If you read the original manual it said Bowser turned the mushroom people into object such as pipes and bricks. Does this mean when you break a brick you're killing a toad? Or is it supposed to mean the ? blocks and the ones that give you items? Any thoughts?

Mario has the deepest lore.

Did you know that Mario has antisocial personality disorder?

Wow. That's just odd. Where did you hear this?

"Wow. That's just odd. Where did you hear this? "

I'm guessing he found it on either Game Theory or Vsauce3, because I'm pretty sure both channels talked about that. But maybe he found it somewhere else.

I normally would pass this off as nothing, but I'm pretty sure in the manual it also says something along the lines of "Mario, the hero (maybe) of Mushroom Kingdom." I don't know if that's exactly what it said, but it was something similar anyway. Kind of odd.

has been known for quite some time. Long before the game theory or vsauce videos ever came out.

in the original super mario bro's manual, the game stated that, yes, bowser transformed the residents of the mushroom kingdom into blocks(among other things) and so yes, it does in fact mean that every time you break one, you are theoretically taking out a mushroom kingdom citizen.


Take it how you will. Remember this game was created in 1985 they didn't exactly expect people to look too deeply into things, especially the story in the manual of a video game. It was in all honesty probably thrown together within a week or so, to fit the gameplay of the game.

The mario series and its games, are not meant to be taken literally or seriously, and the games aren't even made to have any real chronological timeline or anything(except maybe super mario world 2, yoshi's island, so basically, SMW2:YI, then, everything else in random order)

^ I agree with that. However, that part in the manual that I mentioned is a bit odd. It could just be nothing, though, especially considering game developers didn't really make complex lore for their games.

It says bricks and stones not brick blocks and stone blocks so your freeing the toads that were bind together and Mario having aspd is such a dumb theory it made me facepalm and game theory videos have never made me facepalm him "punching" yoshi is him pointing look at art from the official artists him dropping yoshi in a pit is up to the player I never drop yoshi in a pit donkey Kong and his son that was jump man not Mario just like cranky Kong is the original donkey Kong its impossible that cranky is a grandpa but Mario is still a Mario  daisy? When link helps dreamie he gets a hug/kiss does that make him bad with Zelda no when Mario saves her of couse he's happy And she's a princess that could have been a kiss from daisy for saving him or Mario kissing her hand because daisy is a princess Luigi him grinding his foot is just brotherly teasing the balloon peach and Mario can't stop the balloon and they saw the toads letting Luigi in there balloon what's her face from donkey Kong those toys were celebrating her and Mario's grandparents days when peach wasn't born peach didn't have anything to do with donkey Kong and she has more important things to do than go to a toy release and of course he'll save her if she's in trouble throw anything else at me I can debunk it if you want to talk about a worth while theory talk about the girl from red and blue that predicted munna now that makes sense

^ Yeah, Mat Pat is good at what he does, but he does read into things too much sometimes. Or miss things entirely, like Mario clearly pointing and not punching Yoshi, as you said.

Ya that theory and the rosalina theory him: bam there you have it me : that is clearly not a evergreen matpat

Well then it says something in there about how when you find Mario's friends in blocks they reward you with items...which makes it even more confusing.

I think that his best theory was probably the Super Smash Bros. one.

Ya that one was good