Mario or Sonic

[Metalheadz]

I personally prefer Mario because his games are more fun and better. His spin-offs are also fun.

Sonic games get old easily in my opinion... It's mainly get from A to B, and thus his spin-offs suck.

[Doodleshark]

Being a PC/PS3 gamer, I override your choices and select Ratchet and Gordon Freeman.




^ Possesses the most badass goatee in EXISTENCE.

I'd pick Mario because his games are slightly better, but in the end both he and Sonic are sellouts. *Proceeds to go on anti-Nintendo rant.*

[Metalheadz]

Being a PC/PS3 gamer, I override your choices and select Ratchet and Gordon Freeman.




^ Possesses the most badass goatee in EXISTENCE.

I'd pick Mario because his games are slightly better, but in the end both he and Sonic are sellouts. *Proceeds to go on anti-Nintendo rant.*

lol, I kinda wish I had a PS3

[Josiah]

Let's see here... Mario is the king of platforming games and kart racing. He's also got some great sports games, puzzle games, and RPGs. While Sonic had a few really cool games...many, many years ago... Yeah, Mario wins hands down. I mean, he's never even been in a bad game (a few so-so ones, but most are very good or better). Sega, on the other hand, seems determined to run Sonic into the ground with one seriously flawed game after another. Poor Sonic, the Genesis games were so good...

[Eclectric]

it's a meeeeya maaaario:3 lol
I agree, mario has been in more good or great games than sonic, and good mario games are still being made.. sonic now it's just... mediocre ones at best.

[Doodleshark]

Yeah, Mario wins hands down. I mean, he's never even been in a bad game (a few so-so ones, but most are very good or better).

I blargh at your statement! Blaaaaaaaaaaaargh!

[Metalheadz]

it's a meeeeya maaaario:3 lol
I agree, mario has been in more good or great games than sonic, and good mario games are still being made.. sonic now it's just... mediocre ones at best.

I've never really like Sonic anyways. the first games were okay, but Mario games have always been good.

[Cheezdude]

No contest.

[Josiah]

Yeah, Mario wins hands down. I mean, he's never even been in a bad game (a few so-so ones, but most are very good or better).

I blargh at your statement! Blaaaaaaaaaaaargh!

Ok, you've got one really obscure bad Mario game that wasn't even made by Nintendo. Compare that to all the bad Sonic games, most of which are made by Sega's Sonic Team.

[Metalheadz]

Yeah, Mario wins hands down. I mean, he's never even been in a bad game (a few so-so ones, but most are very good or better).

I blargh at your statement! Blaaaaaaaaaaaargh!

Ok, you've got one really obscure bad Mario game that wasn't even made by Nintendo. Compare that to all the bad Sonic games, most of which are made by Sega's Sonic Team.

Sonic Adventure 2 was the last good Sonic game, I don't even wanna mention 2006 and beyond...

Mario Galaxy/Sunshine/64 ftw!

[Cheezdude]

I love Super Mario 64 to death. It's my favorite game ever (well, other than RB2) and I've beat it more than 10 times. I also beat Super Mario Galaxy three times as both characters and it's amazing, which is why I'm so excited for SMG2. Sunshine was OK. Couldn't beat most of it until this November and I don't feel like replaying it.

[Josiah]

I liked Sunshine better than 64, actually. Particularily the larger more open levels. Though Galaxy is, in my opinion, the best 3D Mario game hands down.

And I'd like to take issue with Sonic Adventure 2 being good. Playing as Sonic and Shadow was pretty good (a few camera issues aside), Knuckles and Rogue were ok (though not great), but playing as Tails and Robotnic (err, Eggman (I prefer his original name)) was horrible. Especially knowing that Tails outside of that stupid clunky mech can ran nearly as fast as Sonic and fly... Both Adventure and Adventure 2 had their good points, but both also had some characters that were in no way fun to play. And the middling characters (Knuckles, Rogue, that robot in Adventure, etc) weren't bad but didn't really feel like they belonged in a Sonic game either. Sonic games as supposed to be all about running really fast, so why put in characters that just walk around slowly?

[Saber Knight]

I looooved Sonic Adventure 2 Battle. One of my favorite games. Well, I think it was mainly the Chao that I loved.

But, Mario has too many awesome games. Super Mario 64 was my first video game, and it was awesome. Mario wins.

[Metalheadz]

I liked Sunshine better than 64, actually. Particularily the larger more open levels. Though Galaxy is, in my opinion, the best 3D Mario game hands down.

And I'd like to take issue with Sonic Adventure 2 being good. Playing as Sonic and Shadow was pretty good (a few camera issues aside), Knuckles and Rogue were ok (though not great), but playing as Tails and Robotnic (err, Eggman (I prefer his original name)) was horrible. Especially knowing that Tails outside of that stupid clunky mech can ran nearly as fast as Sonic and fly... Both Adventure and Adventure 2 had their good points, but both also had some characters that were in no way fun to play. And the middling characters (Knuckles, Rogue, that robot in Adventure, etc) weren't bad but didn't really feel like they belonged in a Sonic game either. Sonic games as supposed to be all about running really fast, so why put in characters that just walk around slowly?

Other than the spin-offs, sadly, Sonic has NEVER had a game that didn't involve fast running. I absolutely hate the time limits and the rank they give you. I like SA2 but M64 was by far better.

[Josiah]

The old 2D Sonics didn't rank you based on how fast you finished a level, that started with Adventure. You did have a time limit, but it was really long and if it ran out you just lost a life and the timer reset (standard for lots of old 2D games, Mario included), so it was no big deal.

My point wasn't that newer Sonic games don't have fast running, but that you spend such a large portion of the game playing as characters that don't do any fast running (doesn't help that a lot of what said characters do isn't much fun either).