Paper Shredding (Mario Profile Revision)

[James_Plays_4_Games]

Does it matter? Mainline Mario's backstory ain't affecting whether Paper Mario and Main Mario are the exact same dude.

The canonicity of Yoshi's spin-off games was being used as a comparison example to the matter at hand. I wrote what I know and think about those games starring Yoshi because I have led myself to believe that their canonicity is more questionable than most people think they are.

 

[Armorchompy]

That's pretty tertiary, anyways, let's not get hung up on that

 

[Mephistus]

One paper refence that comes to mind is mr L ripping the screen with a piece of paper rip in SPM just before the bro bot fight.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

A friend of mine said I could share this doc since it's easier than copy pasting pieces bit by bit. But he brought up a lot of contradictions, to some refutes, elaborated how some statements aren't full contradictions to Mario and Paper Mario being different, and also brought up how many things Paper Jam contradicted. The book recording thing also gave another possible interpretation that Paper Jam Paper Mario actually could simply be a past version of Mario. It's like if I made a photo album of a missionary trip to Japan back in 2012 and someone decided to bring that version of me to life by today's standards thus is technically just a past version of me being teleported to the future. But otherwise, he brought up how some of the TTYD abilities in Paper Jam aren't entirely identical to the TTYD counterparts. He also forgot to mention Koopatrols also appeared in Super Princess Peach. But that's all I got for now.

 

[Armorchompy]

I find the passive-aggressiveness of the doc to be pretty insulting, especially since debating indirectly like this is pretty annoying. I would appreciate if you could tell your guy to be less sarcastic in the future.

"Every “lolPaper” argument is covered by the canonical artstyle/physiology changes, not going to repeat it." - The counterarguments are barely relevant to the point as a whole, let alone the examples I picked which were purposefully chosen to make no sense under the "Just an artstyle" interpretation.

"That shit is done via a curse" - Acknowledged already, even in the post itself. I don't understand what the video is supposed to prove, but I hope it isn't "why don't the characters just walk through the pipes because that's just a weakness established by SPM or, failing that, very light PIS.

"No one denied that it's paper mario, it's just a different one." - No one denied it's Paper Mario, it's just not Paper Mario? If it's a "different one" then it's not the one people actually care about. I've acknowledged the "plot hole" stuff already, I doubt Alpha Dream gave that much of a shit about Sticker Star lore and even if they did it was a honest fuckup, definitely not some subtle indication at a different continuity.

"saying it's a plot hole makes it worse" - Nah, not really, ******* up the "lore" doesn't mean you're a different continuity. It's a retcon at worst. Series **** up their own lore constantly, and those actually care, while I guarantee to you not one soul making Paper Jam gave a shit about this level of consistency.

"and how a toad mentioning there aren't many 3D blocks, which is objectively wrong because in every sec in every paper mario game there are a ton of 3D blocks" - Countered earlier in the thread. I'm not going to accept this sort of stonewalling so I won't bother repeating answers I've already made.

"it's not unreasonable to assume that it's just a paper mario based on the events the actual mario experienced" - It's also total headcanon given that nothing actually points to it minus some completely unrelated bits of the franchise.

"Paper Mario series (as in the games themselves) are canonically vocal readings of previous adventures written in books." - The book that is central to the plot of Paper Jam, yes. You're proving my point. Also, no they aren't just "vocal readings", given Paper Mario 64 starts with Bowser actually modifying one of said stories and it actually altering the world he's in, it's just a framing device.

"yoshi is literally intended to be the same regular yoshi he was changed to yarn to fit the game going by another interview" - Addressed two times already. Won't do it a third.

Regarding the Paper Mario 64 stuff, I don't disagree that those are counter-evidence, but that's clearly been retconned. In the interview I posted the SS devs basically acknowledge that the paper stuff started as little more than an aesthetic and then turned into an integral part of the world. Most of the other stuff is just references, something that Mario is very happy to do and not a particularly strong evidence of canonicity. Not worth nothing, but not enough to offset my examples. Some of them are just shared characteristics between PM and mainline characters. Like, yeah no shit if Bowser and Paper Bowser are extremely similar, King Goomboss and Paper King Goomboss are probably going to be too, and if Paper Luigi is like Luigi in almost all ways, then yeah he probably hunts ghosts too. I find the usage of common enemy troops as evidence to be particularly puzzling, they aren't even characters, it's not exactly a leap to say they just exist in both universes. But if we wanna consider that evidence, then here's a PM-exclusive enemy appearing (in paper form) in Paper Jam too

"Partners in Time article says the bros were turned into paper, implying the paper aesthetics happened at times." - It's just a Nintendo magazine, it's not WoG, and even then it's referring to them from an outside of verse standpoint.

"Games after paper Jam - Mario and luigi superstar saga remake" - A remake of a GBA game isn't a new game. It's just staying faithful to the original.

"Color Splash confirms that images from a level in Super Mario Bros. 3 are of the "ancient past" - SMB3 is kinda old, but it is very far from "ancient". Unless you wanna say Mario's centuries old, I wouldn't give that any credit. Also, Mario seems to share Huey's confusion regarding the SMB3 world, so if anything that's evidence that he isn't familiar. Also also, what happened to "it's all an artstyle"? If that's how the world looked at some point, then you'd think it wasn't an artstyle.

Wart stuff - Oh cool, I didn't know of that cameo. Neat. Anyways, Wart doesn't really exist in the "real" universe either, he's just a dream guy, so this is just a range feat for him.

"Birdo references super Mario Bros. 2’s “Mario Madness” tagline." - A... reference to something that isn't even part of the actual game. I don't know how this is supposed to actually prove anything beyond the fact that yep, Mario sure loves self-referencing.

"One of the rooms on The Princess Peach has photos of every previous Paper Mario appearance, with the exception of Paper Jam (An argument can be made that Paper Jam isn’t included because it’s a Mario & Luigi game and not a Paper Mario game, but given how it’s Paper Mario’s only appearance outside of his self-titled games, it’s an unnecessary exclusion)" - You've kinda answered it yourself. Paper Mario has appeared in a bunch of things. It's not an "unnecessary exclusion", it's not referencing a completely unrelated sub-series when it's meant to be a nod to the Paper Mario series. Also curious how there's pictures from all Paper Marios, but no other Mario game. If it's just an artstyle, you'd think there'd be pictures of basically all of Peach's appearances given that she's the same character in those games. While if she isn't, then all of her appearances to her own mainline series are covered.

"Bowser’s Castle has multiple different portraits of 3D Bowser which appear throughout Bowser's Castle in Origami King, yet no portraits of his paper appearance." - Yeah I got nothing on this one. It doesn't mean that much in the grand scheme of things and as I've said, there will be contrasting evidence no matter what, and this is such evidence.

"The Origami King recent rendition of Peach’s Castle is extremely similar to the New Super Mario Bros. U, Super Mario Maker 2, and Dr. Mario World renditions(Mind you Peach’s castle design is always inconsistent throughout all the franchise)" - Yeah everything in Paper Mario (and Paper Jam) looks like its non-paper version, the universes are meant to look similar aside from the paper everything, that's the whole idea.

Paint stuff - These are vague at best connections drawn between unrelated elements from unrelated games. More importantly, CS' story involves the characters being completely unfamiliar with Paint, which they wouldn't be if it was the same substance as previous games. This either proves that it isn't, or that they aren't the same characters, pick your poison.

Artstyles - Most of this falls under references, and has little to do with Paper Mario itself. I understand you're trying to set a precedent, but that doesn't work when PM has evidence that the other games lack.

"Mario returns to paper form" - Another one of the (retconned) inconsistencies. Though, this does crush the "artstyle" argument, actually. If it was just a style, then this wouldn't be a form, it wouldn't be anything in-verse, even.

 

[Seol404]

I have nothing to say that Armorchompy has not said better than I could, so I will agree with him.

 

[James_Plays_4_Games]

A friend of mine said I could share this doc since it's easier than copy pasting pieces bit by bit. But he brought up a lot of contradictions, to some refutes, elaborated how some statements aren't full contradictions to Mario and Paper Mario being different, and also brought up how many things Paper Jam contradicted. [...]

I find that most people on both sides of the discussion think about this matter in the wrong way. This isn't just a matter of people finding random trivia facts about canon that work in their favor of proving a consistency or inconsistency related to their conclusion only for the opposition to insist that those facts aren't valuable or that the interpretation of those facts is flawed. What's important is to establish how normal Mario and Paper Mario canonically relate to each other in a way that makes sense in the setting of the fictional work overall. The conclusion needs to be contextually sensical, not just based on a count of facts working in a conclusion's favor.

To help you understand, I'll address the first part of the document that you linked and I'll explain how what I wrote in the previous paragraph applies to it. That part attempts to disprove the claim that normal Mario and Paper Mario are different characters because the Star Spirits have different roles between Mario Party 5 and Super Mario⁶⁴. I read points about why those standards don't allow for the opposition to make different points, or why this fact doesn't actually contradict consistency, but I think your friend should reframe the answer; Mario himself famously has inconsistent roles in his series despite being the main character, and this is an intentional detail, so we can simply infer that the same applies to the Star Spirits. My answer doesn't prove nor disprove either of the conclusions in the discussion; my answer shows that it's useless to analyze this factor, which both sides of the discussion should acknowledge. No matter if normal Mario and Paper Mario are different characters or the same character, the Star Spirits have one of two jobs depending on what game they appear in, rather than what continuity they're in. The difference between "Star Spirits" and "Star Guards" is no different than the difference between "Mario", "Dr. Mario" and "Builder Mario".

 

[Armorchompy]

There's a difference between famous everyman and jack of all trades Mario changing jobs and characters who are effectively living plot devices tied to one specific thing also just happening to oversee a completely unrelated thing.

Now I don't think the Star Spirits thing is the strongest evidence, so I don't mind dropping it, but I don't think it means nothing

 

[James_Plays_4_Games]

There's a difference between famous everyman and jack of all trades Mario changing jobs and characters who are effectively living plot devices tied to one specific thing also just happening to oversee a completely unrelated thing.

Now I don't think the Star Spirits thing is the strongest evidence, so I don't mind dropping it, but I don't think it means nothing

Fame doesn't truly make that difference in the circumstances of this matter. Mario may be famous for having many roles in different games, but this attribute can apply to all Super Mario series characters. The purpose of it is for there to be a reason for the characters - "our characters" in Shigeru Miyamoto's perspective - to sometimes be enemies and sometimes be friends. This attribute of the fictional work that has the roles of characters vary if that's fitting, in the same fashion as Mario, applies to many other characters. It applies to characters who participate in sports games and who aren't famous for their cooperation despite that being out of character in their appearances during other games. A good example of this is Chain Chomp, who can participate in Mario Tennis Aces without incompetently jumping all around the court trying to eat the hero characters if there are any. Meanwhile, the Star Spirits have two roles that both fit their style of being divine guardian characters. The Star Spirits being this way could pass in a fictional work that has normal continuity and canonicity rules, but it's unquestionably fine in the Super Mario series where the roles of characters are intentionally inconsistent. No matter what side of the discussion you're on, the Star Spirits having two roles is negligible.

 

[Mephistus]

As for the Kamek controversy related in Sticker Star.


And Kamek also appears in the prologue of Super Paper Mario. And in Origami King, Kamek mentions fighting Mario countless times or knowing him much later which outright contradicts the Sticker Star statement.

With that Magikoopa having identical designs as other Magikoopas in Paper Mario 64, Super Paper Mario it doesn't specifically prove it is him unless the English version called him by name and neither alleged appearances in those two even bother doing a namedrop. The Japanese versions of those two games do not differentiate the Magikoopas shown with their identical designs since they utilize the same generic name by Goombario and Tippi. As such the newest info would be a decisive retcon, with his updated design for his white brimmed hat being a trademark difference amongst his grunt subclassification and initial appearance. Judging at the machine translated raws it looks to be the same as the english lines in the Star Star scene that he meets Mario.

Edit: Yes, it actually is the same.



"せっかく こうして お会いできた ばかりで 急な話ですが…" A translation: "I know this is a bit sudden since we just met, but..."

Countless can definitely be hyperbole there by the same Koopa who said "infinitely" when describing the royal sticker Bowser held, if he can mentally fathom such a magnitude instead when he could just be using flowery language, and even then, the fights happening in between games can certainly happen between Sticker Star and Origami King. Thousands of "fights" during the span of a month could happen offscreen, for instance, being kidnap attempts for Peach that Mario thwarts. The guy casually outwalks soundwaves from Boomboxers, many fights can take place at his comfort speed.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I find the passive-aggressiveness of the doc to be pretty insulting, especially since debating indirectly like this is pretty annoying. I would appreciate if you could tell your guy to be less sarcastic in the future.

I too do find it a little annoying; the user in question was someone who asked me to permaban him via "User request". I did ask him if he would like me to lift his ban so he could debate, but told him he would need to promise to debate in a civilized manner. As for "Passive aggressive tone" I won't debate on whether or not he was being that but I could perhaps ask him to try to make his doc profanity free if that's what is being asked. He said he was going to voice chat with me some parts though.

"Paper Mario series (as in the games themselves) are canonically vocal readings of previous adventures written in books." - The book that is central to the plot of Paper Jam, yes. You're proving my point. Also, no they aren't just "vocal readings", given Paper Mario 64 starts with Bowser actually modifying one of said stories and it actually altering the world he's in, it's just a framing device.

I don't want to argue to extensively since I have less than an hour before RL work, but I just wanted to focus on the book part. I think what he meant to say is that even within the Mario universe, Paper Mario/Mario Story is a book series written by Hemmingway in which there are numerous copies of the book and each game is written as their own separate books. There are ways to interpret that maybe each and every book contains a separate universe, and past books chronologically did happen within a past of a sequel's story. The book opened up in Paper Jam was perhaps a copy of Sticker Star given that the "Plot hole" stuff from Sticker Star appears in that game combined with the some of TTYD's abilities are performed in that game would prove that at some point takes place after TTYD. The "Mario Story" book series is also something that appears in Luigi's Mansion which was teased in the original Paper Mario as an eventual sequal. And the author of that "Mario Story" book series is in fact Hemmingway.

Also, I am not entirely certain about Superstar Saga 3D being "Too faithful" to the original. They clearly changed a lot of mechanics and overworld systems. They made the early game have fewer places to explore to avoid fighting strong enemies while under leveled. And as for story, some characters where outright replaced entirely. And a lot of dialogue is clearly different to reflect the numerous tutorial statements and or mention names of the new characters as opposed to the old ones. And despite the numerous changes, the block from Paper Mario still had it's description unchanged. So the most logical conclusion is that they did so intentionally IMO.

 

[Chariot190]

Paper Mario/Mario Story is a book series written by Hemmingway in which there are numerous copies of the book and each game is written as their own separate books.

Based on? Is there any actual confirmation of that? And to be exact, any actual confirmation of the Paper Jam one being such a book?

Because Paper Mario 1 kinda shoots that down given that's where he first debuts and Bowser interacts with the book itself at the start.

Edit: I obviously mean beyond the first easter egg, in following games and out of verse.

 

[Armorchompy]

I too do find it a little annoying; the user in question was someone who asked me to permaban him via "User request". I did ask him if he would like me to lift his ban so he could debate, but told him he would need to promise to debate in a civilized manner. As for "Passive aggressive tone" I won't debate on whether or not he was being that but I could perhaps ask him to try to make his doc profanity free if that's what is being asked. He said he was going to voice chat with me some parts though.

Oh I think i know who that is. I don't really care about the profanity itself and I don't expect any kind of civil or respectful behavior from them.

I don't want to argue to extensively since I have less than an hour before RL work, but I just wanted to focus on the book part. I think what he meant to say is that even within the Mario universe, Paper Mario/Mario Story is a book series written by Hemmingway in which there are numerous copies of the book and each game is written as their own separate books. There are ways to interpret that maybe each and every book contains a separate universe, and past books chronologically did happen within a past of a sequel's story. The book opened up in Paper Jam was perhaps a copy of Sticker Star given that the "Plot hole" stuff from Sticker Star appears in that game combined with the some of TTYD's abilities are performed in that game would prove that at some point takes place after TTYD. The "Mario Story" book series is also something that appears in Luigi's Mansion which was teased in the original Paper Mario as an eventual sequal. And the author of that "Mario Story" book series is in fact Hemmingway.

Even if they are books written in-verse (which I get that he has a book called "Paper Mario" but I find that kinda flimsy), they clearly aren't representative of the original story, the Paper Mario 64 Bowser thing makes that one story go in a completely different direction from the originals, they clearly are self-aware (which is consistent with Paper Jam) and I also don't think anything implies them being different books. Note, for example, that the TTYD book and the Sticker Star book look fairly similar to one another (the star design changes a bit, and the SS one has a bunch of stickers on it, but the former can just be considered a minor redesign and the latter means very little at all). Admittedly, SPM is being read from the Dark Prognosticus, which is a bit of a deviation, though given the DP's actual role you could consider this either an in-story reading or just a framing device.

Also, I am not entirely certain about Superstar Saga 3D being "Too faithful" to the original. They clearly changed a lot of mechanics and overworld systems. They made the early game have fewer places to explore to avoid fighting strong enemies while under leveled. And as for story, some characters where outright replaced entirely. And a lot of dialogue is clearly different to reflect the numerous tutorial statements and or mention names of the new characters as opposed to the old ones. And despite the numerous changes, the block from Paper Mario still had it's description unchanged. So the most logical conclusion is that they did so intentionally IMO.

There's definitely a lot of changes but like, things that do remain the same can still be attributed to trying to remain accurate to the original, it's not like they updated the depiction in any significant way. Even if you don't wanna consider that, an easter egg is pretty minor all considered when there's actual WoG on the opposite.

Also, here's something else I found, the EShop overview for Paper Jam says "When two unique universes collide", which kind of destroys the "it's multiple books" interpretation given that if that were the case, they wouldn't really be unique. Also, "The worlds of Mario & Luigi and Paper Mario have crossed over". That got me to look through more official descriptions and: "Face off against the Origami King and his army of paper invaders", "The papercraft game world", "Mario may be two-dimensional but this adventure is anything but thin!", "Fold Mario's uniquely flexible features", "Imagine, if you will, a world made of paper", "Our paper thin hero [Mario] has all kinds of foldy talents", "When everything is made completely out of paper, even the most ordinary-looking things can surprise you [...] Not only is Prism Island made of paper..."

So uh, that's some more WoG.

 

[Armorchompy]

Apparently, there's a series of short videos made of Color Splash, so here's some more. Red Rescue Squad Toad breaks the fourth wall and calls the watchers "weird non-flat people". He says that when wet, one must dry to avoid warping, which, yknow, happens to paper. Six toads get (accidentally) crammed into an air duct's slits. Also, one of them "ripped up", but luckily they could tape him together.

So, that's more stuff.

 

[James_Plays_4_Games]

I don't want to argue to extensively since I have less than an hour before RL work, but I just wanted to focus on the book part. I think what he meant to say is that even within the Mario universe, Paper Mario/Mario Story is a book series written by Hemmingway in which there are numerous copies of the book and each game is written as their own separate books. There are ways to interpret that maybe each and every book contains a separate universe, and past books chronologically did happen within a past of a sequel's story. The book opened up in Paper Jam was perhaps a copy of Sticker Star given that the "Plot hole" stuff from Sticker Star appears in that game combined with the some of TTYD's abilities are performed in that game would prove that at some point takes place after TTYD. The "Mario Story" book series is also something that appears in Luigi's Mansion which was teased in the original Paper Mario as an eventual sequal. And the author of that "Mario Story" book series is in fact Hemmingway.

This seems to be more of a theory than factual information, so I don't want this interpretation to be used to explain the continuity of the Paper Mario games. It's an interesting and creative idea, but the VS Battles Wiki is not the place for it.

Also, here's something else I found, the EShop overview for Paper Jam says "When two unique universes collide", which kind of destroys the "it's multiple books" interpretation given that if that were the case, they wouldn't really be unique. Also, "The worlds of Mario & Luigi and Paper Mario have crossed over". That got me to look through more official descriptions and: "Face off against the Origami King and his army of paper invaders", "The papercraft game world", "Mario may be two-dimensional but this adventure is anything but thin!", "Fold Mario's uniquely flexible features", "Imagine, if you will, a world made of paper", "Our paper thin hero [Mario] has all kinds of foldy talents", "When everything is made completely out of paper, even the most ordinary-looking things can surprise you [...] Not only is Prism Island made of paper..."

So uh, that's some more WoG.

I'm pretty sure "unique" was meant exclusively relative to the two worlds in question. The universe that normal Mario lives in definitely isn't unique in the sense you mean it in because there are countless dream worlds that resemble it. Surely the word "unique" was meant in a different sense in that description.

The other evidence you presented is more reliable, but as it stands those aren't very useful in this discussion, because the opposing side can claim that those are merely in the perspective of the developers describing the games' graphics and the like rather than describing the canonical state of the world and its characters during Paper Mario games.

 

[Armorchompy]

I'm pretty sure "unique" was meant exclusively relative to the two worlds in question. The universe that normal Mario lives in definitely isn't unique in the sense you mean it in because there are countless dream worlds that resemble it. Surely the word "unique" was meant in a different sense in that description.

The dream worlds aren't really ever that relevant to Mario, and arguably not even that similar, while if this was different from the "real" Paper Mario world it would be functionally identical.

The other evidence you presented is more reliable, but as it stands those aren't very useful in this discussion, because the opposing side can claim that those are merely in the perspective of the developers describing the games' graphics and the like rather than describing the canonical state of the world and its characters during Paper Mario games.

They can claim anything they want, that doesn't mean that'd hold that much weight, given that these quotes are clearly addressing qualities of the world and characters.

 

[James_Plays_4_Games]

The dream worlds aren't really ever that relevant to Mario, and arguably not even that similar, while if this was different from the "real" Paper Mario world it would be functionally identical.

In the case that you're correct, this still doesn't mean that "unique" was meant to be compared to the entire series, rather than being relative to the two relevant universes.

It isn't suitable to claim that a notable aspect of the series' setting isn't important in a discussion about the setting's consistency. I could probably present a different example of a separate universe in this series being similar to the one that normal Mario lives in if I wanted to, but I don't find the need to. Both the normal world and the dream worlds have versions of some of the same characters, similar objects such as Question Mark Blocks, Attack Piece Blocks applicable with each other across the worlds, et cetera, therefore none of those worlds are unique. Me explaining how the worlds aren't unique isn't me claiming that they're similar.

They can claim anything they want, that doesn't mean that'd hold that much weight, given that these quotes are clearly addressing qualities of the world and characters.

The opposing side can discredit your interpretation like you're doing to their interpretation. There are strong likelihoods that the quotes addressed the qualities of the series' world and characters in the sense of game design or in the sense of canonical attributes. We need to figure out which interpretation is correct by prioritizing analyzing better evidence and how lesser evidence relates to them, so we can understand the underlying reasonings of the interpretations.

 

[Armorchompy]

In the case that you're correct, this still doesn't mean that "unique" was meant to be compared to the entire series, rather than being relative to the two relevant universes. It isn't suitable to claim that a notable aspect of the series' setting isn't important in a discussion about the setting's consistency.

I would say that the Paper Mario universe is definitely a lot more relevant when discussing Paper Jam than some dream worlds that aren't even acknowledged in passing in the game. I think it is very acceptable to not consider the latter a "suitable" counterargument when talking about the former.

I could probably present a different example of a separate universe in this series being similar to the one that normal Mario lives in if I wanted to, but I don't find the need to. Both the normal world and the dream worlds have versions of some of the same characters, similar objects such as Question Mark Blocks, Attack Piece Blocks applicable with each other across the worlds, et cetera, therefore none of those worlds are unique. Me explaining how the worlds aren't unique isn't me claiming that they're similar.

This is meant to counter the interpretation that all Paper Mario games are separate book universes. You would be really hard-pressed to call those "unique" when they're both found in the same type of object and have the exact same art-style. Passing similarities that some other worlds may share with mainline aren't relevant.

The opposing side can discredit your interpretation like you're doing to their interpretation. There are strong likelihoods that the quotes addressed the qualities of the series' world and characters in the sense of game design or in the sense of canonical attributes. We need to figure out which interpretation is correct by prioritizing analyzing better evidence and how lesser evidence relates to them, so we can understand the underlying reasonings of the interpretations.

Anyone can try to discredit anything, but I'm at a pretty big advantage given that I don't need to make up headcanon about what the official website is saying and can just take it at face value (Something something Occam's Razor). I disagree that it's about game design, I disagree that it's lesser evidence, and I have to yet see any real evidence on this.

 

[James_Plays_4_Games]

I would say that the Paper Mario universe is definitely a lot more relevant when discussing Paper Jam than some dream worlds that aren't even acknowledged in passing in the game. I think it is very acceptable to not consider the latter a "suitable" counterargument when talking about the former.

This is meant to counter the interpretation that all Paper Mario games are separate book universes. You would be really hard-pressed to call those "unique" when they're both found in the same type of object and have the exact same art-style. Passing similarities that some other worlds may share with mainline aren't relevant.

Let's halt the discussion of whether or not dream worlds are a factor because I only intended for that to support the other factor that can be independent.

I'll give a comparison example so maybe you'll see what I see; in a scenario where Mario and Waluigi have a tennis match between just the two of them, it's accurate to describe that as two unique characters colliding, because they're unique by most standards relative to each other, even though they aren't the only characters who have their attributes. Now I'll apply the logic you're using, which means I'm going to needlessly include Wario and Luigi into the comparison to prove that Mario and Waluigi aren't unique. Since Wario and Waluigi are just dishonest caricature versions of Mario and Luigi, it's no longer accurate to consider Mario and Waluigi as unique in the scenario. Adding Wario and Luigi into the comparison takes the original circumstances out of context.

The statement "when two unique universes collide" related to Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam was describing the difference specifically between the normal world and the paper world. It's just a theory, but if there really are other books with other paper worlds, the statement you presented doesn't disprove that, since the comparison calling the worlds unique is only between the normal world and the specific paper world from Paper Jam. You're taking the original circumstances out of context by claiming that the paper world from Paper Jam being called unique means there can't be any other worlds like it in the Super Mario series, even though it was only called unique compared to one very different non-paper world.

It's also worth mentioning that, regardless of the theory of there being different books for different worlds containing Paper Mario stories, your idea is disproven by Super Paper Mario being a story with multiple universes. That means it's confirmed that one paper universe isn't unique overall, because we've seen that there are multiple paper universes. So, either the description for Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam is incorrect, or you'll need to understand the proper meaning of "unique" in the description.

Anyone can try to discredit anything, but I'm at a pretty big advantage given that I don't need to make up headcanon about what the official website is saying and can just take it at face value (Something something Occam's Razor). I disagree that it's about game design, I disagree that it's lesser evidence, and I have to yet see any real evidence on this.

I think that both interpretations take the statements at face value. Whichever interpretation is the correct one depends on other evidence that contextualize the statements, determining whether it's best to perceive the statements as insight about the way the paper universe functions or to perceive the statements as advertisement of the games' paper graphics and tone.

 

[Armorchompy]

Let's halt the discussion of whether or not dream worlds are a factor because I only intended for that to support the other factor that can be independent.

I'll give a comparison example so maybe you'll see what I see; in a scenario where Mario and Waluigi have a tennis match between just the two of them, it's accurate to describe that as two unique characters colliding, because they're unique by most standards relative to each other, even though they aren't the only characters who have their attributes. Now I'll apply the logic you're using, which means I'm going to needlessly include Wario and Luigi into the comparison to prove that Mario and Waluigi aren't unique. Since Wario and Waluigi are just dishonest caricature versions of Mario and Luigi, it's no longer accurate to consider Mario and Waluigi as unique in the scenario. Adding Wario and Luigi into the comparison takes the original circumstances out of context.

The statement "when two unique universes collide" related to Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam was describing the difference specifically between the normal world and the paper world. It's just a theory, but if there really are other books with other paper worlds, the statement you presented doesn't disprove that, since the comparison calling the worlds unique is only between the normal world and the specific paper world from Paper Jam. You're taking the original circumstances out of context by claiming that the paper world from Paper Jam being called unique means there can't be any other worlds like it in the Super Mario series, even though it was only called unique compared to one very different non-paper world.

It's also worth mentioning that, regardless of the theory of there being different books for different worlds containing Paper Mario stories, your idea is disproven by Super Paper Mario being a story with multiple universes. That means it's confirmed that one paper universe isn't unique overall, because we've seen that there are multiple paper universes. So, either the description for Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam is incorrect, or you'll need to understand the proper meaning of "unique" in the description.

I think you're giving way too much credit to someone typing up some blurb for a kids' 3DS rpg, they're not gonna get deep diving into the series' "lore", but I think it definitely can be interpreted as "no this isn't just a carbon copy of the actual paper mario games this is those actual games".

You're also getting way too hung up on a piece of tertiary evidence, again.

I think that both interpretations take the statements at face value. Whichever interpretation is the correct one depends on other evidence that contextualize the statements, determining whether it's best to perceive the statements as insight about the way the paper universe functions or to perceive the statements as advertisement of the games' paper graphics and tone.

No, definitely not. If you read "this guy is made of paper", and interpreted that as "oh actually it's just an artstyle, that's what they're referring to", that's not taking it at face value, that is essentially coming up with a theory regarding what the actual intended meaning is by looking at surrounding context. The default assumption when it comes that's meant to introduce the story, setting and characters of a game is to take it literally, that's not an "interpretation". This isn't an "oh it could be either way, let's decide which" debate, it's a "people who don't want the split need to disprove the default assumption that is supported by a bunch of evidence" debate.

Also it's clearly not just generally referring to graphics when it talks about things such as the armies being made of paper, or Mario being two-dimensional, that is a specific description of them, they're not saying they look flat or something. I dunno how you can even take "fold mario's uniquely flexible features" as literally anything but an actual description of what he's like in the game, how would it even work if it was just talking about graphics?

That also literally doesn't matter given that there's similar in-verse statements and showings which this just supports, I don't see anyone addressing those.

 

[James_Plays_4_Games]

I think you're giving way too much credit to someone typing up some blurb for a kids' 3DS rpg, they're not gonna get deep diving into the series' "lore", but I think it definitely can be interpreted as "no this isn't just a carbon copy of the actual paper mario games this is those actual games".

You're also getting way too hung up on a piece of tertiary evidence, again.

How were you led to think this about what I wrote? I'm not really giving any sort of credit to whoever wrote the description of Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam beyond them being able to write a simple sentence. I didn't write that the statement was diving into the series' "lore"; I wrote a few paragraphs about the semantics of a few words, and how it affects the viability of someone else's theory. What I wrote about someone else's theory doesn't give credit to the original description. I would appreciate an answer to the point I made about what "unique" means in the description.

How do you expect the VS Battles Wiki to have a reliable conclusion about this discussion when you call this getting too hung up on a piece of tertiary evidence? I'm trying to be productive by getting us to the same level of understanding. My own level of understanding is of both sides, meanwhile most people I see discussing about this only give the opposing side corrections revolving around their belief in one of the sides. To me, we can't continue when we're torn about what a piece of evidence even represents.

No, definitely not. If you read "this guy is made of paper", and interpreted that as "oh actually it's just an artstyle, that's what they're referring to", that's not taking it at face value, that is essentially coming up with a theory regarding what the actual intended meaning is by looking at surrounding context. The default assumption when it comes that's meant to introduce the story, setting and characters of a game is to take it literally. Also it's clearly not just generally referring to graphics when it talks about things such as the armies being made of paper, or Mario being flat. This isn't an "oh it could be either way, let's decide which" debate, it's a "people who don't want the split need to disprove the default assumption" debate, so applying "oh both sides could be right" logic doesn't hold up.

Believe it or not, aside from your over-exaggeration of the wording, it's very normal to interpret it the way you think doesn't work.

• "I worked on map design and coordinated the papercraft game world" has to do with game development, so it makes sense for someone to think it's about the game's graphics rather than how the game's universe as paper attributes.
• The other evidence you presented are descriptions of games on an official website. At face value, these are descriptions of how the games are like. "How the games are like" is a general idea. The descriptions are about how the games look paper, how the characters are made of paper, and do paper things, but inferring that the characters are canonically paper separate from the non-paper universe is an inference beyond face value.
  • In the perspective of someone who's thinking of this matter at face value without being a VS Battles Wiki user, for all they would know, the characters are the same as in games with other styles, but are only paper because of unknown or inexplicable reasons. Maybe the characters became paper, or maybe they're only paper as a graphical choice and the acknowledgement of it is in the fashion of fourth wall awareness. Maybe the way the characters are paper would translate to something non-paper if the style of the game were changed. Without having seen Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam which is beyond the face value of the descriptions of the other games, not everyone would infer that Mario being paper in some games and not paper in other games plays an important part in the continuity of the fictional work.

What's also beyond face value is inferring that the characters in the Paper Mario games are the same as the ones in the other Super Mario games for the reasons available to support that interpretation, which is information that most likely wasn't in mind when the descriptions of the games were written. Whichever of the two interpretations is true depends on better evidence to lead us to a specific and reliable interpretation beyond the face value of "how the games are like". We'll never get to discussing that part properly if you keep behaving as though your conclusion about the fictional work's continuity is the one at face value and that the opposing side needs to disprove it or else they're wrong. I'm sure the opposing side feels the same way that you do. They probably think that because their conclusion sides with Shigeru Miyamoto saying that there's only one Mario, other statements from him that signify how this series' continuity is lenient, and other supporting evidence, they think they have a rock solid interpretation siding with objective facts, and they probably think that you need to prove your points or else you're wrong.

That also literally doesn't matter given that there's similar in-verse statements and showings which this just supports, I don't see you addressing those.

I'm not addressing those because I'm discussing the validity of the specific evidence you presented.

 

[Armorchompy]

How do you expect the VS Battles Wiki to have a reliable conclusion about this discussion when you call this getting too hung up on a piece of tertiary evidence? I'm trying to be productive by getting us to the same level of understanding. My own level of understanding is of both sides, meanwhile most people I see discussing about this only give the opposing side corrections revolving around their belief in one of the sides. To me, we can't continue when we're torn about what a piece of evidence even represents.

You're doing the complete opposite of "being productive" by slowing the discussion to a grinding halt by focusing on the small picture. The conclusion regarding this specific topic would not change things at all, so fixating on it isn't relevant. Quite frankly I am also very annoyed by the fact that you're putting yourself above everyone else in the discussion by claiming you understand both sides and acting as some sort of mediator.

"I worked on map design and coordinated the papercraft game world" has to do with game development, so it makes sense for someone to think it's about the game's graphics rather than how the game's universe as paper attributes.

That's within the context of an interview where they talk a lot about how the paper plays into gameplay, that's not just about it being an aesthetic.

The other evidence you presented are descriptions of games on an official website. At face value, these are descriptions of how the games are like. "How the games are like" is a general idea. The descriptions are about how the games look paper, how the characters are made of paper, and do paper things, but inferring that the characters are canonically paper separate from the non-paper universe is an inference beyond face value.

No it's literally not lol, they say the characters are made of paper, there is one inherent meaning to that sentence and one inherent meaning only.

In the perspective of someone who's thinking of this matter at face value without being a VS Battles Wiki user, for all they would know, the characters are the same as in games with other styles, but are only paper because of unknown or inexplicable reasons. Maybe the characters became paper, or maybe they're only paper as a graphical choice and the acknowledgement of it is in the fashion of fourth wall awareness. Maybe the way the characters are paper would translate to something non-paper if the style of the game were changed. Without having seen Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam which is beyond the face value of the descriptions of the other games, not everyone would infer that Mario being paper in some games and not paper in other games plays an important part in the continuity of the fictional work.

This is just conjecture that's trying to establish an even ground when there isn't one. If someone read a website that said characters were made of paper, they wouldn't start making up headcanons, they would think that they're made of ******* paper, and I can guarantee to you that basically any people who haven't looked into the situation too far think that they are indeed made of ******* paper.

What's also beyond face value is inferring that the characters in the Paper Mario games are the same as the ones in the other Super Mario games for the reasons available to support that interpretation, which is information that most likely wasn't in mind when the descriptions of the games were written. Whichever of the two interpretations is true depends on better evidence to lead us to a specific and reliable interpretation beyond the face value of "how the games are like".

Yes, and those reasons are what the opposition is trying to use to prove that the default assumption of "said to be paper + looks like paper = is paper" isn't correct. That doesn't mean that that stops being the default when its validity being debated, it just means it isn't an absolute truth, which I never claimed it was.

We'll never get to discussing that part properly if you keep behaving as though your conclusion about the fictional work's continuity is the one at face value and that the opposing side needs to disprove it or else they're wrong.

The discussion has already been going on for a while just fine, we don't need someone to play devil's advocate at every turn. I'm not going to keep debating about the debate, it is the definition of pointless.

I'm sure the opposing side feels the same way that you do. They probably think that because their conclusion sides with Shigeru Miyamoto saying that there's only one Mario, other statements from him that signify how this series' continuity is lenient, and other supporting evidence, they think they have a rock solid interpretation siding with objective facts, and they probably think that you need to prove your points or else you're wrong.

I don't claim to be some arbiter of ultimate truth. They can think whatever they want and bring their own arguments to the table, and if the arguments are sufficiently convincing and receive enough support they will "win" the discussion and Paper Mario will not be split. That is fine, but it doesn't change the fact that unless sufficient opposing proof is provided, the simplest possible assumption is the one we go with, and in this case that is taking things at face value, especially with the obvious context of Paper Jam.

 

[Armorchompy]

Here's a vote tally:

Agree (Paper Mario is split from mainline Mario and integrated with Paper Jam Mario): Maverick_Zero_X, Armorchompy, LephyrTheRevanchist, Flashlight237, VegetaFan756, Kirbonic_Pikmin, Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara, TMaakkonen, Potemkat, Chariot190, Seol404, TheMonkeMan, Dust_Collector, thetechmaster36, AStrangeverse, Lou_change

Disagree (Profiles remain as is, Paper Jam Mario is considered an OC, while PM is considered to be the same guy as mainline): DarkDragonMedeus, The_real_cal_howard

Neutral: Mephistus, JJSliderMan, Zespeon Galaxy, I think James_Plays_4_Games?

 

[DaMonkeMan]

Here's a vote tally:

Agree (Paper Mario is split from mainline Mario and integrated with Paper Jam Mario): Maverick_Zero_X, Armorchompy, LephyrTheRevanchist, Flashlight237, VegetaFan756, Kirbonic_Pikmin, Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara, TMaakkonen, Potemkat, Chariot190, Seol404, I think TheMonkeMan (Fairly sure but he hasn't explicitly voiced his opinion so)?

Disagree (Profiles remain as is, Paper Jam Mario is considered an OC, while PM is considered to be the same guy as mainline): DarkDragonMedeus, Lou_change, The_real_cal_howard, I think JJSliderMan?

Neutral: Mephistus, I think James_Plays_4_Games?

Oh yeah I agree BTW

 

[JJSliderman]

Here's a vote tally:

Agree (Paper Mario is split from mainline Mario and integrated with Paper Jam Mario): Maverick_Zero_X, Armorchompy, LephyrTheRevanchist, Flashlight237, VegetaFan756, Kirbonic_Pikmin, Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara, TMaakkonen, Potemkat, Chariot190, Seol404, TheMonkeMan

Disagree (Profiles remain as is, Paper Jam Mario is considered an OC, while PM is considered to be the same guy as mainline): DarkDragonMedeus, Lou_change, The_real_cal_howard, I think JJSliderMan?

Neutral: Mephistus, I think James_Plays_4_Games?

Put me as neutral, I see both sides as potentially valid.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

That friend of mine says he is working on more rebuttals, but one thing he brought up about the books is that specifically, the "Book" Sticker Star takes place in specifically opens up talking about the Sticker Comet from Sticker Star and makes no mention of story events from previous Paper Mario games. Same with the intro to TTYD, it's specifically starting with the Paper Mario prologue not showing any events from the first game on its 1st page. So that's where Paper Mario being a book series comes from as opposed to the whole series being part of the same physical book.

As for the Hemmingway mentioning, it's more so implied as Hemmingway did state in one of his dialogues that he is working on a book entitled "Paper Mario" in your honor. And the book Neville is reading is called Mario Story (The Japanese name of the original Paper Mario)

Also, Color Splash more or less brings up consistent measure of there existing an entire multiverse based on his analysis. As for my input, I know "Parallel Dimension" is a common term and a lot of those "Parallel Universes" happen to be throwbacks of old games, but it doesn't appear separating Paper Mario from regular Mario is a primary focus. Then again, lore isn't always a primary focus for Mario series anyway, so it's still a double edge sword regardless and could go either way. But it's not like Mario 1 and Mario 3 are different universes from each other.

 

[Armorchompy]

That friend of mine says he is working on more rebuttals, but one thing he brought up about the books is that specifically, the "Book" Sticker Star takes place in specifically opens up talking about the Sticker Comet from Sticker Star and makes no mention of story events from previous Paper Mario games. Same with the intro to TTYD, it's specifically starting with the Paper Mario prologue not showing any events from the first game on its 1st page. So that's where Paper Mario being a book series comes from as opposed to the whole series being part of the same physical book.

The Sticker Star bit isn't true, the book opens several pages in. Fair enough on TTYD, but I wouldn't take it as iron solid evidence myself, back then I don't think it was really more than a cute framing device.

As for the Hemmingway mentioning, it's more so implied as Hemmingway did state in one of his dialogues that he is working on a book entitled "Paper Mario" in your honor. And the book Neville is reading is called Mario Story (The Japanese name of the original Paper Mario)

Doesn't this completely bust the "just an artstyle" theories, if it's an actual thing in main canon?

I would also ask how Herringway knows 99% of the story he's supposedly writing, he's not an explorer or a historian, just a novel writer.

Also, Color Splash more or less brings up consistent measure of there existing an entire multiverse based on his analysis. As for my input, I know "Parallel Dimension" is a common term and a lot of those "Parallel Universes" happen to be throwbacks of old games, but it doesn't appear separating Paper Mario from regular Mario is a primary focus.

I would ask you to elaborate on this, when possible.

 

[Chariot190]

Are we still arguing Paper Mario is just a artstyle type thing?

 

[Dust_Collector]

Personally I'm fine with treating Paper Mario stuff as it's own thing, with maybeeee the first one being used for both mainline and Paper Mario due to Superstar Saga implying the events happen in the main continuity but even then that's still a big ol' maybe and I'm down with just leaving that Paper Mario exclusive as well.

 

[thetechmaster36]

After reading the thread, I'm more inclined to agree with the split and that Paper Mario should just be its own thing. I, personally, didn't necessarily agree with them being one and the same, so this split makes sense to me.

 

[ZespeonGalaxy]

Neutral on the split

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

lol

https://cdn.**********.com/attachments/802421011710083082/1098000143594311730/IMG_9044.png

Personally don't get why this is so contentious

@Eficiente @SamanPatou @AKM sama Could use more input if it isn't too much trouble.

 

[Chariot190]

I also wanna ninja Armor and mention it first.

But the book in Paper Jam isn't at all even remotely depicted as just a story book published in-universe. It's considered a legendary book (aka it's old as **** and not exactly common), a specific book that happens to contain an alternate world. Hell it was in Peach's castle collecting dust and Kamek talks about it as if it's a one of a kind myth. This is kind of notable as well, given if it is one of a kind and ancient, why does it depict events from like Sticker Star? If the argument is that the book is just "hey, the book was published in universe and whatever, and details some of mario's exploits", then why is it detailing things that, if the argument was true, would have happened to Mario just a few years prior tops, despite being so old that Kamek thinks of it as just a legend and unsure if it even existed till now? The answer is it wouldn't, it'd be impossible to chronicle that as the book predates anyone in the Mushroom Kingdom's acknowledgment. Only Kamek, the oldest ************ there, is just vaguely aware of a legend about it but the book has been lost for sometime and has just been doing its own thing rotting away.

Hemmingway but a penguin is a literal nonfactor to Paper Jam, he didn't write the legendary, unique, supernatural paper mario book that nobody knew existed.

 

[Lou_change]

The Mario wiki says that a toad in TYD mentions making a play based on the adventure however I can’t find anything to substantiate that claim with.

If that is worth anything.

 

[Armorchompy]

I also wanna ninja Armor and mention it first.

But the book in Paper Jam isn't at all even remotely depicted as just a story book published in-universe. It's considered a legendary book (aka it's old as **** and not exactly common), a specific book that happens to contain an alternate world. Hell it was in Peach's castle collecting dust and Kamek talks about it as if it's a one of a kind myth. This is kind of notable as well, given if it is one of a kind and ancient, why does it depict events from like Sticker Star? If the argument is that the book is just "hey, the book was published in universe and whatever, and details some of mario's exploits", then why is it detailing things that, if the argument was true, would have happened to Mario just a few years prior tops, despite being so old that Kamek thinks of it as just a legend and unsure if it even existed till now? The answer is it wouldn't, it'd be impossible to chronicle that as the book predates anyone in the Mushroom Kingdom's acknowledgment. Only Kamek, the oldest ************ there, is just vaguely aware of a legend about it but the book has been lost for sometime and has just been doing its own thing rotting away.

Hemmingway but a penguin is a literal nonfactor to Paper Jam, he didn't write the legendary, unique, supernatural paper mario book that nobody knew existed.

source btw

 

[AStrangeverse]

ay, count me as agree

 

[Lou_change]

I guess I am okay with this given the recent arguments

 

[Psychomaster35]

I’m fine with separating Mario and Paper Mario’s feats

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I also think @GyroNutz should be pinged as well.

 

[James_Plays_4_Games]

You're doing the complete opposite of "being productive" by slowing the discussion to a grinding halt by focusing on the small picture. The conclusion regarding this specific topic would not change things at all, so fixating on it isn't relevant. Quite frankly I am also very annoyed by the fact that you're putting yourself above everyone else in the discussion by claiming you understand both sides and acting as some sort of mediator.

I'm disappointed that a staff member would make these fallacious points to discredit me, and call one of them a fact. These need to be addressed.

No, I'm not focusing on the small picture, I'm explaining how doing so won't get anywhere useful and that we need to establish the overall context so we can figure out what the best interpretations are, but this got delayed by our disagreement about a few details, which shouldn't be a surprise to encounter on a website like this. I don't know why you're blaming me for slowing the discussion when these are very normal events and when other people are free to continue posting if they want to.

No, I'm not being a mediator and I'm not putting myself above everyone in the discussion. I'm simply writing my advice, and in this case, explaining how you could improve your ideas and reach your conclusion in a more unambiguous way. The circumstances just so happen to be that I understand both sides. Me understanding both sides doesn't make me better than everyone else, but it's a relevant favorable circumstance, and I was using it to help with the discussion using my knowledge so it can hopefully lead to a reliable conclusion.

I'm not doing this to look impressive. I'm doing this because I've seen this discussion repeat itself the same way time and time again, and I want to help the VS Battles Wiki finally discover the correct reasoning and conclusion. Discovering the correct conclusion isn't enough, because the reasoning behind both interpretations is detailed and mostly discerning, and both will always be sensibly at odds with each other until we discover which one makes more sense. A blog post listing all the evidence in favor of one interpretation while debunking the other isn't enough; what needs to be made is a blog post that critically analyzes both interpretations equitably, and finds a conclusion based on what makes sense overall in accordance to the context that the fictional work provides, rather than based on which opinion feels the most correct along with the subjective pieces of evidence that support it.

Clearly my contributions in this thread are disrespected, so I plan to stop writing in it. I read ahead and your answers to what else I wrote is just more of the same that we've been discussing, so unfortunately in the end I couldn't break the cycle of the different sides of this discussion being in perpetual closed-minded disagreement.

Neutral: Mephistus, JJSliderMan, Zespeon Galaxy, I think James_Plays_4_Games?

I didn't vote. I shouldn't be part of a vote count I never participated in.