|
|
Post by cheat-master30 on Aug 20, 2010 9:20:01 GMT -5
And character alignment is that Dungeons and Dragons personality thing TV Tropes users like to mention characters as is. For example, Lawful Good means the character pretty much obeys/enforces the letter of the law at all costs, and Chaotic Evil means they pretty much act for the evulz. tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CharacterAlignmentFor example, from TV Tropes they consider: Mario = Neutral Good Peach = Lawful Good Bowser = Neutral Evil Wario = Chaotic Neutral/Good Donkey Kong = Chaotic Good Presumably Dark Star/Dimentio/Shadow Queen = Chaotic Evil So, alignments for others? Presumably Smithy might be Lawful Evil, or at least the Factory staff might be. Fawful is likely Chaotic Evil etc. |
|
|
|
Post by Koopalmier on Aug 20, 2010 10:03:33 GMT -5
Mario = Neutral Good
Luigi = Neutral Good
Peach = Lawful Good
Bowser = Neutral Evil
Donkey Kong = Chaotic Good
Yoshi = Neutral Good
Wario = Chaotic Neutral
Waluigi = Chaotic Evil
Daisy = Chaotic Good
Toad = True Neutral
Toadsworth = Lawful Neutral
Chancellor = Lawful Neutral
E. Gadd = True Neutral
Rosalina = Neutral Good
Kamek = Lawful Evil
Kammy Koopa = Lawful Evil
Bowser Jr. = Neutral Evil
RPG villains:
Smithy = Lawful Evil
The Shadow Queen = Chaotic Evil
Dimentio = Chaotic Evil
Cackletta = Chaotic Evil
Fawful = Chaotic Evil
Princess Shroob = Chaotic Evil
Elder Princess Shroob = Chaotic Evil
Midbus = Chaotic Evil
Dark Star = Chaotic Evil
|
|
|
|
Post by PDoogan on Aug 20, 2010 12:49:35 GMT -5
I'm not that familiar with the whole D&D thing, but I do have a kind of non-mario related question about it.
What would you consider someone who isn't inherently evil, but does evil things because they're told to? (Kind of like Team Rocket's pokemon)
|
|
|
|
Post by Sarisa on Aug 20, 2010 13:05:55 GMT -5
Lemmy seems to be Chaotic Neutral and Iggy seems to be Chaotic Evil. The other Koopalings act Neutral Evil.
|
|
|
|
Post by SMBBQ on Aug 22, 2010 17:00:12 GMT -5
How exactly is DK chaotic good? What does that even mean?
|
|
|
|
Post by Sarisa on Aug 22, 2010 17:52:26 GMT -5
I'm not that familiar with the whole D&D thing, but I do have a kind of non-mario related question about it. What would you consider someone who isn't inherently evil, but does evil things because they're told to? (Kind of like Team Rocket's pokemon) The normative analysis is that if the creature is incapable of understanding humanoid morality, the creature is true neutral; it cannot be good, evil, lawful, or chaotic. Now, D&D itself doesn't always pay attention, but if Pokemon have no sense of morality, they do not have an alignment. Insane/deeply traumatized humans, though, are assumed to have an alignment at any level of mental maturity (D&D does not deal much with the morality of characters below the age of reason). Creatures intelligent enough to talk are usually given an alignment as well - D&D is humanocentric. |
|
|
|
Post by Koopalmier on Aug 22, 2010 18:12:34 GMT -5
How exactly is DK chaotic good? What does that even mean? Whenever there's a problem, he goes and breaks (see: kill) everything (-one) on his way for teh lulz. Look at Donkey Kong Jungle Beat. Although I'm not sure about the DKC view of the character... |
|
|
|
Post by SMBBQ on Aug 22, 2010 18:47:35 GMT -5
DKC portrays DK as a laidback, somewhat lazy ape who only leaps into action when his friends and/or bananas are in trouble. Whereas DKJB and MariovsDK portray DK as a bumbling idiot wholikes to steal toys and solves his problems by punching things.
I think we can tell which version sucks.
|
|
|
|
Post by EpicGyllynn on Aug 24, 2010 16:46:59 GMT -5
But... I liked JB and MvsDK... Long live Mini Mayhem... Anybody...  |
|
|
|
Post by Vent on Aug 24, 2010 19:34:53 GMT -5
Eh. Jungle Beat was a cool concept but otherwise had crapola to do with the Donkey Kong mythos, DK's portrayal included. The Mario vs. DK series is equally "bleh", especially since they decided to turn the whole thing into a Lemmings clone come the second game.
|
|
|
|
Post by SMBBQ on Aug 24, 2010 20:30:43 GMT -5
Don't forget the fact that MariovsDK was a watered-down clone of DK'94, which was better to begin with. As for it's sequels, why would DK (who has a girlfriend) be kidnapping Pauline?
|
|
|
|
Post by Koopalmier on Aug 25, 2010 0:48:36 GMT -5
If I remember well, it was officially said (I can't remember where) that DK:JB was justely made to show a more mature version of the character. But it's still the same, just from another point of view. On the other side, the Mario vs. DK series takes EVERY character the wrong way, and can be considered non-canon for the moment. It went from a cool platformer to a puzzle game anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by Artemendo on Aug 25, 2010 1:24:02 GMT -5
First off, the Mario vs. DK series has always been puzzle games with platform elements. Second, why are the characters "wrong"? Because Mario talks? He talks in every kart and sports game, also at the end of SM64, SMS, SMG... Is it because Mario gets angry, but at the end he's like, "aww, Donkey Kong, don't cry" and they're friends again? It's been that way since Donkey Kong 94, too. Seriously, only the original Donkey Kong and DK Jr. had them as actual enemies. Is it because Donkey Kong is a stupid ape? That's Miyamoto's original concept of the character.
|
|
|
|
Post by Koopalmier on Aug 25, 2010 1:28:40 GMT -5
Yes, but now there's no more platform, that's the problem. The game being a spin-off of DK '94 was a good idea at first.
The characters are wrong because Mario talks TOO MUCH. In other games, even when he talks, he doesn't talk too much. Also because DK kidnapped Pauline when he already has a girlfriend. And I wonder why did Mario opened MULTIPLE theme parks about Mini-Marios yet doesn't seem to be much richer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Artemendo on Aug 25, 2010 1:35:32 GMT -5
You know, maybe Miyamoto lets DK kidnap Pauline because he hates the DKC characters such as Candy and wants to slowly "push them out" of canon. In his mind, DK is a big ape brute who kidnaps human girls, not a hero with his own girlfriend.
|
|
|
|
Post by Koopalmier on Aug 25, 2010 1:42:30 GMT -5
He can't push the whole DKC series out of the canon. Considering that's the "main column" of the DK series, it'd be like if someone tried to push the Wario Land series out of the canon. And he already tried in Mario Tennis 64. But, anyway, because the DKC series is obviously the canon one, the MvsDK series is not canon... for now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Artemendo on Aug 25, 2010 1:46:34 GMT -5
Yeah... "for now". We'll see how DKCR fares, and if there isn't a sequel, DKC is officially dead and we'll only see those characters in stupid spin-offs. One might argue DKCR is a stupid spin-off already, what with the lack of Kremlings...
|
|
|
|
Post by SMBBQ on Aug 25, 2010 7:19:40 GMT -5
Actually, Miyamoto said in a semi-recent interview that he actually liked DKC, and even worked closely with Rare when they were developing it.
Why would DK:JB be a different take on DK? If anything, it was a disgrace. No storyline at all while DK beats up Yoshi's Story rejects.
Maybe it's because I love the DKC series so much, but I react strongly to these games. (In a bad way, if you couldn't tell by now)
|
|
|
|
Post by Koopalmier on Aug 25, 2010 7:47:17 GMT -5
There was a story. The "kongs" you fight in this game try to take over DK Island. So DK goes and kick butts. It was more of a different view of the character than anything though (although the gameplay also changed).
|
|
|
|
Post by EpicGyllynn on Aug 25, 2010 14:42:12 GMT -5
MvsDK was awesome. I still play Minis March Again, and am looking forward to Mini Mayhem. Plus, it was always a Puzzle game, even the original. The Mini ones just go all-out Puzze, instead of having platform elements. Oh, and DK kidnapped Pauline in the original because she liked the Mario Toy more, and in the Third game because they were sold out. But I agree, the game is not canon, for now.
|
|
