The VG Resource

As anyone could already tell you, Nintendo's two top gaming franchises are Mario and Zelda. One is a collection of platforming games (and the occasional RPG and sports game), while the other is about exploring the world (even if you have to do it in a certain way to advance the story). Both game series are good, but I was wondering which one do you like better. I know the whole deal is basically comparing apples and oranges, but some people like platforming games over adventure games and vice versa.


For my opinion without going into personal problems, I love Zelda over Mario. The stories appeal to me, it's fun to explore the world without a death timer (Majora's Mask is an exception, but you have a way of dealing with that), the rang of enemies is far wider, each game has its own art style, and the characters are unforgettable! That's what I like about it in a nutshell.

Even though I first played Super Mario 64 before Ocarina of Time, I remember enjoying the Zelda games and fantasizing about them over the Mario games.

Both of them.

I'm not really picky with choosing one or the other since they're both pretty great equally in their own unique way.

I pretty much agree with Diogalesu, it's difficult to choose one over the other.

See, Mario's awesome because he's essentially the father of platforming, and although the NSMB games have become a bit infamous for being uncreative, they're still fun to play as what they are: a graphics revamp of the original SMB, plus a couple of extras. Then you also have the M&L RPG series, which is one of my favourite series of anything, ever. SS was awesome in just about every way, and they just keep on getting better.

On the other hand, the LoZ games are also a blast to play. Link's Awakening has a gigantic nostalgia factor for me, and it's one of the few games I've played through multiple times. The Oracle games are also fantastic, as well as the lone GBA game, Minish Cap (Four Swords doesn't count). Also, PH and ST are two of my favourite games on the DS. The former had a couple of sizeable flaws, but the latter pretty much fixed these.

Both series have a few downsides for me as well, though. I played Super Mario 64 a while back, and didn't really get too far. It was some time ago though, so I do want to pick up the DS port and see how that goes.
Ocarina of Time I also haven't gotten far in. I'm currently up to the Forest Temple in the 3DS version and, while I do want to get further and experience the rest of the game, I just somehow don't really have much motivation.
Both of these could be due to the 3rd-person perspective, one that I'm not a great fan of on consoles. I dunno.

That said; I haven't really played many of either series, or at least not as many as other people here. From my point of view though, they're both great in their own ways.
However, for the sake of the poll I'll choose Mario (the M&L series tips the scales ever so slightly).

Easily Zelda, and not just because it feels like we've been bombarded with Mario lately.

Windwaker >>>>>>> Any Mario game, Yes even Super Mario Sunshine.

(07-20-2013, 12:31 AM)Radular Raptor Wrote: [ -> ]Windwaker

You all make me feel loved on the inside

Well, they are both different types of games, so I can't really say one is better than the other. Mario has some good points and so does Zelda. I enjoy Zelda games better because I like thinking a lot about what I should do on a puzzle.

mario actually has good games still.

I love Mario's universe more than Zelda's. It cartoony and fun and it has loads of characters I love. I love Zelda's universe too! But not as much as Mario's. However I prefer the exploration and interaction based gameplay of Zelda better than Mario's basic platforming.

That being said, I sometimes wish Mario was more like Zelda. It would be paradise to freely roam the Mushroom Kingdom, seeing all my favorite characters and interacting with them, jumping and leaping everywhere I see fit!

I like Mario's games better than Zelda's. I'm not saying they're not as good, but the way Mario games are setup, you can keep playing them over and over again, but with the Zelda games after you get that last heart container(or give up on number 18), you won't be able to play that one again(and have fun with it) till like 1-4 years later(so you'll forget the puzzles, a little bit of the levels, story's messed up forever though). I played Mario 3 and Mario World for a long time after I beat it, and I still play New Super Mario Bros. DS to this day playing the levels on normal and challenge mode, and I haven't started a new file once.

Oh my gosh! I've realized why Mario Games don't have real stories!

I don't know, both series make strong points.

In one, it proves that you don't need a strong story to have strong gameplay, while the other shows that a strong story can bring a special flair to already strong gameplay.


If I'm being forced to make a decision between the two, Mario is my end all be all.
The gameplay is timeless, and more importantly for me, it has multiplayer implements.

The reason Mario is so important to me is that it holds a connection between my family
members. Since we were young children, my brother and I have been playing SMB3
together. We've grown 20+ years since then, but whenever we meet up, which isn't
as often as I'd like, we break out that dusty old NES and have a couple play-throughs
of SMB3. (you have to do at least two in a sitting, so as to use all those P-wings on the
replay)

I love Zelda, but it's always been a singular experience, and so It just doesn't hold as fond
of memories.

tldr - so yeah, mario for me

I just realized how odd I am. Unlike most people I love Mario for it's universe more than it's gameplay, and love Zelda for it's gameplay more than it's universe! I'm reverse of your average opinion!

Mario games lost their replay value for me at the first New Super Mario Bros/Super Mario Galaxy, whereas I can replay all but four of the Zelda games right now and still enjoy them.

Basically, my problem with Mario games is that they've stagnated. Each game used to have its own unique gameplay and physics, enough to actually feel like different games. The 2D series has boiled down to: Super Mario Bros, Super Mario USA, Super Mario Bros 3, Super Mario World, Yoshi's Island, New Super Mario Bros, New Super Mario Bros again (disregard if you only play multiplayer), New Super Mario Bros yet again, New Super Mario Bros with multiplayer again.

Likewise, the 3D games are: 64, Sunshine, Galaxy, Galaxy again, Galaxy yet again, and I have some hope for 3D World.

With Zelda, sure there's a formula but the story, characters and lore keep it interesting. Mario platformers lost that advantage years ago. Sadly, it seems the RPGs will too.

Mario for me.
Sure, the games have stagnated... a lot, but I find myself playing these games multiple times. For Zelda, I'm done after getting 99%. If it's too much trouble to get that last 1% or so, I won't bother. It's not that I don't find the experience great. It's that after 1 run (or 2 in Oracle's case) I've seen it. It's just getting the rest of the stuff which are ultimately useless, since I've already beaten Ganon(dorf) (I've already met my last goal).

Zelda, because Link isn't claustrophobic, getting killed in one or two hits, and it's fun actually slashing things. Though I wish the series adopted an RPG system like GodSlayer/Crystalis. I guess that's the reason I can make my own games then...to fulfill my want for more, as well as interactive story telling powers~

I prefer Link's original design though; brown hair, sleeves and pants. It looked the best out of all of them.