[rogerclark]

Carmack is a great programmer to be sure. Commander Keen, however, was not a better version of Mario. It was worse than Mario in every way -- art, music, and gameplay are all inferior.

Nobody outside of Gen X PC gamers know what Commander Keen is. Everyone knows what Mario is. While copying may be the way design works, copying only gets you so far.

[bongodongobob]

The article didn't say it was better. No one thought it was better. It was just the first time anyone was able to smoothly side scroll on a PC. By copying something, he was able to push the boundaries of the perceived constraints of the technology which I believe is what the article is pointing out.

[rogerclark]

"Disappointed, but not defeated, they resolved to build a better version of Mario."

[bongodongobob]

Resolved = tried, wished

[bigstrat2003]

Disagree. Commander Keen 4-6 are better than Mario, imo.

[thestepafter]

To add to this Commander Keen was released on a very limited platform. More people were gaming on Nintendo systems than personal computers. If Commander Keen was released on Nintendo things may have gone differently.

[trentnix]

Even if that were true (and I don't think it is), Commander Keen should be compared to Mario 3 (which still came out over a year earlier than the first Keen), not Mario. And 4-6 are most appropriately compared to Super Mario World, which was released the same year.

Keen was/is great, but Mario 3 and Mario World are on the shortlist for best game ever.

[robertlagrant]

Millennial here - I played this as a teenager on our ancient-for-the-time family PC.