 4 or 5 ever developing into a gamer.

Not like I'd plop a kid in front of a Defender/Stargate cab or anything. Now that would be cruel. I played other games too at that age, but those always kept me coming back because they were tough. Defender on the other hand, that was the evil box that ate your money! LOL

I do enjoy the 2600, but I used to enjoy it more. I've found that the games with staying power are more abstract (this is not absolute, Battle Zone comes to mind) and/or have gameplay in spades. A fun game to play will always resonate to some extent.

[Flack]

I know I'm derailing things, but my son could get to the warp zone in 1-2 at the age of 5. My daughter (who is now five) can beat 1-1 but not 1-2 yet.

[Leo_A]

I know I'm derailing things, but my son could get to the warp zone in 1-2 at the age of 5. My daughter (who is now five) can beat 1-1 but not 1-2 yet.

Sounds like he can run and jump at the same time. Learning to coordinate holding down the button to run while jumping seems to be the most difficult thing for a young kid to learn in this game.

[Emperor Megas]

I enjoy a good 2600 game, but there just isn't an abundance of them, IMO. I still contend that there's a relatively small number of 2600 titles that I consider deep enough to get much out of, and it's hardly even worth arguing that the pixelated graphics don't hamper the game play experience for the average player of any age.

I grew up with the 2600, and I was always thinking about how terrible the games looked (I felt the same way about most of the 3D games released in the PSX generation as well).

For every Yar's Revenge there's about 10 games like Laser Blasts. With that said, I can still play Keystone Capers for hours.

Oh, and for who mentioned it, I can totally see a young kid (or most young kids) loving Freeway. That game use to put me in stitches.

[Rickstilwell1]

Personally I think it depends on whether a person has seen something with better graphics before or not whether they will like something. If you have never seen the arcade cabinet version of Asteroids, Defender, Donkey Kong, Pac-Man, Galaxian, Space Invaders or something like that then you won't think about it when you try it on the 2600. If you have, then you've already been used to something that looks better but does the same thing.

My first video game was the Entex handheld version of Space Invaders which was all one color and no detail. Just red sprites on a black background. It made it that much easier to understand why Atari 2600 looked the way it did when I first tried it out when I was in 5th grade.

I got that little handheld game from a yard sale when I was 3 and then went on to play Super Mario Bros. at my dad's when I was 3 and my neighbor's when I was 4. By the time I was 5, my mom's husband at the time, now an ex had video games and I was able to get farther in Super Mario Bros., try out Ice Hockey for NES and also became skilled at Sonic the Hedgehog for Genesis. I also watched him play Tecmo Super Bowl with the NES Max controller which I thought was quite odd looking. I was in Kindergarten for the first time that year and there were also times I played Sonic 1 at my friend's house. I also tried the version of Contra for Genesis not knowing what the game was called for many years or realizing that was what I had played. I taught that friend of mine the level select code for Sonic that my ex stepdad taught me.

I beat Sonic 1 when I was 5, before beating Super Mario Bros. fully.

On my 6th birthday I got my own Genesis with Sonic 1 and the next day I got my NES with Super Mario Bros. / Duck Hunt and a few other games. When it came to Sonic, I already knew the level select code like the back of my hand. First thing I did when I opened the box and my Grandma was impressed. Then when it came to Super Mario Bros. & Duck Hunt I already knew what to do. My uncle showed me where secret 1-ups and things I missed were located and I beat the game sometime that year after another kid at a party showed me the way through world 8-4 and I remembered it when I got home.

Finally I had beaten Super Mario Bros. at 6 years old.