Talk:Mario Bros. (game)

Prequel?
Can anyone confirm that this could be a prequel to Super Mario Bros.? The article says the brothers entered a pipe the enemies were emerging from at the end of the game. Is this true? -- Son of Suns
 * If I remember right, there was a certain history of Mario that stayed very true to the video games, yet filled in small gaps between them with unconfirmed information, such as the one you mentioned. It was one of the top his on Google.com.  Mind you, this was years ago (more than seven), but I could see it having stayed in someone's mind.  I believed it for quite some time myself.  In any case, we are given no reason to believe that the location of this game on the Mario timeline should "go against" the assumption that the games are released in chronological order (with the exception of certain games featuring baby characters).  So, what I'm saying is that yes, it's a prequel to Super Mario Bros. only so far as Donkey Kong was a prequel to Mario Bros. Still though, it makes perfect sense if you consider The Super Mario Bros. Super Show! interpretation that Mario and Luigi came from Brooklyn.  17:23, 4 January 2008 (EST)
 * It's not a prequel at all. A prequel is a SEQUEL that takes place earlier. As this game came out before Super Mario Bros it cannot be a prequel, merely a predecessor.98.243.94.83 19:38, 10 October 2014 (EDT)
 * Don't respond to comments that have a long year period between them. Thanks! – Owencrazyboy9 (talk) 18:01, 17 December 2016 (EST)
 * You too. ;) 17:04, 19 December 2016 (EST)

Article Name
Would anyone else like to see "Mario Bros." as the header to this page, and then the page currently at "Mario Bros." be changed to "Mario Bros. (disambiguation)"? I just feel that more people will search "Mario Bros." looking for this title instead of looking for the characters. 17:23, 4 January 2008 (EST)

? Mushroom
Well, and I were playing the SMB3 battle mode of this game, and we found a ? Mushroom, that makes the Mario switch to where Luigi is, and also switches their current state (eg: If Super Luigi and just Mario were in the game, and Mario or Luigi got a ? Mushroom, Super Luigi would shrink back to Luigi and Mario will become Super Mario.) So, does this have an article, or not just yet?
 * Not that I'm aware of, and I worked on the early part of the glossary and got beyond articles like ? Barrel. I'm pretty sure someone would have made a redirect to the appropriate name if that were the case.  Are you talking about the arcade version or the GBA remake?  21:42, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
 * The SNES one in SMB3, from SMAS+SMW.

That mushroom is exclusive to Super Mario All-Stars. See the report at TMK. "The rare red '?' mushroom item adds a new twist. Here's how it works: If Mario and Luigi are both 'Super' or both small, they will trade places if one of them touches the mushroom. However, if one brother is super and the other is small, it makes the super brother small and the small brother super, and they do not trade places." I'm not sure about the advance ports, but judging from the "new twist" statement it's not in the original SMB3. - 07:12, 26 October 2008 (EDT)

==Who are the other two "mario bros" If you play 4 player on the gameboy advance versions,there are 2 more players that are pallette swaps,are these actuall characters?

Archives
Talk:Mario Bros.-e

Voice Acting
Who voiced the "Classic" and "Battle" options on the GBA multiplayer version? I would upload a sound clip of it but it won't let me yet.

Split Mario Bros. Classic from this article?
Seeing as we have most remakes split, and considering that the GBA remake has a different name from the original, should Mario Bros. Classic be split off this article? I'm planning on making a proposal for this, but first I want to see if the community is in support of this idea. - 16:35, March 25, 2019 (EDT)

Luigi
this is where many people were introduced to Luigi


 * Already in the article. 02:01, July 2, 2020 (EDT)

New York sewer system
Is there a better source that specifies the game's setting as the New York sewer system? The article's current source comes from Miyamoto's quote, "Looking at the setting of that game, it had the feeling of an underground New York sewer system." The impression I get is that it was just his idea from the game concept. Meanwhile, none of the instruction booklets or arcade flyers seem to corroborate with it, and in fact, the blurb in the Atari manuals paints a different picture: "Mario the carpenter and his brother Luigi are hopping mad! The water pipes in their house are blocked with crawling creatures. If the two brothers can’t get rid of them they’ll never take a bath again!" So the setting instead seems to be the Mario Bros.' House, unless that was supposed to be located in New York. LinkTheLefty (talk) 15:06, November 11, 2020 (EST)
 * A 2010 USA Today interview] has Miyamoto states "I think with Mario Bros. we had a setting of course that was underground, so I just decided Mario is a plumber. Let's put him in New York and he can be Italian. There was really no other deep thought other than that.". Glowsquid (talk) 16:08, November 11, 2020 (EST)
 * They decided Mario was Italian later? Though I guess Miyamoto also admits that there isn't a deep thought to it. So how should we take Miyamoto and Atari's story? Should we just write that the house is located in New York, or should we take better note of the difference between settings? LinkTheLefty (talk) 17:05, November 11, 2020 (EST)
 * Well Miyamoto has referred to Mario as "an Italian-American from Brooklyn, New York" as early as 1996 so make of that as you will. Best way to handle it would just to just say it takes place in a sewer and note the differing stories in parantheses imo --Glowsquid (talk) 17:16, November 11, 2020 (EST)

Super Mario Bros. 3 and Game Boy Advance
Lightly touched on above, but moving from this proposal, I definitely think that both the Classic Mario Bros. battle mode in Super Mario Bros. 3 and the Game Boy Advance remake of Mario Bros. are easily transformative enough to split, especially considering Kaettekita Mario Bros. is its own article. LinkTheLefty (talk) 11:51, November 13, 2020 (EST)
 * @LinkTheLefty It would require lots of copying and pasting, and that would be painful. I agree with splitting though. Benjaminkirsc (talk) 17:31, December 6, 2020 (EST)
 * @Benjaminkirsc Not really. I agree on splitting. 17:54, December 6, 2020 (EST)
 * I agree on splitting but I also want a separate article on the All-Stars Battle Game, preferably titled "Battle Game (Super Mario All-Stars)". It's a distinct intermediary of the SMB3 and the SMA versions. --Platform (talk) 13:14, December 24, 2020 (EST)
 * The thing about that is the Super Mario All-Stars manuals (Super Famicom, Super Nintendo, and Wii) group the Battle Game mode under the original minigame, so I think it would be more prudent to split "Classic Mario Bros." and "Mario Bros. (Game Boy Advance)" first, then maybe discuss afterwards if they can be further split into Mario Bros. Classic and Mario Bros. Battle from the former and Battle Game from the latter since it seems about right that they all receive the same treatment. LinkTheLefty (talk) 14:54, January 15, 2021 (EST)

Luigi on the GBA
Nintendo hasn't confirmed Luigi in the GBA remake of Mario Bros. This 'Green Mario' doesn't use the Luigi sprite or voice samples from Super Mario Advance, he just uses Luigi's color palette. However this is still confusing. Just saying. YoshiPrower542 (talk)YoshiPrower542

Port of Mario Bros. for the PC-8001 (the one developed by MISA and published by Westside Soft House) likely a bootleg
The recent discovery of the existence of Mario Bros. Special and Punch Ball Mario Bros. ports for the PC-8001 indicate that the version of Mario Bros. developed by MISA and published by Westside Soft House for the PC-8001 is most likely a bootleg. Westside Soft House also has a history of publishing a bootleg of the arcade game Tron and a prototype of a Xevious bootleg developed by MISA meant to be published by Westside Soft House has also been discovered. ~Cherri of Arctic Circle System (talk) 00:46, January 15, 2022 (EST)
 * Bootlegs scrub away copyright information of the original developers. The packaging, print ad, and title screen for this port labels Nintendo as the copyright holder. MBS and PBMB are entirely different games so they are irrelevant. Ocean Software once published a bootleg of Donkey Kong and yet received rights for DK's European home computer ports a few years later.--Platform (talk) 14:37, April 8, 2022 (EDT)

The "For alternate box art, see the game's gallery." section in the infobox
There are two wrong things with it: One, is that it implies that the image that is there is box art, which is not; it is a flyer. The second is that the "game's gallery" text links to Gallery:Mario Bros. (game), but a "Box art" section doesn't exist in that gallery page.

I am aware that this is both thanks to the template, which has in its code to say , and thanks to this game being an Arcade game, instead of a console game like most of the games in this wiki.

To "solve" that, various ideas come to my mind. The first one would be to directly create a "Box art" section in the gallery and change the header image from a flyer to a box art, but I don't think that it would be ideal. Then I think about the option of doing something in the actual "Mario Bros. (game)" page (not the Gallery or infobox template pages) to change that text below the image, and thus changing "For alternate box art" to something like "For alternate 'main images'" or something like that, and changing the link of the Gallery either to the Promotional material or Hardware and box art sections, but I don't know if that can be done because that would depend if the infobox template itself has that option, which I don't think that it does. So another option would be to edit the template to either modify the  parameter to make something like   for arcade games, or to directly add a parameter like   to write at will what the text of that image displays, but I am not sure about which option, nor know if there is a better option in any case.

So, do you think that that text alluding that the flyer is box art, and that links to an nonexistent section in the gallery should be leaved as is, or should be changed? And if changed, in what way? -Kirbeat (talk) 15:46, February 12, 2022 (EST)

Split SMB3 "Mario Bros.", SMAS "Classic Mario Bros.", GBA "Mario Bros.", and/or "Luigi Bros." into their own articles
We are covering numerous versions of the game in a very awkward mixed-together way. This proposal aims to rectify this by splitting the later ports and remakes that are included as sub-games in later releases (since there's no reason to split the many home console ports that every arcade game and their respective metaphorical grandma got in the early 80s). These are more akin to GBDK or (quite literally!) SMA in this regard, which we do have split; this also gets rid of the awkwardness of SMB3's page listing the miniscule amount of battle mode enemies amidst the main game's. There are multiple ways to go about this, depending on whether one wants to split the SMB3 and SMAS SMB3 versions from each other and whether to split Luigi Bros. at all since it's a title and P1 color change from NES Mario Bros. release 1.

Proposer: Deadline: April 22, 2022, 23:59 GMT

====Split all into four new articles (,, , and )====
 * 1) - Seems the most comprehensive
 * 2) Per Doc von Schmeltwick.
 * 3) We currently split different platform versions of games, I feel like this is the most consistent choice.
 * 4) All four are different variations, so I would go with this option as well
 * 5) Per Doc von Schmeltwick.
 * 6) Second choice.
 * 7) This sounds like a good alternative to the (useless) former Mario Bros. stage article.

Split covering both Super Mario Bros. 3 and Super Mario All-Stars,, and

 * 1) I think splitting a minigame remake of a minigame remake is going a bit far, but otherwise per proposal.
 * 2) - Per what LTL said in the comments.

Split, , and , but NOT Luigi Bros.

 * 1) - Secondary choice
 * 2) I disagree with creating a combined  article since one of the two modes is exactly the same as, but with updated graphics. I think it should be replaced with , which is unique. Regarding LinkTheLefty's concern about the GBA article, we don't need to split the GBA modes into two separate articles as both are distinct from all other variations of MB. "Luigi Bros." is just the Arcade Classic Series version with a new title and a sprite swap.

Split covering both Super Mario Bros. 3 and Super Mario All-Stars and, but NOT Luigi Bros.

 * 1) Per proposal.
 * 2) Per above, which seemed like a clear-cut discussion. I'm hesitant to split "Classic Mario Bros." further, especially without giving the same treatment to the "Mario Bros. Classic" and "Mario Bros. Battle" modes of the Game Boy Advance version. As mentioned, the Super Mario All-Stars manual essentially treats the Battle Game as a different flavor of "Classic Mario Bros." rather than a wholly separate thing. Furthermore, I'd argue that "Luigi Bros." has no business here when "Super Luigi Bros." exists, and should really be part of a different proposal altogether.
 * 3) - Per LTL.

Comments
I'm a little confused. "Classic Mario Bros." in All-Stars, which had the same Japanese name as in the original Super Mario Bros. 3 manual, is used here as an umbrella term referring to both the "Mario Bros." game (there referred to as a Battle Mode) and the added Battle Game mode (accessible via title screen). So the options in which those two are split should probably be "Mario Bros. (Super Mario Bros. 3)" [or maybe "Battle Mode (Super Mario Bros. 3)"] and "Battle Game (Super Mario All-Stars)". Also, as minigames, they don't need to be italicized (see retro-style microgames). The above discussion didn't bring up "Luigi Bros.", which I really think should be paired with a "Super Luigi Bros." split more than this one. Can you add an option for splitting "Classic Mario Bros." and "Mario Bros. (Game Boy Advance)", but not "Luigi Bros."? I feel that's most reflective of the above discussion. Honestly I was pretty close to getting around to this soon, to be frank I think that got enough support to split via discussion since I believe the more contentious matter that could've been addressed later is whether or not the "Classic Mario Bros." modes and the Game Boy Advance "Mario Bros. Classic" and "Mario Bros. Battle" modes should be split further. LinkTheLefty (talk) 10:13, April 8, 2022 (EDT)
 * That's options 2 and 4. Isn't the title screen-accessed mode the only MB in either SMB3 or SMAS, or is there a substantially different version in the main game's 2P mode? I've only single-playered it, so that possibility never even occurred to me. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:58, April 8, 2022 (EDT)
 * What are the proposed titles for the splits of "Classical Mario Bros." I am not in favor of that title as it sounds very confusing.--Platform (talk) 14:53, April 8, 2022 (EDT)
 * "Classic Mario Bros." is the official title of the SMAS one according to the article. I guess we could change both SMB3's and SMAS's to "Battle Mode ([game])," though that wouldn't cover cooperative (which I see as more of a "game type A" and "game type B" thing). Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 14:57, April 8, 2022 (EDT)
 * Super Mario All-Stars contains both the original Super Mario Bros. 3 version accessed via world map panel in 2 Player and a new, revamped version on the title screen. It's basically a direct predecessor to the Mario Bros. for Game Boy Advance, sharing a lot of the same assets. The All-Stars manual groups them together under the name "Classic Mario Bros.", which is the name that the Super Mario Bros. 3 (Japanese) manual used. Basically, All-Stars considers "Battle Game" to be an extension of the Super Mario Bros. 3 minigame, similar to how the "Mario Bros. Classic" and "Mario Bros. Battle" modes are considered different flavors of the Game Boy Advance Mario Bros. Hope that makes sense. LinkTheLefty (talk) 16:27, April 8, 2022 (EDT)

I am in favor of an article that focuses exclusively on the All-Stars Battle Game in the main menu. There is no point in creating a combined article for both versions since the 2-player mode's version has the exact gameplay found in SMB3. Using the principle of once and only once, the more SMB3 faithful mode should only be given passing mention in and .--Platform (talk) 14:53, April 9, 2022 (EDT)
 * Makes sense to me. Once again I was unaware SMAS had two substantially different versions since I never had a player 2. I have amended the titles in the options, which ultimately keeps the intent of the proposal the same with more concise wording. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:04, April 9, 2022 (EDT)
 * The problem is that the Super Mario Bros. 3 one is literally a card-catching/turn-swapping minigame within the main game, and the "faithful" Mario Bros. screen is only one of several scenarios. There's also a Wrecking Crew-esque screen, and another screen with coins and other objects flowing out of a pipe that doesn't really resemble anything else. Also, it's not really "once and only once" if the information remains spread across multiple articles. The point is to have a dedicated page to contain the content. LinkTheLefty (talk) 15:10, April 9, 2022 (EDT)
 * OK so how should I word it then? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:13, April 9, 2022 (EDT)
 * Looks fine, Doc. I meant to direct that above you, but I think I misunderstood and thought Platform was saying to just split the Battle Game. LinkTheLefty (talk) 15:21, April 9, 2022 (EDT)
 * Just to clarify what I meant by faithful: The in-game SMAS mode is faithful to SMB3's mode, not the original arcade version. They have the same gameplay.--Platform (talk) 15:26, April 9, 2022 (EDT)
 * I see. I still think the "Mario Bros. Battle" mode is directly analogous to Battle Game. The gameplay of both has more in common with each other than the respective game's other mode: it has five rounds to win (same conditions; either first to get five coins or last one standing), the same round music and similar results screens, gimmick overlap, etc. It's the competitive counterpart to "Mario Bros. Classic" mode (which can also be played in multiplayer). All in all, the same arguments apply for the GBA Mario Bros. LinkTheLefty (talk) 16:06, April 9, 2022 (EDT)

Better images
Now the above proposal to split the article has passed, I suggest finding better images to differentiate the various versions. All images should have both brothers. The more peculiarities crammed into the picture, the more informative it is. --Platform (talk) 11:26, April 23, 2022 (EDT)
 * Arcade: An image with Shellcreepers and one other type of target enemy (preferably in different color forms), both types of fireballs, Freezie, and icicles
 * NES: same as above but without the icicles of course
 * SMB3 (both NES and in-game All-Stars): Spinies and Fighter Flies, fireballs, cards in inventory, and at least one loose card; images for all bonus rounds
 * All-Stars Battle Game: Spinies and one other target enemy, Koopa Troopa, ? Kinoko, Boos, one brother is super form with the other being small
 * GBA: Classic image should have 4 players with both POW blocks, both types of fireballs, Freezie, and icicles. 4-player Battle image should have Bowser, players in super and small forms, one player being held by another, one charging for a squat jump, and fireballs. 2-player Battle image should have a heart or starman and Bowser.
 * Luigi Bros.: similar to NES

So...
Why haven't the versions of Mario Bros. the proposal is going to split, been split already? 10:01, March 30, 2023 (CST)
 * I would do it but there are some things holding me back. First, I would like better images as I mentioned above. The current ones don't convey the uniqueness of each iteration. Second, the GBA version is missing a sprite for the Star. It's a very specific sprite that is different from the one used in the main game(s). I can't get a clean rip of it at the correct resolution. I don't want to use a "no image available" placeholder. Finally, bin needs to be split but it requires a vote. The proposal could be quite complicated as there are many different ways to split it. I'm also too busy to monitor the vote.--Platform (talk) 12:52, March 31, 2023 (EDT)