Apparently Angry Birds is Bigger than Mario.

http://wireless.ign.com/articles/119/1197120p1.html Well I Totally see their Logic in saying that a 99 cent iphone app that is just Crush the castle with a different coat of paint which is mostly free on every other platform, to a Franchise that has crossed virtually every genre and succeeded and is the most memorable video game character of all time. yep angry birds sure is superior.

Can't spell ignorant without IGN

-Insert generic gamer rage here.-

This is so... so... I don't know what it is but I think it just broke my brain.

But really, this is just trolling. They can't possibly so stupid to really think that, right? RIGHT?

edited 29th Sep '11 7:50:55 AM by Nyarly

^^^ Regardless of what you think of IGN, that joke is prehistoric.

edited 29th Sep '11 7:53:33 AM by RTaco

Meh, must be another slow news day.

-sees Sonic Generations Dreamcast Era trailer-

Aw, yeah...

As a VIDEO GAME INTELLECTUAL, my official opinion of this is:

What the fuck are they on about?

In terms of sales it is. It's never going to remove Mario from his pedestal though, mainly because the old Italian Plumber more or less saved gaming back in the 80s and made it the big business it is today.

... This is all they had to write about? Really? Couldn't they have something more worthwhile to make an article about?

Lol wut. Herp derp article is herpy derpy.

Ah, games journalism.

Seriously, though, they're failing to consider revenue. Each of those sales makes orders of magnitude less money than a Mario game sale.

The main difference is one is an actual game and the other is a pretty crappy physics engine used for people to pass the time on while they are waiting for the bus.

Eh. I know more people that play Angry Birds than Mario. But still...

Doesn't make it any less true.

Sigh...

...Why are you acting with gamer rage when this is nothing more than the videogame equivalent to a celebrity declaring themselves to be bigger than Jesus or whatever?

I mean, I thought they might be suggesting that more people had played Angry Birds than had played a Mario game - which would be surprising, but not too much, given that Angry Birds is a much cheaper game - hell, with plenty of versions available for free - which appeals to a drastically different audience. But they're not even claiming that - IGN is claiming that Angry Birds will, at some uncertain future point, be bigger than Mario. In some, ambiguous, way. Presumably requiring the unstated assumption that the popularity of Angry Birds has no peak at which the number of possible levels/audience interest/people who have yet to play it levels off, and can thus continue going for ever and ever.

EDITED to add: And there's a whole bunch of other dubious ideas in the piece. Apart from the fact that there are numerous free editions and versions of Angry Birds, there's also a difference to how a family will get it. Both my sister and I have our own copies of Angry Birds; we share each version of Mario.

This whole thing is clearly just an IGN writer needing to write something trying to troll up something, and typically the fanboys fall for it to start frothing with their typical rage about the evils of casual gaming.

edited 29th Sep '11 9:55:59 AM by Danel

I like Angry Birds, even if I wouldn't say it's bigger than Mario...

Next thing you know, some game company will claim that they're bigger than Jesus, and people will start burning copies of their games.

You mean Capcom?

I can kinda see where they're coming from. Angry Birds is really popular among a very wide audience. It's easy to pick up, adults like the complicated puzzles, and the kids like the colors and sounds. It's also fun. That's important, too.

I wouldn't ever say it's more popular than the Mickey Mouse of video games, though. People all around the world know who Mario is, though I think the sad thing is that most people know him from Mario Kart, and not, you know, Super Mario Bros. This speaks volumes for how the critical market in gaming has changed. People have more access to 99 cent games on their phone that are still fun and easy to get into, than a $50 game sold on a $150 console.

Once again, IGN proves their incompetence by making shitty articles no one cares about.

Really, I have a hard time imagining something like Angry Birds surpassing Super Mario Bros. Mario has been around for years (more like decades) and is simply established and popular for the long-term. Angry Birds, on the other hand, is a recent arrival, and it simply is not as established and popular for the long-term as Mario. That, and the two of them have very different premises between them, as well as being in different genres, and so there is little to compare between them.

edited 29th Sep '11 12:47:38 PM by TiggersAreGreat

You can't spell poignant without IGN

And IGN proves once again that gaming "journalism" is the equivalent of a goddamn "shocker on page 5" tabloid.

So is IGN implying that Angry Birds is the Beatles, and Mario is Jesus?