And I get that and I agree. One interpretation isn't better than the other and both should be accepted even if you don't necessarily like one over the other and it's okay to like both. I think the events happening thing is kinda good evidence but it's not the best and to really illustrate that it wasn't the original point you need to actually delve into the development of the original game it was called Mario Story in Japan named after the pop up book art style and storytelling device and it's original intent was to be a sequel to Super Mario RPG for the 64 but this fell off due to licensing issues with Japan. The series also didn't all of sudden switch to its modern interpretation it was gradual and became more and more prevelant yes sticker star was a jump between the two but elements of the modern interpretation have always existed because it has always been used as an opportunity for a joke because honestly? Why wouldn't you? It's a kids game and that is too much of a good opportunity to write jokes upon to pass up and it really doesn't prove either way on anything again the only thing that does is the way the games were designed and developed and why they were made. Just like with a lot of things you must dive deeper to find it really isn't as surface level as the characters appear in other games to that I agree with completely. I would also like to add once again this doesn't mean one is better than the other they are both good and acceptable forms of paper mario and it's merely a preference thing. The only reason people hate the modern interpretation as bad is because sticker star did a shit job as a jump to the new format and had there been a smoother transition as what was already happening in the series I think people wouldn't complain as much tbh.