Am I the only one who thinks Super Mario Bros 2 is better than Super Mario Bros?

Some people act like you're crazy if you say that SMB2 (the American version, not the Lost Levels) is better than the original SMB since it seems to be the black sheep of the series. But I actually find SMB2 to be a pretty good deal better (though SMB3 and both Super Mario World games are definitely better than SMB2).

Don't get me wrong. I love the original SMB, but it just feels a little too simple in comparison with SMB2. SMB2 has a really odd atmosphere (after all, it is a reskinning of another game)and alot more depth than SMB, like the magic potion that makes an alternate world, or the digging portions, or the masks or the use of bombs, or the verticality of some level designs. Plus, it just looks alot better with more vibrant colors and I feel it has more interesting level design.

Basically, while SMB1 has a decidedly faster pace, I prefer the more fleshed-out gameplay of SMB2.

BTW, I think SMB3 and Super Mario World do an excellent job of fusing the more fleshed-out gameplay of SMB2 and the faster gameplay in SMB1 while feeling more Marioish than SMB2.

What do you guys think?

Depends which SMB.2 you mean. If you mean the Japanese original (aka Lost Levels in the Western world) I'd agree, but if you mean the Western version (aka Super Mario USA in Japan), then I'm not so sure. I will agree it's much better than what some people make it out to be and is certainly a good, even classic, game, but it's also pretty hard and feels more like a spin-off (which it basically is since it's a different game with Mario and friends). However the original SMB. has a big flaw and that is the ease of skipping levels. It's just far to tempting to simply skip the levels in the original SMB. which is a drawback imo. But both are good games, no doubt.

Depends which SMB.2 you mean. If you mean the Japanese original (aka Lost Levels in the Western world) I'd agree, but if you mean the Western version (aka Super Mario USA in Japan), then I'm not so sure. I will agree it's much better than what some people make it out to be and is certainly a good, even classic, game, but it's also pretty hard and feels more like a spin-off (which it basically is since it's a different game with Mario and friends). However the original SMB. has a big flaw and that is the ease of skipping levels. It's just far to tempting to simply skip the levels in the original SMB. which is a drawback imo. But both are good games, no doubt.

nameless12345

I'm talking about the American one with the turnips and Birdo and what not.

I agree that it's really tempting to skip levels in SMB1, but I'd usually only use the warp zones as a way to get back to levels I had reached in a legit way.

I love Super Mario Bros. 2. Great game, one of the gems in the NES's library. But still, SMB 1 is the better game of the 2, IMO. Super Mario Bros. 2 obviously had better graphics, and was a fun game, but SMB 1 was more fun IMO, a lot more fun.

This whole thread is gaming blasphemy!!!!:P

I prefer Super Mario bros 2.

I found it to be longer and more creative than the original.

The original is still great but number 2 is just slightly better.

Super Mario bros 3 however..... oh don't get me started. :lol:

while you are most likely in the minority, there nothing wrong with liking a game most people like less than another game in a series.

I like the original DOA in alot of ways more than DOA2(though DOA2 is still a superb fighter), despite the fact that pretty much every gaming magazine (and quite a few DOA fans) will disagree (probably because the first has quite a bit more to do with Virtua Fighter in terms of gameplay)

so yeah , youre in the minority, but there is nothing wrong with that

.

Super Mario Bros. 2. I don't care if it's not a Mario game. I have more memories with it because I played it more. It was more fun to me than SMB1.

The Super Mario Bros. series just gets better and better with each entry. I never really understood why Super Mario Bros. 2 is so disliked:( it's an excellent game in my opinion.

i like that SMB1 is faster and the fact that it really started it all. but Smb2 is fun because its totally different and it can be kinda funny. The fact that you have the choice of characters was cool, and I wish they would have done that in SMB3 also.

Yeah many dont consider SMB2 to be a "real" super mario bros game, but it is really just the odd one of the group.

Super Mario Bros over number 2 but 3 eclipses both of them in fact it is the best in the series.

I can't stand Super Mario Bros. U.S.A. I don't know why, I just can't. I guess part of it is that I can't imagine liking a game called Doki Doki more than the first game in my favorite series. But I hate all the other parts about it, for the most part. I won't lie, I wasn't around for the original releases. Not even for Super Mario World. But I did know Super Mario World was a great game from what I had seen on YouTube. I went to a GameStop to get a GameBoy Advance game (I was bent on getting a Mario game, specifically) and while I was looking through, I found Super Mario Advance. I had the fourth one, which of course is just the SNES version of Super Mario Bros 3 (I actually didn't even know these games were remakes at the time, though :P ) and loved it. I figured that this one had to be good! Not to mention that the employee called it by "Super Mario World" when I asked him about it. As I said, I knew it was an amazing gamefrom what I heard online. So I got it. Then I put it in my Game Boy when I got home, played it, and right away noticed that it wasn't even close to what I thought it was. Not only was I disappointed in it in the first place, I, quite bluntly, thought it sucked. Now, this was quite a while ago, and I know better now, but at the time I couldn't appreciate it at all. I like it to some degree now, but not enough to keep it. I ended up trading it for Zelda: Phantom Hourglass last year to my cousin because after all this time, I was still in World 1.

But the worst part is, the single worst part, is that they had Mario and Luigi Superstar Saga. At the time though, I was not educated at all on the Mario franchise except that there was Super Mario Advance, the super-fun platformer games, and then there were thedecent sports games. I got "sports game" out of "Superstar" and avoided it. I was disappointed once more when I learned that it was really a role-playing game (the other type of game I liked at that age) and I ignored it. I haven't seen the game since. :(

Super Mario Bros over number 2 but 3 eclipses both of them in fact it is the best in the series.

chocolate1325

SMB 3 does eclipse them both, but I'd say SMW was the best in the series.

SMB2 is better than SMB1

[QUOTE="chocolate1325"]

Super Mario Bros over number 2 but 3 eclipses both of them in fact it is the best in the series.

Emerald_Warrior

SMB 3 does eclipse them both, but I'd say SMW was the best in the series.

Oh definitely! Super Mario Bros.3 is awesome, but Super Mario Worldis king.

[QUOTE="Emerald_Warrior"]

[QUOTE="chocolate1325"]

Super Mario Bros over number 2 but 3 eclipses both of them in fact it is the best in the series.

Koi-Neon-X

SMB 3 does eclipse them both, but I'd say SMW was the best in the series.

Oh definitely! Super Mario Bros.3 is awesome, but Super Mario Worldis king.

[QUOTE="Koi-Neon-X"]

[QUOTE="Emerald_Warrior"]

SMB 3 does eclipse them both, but I'd say SMW was the best in the series.

Darkman2007

Oh definitely! Super Mario Bros.3 is awesome, but Super Mario Worldis king.

I love that game. One of the best games of that era. But I still feel the "Super" Mario games were better.