Talk:Super Mario Bros. 2

Featured guide cleanup
I put in most of my bulletpoints and one of 's bulletpoints; after reviewing the blocks of text from the StrategyWiki:Featured guides entry. Let the collaboration discussion begin! --RAP (talk) 01:37, 26 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks, RAP! -- 16:16, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

New features page
@: I just saw one of the bulletpoints you added: "Fix SNES (and maybe NES) info on Super Mario Advance/New features. I'm fairly certain it's incorrect in particularly the naming, but I need to check." – I have to point out that in making the page, all the comparison content is actually from the Super Mario Advance page (edit in action) with fact checking on the content from videos of longplays. I just transferred all the content into a new page, stripped out the fat to fit in a new table. I'm curious if there's any more differences that I missed that is not trivial for the guide. --RAP (talk) 09:56, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah I noticed while it was still on that page, I just hadn't mentioned anything until now. My official nintendo strategy guide disagrees with some things, but I wanted to thoroughly go through the game and such to catch anything else before changing it. -- Ceegers (talk) 02:53, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Just FYI, from personal experience, multiple official Nintendo publications are inconsistent and disagree with one another. That often makes it tough to cite one official reference.   Pro  cyon  02:59, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
 * These publications do not have to be correct. They just have to sell. They aren't history books or quotes from developers. Just gamers and editors with some inside info. Our guides are better :P -- 16:11, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Ok, so here's the way it looks... Subcon I do not see mentioned anywhere in-game (except to name the creature that comes out of the pipe at the end as subcon, but also one word). In both the NES and SNES instruction manuals, it is one word. Since there is then no change, I have deleted that line on the changes page. The enemy name changes I admit are in the game, however clawgrip and hoopster are labeled as such in the NES instruction manual, contrary to what the credits have. Ostro and Birdo I surprisingly can't really argue, as the NES manual has them flopped as well. The SNES manual doesn't even mention enemies (saving space I'm sure, since it needs to cover 4 games). And of course the strategy guide I mentioned has all those enemies listed the way they are in the GBA version (except Shyguy, that's still one word). I think that due to the disagreement between the included instruction manual and the game, we really don't have a good reason to say that the names changed... more like typos were corrected if anything. If you are going to be picky and mention it, you might want to mention that bob omb has no hyphen in the game (but, again, it does in the instruction manual). -- Ceegers (talk) 06:17, 1 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Interesting thought on the direction: deciding which content to take - take the game's word, or the game manual's word. Canon-speaking wise, it would be a bigger mess when official content like strategy guides mixes the content up wrong, making us question whether to 1) stick with the canon, 2) go by the most recognizable, or 3) accept the alternative name. Personally, I put the game higher than the manual because more people would play the game first than people who would read the manual first; unless of course the game manual is integral to how the game functions and/or enhances the player's experience interacting with the game, like a large book manual on Microsoft Flight Simulator or a large computer RPG back in the days per say. --RAP (talk) 07:40, 1 April 2014 (UTC)


 * We can, and should, put both in-game and manual content. Just add the manual content after a linebreak, in the same cell. Yes, it will be fatter, but no, that doesn't matter. -- 23:00, 1 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, integral to enhance the player's experience to the game, both from the manual and the game. Even little things like the enemies' names and the game's setting make it work. Even though SMB2 is a dolled-up installment, I'm somewhat sad that they didn't make another game solely based on the carrying and throwing mechanic, or even expand the idea of what activities go beyond what SMB2 showed us in the dream world of Subcon. I don't even recall a single platformer game that focuses on this mechanics as far as I know. --RAP (talk) 00:27, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

RAP's inclusion of BS Mario
Ugh, I was going to try to avoid mentioning BS Super Mario Bros. USA, that's kind of a mess. At best, it could be an additional entry in the version differences page. But due to the nature of BS titles, it's really hard for anyone to actually experience the content of the games properly, so there's no much point covering it in great detail.  Pro cyon  01:29, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Curious, checking Template:Unplayable; I don't think it would fit the criteria because the ROM dump exists, but the audio content is absent due to the nature of how Satellaview functions as playing the game is limited by a certain amount of time. If the game is not in complete form, would it be considered Template:Unplayable regardless whether or not the game is playable without additional audio content, or potential content tied to the service that is not present in the ROM (there is no info on the result of collecting all the gold statues as far as I recall)? Would Template:Unplayable section be more appropriate?


 * There are pieces of recorded content dedicated to the game out there, even the appropriate ROMs, but the only missing pieces upon browsing around the game are the audio content (VGM that isn't possible to process on the Super Famicom, and dialogue when the character sprites at the top left pop up). I do not intend to frustrate you, I want Super Mario Bros. 2 and subsequent versions to gain feature guide status with the highest possible caliber of work done to it in order for StrategyWiki to represent the best of our work; even if Super Mario Advance is less played than Super Mario Bros. 2, and BS Super Mario USA is vastly played less than the Advance version.


 * However, as said back in Featured guides/Current requests on 17:28, 19 March 2014 (UTC): "It is better if we upgrade a guide that deserves it to featured, then if the compilation or shared ToC title also, eventually gets it, then the original featured front page blurb can be modified." The purpose of a featured guide is not only to show best of what StrategyWiki's collaborated work provides, but also give users who need help on the game the highest quality of assistance provided to the user. Since BS Super Mario USA is only played by so few people in the world, it would be regretful if Super Mario Bros. 2 and subsequent guides (which includes the BS version) would be held back indefinitely due to BS Super Mario USA not being remotely covered with subsequent info. The wiki's task is to help users, not hinder them.


 * To wrap it up, personally, I want the guide to have the most complete info in their hands, but not at the expense of users outside of StrategyWiki to look help elsewhere, and the people actively seeking other websites that are worth contributing to be recognized for the work they would provide as well (like me). Although we'll be waiting for additional responses, I can remove that bulletpoint for you if you want. ;-) --RAP (talk) 03:57, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Ugh. I really don't want another title throwing another challenge in our progress towards SMB2 getting featured. We should just make a main page, slap on unplayable (unless you count emulation, which I see going on with YouTube videos), and then add an extra page like "BS Super Mario USA tips" which can be like a mini-guide page. -- 15:34, 2 April 2014 (UTC)