Super Mario Bros. X Forums

Yep, this picture will help explain what this topic is about. Some of you might have noticed this, but I want to put this out to everyone so they can have a say on it.

Is Mario actually the bad guy?

Now you may be thinking that this can't be true, mainly this is because of the reasons that I put up at the top, but if you keep reading, you'll soon discover what Mario actually is that makes me think that he is the bad guy.

In Mario's first game, Donkey Kong, he is seen chasing the titular ape up the skyscrapers in order to recover his girlfriend, Pauline. But why did Donkey Kong steal her? The answer is simple. Donkey Kong is actually the direct sequel to a lesser-known game called Donkey Kong Circus. In this game, Mario is seen putting Donkey Kong as a circus act for entertainment, dodging fireballs when trying to catch pineapples. Mario is there, whipping Donkey Kong every now and then, laughing as he does it. That's outright cruel. Why was this game even out?

It isn't just Donkey Kong either. All the Mario games are guilty of doing this, especially New Super Mario Bros. 2. Mario collects coins as he advances through the worlds, as you already know. If you interpret it differently so it's in line with the theory, Mario is actually robbing the coins and bankrupting the kingdom just so he can become immortal, and he doesn't even show any intention of giving it back - he has to be forced into doing that (remember the Paratroopas in BiS?), suggesting he's a greedy plumber who doesn't care about how he uses his money.

As well as this, you could suggest that Mario is actually supporting Bowser's side, and Peach is actually evil. Following on from what I said earlier, Mario snagged all the coins, and this possibly resulted in a Great Depression where banks and businesses failed around the kingdom. Bowser actually could have used this chance to attack the entire Mushroom World, suggesting that SMB3 is a spiritual sequel to NSMB2.
As well as that, in the ending of Super Mario 3D Land, when you destroy Bowser's bridge, when the cutscene of Bowser falling into the lava plays, it's in slow motion. This can allow the player to think about Bowser's ambitions and how he's feeling now they're all crushed, while at the same time giving the opposite impressions of Mario as an evil murderer, while he goes to save Peach (in fact, this cutscene gave me the idea for this theory!), but while he goes to save Peach, he doesn't even protect her. I mean, he's saved Peach, but now he has to protect her, but instead, she gets kidnapped yet again. With Bowser and his Koopa Troop around, the Mushoom Kingdom can be even worse than Afghanistan, so surely the best thing to do is move out of the kingdom...which they don't do. Also, Super Mario Bros. is allegedly one of the first games in the Mario timeline that's set in the Mushroom Kingdom, so considering Peach has been kidnapped for the first time, how can these castles even exist if Bowser wasn't around? It could be that Peach actually built them and put the lava in them, and Mario put all the pipes in them. That explains why Bowser just stands on a bridge waiting for Mario to destroy it. Also, the inhabitants of the Mushroom Kingdom were turned into bricks and bushes...which MARIO SMASHES.

Mario can, as well as this, be seen to actually kill innocent creatures. In Super Mario 64, he floods the Wiggler cave for no apparent reason apart from to satify his greed for more stars. That Wiggler is an innocent being, so why does Mario have to destroy his way of life, and yet still be called a hero? And the Goombas that aren't really part of the Koopa Troop get killed as well - why does Mario even have to do this to innocent creatures?! Why is it that Mario is the one who's entitled to save the kingdom and yet he's killing those innocents?!

The last thing is that he leaves Luigi out a lot. All the time, he has to bring his brother with him, and he doesn't even see the light of day most of the time. You know when Mario gets all the powerups? Luigi doesn't even get any. When the bros. save Peach, what happens? Mario gets the kiss. Yes, Mario. Well, he could be Peach's boyfriend, but Luigi can get the kiss as well, only in games where you can play as him. Luigi even references it in Paper Jam as well, after Mario and Paper Mario get kissed by their respective princesses, Luigi stands around so he can get his kiss, giving time for Bowser and Paper Bowser to steal the book containing the Paper Mario world. Mario seems to think that the world revolves around him and his problems with the princess. Why is Luigi being dragged around just for nothing, or even something that isn't even his problem? It isn't fair for him. In fact, it could be suggested that he HATES Luigi. When Luigi wins a Mario Tennis tournament, Mario is seen appearing to congratulate him. In actual fact, he is slapping him and treading on his foot in a way that makes him suggest he is a sore loser, with no emotion whatsoever.

Well, that was a massive text wall, eh? Do you think Mario could actually be a bad guy?

Yeah okay MatPat. We totally haven't heard this before. :/
The goombas try to kill him. In Mario 64, they charge towards him full force. What is he supposed to do? Dodge em and have goombas ram his ass?

This is why i just don't like Game Theory. It spreads bad ''theories'' so everyone believes them. Also Mario & Nintendo do what they want.

Epoch wrote:The goombas try to kill him. In Mario 64, they charge towards him full force. What is he supposed to do? Dodge em and have goombas ram his ass?

They could be seeking revenge for something tragic, though it may or may not have been related to Mario. We can already confirm that at least one Koopa Troopa isn't one of Bowser's minions based on willingness to be fair and hand out the star, and we have a Lakitu managing the camera, so who says there can't be at least one Goomba that just wants to maintain the good?

But we can more likely say that Bowser seeks excessive power, because at least we're able to understand what he says even if he does side with Mario.

The lava traps in all the castles around the Mushroom Kingdom were already installed before Bowser took over. Think about it.

mechamind wrote:We can already confirm that at least one Koopa Troopa isn't one of Bowser's minions based on willingness to be fair and hand out the star, and we have a Lakitu managing the camera, so who says there can't be at least one Goomba that just wants to maintain the good?

There is a few goombsd. Like Goombario and the one from Paper Mario TtYD.


But if Mario would be a bad guy. What if Link is also one.

But really Gametheories are never really true anyway.

How could you bankrupt a kingdom by collecting coins that are found out in the open?

One "theory" that you could use is that the kingdom really has unlimited funds due to all coins respawning once exiting a stage.

did you just write multiple paragraphs arguing that mario might be the bad guy.

qig wrote:did you just write multiple paragraphs arguing that mario might be the bad guy.

life choices

qig wrote:did you just write multiple paragraphs arguing that mario might be the bad guy.

My goodness. Now I know for sure. It was all Mario's ploy just to spread a stereotype against reading!

mechamind wrote:

qig wrote:did you just write multiple paragraphs arguing that mario might be the bad guy.

My goodness. Now I know for sure. It was all Mario's ploy just to spread a stereotype against reading!

The problem's not that it might take some time to read it, the point is that he wrote multiple paragraphs arguing that Mario might be the bad guy.

In Paper Mario 2, the ultimate final bad gal is all 'join me and stuff'. Since Mario doesn't join them, he's probably okay.

In Super Mario Galaxy, Bowser tries to destroy the universe or something. It's not very clear. He's probably a jerk. Also there's the whole Mario Sunshine thing.

Hyperme wrote:In Paper Mario 2, the ultimate final bad gal is all 'join me and stuff'. Since Mario doesn't join them, he's probably okay.

In Super Mario Galaxy, Bowser tries to destroy the universe or something. It's not very clear. He's probably a jerk. Also there's the whole Mario Sunshine thing.

If Mario is the bad guy, why is there mystery goop jizz everywhere? Also about the lava traps, why the hell would The mushroom kingdom use it for? They proved that they are not the aggressors as the Koopa kingdom quite literally stole and bombed Peach's castle in Galaxy

This community, at its core, has been for people with a willingness to spend hours upon hours of time clicking and moving objects in an engine that's vastly considered obsolete to the gaming industry as a whole, and the majority of the skills and design intuitions they will develop within using this engine are theoretical and/or specific to a franchise that most (if not all) of them will never have the license to develop for. On the other hand, a passionate Mario fan wrote a few paragraphs about a game theory.
I don't think anyone has much business mocking him for how he spends his own time regardless, but even if I did, I'd think it was relatively strange when weighed against something like SMBX design, which we're all otherwise okay with.

My thoughts on the chronology of the Mario games: despite not having thought much about it, I'd expect to have a lot of difficulty connecting them. Here's an example of why. NSMB, on its own, completely destroys basic linear causal logic. You spend the entire game chasing Peach, and when you take a warp cannon, Peach is still ahead of you. (Before anyone misinterprets me I'm not saying this makes it a bad game or something. I'm just pointing out that this kind of thing alone doesn't lend itself to chronology of any kind, not to even mention any other contradictions you'd find in other Mario games.)

Bowser's fallen for the bridge strategy so many times that it can only suggest to me that he's just that adorably stupid. At any point is it said that he wasn't responsible for castle design and placement himself?

That being said here's a picture of Mario being an asshole for no reason

Magician wrote:This community, at its core, has been for people with a willingness to spend hours upon hours of time clicking and moving objects in an engine that's vastly considered obsolete to the gaming industry as a whole, and the majority of the skills and design intuitions they will develop within using this engine are theoretical and/or specific to a franchise that most (if not all) of them will never have the license to develop for. On the other hand, a passionate Mario fan wrote a few paragraphs about a game theory.
I don't think anyone has much business mocking him for how he spends his own time regardless, but even if I did, I'd think it was relatively strange when weighed against something like SMBX design, which we're all otherwise okay with.

My thoughts on the chronology of the Mario games: despite not having thought much about it, I'd expect to have a lot of difficulty connecting them. Here's an example of why. NSMB, on its own, completely destroys basic linear causal logic. You spend the entire game chasing Peach, and when you take a warp cannon, Peach is still ahead of you. (Before anyone misinterprets me I'm not saying this makes it a bad game or something. I'm just pointing out that this kind of thing alone doesn't lend itself to chronology of any kind, not to even mention any other contradictions you'd find in other Mario games.)

Bowser's fallen for the bridge strategy so many times that it can only suggest to me that he's just that adorably stupid. At any point is it said that he wasn't responsible for castle design and placement himself?

That being said here's a picture of Mario being an asshole for no reason

Fuck Mario, he's an ass. Also, Emral, I'm sorry for what I said before about the MatPat and stuff. At least your theories don't invovlve convoluted gorilla sex (Mario timeline). That being said, it is still a theory, which means we can still debate about it, as long as we don't say anything nonsensical.

Here's another thing to consider as well (which I forgot to put down):

In the original Super Mario Bros. the Toads and all the other inhabitants were turned into blocks, grasses and other inanimate objects...which MARIO SMASHES. Does this mean he's killing those same inhabitants without realising it?

castlewars wrote:Here's another thing to consider as well (which I forgot to put down):

In the original Super Mario Bros. the Toads and all the other inhabitants were turned into blocks, grasses and other inanimate objects...which MARIO SMASHES. Does this mean he's killing those same inhabitants without realising it?

If Mario is doing it unintentionally then that doesnt make him a bad guy. Now if he knew the circumstances, and was purposely doing it, then yes.

Epoch wrote: Fuck Mario, he's an ass. Also, Emral, I'm sorry for what I said before about the MatPat and stuff. At least your theories don't invovlve convoluted gorilla sex (Mario timeline). That being said, it is still a theory, which means we can still debate about it, as long as we don't say anything nonsensical.

Last time I checked the only post I made in this topic got completely ignored.

castlewars wrote:If Mario is doing it unintentionally then that doesnt make him a bad guy.

Maybe, but the constant rise in Goomba pancakes thanks to all the jumping doesn't help his cause. Also...

Emral wrote:The lava traps in all the castles around the Mushroom Kingdom were already installed before Bowser took over. Think about it.

Emral wrote:Last time I checked the only post I made in this topic got completely ignored.

Epoch wrote:Also about the lava traps, why the hell would The mushroom kingdom use it for?

Oh whoops! Totally missed that. Epoch's post I quoted still makes zero sense even after reading the post I missed though. Ah well.

Why would they need lava traps? Well.. have you ever seen a garbage bin in the mushroom kingdom? They're so advanced they have them everywhere in their castles, in form of a lava pit.