• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Possible Mario Profile Split/Varies Rating

Status
Not open for further replies.
StrymULTRA said:
Is literally shown on screen that they transform in Galaxies, not just a statement.
Click to expand...
The video shows no such thing and SMG 1 and 2 both refer to tiny planetoids as planets. I don't think we should accept that this is somehow Galaxy level when there is quite literally no way of actually proving whether it is or isn't and the staggering amount of evidence shows these characters at levels which are in the decillions of times lower.
 
StrymULTRA said:
It was literally the same "outlier argument" because "they're usually decillions times weaker" oh c'mon.
Click to expand...
It was literally not, you're blatantly ignoring the point, which is that at no point in any of the SMG games do we actually see a 3-C feat take place, the only possible evidence to 3-C is that they are called Galaxies, but those same games use terminology very liberally, so I find that justification weak. My point is not that 3-C Mario is an outlier my point is that 3-C Mario doesn't exist.
 
Seol404 said:
It was literally not, you're blatantly ignoring the point, which is that at no point in any of the SMG games do we actually see a 3-C feat take place, the only possible evidence to 3-C is that they are called Galaxies, but those same games use terminology very liberally, so I find that justification weak. My point is not that 3-C Mario is an outlier my point is that 3-C Mario doesn't exist.
Click to expand...
Issue is that it was launched in a space full of realistic galaxies, so while planets may not seem realistic in the game, they're definitely far bigger than what they appear and the Earth is shown as realistic in Odyssey and many other games.

So it can really just be an artistic choice to not make levels look too big tbh.

Anyway, I'd like to end this for now to give room to @DarkDragonMedeus and @GyroNutz, then we can keep the discussion with them too.
 
StrymULTRA said:
Issue is that it was launched in a space full of realistic galaxies, so while planets may not seem realistic in the game, they're definitely far bigger than what they appear and the Earth is shown as realistic in Odyssey and many other games.

So it can really just be an artistic choice to not make levels look too big tbh.
Click to expand...
It being launched into a space full of realistic Galaxies is completely irrelevant, I'm not arguing that real Galaxies exist in Mario, they obviously do lol. I'm disputing the idea that Lumas can instantly transform into said realistic galaxies on demand, which there is no proof of. I'm going to be honest with you though I have absolutely zero clue why you continue to link sources that don't in any way refute my points and merely confirm what I say, it's a rather unorthodox method of debate.

Claiming that what they transform into only appears the way it does because of an artistic choice and that canonically they are actually full sized planets and galaxies is an absolutely extraordinary claim which I do not believe you have the evidence to back up.
 
What about the grand star that empowered Bowser to threaten the universe in Mario Galaxy 1? How does that factor into this?
 
Option A: Armorchompy, Pikaman, Maverick_Zero_X, Seol404, SamanPatou, TMaakkonen, Eficiente, Pain_to12, Newendigo, Elizhaa, AKM sama, Kirbonic_Pikmin, Shadyboi0, Mariogoods, Transcending, RethPo, Mephistus, Foxthefox1000

Option B: Bobsican, I'm_Blue_daba_dee_daba_die, Psychomaster35, Antvasima (Doesn’t mind Option A if members are willing to put in the work), Confluctor, Lou_change, y3p_owo, Oleggator, StrymULTRA

Neutral: Chariot190k, The_Impress
 
Last edited:
I am probably gonna to throw my own few cents on this and side Varies option as well personally.

While idea of separating Mario doesn't really sounds bad, it just doesn't feels right in my head.

At least imo composite is when you combine actual different versions of characters (such as let's say mixing Archie and Game Sonic) or mixing their different continuities (Racthet Pre-2017 series and Post-2017 series) and well etcetera (Mickey Mouse who has variety of different cartoons, Popeye, Angry Birds Red with different medias and many other characters), Mario just doesn't seem to be fit in under those examples at least cause it's pretty much really same Mario whenever you look at his games and wasn't implied to be different as well, (except for like, Paper Mario but then again that's another topic) and Myiamoto's statement is for support of that.
 
Last edited:
Pikaman said:
Key: A:B:Neutral

Staff: 6:3 (2:1)
Members: 5:6
Overall: 11:9
Click to expand...
So staff convincingly in favour of A, with members mildly leaning towards B

DDM’s input could obviously tip the scales heavily in either direction, or towards a whole new option
 
Looks pretty one-sided agreement to me considering Ant is okay with option A too if people can put in the work.
 
Pikaman said:
On a staff level yes, consider members opinions... not so much

also DDM still has to give their points
Click to expand...
I am complete neutral on this, but the staff do have more authority on that front compared to regular members.

I don’t really care for both side, but will give it to the ones who prefer Option A or Option B tbh (even though a varied option isn’t that convincing to me.)
 
Last edited:
HammerStrikes219 said:
I am complete neutral on this, but the staff do have more authority on that front compared to regular members.

I don’t really care for both side, but will give it to the ones who prefer Option A or Option B tbh (even though a varied option isn’t that convincing to me.)
Click to expand...
Obviously staff has more influence, it’s just important to take note of members too, right now I agree it leans option A all things considered but if members presented a clear and overwhelming majority output in favour of B (not that that looks likely tbf) then that’s an extremely important part of decision making
 
Wanna ask Impress again which option she votes for? She was the one to brought up the idea for A in the beginning iirc so maybe she also supports it.

To make sure.
 
I dont really care about voting for either option. But marios tier would at his absolute weakest would be high 8-C right (for either options)? Since hed scale to bowsers stronger enemies like big boos, and im not sure if enemies are gonna vary per game (although their rating is based on doing 3 times as much damage to mario so... not sure about that).
 
Psychomaster35 said:
A is if you agree the profiles should be separated into multiple profiles by series (IE. Super Mario, Mario & Luigi, Mario Party, Paper Mario, etc) while B is if you agree the profiles should stay as is, but with a Varies tier added given the inconsistent nature of the series.
Click to expand...
I agree with Option A since it would make the profile more readable and reliable. Also, I feel that it also applies to other Mario casts such as Luigi. Somewhat like Link.
 
Last edited:
I need to sleep soon, but Styrm did spoke with me about other consistent feats, and I also heard Mephistus say he might give his two cents.
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
I will write my rebuttal and/or considerations later I said. I honestly dislike both options, but I would prefer Option B over Option A overall. I still strongly agree they're all the same canon as even Eficiente even if he agrees with profile splits still agrees them being treated as same character/canon but over the course of different time periods.

There are also criticisms with option B, given Mario is simply inconsistent; he's not like Hulk where there's a lore based "His power varies via being angrier" or other Empathy based powers or Superman being stronger based of his "Solar battery genetics physiology" It's just writers/programmers themselves being contradictory to each other where little to none of them care about powerscaling/battleboarding in general. But if anything, there are few and showings statements about getting stronger via progression but clearly no statements getting weaker but just showings via game to game portrayal. RPG games specifically have the level up systems albeit level 1 reverts next games. And common plots of Mario being fodder against main villain/final boss but then later becomes their equal. And the other is taking the DK Rap lyrics "He's Bigger, Faster, and Stronger Too!" But there are still counter arguments against that too. And the biggest issue about the "Getting stronger via progression" is that Partners and Time kind of made the baby versions of the Mario bros just as strong as the adult versions. Kind of confirming the power levels tend to be back and forth.
Click to expand...
You just proceed to demonstrate the canon flexibility I was discussing about.

The "Varies" isn't due to mechanics, it's due to listing convenience, I have stated this already
DarkDragonMedeus said:
As I said before, I'm slowly but surely repeatedly losing interest in debating Mario's tiers via repeated topics, exhaustion, the fact that all the real Mario experts such as Dino Ranger Black left the wiki resulting in the same downward spiral that discussions (Not just Content Revisions) that several other verses such as LoZ and MLP have been going through. The actual "Downgrades/Upgrades" and what not are actually the least of the issue, but just talking about the verses in general just doesn't seem fun anymore.
Click to expand...
In context of argument I think this serves no purpose other than a technical appeal to tradition and painting the opposing side as antagonistic and implied unknowledgeable ngl, for having started the debate.

This isn't even a point that requires a "Real Mario Supporter" to do anything other than provide context.
DarkDragonMedeus said:
But one of the main things I will expand upon is perhaps remind us all why the continuity is just one big continuity and while Cosmic lore and stuff should still carry over even if we assume Mario cast get stronger as they exercise/adventure but weaken when they've been sit around outside of adventures that we either do Option A making separate pages/keys for different periods, or option B with just having variable tiers.
Click to expand...
Stop misrepresenting Option A, it's not erasplit, it is series split because Mario's capabilities are dependent on the series and the way Nintendo wants to use it, which is for the 90th time, is just indexing convenience because we don't need 19 keys on the same page
DarkDragonMedeus said:
But variable tiers within a single key should not try to make the gaps too extensive; not something like Tier 9/8 to Tier 2. But I better get to that later.
Click to expand...
Why? This only sound like disingenuous representation, and if you feel that ridiculed by a Varies of THAT MUCH GAP, I'll suggest you vote Option A for proper stat representation for each version, with all the context accounted for the ratings.
DarkDragonMedeus said:
I just need to gather my scans for each canon connection claim.
Click to expand...
...Issue isn't that the games aren't canon the issue is that the games aren't in continuity. There isn't a continuity, there are multiple contradictions within the lore, the crux of the matter is it's a loose canon, Mario's stats, history and whatnot are subject to the whims of the developers in order to present their games.
DarkDragonMedeus said:
But I will say this, anything below Building level is pure downplay. Even fodder enemies such as Goombas, Koopa Troopas, and Monty Moles have fairly consistent Building level feats, there are giant blocks in World 4 of SMB3 where fragmenting would get 9-A. Mario also one-shots Banzai Bills who consistently pile through giant sections of brick blocks that would get now lower than Tier 8. And I'd argue anything below Tier 7 amongst the Seven Star Children is also out of the question for the most part as Bob-Ombs do have Tier 7 explosion feats, though inconsistent given some survive their own explosions while most are still glass cannons.
Click to expand...
No one said Building level, or discussed stats yet.
DarkDragonMedeus said:
I also think this statement is also even more blatant, but we are definitely not upgrading every single fodder enemy to the level of Mario. No galaxy level lava, no galaxy level galaxy level bombs/fire arms especially ones not magical/supernatural in nature, and things like "Throwing objects to harm a high tiered character" is something we give credit to the throwers and not the objects being thrown unless there's some mystical nature surrounding object in question.
Click to expand...
This is cherrypicking in order to make your narrative LOOK like it's cohesive, while unironically, you are stating that Mario does get harmed by 3-C lava by asserting the existence of a standard continuity with no flexibility, you just know how dumb it sounds to say 3-C lava and fall damage so you just never acknowledge it.

Genuinely prove how it's not otherwise.
DarkDragonMedeus said:
But who knows, I might be able to come up with some solution. But when I explain the canonicity reminders, I will propose some conditional branches for any possible variables and/or profile splits via eras/sub-series/spin-offs. But given me time to explain them later.
Click to expand...
How much time do you think that'll be, actually?
 
Last edited:
Psychomaster35 said:
A is if you agree the profiles should be separated into multiple profiles by series (IE. Super Mario, Mario & Luigi, Mario Party, Paper Mario, etc) while B is if you agree the profiles should stay as is, but with a Varies tier added given the inconsistent nature of the series.
Click to expand...
Then I agree with A.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Omnificence
  • Locked
The Super Mario Bros Movie Revised (Potential Buffs and Upgrades) (ACCEPTED)
Replies
37
Views
2K
Omnificence
Omnificence
Omnificence
  • Locked
Super Multiplier Bros REVAMPED (4-B AP proposal for Mario Bros)
2
Replies
56
Views
3K
Omnificence
Omnificence
Armorchompy
  • Locked
Small Mario AP Upgrade
2
Replies
40
Views
3K
Armorchompy
Armorchompy
DimeUhDozen
Princess Peach Small Addition
Replies
4
Views
426
Minion_of_Pigsaw
Minion_of_Pigsaw
Omnificence
  • Locked
Super Revision Bros 2.0 (Mario and the Power Stars)
2 3
Replies
116
Views
7K
Omnificence
Omnificence
Back
Top