Mario transforming into a paper airplane sounds like Yoshi transforming into various modes of transportation in Yoshi's Island...And anything that can be compared to Yoshi's Island will always be a good thing...

Mario raises his left leg and fires an egg at a goomba? What?

Why does it have to be Mario? Don't get me wrong, Paper Mario was great and i'm sure this will be too, but this seems like a good way to start a new franchise.

Quote

---

Why does it have to be Mario?

---

Paper Zelda?

Paper Zelda... Zelda RPG? hmmm... I'm only so familiar with the zelda series, but i do not believe that a zelda rpg has been released... just think of the possibilities!! that game would be a must have on my list!

although referring to the "why mario" comment. I agree, why mario? I haven't had a chance to play a mario rpg but I'm working my way through the mario and luigi rpg and I think that a sequel to that would be much more impelling, oh well, this is only first word, here's hoping!

there are plenty of reasons for us nintendophiles to quibble and quabble over the little things, but it's stuff like this that reminds me why I love nintendo.

Because a game like M&L fits nicely in it's quasi-3d style on the Game Boy...

NO, you are all blasphemers! Paper Mario is one of the greatest games ever!!! I don't even think Mario & Luigi, as great as it was, lived up to Paper Mario.
I will buy this game the day it comes out. I am ecstatic!

What sort of question is "why Mario"? This Paper Mario 2. It's the SEQUEL to Paper Mario. Therefore it wouldn't make much sense to have the sequel be based on something new. Plus the whole real draw of the Mario RPGs is that they star Mario. If they starred someone else I think a lot of the appeal would be gone.

Paper Zelda?! I like the idea of a Zelda RPG but not in the "Paper" style. That just seems too goofy for Zelda in my opinion. If you thought the Wind Waker backlash was big it would be nothing compared to that if Link could fold himself into a paper airplane.

Yeah, only the Mario Universe fits well in "Paper mode"...

I'm much more knowledgable about Mario than Zelda, but after beating Super Mario Sunshine and playing the Wind Waker, I have to agree. Although both games rely heavily on fantasy aspects, something about the Zelda universe seems much better suited for a dark and gritty atmosphere.

well the zelda rpg doesn't have to be in paper form, it was just that the paper zelda idea sparked other ideas of a zelda rpg, and yes mario is more suited for the paper world and Link for a darker world. plainly put I'd love to play a zelda rpg in any way, shape or form despite that fact that some may say they're just milking a franchise, it's what I'd want.
on the paper mario thing, I haven't gotten a chance to get my hands on the cart, but supposing it is that good I guess I'd better hurry and try it out. I'm still not done with mario and luigi, but it quickly became one of my favorites.

I have to agree with "why mario?" The first parper mario had cute visuals keying you in that it was a story about the mario universe. Now that you can actually perform oragami on yourself, I am wishing Nintendo did start a new franchise. This could be a game by itself and doesn't need mario to carry it. That and I want more smash bros. characters.

I've been waiting for a fully 3d cel shaded Paper Mario SEQUEL for a long time. I've been sickened lately by rummors that it might just be a ramake further solidifying GC's reputation of a game collector's system.

I don't mind that the view maybe similar to the original, but I would prefer cel shading to the exact same paper technique. I thought cel shading was mostly inspired by Paper Mario's look.

Unfortunately for us they took the paper gimick one step too far. Paper airplanes? What's the boss? King Kutter? The Evil Scisors? The Big Book of Matches?

At least fire balls will seem like a real threat in this Mario game. Joking aside though, you guys are right. Why do they do this with every idea they come up with. They brainstorm behind a ninety foot tall bullet proof wall for three years until they come up with an idea that has nothing to do with Mairo or Zelda and then tack it on like we won't notice that it could have been an original game with real focus on back packs, or oragami, or sailing the open seas.

I personally found the sailing to be relaxing, but the airplane thing seems a little odd. As much as I like new and unusual ideas I really want to see this before I come to any conclusions.

Hm, a Zelda RPG should be done by Square, they have the style down pretty well. While playing FFCC I noticed a lot of things that seemed to be inspired by Wind Waker (or had the same inspiration as that game). The way enemies disappear into a purple/black cloud, the way your character handles the sword, the way the Moogles look... Especially the Moogles looked like they could have appeared in the Wind Waker.

Hmmm.. I loved the original Paper Mario (at least what I've played of it) so a sequel is good to hear. I just hope that they innovate rather than letting the franchise stagnate like various other Mario spinoffs have..

You didn't play Superstar saga did you?

And how can sports titles innovate without no longer being sports titls?

Avinash: How about new levels instead of only those stadiums that all play the same? Mutators? Optional weapons? If they can't add anything new they shouldn't make the games, simple as that. There's no law forcing them to make a new one every year.

Exactly, KDR. There's nothing that makes me want to buy a $50 sequel that hasn't made substantial improvements over an N64 game I can get for $15.

Don't get me wrong, though. I have high hopes for this Paper Mario 2. Come to think of it, I still need to go back and beat Paper Mario. What I've played of it was extremely entertaining.

Quote

---

Exactly, KDR. There's nothing that makes me want to buy a $50 sequel that hasn't made substantial improvements over an N64 game I can get for $15

---

Guys, I don't think there will be anything to worry about in terms of how different Paper Mario 2 will be. Paper Mario was a substantial improvement over Super Mario RPG and Mario and Luigi was a substantial improvement over Paper Mario, so odds are Paper Mario 2 will be a substantial improvement over Mario and Luigi. I surprised there's any debate over this at all.

I was referring to the sports games.
Either way, I doubt this is just a minor update (hey, noone complained about Jak II or III or all the other sequels that came out or will come out soon). Of course there will be elements from the first game in this, else they wouldn't use the title, but, like almost every sequel, it will have new stuff compared to the first.

Quote

---

(hey, noone complained about Jak II or III or all the other sequels that came out or will come out soon)

---

Quote

---

Originally posted by: nemo_83
I've been waiting for a fully 3d cel shaded Paper Mario SEQUEL for a long time. I've been sickened lately by rummors that it might just be a ramake further solidifying GC's reputation of a game collector's system.

I don't mind that the view maybe similar to the original, but I would prefer cel shading to the exact same paper technique. I thought cel shading was mostly inspired by Paper Mario's look.

Unfortunately for us they took the paper gimick one step too far. Paper airplanes? What's the boss? King Kutter? The Evil Scisors? The Big Book of Matches?

At least fire balls will seem like a real threat in this Mario game. Joking aside though, you guys are right. Why do they do this with every idea they come up with. They brainstorm behind a ninety foot tall bullet proof wall for three years until they come up with an idea that has nothing to do with Mairo or Zelda and then tack it on like we won't notice that it could have been an original game with real focus on back packs, or oragami, or sailing the open seas.

---

Quote

---

Originally posted by: mouse_clicker

Quote

---

(hey, noone complained about Jak II or III or all the other sequels that came out or will come out soon)

---

No one complained about Jak II or Ratchet and Clank 2, no, but everybody always seems to find the time to rail on Nintendo when they don't completely revolutionize a genre with every release.

---

I have no problem with the Jak or Ratchet & Clank series... yet. They were decent games that sold well so I see no problem with releasing a sequel. That's perfectly acceptable. Now that they're making the third game for those series well it's getting a little tiring but I consider three as the limit of sequels for one console so they're still okay. Mario had three NES games to these guys can have three PS2 games. It's when they start releasing 4 or 5 or dare I say 6 on the PS2 then I'll have a problem because that's too many sequels in a short period of time. And odds are most people will feel that way as well and those series will completely lose their selling power. But right now they're okay.

Paper Mario 2 is hardly a result of sequel madness since the first Paper Mario came out three years ago. That's a perfectly acceptable gap. In fact I'd say anything more than that is too big of a gap. It just may seem less new since the last Mario RPG came out only last year but that game plays differently than Paper Mario and is on the a different system so it's okay.

And even if Paper Mario 2 isn't a really innovative game it doesn't have to be. As a sequel it merely has to improve on the original design or at least that's all I need. SSBM for example isn't innovative but it greatly improves on the original's design and sure enough it's one of the best games on the Cube. Quality is just as important as innovation or perhaps even more important. If a game strives to be high quality it will often turn out really good. Innovation however doesn't always guarantee quality. Nintendo tried to innovate with Super Mario Sunshine by adding the water pack elements. In the end that "innovation" didn't make a difference. The game was disappointing because Super Mario 64 was still better. I would rather have a REALLY good but generic Paper Mario sequel than one that's innovative but isn't as fun to play.

Quote

---

Avinash: How about new levels instead of only those stadiums that all play the same? Mutators? Optional weapons? If they can't add anything new they shouldn't make the games, simple as that. There's no law forcing them to make a new one every year

---

I meant sports games like Madden or FIFA... Now, FIFA with vehicles would be fun! Vehicles in Bombing Run would be enough, though...

Quote

---

Originally posted by: GoldShadow1
Exactly, KDR. There's nothing that makes me want to buy a $50 sequel that hasn't made substantial improvements over an N64 game I can get for $15.

---

Quote

---

Originally posted by: NotRimmer

Quote

---

Originally posted by: GoldShadow1
Exactly, KDR. There's nothing that makes me want to buy a $50 sequel that hasn't made substantial improvements over an N64 game I can get for $15.

---

Please tell me where I can find Paper Mario for $15

---

"Exactly, KDR. There's nothing that makes me want to buy a $50 sequel that hasn't made substantial improvements over an N64 game I can get for $15."

I would find this ironic if you like the Final Fantasy series...

Quote

---

I would find this ironic if you like the Final Fantasy series...

---

MC: Uh, thse games improve enough to be considered a "substantial improvement". BTW, SMB 2 was a REALLY bad example.

My interest in this game = 0
My interest in RPG's = 0

Those game were an improvement on the same formula, yes, but offered almost nothing new at all. and how is SMB2 a bad example? I LOVED that game- I played it for hours on end when I was little, and sometimes still pop it into my NES to give it a whirl. One of the best platformers ever, if you ask me, and I'm sure many here agree with me. It really didn't change the Mario formula, either, just the appearance.

Cubed: What a productive comment!

I imagine Super Mario Bros 2 is a bad example because it's technically not even a sequel so it's really total coincidence that it plays similar to other Mario games. It also was quite different in the way it played. Mario and jumping were pretty much the only connections to Super Mario Bros. A lot of the gameplay focused on throwing.

I would also consider Majora's Mask a pretty big change up in the Zelda formula because of the three day thing. That's really unique and a fair bit of people have been turned off of that game because of that major change. I would consider MM to be the perfect example of an innovative concept being successfully integrated into an existing series.

Of course if you're really picky then you might not consider those significant enough enhancements. But if you're going to be like that then Paper Mario 1 isn't all that unique since it borrows the general design of Dragon Warrior or, if you want to go way back, Adventure.

It was no coincidence the American version of SMB2 played almost exactly like Mario anyway- do you really believe Nintendo wouldn't try out the success they had with SMB's style of gameplay in other games? As for Majora's Mask, it's 3 day time limit was just an extension of the day/night cycle in Ocarina of Time- I see it as an important feature to the game, but nothing incredibly innovative.

Quote

---

Originally posted by: NotRimmer

Quote

---

Originally posted by: GoldShadow1
Exactly, KDR. There's nothing that makes me want to buy a $50 sequel that hasn't made substantial improvements over an N64 game I can get for $15.

---

Please tell me where I can find Paper Mario for $15

---

I'm really looking forward to this game, the original was one of the best N64 games. I hope they change the experience system, though.