I feel that Nintendo hasn’t made a good Mario game since… 3D world on the 3DS/wiiU and before that… Mario Galexy and then… since Paper Mario on the original Wii. those games were in my opinion the best of what Mario has to offer as it was originally intended. Fun, colorful cartoony, and exciteing.
born in year 1999 and my first Mario game was Super Mario advance 2 super mario world for the gba, then New super mario bros ds, I didn’t actually get to play Super Mario 64 untill I got it on the wii virtual console. But the way I remember super mario world on the gba, including the cover art it was amazing. even looking at it now it just looks so nice. I was atleast 5 or 6 when I got into Mario, I use to be a big fan of Mario generally untill I realised Mario games were slowly losing the vibe from past, if not entirely.
I feel one of the main reason I know so much about Mario now is because back then I would go on the Wii consoles internet channel and google search about all the Mario games, and other times I would just go on the Wii shop channel and explore. Was a good time for me as a Mario fan.
apropos of nothing, have you ever tried to actually get your jaws around someone else's head? you can't really open your mouth enough to do more than scrape the skin - biting someone's skull open would probably not be possible.
As an aside to what others have already pointed out about “braaaiiiiinss” originating in Return of the Living Dead, the zombies in that film also aren’t mindless. They can still think and feel, and they crave brains because it (somehow) eases the pain they feel from their bodies decaying.
It’s an element of zombie lore that I really wish was used more often because it makes becoming a zombie even more frightening. They’re also totally immortal beyond cremation, so no aiming for the head to put them out of their misery.
The first and third Return of the Living Dead movies are my favourite zombie films ever. The second is… fine. It’s basically a remake of the first focused more on comedy like Evil Dead 2, but it didn’t really work for me. The two latest movies throw out all of the unique elements of the series to become generic zombie movies and aren’t worth watching.
The sliced up dog returning to life was a messed up scene and also pushed the movie in the magic realm. This version of Zombies can never die, even after total bodily annihilation.
Not OP, but I get your comparison since Land of the dead goes into something similar with zombies remembering stuff. That being said (in case you didn’t knew) Land of the Dead is not a standalone movie, and is in fact from the original non-voodoo zombie movie universe. A lot of the criticism I see towards Land of the Dead comes from people who watched the movie in isolation and complain about it never explaining zombies and why they can do things, but that’s almost like watching Matrix 3 and complaining they never explained the Matrix.
If you like that concept it’s gradually built in the series, so other movies feature it in one way or another. The original Night of the Living Dead introduced the concept of zombies; The sequel Dawn of the Dead already painted a picture where zombies brains remember something, since it’s pointed out they go to the shopping mall and drag carts around because that’s what they did when living; Day of the Dead is entirely focused on a research project on zombie behaviour, with a scientist doing experiments to see how much zombies still remember; then finally you get to Land of the Dead.
Sorry I went out on a rant about it, but I love those movies, they’re not only great horror movies that defined an entire genre but also are very strong criticism to society and humans in general which I think a lot of other zombie movies miss entirely.
It was good but not my one of my favourites. The zombies are developing a form of intelligence and are empathetic to each other, but that’s used to contrast with the cruelty of the humans living in Fiddler’s Green. It makes the zombies sympathetic, but they aren’t in perpetual suffering like RotLD’s zombies. There’s just something really creepy to me about a mostly decayed corpse saying it can feel itself rot.
I think Land of the Dead is very similar to I Am Legend where the “monsters” form their own society, which is fitting because Romero based his zombies off of the creatures in The Last Man on Earth which was in turn based on I Am Legend.
on the nes Mario started as a 2d platformer, and on the SNES, Mario evolved to the hardware and possibilities of the hardware and while introducing new characters it and powerups it stayed to its roots, on the N64 Mario went 3D because that was essentially the point of the next gen consoles and the game was great, although dated now, after came super Mario sunshine for the gamecube, what happened here? why didn’t we get a real 3d Mario platforming game on the Gamecube instead of this water cleaning mess, this is when Nintendo started downgrading the Mario games from their true pottential. Then on the Wii, while Mario Galexy would had been better as a spin off, not that it’s a bad game, it feels more like a spinoff or small experiment when you look at the history of the games. Sunshine also seems to had been a small experiment.
The problem with Super Mario Wonder isn’t the game itself. I would even say it’s the best 2d Mario game of all time. But you’re telling me this couldn’t had been done on the Wii U or the Wii? It shouldn’t be $60 because the game is so basic being 2d. Now if it was 2.5 d looking as vibrant and exciting, then we’d be going somewhere, because then it would look more like something form the Super Smash Bros Brawl campain. But as it is, it doesn’t take advantage of the hardware that I bought, which would be fine if it wasn’t a full $60.
I agree with your point that 3d Mario games suck, because they do. Why tho? because it appears to me that Nintendo abandoned making real 3D Mario platforing games since the N64, everything after, while it may be 3d- either it has a special gimmick or- they over simplify the 3D platforming viewing experience. While Super Mario 64 may not be HD, it looks more interesting as a 3d platformer then say Super Mario 3d world, due to it being soo over simplified for even the Wii U console specs. Not all the games are necessarily bad, but they aren’t complete Mario experiences, alot of them are games that are trying to sell a gimmick, rather then the ip itself. Mario Sunshine started the trend with the water flood tank.
You clearly feel a lot more strongly about this than I do.
Life is too short to play bad games. Mario wonder wasn’t a bad game for me.
If your gripe is more with nintendo’s increasingly poor value proposition, predatory consumer practices and litigious bullshit then there’s more of a conversation to be had. I’d suggest your best revenge tools at this point are called Yuzu and Ryujinx.
Mario Wonder is not a bad game, to me it’s just a little too late for a game like this, this could had been done easily on the last gen console, the Wii U when I was more open to the Mario games then most people because everyone was playing on the XBox 360 and Ps3, I was one of the real Mario game supporters of that console generation. but then… the Wii U happened… and then… all you would get on the switch were Wii U ports… besides odyssey. and now when the switch is about to be replaced by the next console soon, they finally make a new Mario game that’s actually good and charge full price for it.
I will never say that Mario wonder is a bad game, it’s a great game, if you have fun with it that’s great, I personally would have fun playing it myself. However, the point is not that the game is bad, it’s that it’s not as good as it should be for the hardware that the game is running on. I’m not expecting it to be like GTA quality, but I’m kinda rather expecting something in the mix of super Mario 64 and Super Mario sunshine but better for next gen. That’s my idea of a real Mario game.
I feel your frustration. I played New Super Mario Bros. Wii (2009) on an emulator recently and then New Super Mario Bros. 2 (2012). They’ve literally been selling the same game over and over again for full price for 15 years.
I guess I just take this in another direction. I don’t yearn for some new fangled mario with better graphics, I just accept that I’m not going to pay for the same product over and over again.
Your the only one that could meet half way and understand atleast where I am coming from. I don’t buy the Mario games, instead I just bought Toree 3D, Toree 2 and kiwi 64, 3 great 3D platformers although short, from this indie dev Siactro on the switch. Toree 3d and Toree 2 were both $1.00 each and kiwi 64 was $3 and kiwi 64 was shockingly good for the 3 dolar price tag. It was just short.
It's a 2D platformer. Technology is no longer the limitation.
That's the reason the value proposition is so bad, too. It's not that there's anything inherently wrong with any of the 2D Mario (or the rest of their 2d side scroller catalogue). It's that they're charging full AAA game price for content any indie can match at everything but the specific IP (and many do better).
Some of their ideology helps their games last the test of time reasonably well, and they're the biggest publisher that's so heavy in 2D side scrolling stuff, but the reality is that it's now so easy for a solo dev to publish in an extremely polished format that there's very little they could do that would justify their price point.
I think everyone has already covered the fact that it depends on which kind of zombie you’re talking about, since the only “real” zombies aren’t actually undead at all, and are certainly not mindless.
But! Even within the brain hungry zombie type, there would be plenty of reasons to target something other than the head!
First, the chances of attacking a living person, getting through their skull, and to the brain in a single attack are low. So, attacking other parts of the body in order to prevent the prey from escaping is a good idea.
If you then assume that the zombies will want living brains, rather than freshly dead, the guts are the ideal target. See, if you can get the living human down, and tear into their guts, they’ll be immobilized for the most part, but their heart should stay beating for at least a few minutes. This gives your brain eating zombie much better chances of having a bit of live brain. So, even if they’re too weak to crack the skull and eat quickly, if you have time, you can make it happen anyway.
Now, you probably were seeing one of the varieties of zombie fiction where their hunger is for either flesh in general and human by preference, or specifically for human flesh.
The walking dead zombies were flesh eaters in general, they were shown to eat deer and horse for sure, but seemed to prefer human when available. And there were a good number of scenes where they were seen digging into the abdomen. While Robert Kirkman has never given real details about how and why his zombies function as they do, we know two things for sure: First, they can function even when their body isn’t fully intact; second that they have a constant hunger for flesh that will drive them to attempt to eat, no matter what happens to the rest of them. Indeed, severed zombie heads can still try and eat.
So, you run into zombies in that world that may not be at full strength, but can drag down the living in numbers. They then crawl their way to the meat and gnaw.
But, the reason why walking dead zombies often go for the soft parts rather than arms and legs isn’t an in-universe thing, it’s practical. Zombies tearing the guts out of a victim looks cooler, and it’s easier to make effects for. Making a believable leg eating prop is a lot harder.
There’s also been versions of zombies where they have residual capacity for thinking, and memories. When that’s the case, you could be dealing with the mind that’s left going for a target that’s easier to chew into, as compared to a skull. The throat and belly are the most vulnerable targets available for human teeth that will kill or immobilize in a reasonable span of time.
Movies? Look, I’m asking for a friend, he’s been at McDonald’s for like 45 minutes and the manager keeps refusing him brains. I just want an ice cream cone.
Does judging books by their cover count? Seems like in the same vein…
In the 90s, I avoided Lois McMaster Bujold’s Vorkosigan series books because the Baen covers were awful, and at the time she hadn’t written books for any other publisher so I didn’t get introduced to her via that route. In the 2010s I finally read her books…and I was mad as hell that they’d put such ugly covers on them back in the day, because I would’ve been crazy about this series in the 90s!
in the same vein, I’m so glad they reprinted Glen Cook’s Black Company books, because no one I tried to get interested in them would read them with the old covers. I’m not sure even I did. I certainly can’t imagine I deliberately chose to pick up a book with this cover.
I used to! I picked up a set of Black Co at a used book store to try and loan out. finally didn’t come back after I “lost” the cover and apologized for the state of the book I was loaning. but got another convert, so a win in my book.
My own? Or that of others? Ignorance is usually fixable, learn what you need to. Incompetence can often be remedied through practice. Nobody starts out knowledgeable or competent.
If it’s someone else’s incompetence and it’s affecting me (like we had an A/P person at work who could not get one vendor paid at the right amount, ever, and it was making my job harder) I usually look at the systems around the person, thinking things should be set up to avoid human error - people are often asked to do things that don’t make sense. For example, to keep the same example - “make sure you don’t pay an invoice twice if it’s sent to us twice”. I mean, sure, but the system should be preventing that, people are always going to fuck it up.
Long answer but I generally approach it thinking people aren’t trying to do bad work, and certainly not doing bad work to annoy me, there is something in their way.
It has the second highest concentration in the body, after the skull. Since the human bite force is not strong enough to penetrate the human skull the zombies are actually targeting the next best area to eat brains.
asklemmy
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.