Science Tries To Ruin Our Fun As Zelda's Hookshot And Mario Galaxy's Planets Come Under Scrutiny

I'm glad that all scientific problems based in reality have been solved. Now science finally has time to tackle the fanciful!

LOL, Game Theory. It's interesting though some people take it too seriously.

As far as I'm concerned, with a few exceptions due to glaring omissions, Game Theory is law. Its hard to disprove science. I've looked at Rosalina in a whole new light now, and thanks to Game Theory I enjoy her as a character ten times more than I did before. Seeing mother and daughter duke it out in Smash is extremely interesting to boot!

Another thing that MatPat didn't even bother thinking about though, Hyrule is (theoretically) another universe and planet with its own laws of physics and gravity. So is Mario Galaxy as well.

I like astronomy but Mario Galaxy is fantasy that isn't based on real world physics... it doesn't need to be.

But when mario takes a dump, he'll have lost 0.99~n10 percent of his weight, making super mario galaxy very plausible just through a visit to the loo. Remember that, dear children, the next time you poop. You CAN fart rainbows, after all.

It's true. I tested it.

"The students observed that Mario's movement and jumping capabilities were the same on each planet (including Earth)"

Is Mario really on Earth in the Galaxy games? If not the assumption of a surface gravity of 9.81ms² goes out the window, right?

As soon as I saw it was Game Theory I turned it off.

@wouwter
I think of the Mario World as its own planet rather than Earth. Also Mario and others can jump quite well in a way that isn't possible on real world Earth... which might mean less gravity?

I don't think those planets would explode because of gravity in reality because there would be no reason for them to have so much gravity to begin with... it doesn't matter because Mario isn't based on reality.

The other day on TV I saw a person attached to a speed boat ready to start waterskiing from a standing start on land and it literally ripped them forward at what looked to be an extremely fast rate, I mean I'm talking fast and hard, and then they slammed into the water very hard too. Now; I'm presuming they survived relatively undamaged, so, basically, I'm not entirely buying the "scientific" explanation for the amount of damage that would be caused.

Oh wow, a video game not based on reality? Had no idea such a thing even existed. Show me the way!

Some episodes of Game Theory are great fun. Other episodes such as this, I find annoying because he is over analyzing a fantasy video game.

thanks for crushing my dreams...

I guess that means I can't really change into a morph ball?? Maybe I should stop trying then.

It was a nice attempt, but Game Theory missed quite a couple of important things; in their calculations they assumed what would happen if Link shot a 89 kg object in an instant, however this is not the case, as the chain isn't launched all at once. It's a gradual process, thus spreading the force acting on Link over a longer period of time. I also doubt the short moment of increased g-forces are enough to cause any damage either.

The only thing that would cause severe damage for sure would be the impact, but they seem to forget about that. It would be nice to see some proper calculations on the hookshot though.

@May_Nyan It might even be better to think of it as its own universe, in which case our laws of physics don't even apply.

Anyway, the "research" is silly and a waste of time.

@Spoony_Tech He confirmed that all u have to do is sit in a ball.

Um... If you are play Zelda and Mario for scientific accuracy, I think we can safely tell you that you are doing it wrong.

If this is the best that scientists can find to research, then perhaps they need to lose their government funding and be allowed to go back to researching how to best say, "Do you want fries with that?".

I hate that guy's voice so much. I can't stand to watch any of his videos all the way through. "Interesting," you say. Irritating, more like.

As Octane said, the chain launch is a gradual process. What would cause the most damage would be the nearly instant acceleration and then deceleration of Link. As the video said, 20Gs would cause serious and permanent damage... but then you hit the wall at 72km/h.

And you dead.

That fun.
But steel is just as heavy as iron, haha.

I don't get why you guys are getting upset over this, I mean, its just a theory.

lol, gotta appreciate the time and effort put into this. I was also waiting for the part where he explained Link slamming into the wall, but that seemed to be forgotten. To me, that would be the worst part of it all!

I really hate people that already believe this stuff right at the end of the video. The title of the series of the show has the word THEORY doesn't mean anything he says is considered true. Heck, even he said that he doesn' t believe his own theories.

I think people criticize Game Theory too much. I fully enjoy every episode. Link's dead in Majora's Mask was interesting but it doesn't mean I have to believe it. The mental Mario theory was pretty shocking but I don't believe it. This episode was interesting as well and it gives you food for thought.

Keep in mind that while these games are in a fantasy setting, the GT guy is just comparing their physics, etc. to the real world's. I don't think he means to be too serious about these.

...though one thing he should change is it should be Game Hypothesis. Theory is misused here

@WaLzgi That depends on your point of view. If we go by what the GT guy himself proposes, then theory is right since he uses real life science and physics that have been proven, to apply them to events happening in video games.
For anyone interested, here are the differences between theory and hypothesis:
(and just to be clear: there are some common denominators, but I tend to lean more towards theory, although not because he named his channel as such. It's just my opinion)

While the terms are sometimes used interchangeably in everyday use, the difference between a theory and a hypothesis is important when studying experimental design. Some important distinctions to note include:

• A theory predicts events in general terms, while a hypothesis makes a specific prediction about a specified set of circumstances.
• A theory has been extensively tested and is generally accepted, while a hypothesis is a speculative guess that has yet to be tested.

I just love it when fiction gets deconstructed in such a serious way, despite it being fairly obvious that it's not designed around realism in the slightest. O can still learn from stuff like that, but it doesn't change my view on the medium in question at all.

@Spoony_Tech I wouldn't be too quick on that, but you'll most likely need to survive until cryogenics advanced far enough to be safe. It's gonna take a lot of time until energy sources will be invented that can power a virtual storage that allows for digitalization and rematerialization of both the human body as well as a combat suit.

As an alumni of the university where the Mario research was conducted, I have to say I couldn't be more proud of the students dedication to the Nintendo cause.

I loving hate Game Theory. All their theories are stupid (Link is dead, Peach is dead, and Rosalina is Peach's daughter?) and unnecessarily controversial. They just want the attention and to ruin people's childhood in the process.
_{Please watch the profanity — TBD}

The narrators announcer voice turned me off. I couldn't stand a minute of it.

This was a little interesting, although I don't think there's only those metals in Hyrule, and the chain seems much thinner than what he's supposing. Anyway, it was a nice video.

Next time he should try explaining the Switch Hook

Poor Link is probably dead.

But I mean, as said, these are fantasy worlds. In Hyrule, who says they don't have metals that are lighter and more sturdy than the ones we have? That alone makes the first half of the Longshot equation irrelevant. Plus, no one ever said Hylian biology is that similar to human biology, they could be much more durable (after all, they deal with monsters on a regular basis), I mean macro evolution is likely irrelevant considering Hyrule was supposedly created by the goddesses (and I mean perhaps that could be considered myth but the existence of the Triforce alone at least seems to prove supernatural forces exist), so the goddesses could've created Hylians with much stronger bones and organs - or even just the Hero of Time, for all we know the average Hylian would be ripped to shreds using Link's tools, he does have a piece of the Triforce after all, I assume that thing is just for show.

But why am I even wasting my time arguing this? It's fiction, just enjoy it. Honestly, game theories really waste their time using all this math based on real world variables. All this proves is that, no matter how rich I might get, building a real world hook shot would be suicide.

@Jahir I'm pretty sure the switchhook is just plain magic, there's not much to calculate there unless there's calculations based on theoretical teleportation.

That's It. I'm making the hook shot even if it kills me.

I stopped caring about Game Theory after "Mario Is Mental". What a slop-job that one was.

@octane That was my thinking, too, with the chain and him skipping the impact. Although, I think everyone knows it is impractical as shown in the game. So funny how he mentions the iron boots and how they weigh him down "when he wears them" but then is concerned about the physics of holding the weight of the hookshot and the precise rates of fire. Obviously, games bend reality to fit what's fun, and he does mention that but: Hey, there's all this mysterious crazy magic constantly displayed in the game...

Still, it was an interesting and entertaining video.

I wonder if there is a practical solution for this type of thing, where acceleration is considered and materials are carefully considered. Something less heavy than a chain would be used of course, maybe some sort of twisted nano carbon tube ropes or something. The acceleration and deceleration would be tough to control because you actually need to be pulled in a somewhat straight line for it to be useful.

@TheRealThanos I usually use the tested definition myself. It makes things so much simpler

@Darknyht You've best summed it all up for me. Science has no bearing at all in the realms of fantasy, to mix the two is silly at best and just plain stupid at worst. To have a fanciful what if moment is perfectly fine and a good exercise of the mind from time to time. But if you are wasting precious funds on outlandish garbage like Mario Galaxy "Physics" or take 85% of what game theory says seriously, then you have issues.

I liked the Majora's Mask theory. Please don't hate me...

If link can survive that, than he is a BOSS!!!

@WaLzgi The tested one IS the theory:

• A theory has been extensively tested and is generally accepted, while a hypothesis is a speculative guess that has yet to be tested.

@evosteevo Yeah, that was actually quite a good Game Theory and some of it really made sense.
@Hamguar Hey man, no need to get so worked up about it. It's just a bit of harmless fun and speculation, the guy that makes these videos isn't a real scientist at all. Maybe a smart student but no more than that. He just does this for fun and to maybe entertain some of us. And after all, it's only a theory: a GAME Theory...

@Chaos_Eevee Huh, interesting. That was the theory that completely destroyed my already dying interest in the show. It jumped to so many conclusions (unrelated people share similar traits all the time on Earth, let alone in the vastness of space!), errors (the tree in the book and the tree in the ending sequence were completely different trees!), and just plain poor research (the developers said that at one point, they planned to make Peach and Rosalina related (hence the similar appearances/traits), but decided against that. Therefore, NOT RELATED.) Not to mention I had the opposite effect - I thought it totally shat on her backstory.

His 5 Nights video, while a theory I did personally disagree with, was what revived my interest in the series, because I found it interesting and actually well researched.

@Seanmyster6 Lol, yes I agree, that was another theory on Game Theory that can only be described as awfully done.

After the horrible Rosalina episode and the way that he kept shoving the Mario is Psycho theory down our throats, I decided to just give up on GT.

His "theories" have gotten so asinine that even MatPat's die-hard defenders/followers are having a hard time trying to watch through cringing.

This guy lost all credibility for me when he started selling out to audible dotcom. Prior to that, he was really entertaining. Seriously dude, why???

@Pahvi My point is that there are more important things to be exploring than whether Super Mario Galaxy follows the rules of physics. Is it really a surprise that in a world where Mario eats Mushrooms to grow and flowers to gain the ability to throw fireballs that there are planets that cannot exist? How much time was spent to come to the conclusion?

As for Game Theory, he is entertaining and wasting nothing but his own time. Although much like the above, video games (like most entertainment) aren't really concerned with following science and will happily use "Deus Ex Machina" to break those rules when they are inconvenient to the story.

Welp, I was never a big fan of GT, and watching this video certainly affirmed that opinion. sighs

@StarDust4Ever the hell is wrong with having some extra cash. its not like audio books is bad

They should call mythbusters to see if the hookshot idea is even feasable. In the real world, the motor would have a fixed amount of torque available. The article based ther findings on a nearly instant acceleration of zero-to-max speed in 1/10 sec. A real hook shot would acellerate until it reached the maximum ascention rate for the payload. Also, the person wouldn't travel in a strait line but follow an arc as the hookshot rope swings like a pendulum, potentially draging the operator across hazards or possibly bludgeoning him into environmental obstacles.

As for Mario Galaxy, the planetoids are not super-massive, only the black holes within them. Funny but there are a few planetoids in the game where Mario can reach the escape velocity with a long jump or triple jump followed by a mid-air spin. Typically this results in floating into space or falling into a black hole, resulting in death.