Login

Nintendo removes sombrero-wearing Mario from Super Mario Odyssey's cover

This was the first box we saw for Super Mario Odyssey. Now it seems the box has been updated, and one particular Mario design has been removed.

People have noticed that the image of Mario wearing a sombrero has been removed. We didn't bring much attention to it, but there has been a bit of backlash from people who were offended by that particular Mario outfit. We don't know why Nintendo removed the image from the game's box, but perhaps it had something to do with those complaints.

Categories: Media, Consoles
Tags: eshop, mario, switch

Comments

Top Rated Comment
nickd80
Tue Aug 01 17 03:10pm
Rating: 16

People are offended by a sombrero??? Good god...

The original image was kind of boring, just Mario there shivering... I think Mario underwater shows off a more varied adventure... I don't really think they changed it because of that.

jingleboy
Tue Aug 01 17 03:15pm
Rating: 3 (Updated 1 time)

I think your point is completely reasonable.

There's no point jumping to other conclusions unless there's specific evidence.

chaoxys
Tue Aug 01 17 03:19pm
Rating: 5

I think you pretty much nailed it. Every other shot has something of interest, but not that one. I mean, it's not like they've removed the costume from the game, so I don't think theres any concern on the matter.

berrix
Tue Aug 01 17 03:40pm
Rating: 4

On a designer perspective this is also a good fix. You have a cooler color in the background, making the warmer colored logo pop. As opposed to two warm colors battlinh for supremacy.

nickd80
Tue Aug 01 17 03:10pm
Rating: 16

People are offended by a sombrero??? Good god...

I've seen no evidence that anybody was offended.

Maybe you should ask RMC, he mentioned it in the article himself. Are you calling him a liar?

ericxc
Tue Aug 01 17 03:23pm
Rating: 6

Specifically people got offended for other people that "should" be offended.

darkazura
Tue Aug 01 17 03:11pm
Rating: 3

Sombrero is awesome, lol snowflakes

Lol guy credulously believing there were tons of people upset by a sombrero with no evidence and for no reason

There was definetly one female twitter user who commented it was bad , recieved massive backlash and made her profile go private. I cant speak for the amount of people upset but it did happen

yukito
Tue Aug 01 17 07:53pm
Rating: 3

Both the article and it's source are troll posts. People blaming this on "snowflakes" are the only ones who are triggered...

From what I could tell, Mexican folk thought it was neat, as expected from the country that loved the shit out of Speedy Gonzales, and it was self-righteous Caucasians who were offended by this. Who were promptly called out by said Mexicans.
And what makes it even better is the fact that Mario himself is a HUGE Italian stereotype and nobody bats an eye.

This decade is so crap.

kuro
Tue Aug 01 17 03:14pm
Rating: 1

Maybe the Sombrero picture was just a placeholder until that water kingdom was revealed?

Plus one for this reasoning. This is exactly what I thought. Nintendo knows fans dissect everything

bigwalrus23
Tue Aug 01 17 03:15pm
Rating: 4

As a Mexican myself I fell offended that they removed it I liked Mexican Mario

Besides how can someone find that offensive? I think cultures and diversities should be celebrated. I think it's awesome that the world is different. I love trying out new food, recently been into German and Egyptian food (and middle eastern). Also I think I'll be using the sombrero Mario for a big chunk of the game lol.

They didn't removed from the game, just from the cover. I actually think the second cover looked better because the water stages was more colourful and showed more variety.

People were offended by a freaking sombrero? No wonder trump is president...

nuff64
Tue Aug 01 17 03:24pm
Rating: 1

Box art changes happen all the time. I'm just gonna assume it's change because change. Nothing more. As long as they don't remove sombrero Mario from the actual game, I'm good.

THere´s still a tostarena guy in the boxart, so i think the change was to give it a little more color rather that remove the "offensive" mario mexican....BTW im mexican and i LOVE the mexican outfit

hamr
Tue Aug 01 17 03:33pm
Rating: 3

Between this and 'Ur Mr Gay', I think we can safely conclude that people spend far too much time looking at Mario boxart.

Oh man, I forgot about "Ur Mr. Gay" haha how ridiculous does the internet get?

breakfastboy
Tue Aug 01 17 03:35pm
Rating: 1

That's unfortunate, as a Mexican myself I was so happy to see my culture represented in one of my favorite series (even if it was very stereotypical just like the depiction of Mario as a stereotypical Italian).

Though I doubt it was due to outcry and people(specifically Mexicans) being offended, because just like Speedy Gonzalez most Mexicans love to see their culture represented in any way possible.

Anyways It's an unfortunate loss, but at the end of the day it's a small little change that in no way impacts how great Mario Odyssey will be ;)

dematador
Tue Aug 01 17 04:13pm
(Updated 1 time)

I love how everyone's pretending this change was made because the original image was boring and not to pander to outrage-happy idiots.

When was the last time you saw a part of a game's cover art, only one specific part, modified simply because it wasn't interesting enough?

hamr
Tue Aug 01 17 05:08pm
Rating: 5

When was the last time you saw a part of a game's cover art, only one specific part, modified simply because it wasn't interesting enough?

smh at all those people outraged at non-angry eyebrows, anthropomorphic leaves, and cloudy weather.

Tue Aug 01 17 05:48pm
(Updated 1 time)

Hah, good old cover alterations for different reasons. Reminds me of the hilarious Crash Bandicoot changes for the Japanese market. Even with the release of the new HD Collection, they changed the artstyle of the cover to super adorable cute Crash Bandicoot.

"The tanooki leaf needed to be in there, they were bringing it back and going to their roots of what made those classic games fun. This change SPITS all over their traditional fanbase!"

Oh yeah, I remember that change quite well.

Did you even read my comment? Those are all regional changes, except the last one which is a complete redesign. They removed clouds, made the moon much brighter, the sky much bluer and they even changed the freaking 2 to red. All design changes.

None of these are in any way applicable to my point, what are you even arguing?

"Those are exceptions the the exact thing I asked, clearly doesn't count against my clad-iron argument."

Good, solid counterpoint.

No, dude, you replied to an argument about apples with pictures of oranges.

hamr
Wed Aug 02 17 01:30am
Rating: 2

"Did you even read my comment?"

You asked a question, and I answered it. I even quoted it and everything.

"Those are all regional changes"

Regional changes where they changed a part of a game's cover art, only one specific part, modified simply because it wouldn't be interesting enough to the people in the territory.

Or do you think they slightly zoomed-in the picture here because they were surrendering to the complaints of a bunch of irate near-sighted Americans?

"what are you even arguing"

That companies make silly and pointless changes to boxart all the time for all sorts of reasons without it automatically being the result of a PC conspiracy, lol.

Oh no, Activision took the astronaut from the WIP cover and put him in tact gear in the final boxart. Clearly, this must be because of all the letters they must have gotten about spaceman culture being offensively appropriated.

There is no other possible explanation.

"except the last one which is a complete redesign"

So your working hypothesis is that companies will make complete redesigns to in-progress boxart just because, but a slight tweak can only ever be attributed to fan outcry on Tumbler or w/ever?

rsmith7
Wed Aug 02 17 03:59am
(Updated 2 times)

Yes, companies make tweaks on their box art all the time, but with the controversy with Mario been called a racist because he was wearing a sombrero and poncho, and Nintendo removed Mario wearing a sombrero from the recent box art change does raise some suspicion. It's almost hard to tell if the change is a coincidence or on purpose for PR reasons. And we all know that Nintendo want to avoid any form of bad press. And never underestimate the outcry of SJWs. Despite them being a small minority, they are a very, very, very LOUD vocal minority. And a lot of companies these days been trying to cater to these loud mouth busy bodies because they're the ones who speaks the loudest. Especially on social media platforms such as tumblr, facebook, and twitter.

hamr
Wed Aug 02 17 05:20am
Rating: 2

"with the controversy with Mario been called a racist because he was wearing a sombrero and poncho"

Can I get a citation on the extent of that 'controversy'? Change.org petitions, mass Youtube downvotes, organized boycott calls, or even a hashtag?

"And we all know that Nintendo want to avoid any bad press."

But slightly changing the boxart would not avoid any of that press. If Nintendo genuinely feared what a handful of random nobodies on Twitter were saying, they would not be leaving the outfit and associated mechanics in the final product.

"And a lot of companies these days been trying to cater to these loud mouth busy bodies because they're the ones who speaks the loudest."

Nintendo caters to the persistent vocal minorities who spam social media? That must be why they localized Mother 3 in the west and cancelled Federation Force.

rsmith7
Wed Aug 02 17 04:19pm
(Updated 1 time)

Of course changing the box art would not avoid any kind of bad of press. It won't make people forget about the controversy. Especially the type people who complain about whole thing in the first place. And those kind of people are the type that will never be please. No mater what you do. And not changing the content in the game does but the box art does not mean that Nintendo had been paying attention to these people. That's why I ask if the change was a coincidence, or done on for PR reasons. And the box art change and the controversy that happen before awhile back raise some suspicions. You can say the whole thing may be a case of "Unfortunate Implications"

And there's different situations with Mother 3 and FF compared to Odyssey, and different group of people that are involved with those games. The people who were spamming social media about the localization of Mother 3 were Mother fans who's desperately wants the game to finally came to the west. Unlike Odyssey, Mother 3 had no controversy that people accuse it for being racist. And the people who were complaining about FF were really desperate Metroid fans who been lusting for a new traditional Metroid games for years after the disaster of Other M, and fearing that the series might be on death's door. And the people who where complaining about sombrero wearing Mario in Odyssey are social justice obsessed busy bodies who takes it upon themselves to be offended for the very people they think they're standing up for. Even though the very people they think they're defending don't even think Mario wearing a sombrero is offensive. And guest which group have

For for some example of the whole controversy look at this video that explain the whole controversy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5lg6ubwNmQ

Here's one twitter example...

https://twitter.com/KrunchyNaut/status/874664057365835776

And here's a screen shot of the tweet that started the whole thing..

https://i.redd.it/ohrbccudwg3z.png (luckly alot of people actucally called bullcrap on this person)

"Of course changing the box art would not avoid any kind of bad of press."

If they are not doing anything to avoid that kind of bad press, is that not evidence that they are not all that concerned about it?

"And there's different situations with Mother 3 and FF compared to Odyssey, and different group of people that are involved with those games."

I agree that they are different groups. For starters, there appear to be substantially more people in the first two groups, and they appear they have the sort of thing I asked for, like hashtags, petitions, actual calls for boycotts, and mass group dislikes for videos on Youtube.

I am not really certain I follow why anyone thinks Nintendo is more afraid of the smaller, less vocal, less organized group.

"For for some example of the whole controversy look at this video that explain the whole controversy."

Okay, so the extent of the controversy is... a person complaining about a few dumbasses on Twitter, two very-moronic tweets (one of which says later that he was being sarcastic), and a deluge of people calling those tweets stupid.

And... that is all it supposedly takes to make a billion-dollar global corporation quake in its boots?

By the standards of most Nintendo-related 'scandals' where you have tens of thousands of people doing things, that seems pretty weak.

"If they are not doing anything to avoid that kind of bad press, is that not evidence that they are not all that concerned about it?

As I mention above, was the box art change was coincidental, or done for pr reason? The problem with the whole thing is Nintendo change the sombrero wearing Mario image with another image. People wouldn't have no problem if there wasn't that controversy that involved people thinking Mario wearing a sombrero racist. It makes the box art change suspicious. If it wasn't done on pr reasons, then the whole thing is a case of "unfortunate implication".

I am not really certain I follow why anyone thinks Nintendo is more afraid of the smaller, less vocal, less organized group.

Yes, why Nintendo would be afraid of these small group of people? Remember how people raise heck about Tomodachi Life not having a "same-sex relationship" option? I show do. Oh, and how people complain about Nintendo firing a female treehouse employee, even though it was justified because she violated company policy? And these same people was "white knighting" her. It went so far that some no name game devs said they won't make games on a Nintendo system because they fired the said woman.

Like I said before, never underestimate the outcry of sjws Just because they're a small vocal minority doesn't mean companies don't listen to them. You want a big example of that look at Marvel (the comic division, not the movie division). As of late, they been trying to cater to the SJW crowd. The very people who don't even read comic in the first place. And they're pretty much running themselves in the ground because of it. And there was Pepsi who tried to appeal to these people with a ad, but that it in up blowing up in their face. On the gaming front, there's Mass effect Andromeda. And we all know what a mess that game in up being. I would also like to add Yooka-lay-lee on the list too.

"As I mention above, was the box art change was coincidental, or done for pr reason?"

It could have been either, but given the limited nature of the change and the even-more limited nature of people actually asking for it, coincidence seems the more likely explanation to me.

"People wouldn't have no problem if there wasn't that controversy that involved people thinking Mario wearing a sombrero racist."

Does two people saying something stupid on Twitter really constitute much of a controversy, though? I am pretty sure that I can find just as many people saying just as many dumbass things about literally every game. In the absence of any real acknowledgement or effort from Nintendo at appealing to those people, this specific case seems like a bit of a reach.

"Remember how people raise heck about Tomodachi Life not having a "same-sex relationship" option?"

Of course. That one had a dumb petition that a couple thousand people signed, and Nintendo made a show of officially apologizing for it. I think it is fair to attribute that one to the complainers.

Neither of those things seem to be the case here, though.

"how people complain about Nintendo firing a female treehouse employee, even though it was justified because she violated company policy? And these same people was "white knighting" her"

I remember that, but given that she is still fired, that seems like an example of Nintendo ignoring Twitter outcry.

"Just because they're a small vocal minority doesn't mean companies don't listen to them"

Sure, companies sometimes listen to vocal minorities. I just do not believe that is the case in this particular instance.

It could have been either, but given the limited nature of the change and the even-more limited nature of people actually asking for it, coincidence seems the more likely explanation to me.

And that's what I'm getting when say the box art change might be a case of "unfortunate implication". The whole thing might not even been done out of PR reason. But after that little controversy, and the removal of sombrero Mario from the box art several weeks later after the whole thing does make people think it is.

Does two people saying something stupid on Twitter really constitute much of a controversy, though? I am pretty sure that I can find just as many people saying just as many dumbass things about literally every game. In the absence of any real acknowledgement or effort from Nintendo at appealing to those people, this specific case seems like a bit of a reach.

Have you watch all of the video I have linked you before? It showed that it wasn't just two people who were complaining about Sombrero Mario, there were several others others who accused Mario being racist because he was wearing a sombrero.

Of course. That one had a dumb petition that a couple thousand people signed, and Nintendo made a show of officially apologizing for it. I think it is fair to attribute that one to the complainers.

And it's an example "why Nintendo would be afraid of these small group of people". And the reason why would companies listen to SJWs is because they don't want to have any bad pr about being accused of being "racist", "homophobic", "transfobic", etc, etc. And having those labels on you can ruin your repetition.

Neither of those things seem to be the case here, though.

But it's still an example as much of that whole "box art change all the time" example.

Sure, companies sometimes listen to vocal minorities. I just do not believe that is the case in this particular instance.

Are you sure about that? At this point none of us truly don't know what's the exact reason why Sombrero Mario was removed in the first place. It can be ether way.

"But after that little controversy, and the removal of sombrero Mario from the box art several weeks later after the whole thing does make people think it is."

I understand why people are making a post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc fallacy, but it is not something that I find all that persuasive.

"It showed that it wasn't just two people who were complaining about Sombrero Mario, there were several others others who accused Mario being racist because he was wearing a sombrero."

'Several others' is the sort of vague measurement that people use to make things sound bigger than they actually are.

I like concrete, specific numbers. 24,061 signed the FF petition. 3,784 people signed that dopey Tomodachi thing. 42 people thought bacon-scented soap was a good idea.

"And the reason why would companies listen to SJWs is because they don't want to have any bad pr. And having those labels on you can ruin your repetition. "

But Nintendo is not actually listening to them in this case. None of the tweets linked were specifically about the boxart.

Nintendo being deathly afraid of this particular PR and Nintendo not being concerned enough about it to address (or even acknowledge) the complaints are mutually-exclusive positions.

"Are you sure about that?"

In the absence of any especially compelling evidence to believe otherwise, yeah.

If you can link me to something that I am missing, like a thousands strong anti-sombrero Mario Facebook group, or an official announcement from Nintendo apologizing, or evidence that the costume has been removed from the game, then I am open to reassessing.

Until then, the idea of Nintendo caring enough to change a game cover (while simultaneously not caring enough to change the game itself) purely to appease one of the seemingly-least-significant scandals in the history of videogames -- while possible -- just does not seem all that likely to me.

rsmith7
Sat Aug 05 17 08:37pm
(Updated 6 times)

I understand why people are making a post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc fallacy, but it is not something that I find all that persuasive.

There's a reason why I said the change might be a coincidence.

None of the tweets linked were specifically about the boxart.

But it does lead up to a possibility why the box art was change. After all, the change happen several weeks after the controversy. And they specifically removed Sombrero Mario from the boxart. That's going to make people think why it was removed. Just because tweets may not have nothing to do with the boxart doesn't mean it didn't lead up to the reason why the box art change happen.

I like concrete, specific numbers. 24,061 signed the FF petition. 3,784 people signed that dopey Tomodachi thing. 42 people thought bacon-scented soap was a good idea.

For the "dopey Tomodachi thing" I have to ask. If the petition numbers was small, then why Nintendo still apologize to these small number of people who complained about there's no "same-sex relationship" option in the game, even though they may not had intention to put it in the game at the time? They didn't apologize about FF, but why Tomodachi life? Their petition numbers was smaller then FF. Why Nintendo waste their time to apologize to the small-number of people who were complain about a missing relationship option in a game? Should the complaints of a small number of people shouldn't cross their mind? This goes right back to what I said about companies listening to SJWs. If it wasn't, then Nintendo wouldn't bother apologizing to these small numbers of people. And are those two petitions from places like Change.org?''

Until then, the idea of Nintendo caring enough to change a game cover (while simultaneously not caring enough to change the game itself) purely to appease one of the seemingly-least-significant scandals in the history of videogames -- while possible -- just does not seem all that likely to me.

Hence why I said before that The whole thing might not even been done out of PR reason and At this point none of us truly know what's the exact reason why Sombrero Mario was removed in the first place. It can be ether way. It's easy can brush the whole thing off as nothing but a coincidences. But at the same time, can't ignore the implication of the whole thing because of controversy and the removal of Sombrero Mario from the box art that follow after the following weeks..

hamr
Sat Aug 05 17 11:07pm
(Updated 2 times)

"After all, the change happen several weeks after the controversy."

Like I said above, believing an event is caused by another event just because it happened after it is a logical fallacy known as post hoc ergo propter hoc.

Arguments based on logical fallacies by definition cannot be trusted.

"Just because tweets may not have nothing to do with the boxart doesn't mean it didn't lead up to the reason why the box art change happen."

Sure, it is a possibility that they were related events -- but not all possibilities are equally likely.

Given that there is not much evidence that they were related, it does not strike me as an especially likely possibility.

"For the "dopey Tomodachi thing" I have to ask. If the petition numbers was small"

Size is relative. A few thousand people is still large compared to something like ten.

"They didn't apologize about FF"

Why would Nintendo apologize about FF? They were only months away from announcing two new traditional Metroid games at E3 and giving the people who signed that petition exactly what they wanted.

"If so, then why Nintendo bothered to apologize for the whole "dopey Tomodachi thing"?"

Because there was an observable thousands-strong organized movement against it, whose existence Nintendo explicitly acknowledged.

If those things were the case here, then I would say this is probably a comparable situation, but they are not, so it is probably not.

rsmith7
Sat Aug 05 17 11:49pm
(Updated 3 times)

Believing an event is caused by another event just because it happened after it is a logical fallacy known as post hoc ergo propter hoc.
Arguments based on logical fallacies by definition cannot be trusted.

Have you pay attention when I said the whole thing might be a coincidence?

Sure, it is a possibility that they were related events -- but not all possibilities are equally likely.

"See last comment above".

Size is relative. A few thousand people is still large compared to something like ten.

Because there was an observable thousands-strong organized movement against it, whose existence Nintendo explicitly acknowledged.
If those things were the case here, then I would say this is probably a comparable situation, but they are not, so it is probably not.

And guest who usually do these organized movement, especially as of late? The SJWs. That's why I keep saying companies do listen to sjws. And why I keep saying despite being a small minority, they're a very LOUD vocal minority. Which lead back to the Sombrero Mario controversy. It was a bunch of SJWs who was complaining about it Mario wearing a sombrero.Which leads to the suspicion why Sombrero Mario was removed from the box art, which might not ease be the case, but it's a possibility.

hamr
Sun Aug 06 17 02:25am
(Updated 1 time)

"Have you pay attention when I said the whole thing might be a coincidence?"

Right, and I am explaining why I believe it probably is.

"And guest who usually do these organized movement"

You seem to be making a general statement, which I do not necessarily disagree with.

I am making a narrow statement that I do not believe this particular instance is an example of that.

"it's a possibility"

I agree it is a possibility. I just do not consider it a likelihood. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Since we both seem to be repeating ourselves, this seems like a decent point for me to bow out.

I agree it is a possibility. I just do not consider it a likelihood. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Since we both seem to be repeating ourselves, this seems like a decent point for me to bow out.

Agreed.

Since we're going around in circles at this point, and dragging out the whole thing way too long then it should (plus I'm getting tired of the whole debate in general) Let's just "agree to disagree." and move on something else.

Welp. See you around! (^_^)/

"You asked a question, and I answered it. I even quoted it and everything."

You quoted it. Doesn't mean you answered it.

"Regional changes where they changed a part of a game's cover art, only one specific part, modified simply because it wouldn't be interesting enough to the people in the territory."

Regional changes made by different region-specific marketing teams. Do you not understand that you're arguing literally nothing?

"That companies make silly and pointless changes to boxart all the time for all sorts of reasons without it automatically being the result of a PC conspiracy, lol."

No need to imagine a "PC conspiracy" you dimwit. Are you implying no company has ever changed anything about their products due to online outrage?

"Oh no, Activision took the astronaut from the WIP cover and put him in tact gear in the final boxart. Clearly, this must be because of all the letters they must have gotten about spaceman culture being offensively appropriated."

They completely redesigned the cover. Unlike the Super Mario Odyssey cover. You're just proving my point, really. Thanks!

"So your working hypothesis is that companies will make complete redesigns to in-progress boxart just because, but a slight tweak can only ever be attributed to fan outcry on Tumbler or w/ever?"

My "working hypothesis" (I too have read books!) is that different regions have different marketing teams with different preferences of cover art, and that when a same marketing team decides to modify a boxart they had already designed it's usually, like 99% of the time, a complete redesign. I had never seen two cover arts of a game for the *same region* (please read this part multiple times as you don't seem to grasp the concept) with only a fraction of it different. And it oh-so-happens to follow a couple of idiots online complaining about the specific character depiction shown in the bit of boxart that was changed.

If this was a response of being so offended by Mario sombrero as racist, how come Nintendo hasn't edited their initial video to leave those parts out at the very least? I mean, that is where the three people saw and got offended over a phantom opression. Or is this another oranges and apples thing cause Youtube reasons?

This is not an argument. The fact they haven't changed a video doesn't prove anything regarding this cover. And the burden of proof isn't on me, dude, there is far more evidence supporting my theory than yours.

If we stop seeing Sombrero Mario in marketing, you'll know I was spot on. By your own logic.

Actually the first part of marketing PR damage control is to neutralize the source where this problem would essentially originate, which is the video itself. Where this all began. That would actually help your argument, but it's not edited out. Thus, not helping you. And the fact the game remains unchanged as we know furthers this.

But hey, your evidence of "Mario reflecting culture was removed, and others agree" looks to take the same colors as those who took offense in the first place. And the fact you throw the "I claimed this as fact, not my problem to prove it" only galvanized that mentality.

Minor upset group, loud voice, and a complete disregard of critical thinking.

hamr
Wed Aug 02 17 11:41pm
Rating: 1

"You quoted it. Doesn't mean you answered it."

Sure it does.

"Regional changes made by different region-specific marketing teams."

Yes, just like non-finalized boxart gets changed as it goes through the different marketing teams and gets approved by the different business people. That is kind of the whole point of boxart being a WIP.

"No need to imagine a "PC conspiracy""

And yet you keep doing so.

"you dimwit"

Lol, you mad.

"Are you implying no company has ever changed anything about their products due to online outrage?"

Nope, not implying that at all. I willingly grant that fan outrage is a possibility, albeit an extremely unlikely, poorly-thought-out one.

You are the one flat-out saying that your version of events is the only one that you can possibly think of, evidently not realizing how that is kind of a self-own.

"I too have read books!"

Um. Congratulations?

(Do you frequently go around randomly shouting suspiciously-specific claims at people about how normal you are? 'I too have passed the second-grade!')

"different regions have different marketing teams with different preferences of cover art, and that when a same marketing team decides to modify a boxart they had already designed it's usually, like 99% of the time, a complete redesign."

So you think the same team consisting of dozens of people in different positions can change their mind massively but they will never ever change their mind a little? And as that in-progress boxart works its way through the different stages of graphic designers, throughout the ranks of the different PR people, and up the ranks of the upper management, those people will only ever say 'Change everything' or 'Change nothing'?

"I had never seen two cover arts of a game for the *same region* (please read this part multiple times as you don't seem to grasp the concept) with only a fraction of it different"

'If I have never seen something, it cannot possibly exist.' Irrefutable logic.

Man, look at Ignition-North America catering to the cabal of anti-wolf protesters who are definitely real and definitely forced them to move their logo to that corner and cover him up.

Tue Aug 01 17 04:36pm
Rating: 1 (Updated 3 times)

The Mexican Mario is a throwback to an outfit he wore in Mario X Qix on the Gameboy and so many of the outfits are throwbacks to costumes he has worn throughout many of his countless appearances in other games over the years. The level of walking on eggshells that goes on in this country because of the outrage generated by crybullies is very sad and doesn't appease anybody. If anything, it only encourages the slowflakes to get even more upset and start demanding more and more until everything we know and love is altered beyond recognition.

https://www.kotaku.com.au/2017/06/super-mario-odysseys-outfits-are-a-nice-throwback/

rance
Tue Aug 01 17 04:50pm
Rating: 1

I wouldn't worry too much.
Sane people still outnumber snowflakes.

I agree. Social justice warriors are a minority but a very vocal and annoying minority. It's good to know that there are still plenty of normal people in this country who haven't surrendered to cultural marxism.

I love this. They told her off quick.

It doesn't seem like cultural appropriation is seen as offensive in that community. They were the main folks pushing for a return of Speedy Gonzales once he got the ax for being "offensive". The SJWs just don't seem to get it when they take it upon themselves to speak for everybody else that they deem to be oppressed. They are not helping them no matter what they think.

donzaloog
Tue Aug 01 17 11:11pm
(Updated 1 time)

They're not helping anyone anywhere with their perpetual victimhood. That's pretty much the most annoying thing about the SJW idiots. They take offense for other people. As if those people are too dumb to know when they're offended. They are often white people with white guilt who project that guilt unto minorities in an attempt to show that they are one of the "good ones". It's just virtue signalling meant to do nothing but stroke the ego of the SJW.

Exactly. These are the same people that claim that they want all groups to be represented in all forms of media and when they are, they cry that it is offensive cultural appropriation when in reality, the majority of the Hispanic folks I have seen feel, instead, represented by Mario's sombrero and I know enough Mexicans to know that they love them some Mario. I can understand if it were blatant negative stereotypes being portrayed but it's a freaking poncho and sombrero.

These people don't know anything about moderation. Unless you are of that culture wearing anything from it makes you a racist. It doesn't matter what the actual people from those cultures think. Their moral betters be offended on their behalf.

These SJWs ruin public discourse and widen the gap between groups. The entire concept of cultural appropriation is stupid. By that logic, no one but Chinese people should eat Chinese food, no one but white people should wear t-shirts and jeans etc. The point is we're supposed to be embracing each other's cultures not excluding people from it because of their race. SJWs are the real racists.

It's out of control but we are at the point that whatever they do is going to blow up in their faces at this point because they are just that annoying. My parents were always fairly liberal when I was growing up but they look like hardcore right-wingers compared to this batch that is running around now like a bunch of deranged crazies. They act like minority groups are their pets and that they are their handlers. Not only that, they think that these groups couldn''t possibly survive without them rushing to their aid every time the opportunity comes up for them to zone in on something like flies on crap. It is the bigotry of low expectations and It is really quite sick.

The people on the left have carried things so far left, that things will inevitably swing back to the right. Thankfully, so many people are getting sick to their stomach with the left wing idiots, we are starting to see that swing now.

It's happening. I called it years ago because I knew that the level of over-the-top behavior and demands were not something that would be tolerated very well or win new converts very easily. They were shocked and dismayed to find out that those people that they have been pushing around didn't see things their way no matter how much it was attempted to beat those thoughts into them and chose instead, to put in the very one who triggers them the most and refuses to allow them to get his back to the wall where they like it.

donzaloog
Wed Aug 02 17 01:59am
Rating: 1

Oh yes. The backlash is real.

It's about time. I've been fighting this stuff for the last 7 years and have been right in the thick of it enough to see the changes for myself. I used to get bombarded with all of the usual smears you would expect but now I am pretty much left alone to speak my mind for the most part. I am diplomatic when it's opinions being discussed but when they get snippy, giving them a taste of their own medicine is all they understand. They don't realize how fragile of a foundation they were building their case on when you can easily find enough material to give everything right back to them ten-fold and be completely accurate in doing so.

Same here. Consistency, common sense and self reflection are alien concepts to these people. There was a time where speaking out against them brought with it serious social censure but the tide is turning.

True.. It's almost impossible to hold a conversation with one of them without emotional outbursts and one logical fallacy after another. It does no good, really. People are at their most effective when they don't let them become a distraction and just go around them to carry out your mission so they don't run out the clock with their constant distractions they throw out there to keep us busy fighting straw men.

You can get further talking to a brick wall.

NINTENDO HATES SOMBREROS!
BOYCOTT THEM

Wait, there was a negative response? From whom? The only response I've seen was universally positive. Especially from Mexicans. The response was pretty much "Dude, Mario in a sombrero! That's awesome!" from everyone I saw and doubly so from anyone I know of Mexican descent.

How do Italians feel about Mario though? :p xD

That said, the colour palette does seem more balanced with the underworld water shot addition to me, so good good.

If you're offended by a hat, you're a damned idiot.

berrix
Tue Aug 01 17 06:05pm
Rating: 1

All y'all who are bitching may need to take a small course in graphic design. Like, seriously... Even the free ones online would do here.

Even if it was basic Mario in a desert, the change would be better off regardless.

How can you honestly argue this is a graphic design change when no other single thing was changed in the cover. They wouldn't bother changing it just because that scene wasn't "attractive" enough or something. That's not how companies work.

It's clear they only changed it to avoid potential cries of "RACISM!!1!" and "CULTURAL APPROPRIATION" and such manufactured outrage.

Ok then I assume this is the same reason "angry" Kirby is a thing on boxart as well? Or that Bayonetta moons are too triggering?

rsmith7
Wed Aug 02 17 03:41am
Rating: 1 (Updated 2 times)

The problem with the removal of sombrero wearing Mario from the box art is that it might have something to do the little controversy of some people calling Mario wearing a sombrero and poncho racist, even though it's not. And for the Kirby and Bayonetta box arts, no one is complaining about them because there were no controversies that surrounded them compared to Super Mario Odyssey.

Yes, box art change over time, but with the controversy with odyssey awhile back does rise some eyebrows in the reason why they change it. Was the change coincidence, or done for PR reasons?

You insist on comparing apples with oranges. You be you.

Let me guess, too proud to explain why they are so drastically different?

Nope. It's pretty simple:
One involves one marketing team fixing their own output.
The other involves two completely different marketing teams from different regions.

Evidence to back this up that this change isn't regional?

You're not even trying, are you? I'm done arguing with you.

Both images have ESRB stickers.

Well atleast its still in the game so that's fine.

I'm more offended by that E10+ rating

ddark
Wed Aug 02 17 12:20pm
Rating: 1 (Updated 1 time)

There are always going to be idiots on both sides. A couple stupid people upset at sombrero/poncho Mario does not make a controversy. Likewise, the anti-Snowflake ones on the other side are also dumb for now trying to blow up a small boxart change.

How about we all mind our own f*cking business, live our own lives, and let others do the same. Everything in this world has become so bitter and divided and it's because of both sides. Not just the far left SJW or the far right Pepe crowd. Both. It's disgusting and beneath the entire idea of freedom and democracy.

I'm a centrist democrat (or left of center as some might say.) The amount of times I've got called a "snowflake" for no reason by some triggered alt-right moron is ridiculous. They don't see the hypocrisy that when someone has a different view than them and they get all pissy and retreat to their "safe space," they are no better than the loonies on the other side of spectrum who they make fun of for "safe spaces."

It's ok to have respect for other cultures, races, religions, etc. But, it's also ok to let those people speak for themselves.

It's also important for both sides to learn to live and let live and stop trying to tell others how to think and act. Those of us in western democracies need to get used to the fact that not everyone is going to agree. That's the beauty of the freedoms we enjoy. We need to recognize that it's what we have in common and what binds us together that's important. Maybe if we'd all stop and listen to each other, instead of coming up with whatever counter talking-point our "side" has memorized for every argument, we'd realize that good ideas and decency can come from anywhere.

rsmith7
Wed Aug 02 17 02:53pm
(Updated 1 time)

It would've been nice if people just live and let live, but unfortunately, there's always those who would make a big stink of things and try to enforced their ideology on others. And a lot of those type of people tend to be in high places. It makes you wonder if people ever heard of the this quote... "He who fights monsters should see to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.". You can say on a meteorically sense when the abyss gazed back on some people, they blinked and became the very monsters they claim to fight against. Ever since last year's election, it had brought out the worse of alot of people, due to their political standing. As of now, it's one gigantic culture war. But I would ask you this, which of the two groups is worse? And who have the most influence in society at the moment?

TBH, even though people are free to lived way the way want to live. I just wish some people would just have form of common sense. .

I miss mexican Mario.

Search

Today's VIP

chuggitmcnuggit's avatar
Joined: February 2017
Fledgling

Social Services

Want to join this discussion?

You should like, totally log in or sign up!