This is from a conversation ,"Daisy is not unneeded" warning it's long.
A:Is DAISY doing anything?
The bitch plays tennis and boardgames..
B (B is me):Super Mario Land, has indirectally created Wario and Waluigi. Game set and match.
A:She did one thing, and wasnt even a part of a story. She was just there for 10 seconds, didnt even know it was her instead of peach untill you beat the game. At least rosaline had a plot. And most people dont even recognize the original mario lands (unfortunately) so why would she be a big thing, other than for mario Sports/Party? Wario has his own games. Daisy doesnt. Neither does waluigi for that matter.. They were brought back/created for the sole purpose of additional characters for games like Mario party, Sports, and mario kart. But to say Peach isnt doing anything, but DAISY is needed? Thats just ridiculous.. She's always been a part of mario. If you say daisy is needed, then wheres Pauline?
B:1uppercut1 No, Daisy was created for Super Mario Land, a game who's a main game, Nintendo confirmed this last year, and "10 seconds only" who cares, her creation still needed. You don't know why Daisy is instead of Peach? Really? There are two reasons: 1 The location was Sarasaland a land far from the Mushroom Kingdoom, 2 The developer was not Myiamoto so he wasn't autorized to use Peach, so we had 2 reasons for use Daisy instead of Peach. Yeah Rosalina has a plot, but Daisy has indirectally created Wario and Waluigi two characters who are considerated a part of the major cast so without her we are delting Wario's story too (wich is not that small), (no hate on Rosalina she's cool). Just because a character appears mainly in spin-offs doesn't make it automatically unneeded and Daisy is the example, only Waluigi was made as a filler he was created for be Wario's tennis partner after all. People who say Peach is uneeded are just 7 years old Peach haters, Peach is... Peach, I don't need to explain why she's needed. Both Daisy and Pauline are needed.
A:I love how you explained to me everything I already knew and previously stated.. As if you're making a point.. lol, Daisy could have easily be replaced by Peach and we wouldnt be missing anything. Her only existence was created for a legal purpose. (I guess.. They can use mario but not peach?...) Also, daisy had NOTHING to do with the creation of Wario, she wasnt even in 6 gold coins..
Either way, if I'm wrong about that, she was still an unnecessary addition as a CHARACTER. Fuck legalities. All she ever did was thank mario and vanished for years, then was brought back solely for spinnoffs. Just as useless as waluigi. You can like them if you want, I do. But I wont deny the fact they have no purpose. They just exist. Daisy just a FRACTION more than waluigi.
B:+1uppercut1 You really need to understand: PEACH HAD NO REASONS TO BE IN SUPER MARIO LAND because 1The developement team was different, they probably weren't autorized to use Peach and they wanted to make the game outside the Mushroom Kingdoom, in fact: 2 We were in Sarasaland a new and far land outside the Mushroom kingdoom, Daisy was made for be the princess of this new land since Peach would ve no sense here. She was created because they weren't able to use Peach? Why not? This is what point 1 said, but this also makes Daisy's creation 100% necessary, if we can't use any of those characters what we can do? Create a new chatacter. And how we can get Super Mario Land 2 without the prequel? Daisy was FONDAMENTAL here and without her the game would not exist so no SML1 = no SML2 = no Wario and everything he did. THIS is a fact, saying that Peach had to be in SML and Daisy was not needed here is just dumb.
These are the facts nothing more nothing less.
B:+1uppercut1 And? A lot of characters appears mainly in spin-offs: Daisy, Wario, Toadette, Birdo and Waluigi but outside Waluigi (and Toadette sort of) nobody is a filler unneeded character created for spin offs only. And no Wario games doesn't count.
A: Thats what I said... But we wouldnt be missing anything if it where peach instead of daisy.. Thats basically the definition of pointless..
A:And she didnt really influence the plot.. It was another point A to B, save the princess.. Could have easily been peach and know one would notice, or care..
B: +1uppercut1 We would miss the logic: we are in a new land far from the classic Mushroom Kingdoom, here an alien has kindapped the local princess... Peach?
Characters who exist with similar roles of others aren't automatically pointless, the same logic could be applied on Bowser instead of DK, Peach instead of Pauline and Wario instead of Bowser, we didn't always need the same characters because like in Daisy's chase use the old one instead of new ones would not make sense.
A: Except that fact ALL THOSE OTHER CHARACTER DO SOMETHING! They have other games, do different things, have different plots, EVEN GAMES! Daisy existed, then didnt, and now plays tennis.
B:+1uppercut1 Has not influenced the plot? SML games have a connected story: Mario goes in a far land for save Princess Daisy from Tatanga while Wario steals his castle. And again, Daisy's creation has indirectally created Wario.
A:She was pointless! The aliens could have EASILY taken peach to a new land. Why is mario there? How does he know? Theres not much "plot" there to really make use of another character for 10 seconds. Pointless
B:+1uppercut1 And Wario? His games aren't main games, he was only in Super Mario Land 2 and Super Mario 64 DS, a remake.
This is because Nintendo does not use them despite they've have a purpose.
B:+1uppercut1 Again, the developer was not Myiamoto and they weren't autorized to use Peach. And Tayanga has invaded Sarasaland and kindapped Daisy, why he should kindap Peach, go on a far land and invade it? He could easily invade the MK but that's not what the developers wanted.
A:Main Games or not, they exist in the mario universe and actually have a point to their creations. Thats like saying DK doesnt count either. They all had a reason to exist in mario, and continued to go on afterwards. Daisy didnt.
B: +1uppercut1 And there is a plot but is a plot who's connected with the second game: Tatanga has invaded Sarasaland and kindapped Daisy, Mario arrives on Sarasaland for save her and When Mario is busy Wario steals his castle and after Daisy was saved Mario needs to defeat Wario and save his castle.
B:+1uppercut1 Wario was made for be Mario's rival but in his games Mario isn't even mentioned so Wario does not follow his purpose here. They do something outside main games? Spin offs are outside main games too... Daisy has a purpuose.
A:Ok, then she was created because they couldnt use peach? Thats what you said right? That further validates my point! Her only reason for existence is because they couldnt use the princess THEY ALREADY HAD! I bet it WOULD have been MK if it werent for that, and it WOULD have been peach and thus, making Daisy USELESS!
B:+1uppercut1 This isn't the definition of useless and... WARIO FOLLOW THE SAME LOGIC, why in the second game we have Wario and not Bowser? An alien kindap Peach and Bowser steals Mario's castle. Too bad they weren't able to use these characters.
+1uppercut1 Definition of useless: a thing that isn't really necessary and things can work without it. If we can't use Peach how SML can have sense? It cant, we needed a new princess here.
+1uppercut1 and without the developement problem we still have the location problem: an alien kindap Peach and go on a land invading it? Why not the MK? This makes no sense and it wasn't what Nintendo wanted.
A:Thats my whole point, were talking about usefulness as far as a character in the series, not because of a fucking legal term. All she was was peach with a different name, a ripoff. A pointless addition the the series. A peach clone. THATS ALL SHE DID! How is that a necessary addition to keep around?
Mario isnt mentioned in DK either...
This is stupid. She plays tennis and Kart racing, get over it. She's a fucking pointless character that only appeared for 10 seconds, ONLY due to a legal term, and was only brought back for girls to have another princess to pick from. Thats it.
B:+1uppercut1 Legal terms AND because the location was not the MK but a new far land my dear, they had 2 reasons for not using Peach. You can say: why not in the MK? BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT THE DEVELOPERS WANTED. With the same logic you can say: Why SM3DW is not in the MK? Because the logic would not fit, they wanted Sarasalad.
And clone? No, they are not the same person they just had the same role.
A:THATS ALL SHE DID! We didnt need her! Peach gets taken to other places all the time! She was in fucking space!
B:+1uppercut1 that's what they wanted: new land, new princess and new enemies. With the same logic you can say: Bowser instead of Wario fit the same but no, that's not what they wanted, and they weren't even able to use her for 2 REASONS. +1uppercut1 because Bowser wanted to conqued the space and kindap Peach, this is what the plot say, what the developers wanted, Tatanga wanted to conquer Sarasaland and her princess, not Sarasaland and a princess of another kingdoom the logic would be screwed and it will not follow what the developers wanted. +1uppercut1 they still not the same person.
A:In what ways was she different? In that ONE game, did you see any kind of personality that stands out in ANY way? If you couldnt read, how would you know it wasnt Peach? She's a peach clone! And no, its NOT the same logic. The bosses like Wario, Wart, Bowser jr, etc all actually do something. Daisy was just there.. For ONE game.. And never anything else except for filler.. No games. no purpose. Nothing additional to add to the mario universe. Key word ADDITIONAL.Useless.
B:+1uppercut1 Wario did things for two games and one of them was a remake, the logic is the same.
They still not the same person, Daisy has shown a personality in spin offs, a tomboy (wich was started in this game), is Peach a tomboy? Lol no.
A:He was a boss and the main antagonist. Not the same logic.
B: +1uppercut1 listen the truth is this: they wanted a game outside the MK with new characters because THEY WANTED IT! THEY SAID IT IN THE PROJECTS. MK was NOT a part of that project and they can't even use Peach due to the location and legal problens, 2 reasons. +1uppercut1 the reason? They could easily use Bowser and do the same things.
A: Yeah, in fucking tennis? you really want to use her traits from a group of party games that ONLY have her for filler?
B:+1uppercut1 she was called a tomboy since SML but she has shown it in spin offs, it was just the confirmation.
A:I asked about her in the only actual Mario game she ever existed in.
B:+1uppercut1 In a game who also has effects on the sequel. Wario has the same level of affection.
A:Wario was actually a memorable character.. Because he actually DID something... Daisy was only brought back for girls to have another Princess to play with in party games. Otherwise, no one would have ever gave a shit, and you wouldnt either. Her ONLY personality traits were portrayed in party games. Wario actually shown some personality in his role. He actually DID something. He was a Boss and an antagonist, and went on to have his own game series as well as spin offs, as WELL as playing a role in the party games like sports, kart, etc. The ONLY thing Daisy does, on the other hand, is say "Thank you Mario! Oh Daisy!" and the game ends.. Never to be seen again until they wanted to have another girl to play as in party games.. She would have been forgotten otherwise. That sounds to me like she really has no importance to the Mario universe, otherwise, wouldnt she have done more? gone on to be a playable character in SM3D World or something? Why Is she ONLY a filler character in multiplayer/party games that have no relevance to the plot of the Mario universe? Just about everyone else did. She didnt. Waluigi is the only other character thats just slightly more useless than Daisy. He was created for the same purpose. Party games.
B:+1uppercut1 Daisy was created for a main games, she always was, she did something for the plot in SML, and spin-offs or not she has shown personality like other characters did.
Daisy was created because they needed a princess for Sarasaland, they weren't able to use Peach because legal terms and due to the location "but you can kindap Peach and bring her to Sarasalad" no because legal terms and it doesn't have logic, if it was in MK it can "so change the location to the MK" no, because that's not what the developers wanted, that is not what the games is supposed to be, with the same logic you can change SM3DW location without problems but the projecrs of the games say that you can't. Spin-offs or not Daisy has shown a personality, personality wich was said to exist in SML, spin-offs just confirmed it, and Wario has shown like 1/8 of his personality in SML2.
Wario series still not a part of the main games.
Daisy would not fit in SM3DW.
And since she was created for SML she automatically can't be created for spin-offs only, Waluigi was, she just appears mainly in spin-offs just like Wario, she still needed.
An unneeded character doesn't depend on how many games it appears but HOW it appears: Daisy was a damisel in distress, a normal role for the ladies of Super Mario in '80, but she was 100% needed in this game, without Daisy we can't have this game and without this game we can't have Wario who has started on the sequel and Waluigi. The youtuber who made this video made another one on this, most important Mario characters, just watch it.
Now I'm pretty busy and I need to go, bye :)
A:lol, Bye! I'm done with you, you dont get it. She shown 0 personality in the ONLY game she existed in. She ONLY came back for party games. I cant beleive how blind you are to that 1 fact. Enjoy your filler character. Love ya sweetheart! ;)
B:+1uppercut1 hopefully you will understand that spin offs maingames or not still games and characters like Luigi shown more personality here and the evidence: Peach was just not good for SML only Daisy was. Bye!!! ^^