Topic: Splitting Franchises...

This is an idea i've been thinking about since NSMBW, and since i just saw Adam mention something similar, i thought i would start a thread. Here's what i think Ninty should do... what are your thoughts?

I thinkk they ought to split some of their major franchises in two. This gives them more variety to offer to players, and can allow two teams to work on, say, a Mario game simultaneously, giving us more games. Let me show you what i have in mind:

Super Mario (3D Mario in keeping with 64, Sunshine, Galaxy, and Galaxy 2)
vs.
Super Mario Bros. (2D Mario along the lines of SMB, SMB Lost Levels, SMB2, SMB3, World. drop the "New" portion of NSMB since it's unnecessary as long as you have the Bros. to differentiate between 2D and 3D)

Metroid (2D, such as Metroid, Super Metroid and Other M)
vs.
Metroid Prime (FPS like Prime, Prime 2, and Prime 3... Ninty has no other FPS Franchise)

Legend of Zelda (3D action-adventure like OCarina, MM, and TP)
vs.
Link('s whatever) (Rail Shooter/Lightgun like Crossbow Training and the possible Crossbow Training 2, but bigger games. Ninty has no other Lightgun franchises still running)
vs.
maybe Zelda (a return to 2D action-adventure like LoZ, or A Link to the Past)

now, they have 7 games and 7 genres where they previously had 3. expansion of genres, expansion of continuity, expansion of a console's library. nobody loses. anybody like/dislike this? have any other franchises you'd like to see going in multiple directions?

I'm not sure I follow. Are you suggesting they do this for these series? Because they already do. Well, they used to for Metroid, though they've slacked off in the 2D department since the 2D team has been working on Other M -- which can only be a good sign.

Zelda doesn't have a 2D series, but the Toon Link series has become a series unto itself complete with a different team working on it. And New Super Mario Bros. is now technically a series.

I do really like that they're doing this, though, and if it's at all practical, I hope they continue to do so. Personally, I'd rather see new worlds / characters / IPs explored with these spin-off series, but doesn't make that big a difference as long as the game is fun.

What difference would it make to say "They are different franchises now!"
They are already subfranchises of these franchises, would make no sense to make them different franchises at all
also they are developed by different Teams (would be logical because New Super Mario Bros. Wii and Super Mario Galaxy 2 were developed around the same time and afaik every team only develops one game at the same time)

Yeah, what Adam said, they pretty much already are. If they were to pump out games exactly as you outline, bro, I think the quality of the games would dip and my wallet would be empty and they'd just be milking their once-legendary franchises.
EDIT: Also, I like their franchises exactly how they are right now.

I don't know that the quality would dip. Nintendo has the resources to put different teams on each series. NSMBW definitely was high quality despite fitting in this scheme just fine. And I'd love for Aonuma to be able to develop the Crossbow game into a series if Nintendo allowed him to.

@Adam I'm just going by the fact that their first-party releases are few and far between on the Wii each year. I know they're rich and have the resources, but presumably if they were going to have multiple installments of each franchise every two years or so, they'd be forced to rush them and they wouldn't be as polished as usual at the least. And either way, I'd be broke.

these are just the examples i used because they seem to be happening already. but i could see it for others, too (for instance, i'm dying to see DK make a platforming return, but if Ninty wanted, they could do that and try again at the rythm genre with him at the same time with a Donkey Konga 3). and Other M could be just one game. nobody knows where the series is going from there. the Toon Link stuff on the handhelds is a separate thing, pretty much, but they are the same as the console versions, largely, in terms of gameplay. i'd love to see new IPs, as well, but i'd just as much want their existing big names to be a fleshed out as possible.

and, Oddy, are you saying you'd rather them release fewer games so that you can buy them all, then for them to release as many quality titles as they can so you can have choices? that doesn't make much sense to me.

As long as it gives me more Metroid, I'm all for it!

Odnetnin, there's no basis for assuming that they'd be rushed though. Nintendo has the money to hire more personnel for more teams or bigger teams if they were to continue this approach. I remember someone saying something about the Mario RPGs, something like every other year we get either a M&L game or a PM game. I'm too lazy to look it up and see exactly how it works, but it splits one concept (Mario in an RPG) into two different series, and they alternate from one series to the other in order to produce games more frequently without stretching thin a single series that would quickly go stale with such frequent sequelization.

My (albeit pathetic) basis is that Nintendo only cranks out a few games every year. They don't reveal much info about projects until they're near completion and they're satisfied with them, and they obviously care about quality (most of the time). This makes Nintendo appear to be a developer who takes their time and even plans brilliant game concepts years ahead. I just don't think bro's idea sounds like Nintendo and they would have to adapt to a schedule like the one he mentions.

@bro I'm just saying I'm comfortable with their pace. Not too many; not too little (for my tastes), all quality.

He never really suggested a schedule, though, really. Most of what he describes they already do, so obviously they can do it. And your basis doesn't have anything to do with they can do, just with what they currently do. There's no denying the company is made of money. They could build a new studio and/or hire more hands if they wanted to "split" another of their franchises without affecting any of what they already do. I don't think any of their other series would really be conducive to this sort of approach anyway, myself. F-Zero is a racer. Game play is the same in 2D and 3D. Star Fox barely manages to get one entry out regularly, much less two, and usually isn't worth it anyway. Pikmin would be cool on DS and Wii, though I imagine it'd basically be the same thing. Fire Emblem stays the same on both platforms, so it can't really "split." Etc. All I hope is that they continue with the series that are split.

All I can say is that if this means more good games, then Im all for it. I mean, there is people doing what they do best with the series, and sticking to it. So if this translates having those good with 2d on 2d games, and those good at 3d in 3d games, then its a good idea.

Same here. But the possibilities of money are pretty much limitless, so I'm going with what Nintendo's been doing for 30 years. Also, I don't think they could do it like that, all officially. Everyone expects a new Mario or Zelda every two or three years, but they don't beg for a Mario RPG, or a handheld Zelda. I interpret bro's ideas as literally turning them all into separate franchises, which is different than basically doing it without dividing them up officially.
EDIT: I used "schedule" for lack of a better term, sorry. I meant operating franchises exactly as bro describes.
EDIT 2: It seems to be all down to our interpretations of his idea.

I have no idea what that means, turning them into "separate franchises" or dividing them "officially." Could you explain? I mean, they basically are different series. They have different teams working on them, they're for different platforms, and they have a unique, consistent style. The only thing that could make it official I can see would be to give each series a unique name, such as "The Adventures of Toon Link" (obviously that's terrible, but you get the point), which wouldn't affect Nintendo's ability to continue producing them as frequently or with as good quality. What am I missing here? It seems like some posters are taking this to mean something else entirely from what I see.

The interpretations of Odnetnin:
Nintendo now:
Super Mario, The Legend of Zelda, Metroid, etc. are their main franchises.
Paper Mario, Mario & Luigi, Mario vs. Donkey Kong, Link's Crossbow Training, Freshly-Picked Tingle's Rosy Rupeeland, etc. are spin-offs of their franchises that have spawned their own series, in some cases.
Mario & Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story has sold well, mostly because it is a Mario game. Many have invested in a seemingly useless Wii Zapper because Link was on the box, regardless of Crossbow Training's quality.
bro's proposal:
See first post. He wants Nintendo to have Mario series A and Mario series B exist at the same time, which would create fans of both series. They would want more, and Nintendo would obviously have to make more.

This is different than Nintendo having Super Mario; everybody is clamoring for the next one, and they release a Mario RPG in between, which people pick up (mostly) because it's Mario. They aren't begging for new installments in both series, there is just one main attraction. It is because of this that Nintendo has the flexibility to release these "spin-offs." I realize that Mario & Luigi, a Mario RPG series, is developed by AlphaDream. They are not under nearly as much pressure as Nintendo to create the next Mario masterpiece. If they were, like bro proposes, then that would create more strain for that developer, for example, and their products might not be as high of quality.
Just speculation, though I think I have reason behind it, at least from my interpretation of bro's view.

I still don't get what you're saying, unfortunately. Nintendo is already making the NSMB and 3D Mario series separately and concurrently. They're already doing the same for Toon Link and normal person Link. They used to do the same with Metroid GBA and Metroid Prime. There's no reason to think this is causing a strain since they are each made by different teams. Why do you think Nintendo can't do what he's proposing when they are already doing it?

The only series not currently split is Metroid, but that's not due to necessity. Retro was making one half of the series while Nintendo's team made the other. It's just that Nintendo's team took over Retro's job for the time being, which sadly means we'll only get one Metroid in the near future, probably, but hopefully it'll be awesome enough to make up for that!

The Mario RPG series shouldn't even be considered a "Mario" game for these purposes because he's talking about the platformers; however, they do fit the bill as well. M&L is made by Alpha Dream. Paper Mario is made by Intelligent Systems. They never get released in the same year, so Mario RPG fans can constantly get new games to play. Zelda and Mario get treated the same way, though their games are still pretty spread out.

Metroid is the only series that has had two games released on the same day, Fusion and Prime. I think it was the same day, anyway, but at the time it made sense as it was a way to get exposure for a series that had sadly been dormant for very long. That was a great time to be a Metroid fan!

In conclusion: Huh?

@Oddy: the mario RPGs are another example of what i was talking about, though i already consider them separate. but they are pressured by nintendo to make games of the same quality as the team making Galaxy 2. it's just a different genre. i think the only thing really different with my suggestion would be the games being released more frequently. instead of Mario being a 3D platformer with the rare 2D game tossed in as a side-thought to please fans, i'd love to see that be two different franchises with two teams dedicated to releasing a new entry every so often. yes they were made by different teams, but that was not the focus of the NSMBW team. their focus is to make what Ninty tells them to make. i'd just like to see the spin-offs elevated to the same evel as the main attractions and given the same level of attention.

I don't think there's any reason to believe NSMB will not be maintained as a series. Nintendo said Galaxy 2 could have been readied for this year, but they held it back so that we could get a regular dosage of Mario platforming. It's a smart move, as impatient as we may be. Think of the short time span between Galaxy 2 and Galaxy, and think of the somewhat short time span between the two NSMBs. They can definitely make quality games (assuming Galaxy 2 is good) in short periods of time if they don't try to reinvent the wheel with each iteration.

@bro I'd like that too. The NSMB Wii team and the Galaxy team are separate, though.
I'll get back to Adam in a second.