Is SML2 better than any NES Mario games?

[fox | 1,673]

5 hours ago, Link said:

This doesn't include the portable games

 

[Link | 2,727]

12 hours ago, fox said:

 

‍ I read the OP, didn't realize your reply was further down the page

[T-Pac | 7,587]

It's been a while since I've played Super Mario Land 2, but I actually think I'd prefer it over the original NES Super Mario Bros. trilogy if nostalgia and historical merit weren't such heavy factors.

-CasualCart

[RegularGuyGamer | 2,017]

If SML2 was developed on the NES, it would be in the top 10, or top 5 maybe, games in the system without a doubt. Most of it's shortcomings are due to the limitations of the platform. However, I enjoy it more the SMB2 US by a lot. It's a real continuation of the world building we got in SMB3 and SMW which is a staple of the series and something I think that still holds up today, better than the world's in SMB2

[Ankos | 463]

To me the big thing other Mario games have over SML2 is physics, which makes them better for long term play, like speedrunning or other player created challenges. Level design could be better, but it's still pretty good in SML2. I'd say that  if I were new to the Mario series and played through each game once, and never played them again, I'd say SML2 is better than SMB1 and a lot better than SMB the Lost Levels. If you plan to replay the games a lot, then I don't think it is as good as SMB1