Play a Mario game...or don't. Either way, if I'm playing something fun — whichever character's name is on the box — that's enough for me.
I don't have to play Mario games. If they stop appealing to me, I'll move on. And if I do, I'll play something else that does appeal to me. There's no problem here at all, especially when I'm choosing, to use your phrasing, between one thing that I find fun and something else that I find fun.
EDIT: Listen, I'm glad you want more from the Mario franchise right now but could you AT LEAST wait for the next 3D Mario game? I promise, if it's any kind of sequel then I'll shut up.
What, you don't like Super Mario Bros. 2? That game was a classic!
It was also a re-skin. Oh and the JP SMB2 had the same visuals as the original, and it had (more or less) the same game mechanics. Which, for you guys, means it's uncreative.
Doki Doki Panic was originally meant to be a Mario game. The idea was scrapped and Nintendo made it a non-Mario game instead. Later, because Nintendo disliked Super Mario Bros.: The Lost Levels's difficulty, they released Doki Doki Panic in the form of Super Mario Bros. 2, the way they originally intended it to be. Plus, the game itself was creative, and in a way, Doki Doki Panic was basically a Super Mario Bros. 2 prototype that was released to the Japanese public. Also, nowhere on my list did I mention Super Mario Bros.: The Lost Levels being a creative game. That game was basically an expansion pack, and the title of the game pretty much gives that away.
That still doesn't change the fact that they took a game and put Mario in it. Imaginative. It's still a remarkable game, I'm not taking that away from that. All I'm saying is that they were probably going to let Doki Doki Panic stay the same if SMB2 wasn't as difficult. And how many new ideas do you need in order to feel like it's original? NSMB is just "unoriginal" because it has the same art-style throughout the series. Do you know why that is? It's because there aren't much graphical limitations anymore. Mario looks the same because that's just how he looks.
Listen, I don't mean to shoot down the whole discussion. I'd LOVE a new Mario game with new ideas. It would be fun. Y'know what else would be fun? If I popped in the disc for NSMBU and played through some levels. They're both fun, and they can both coexist.
How about I put it this way. When you buy Skittles, do you expect it to taste unlike Skittles? Think of the New Super Mario Bros. series as comfort food. You can buy it once in awhile* and you'll always get what you payed for. A new Super Mario Bros. game.
*They've only released one per console so far. So until they release NSMBU2, I don't want to hear "E3 2013, NEW SUPER MARIO BROS. 3/U2"
Super Mario Bros. 2 was basically a re-skin of a re-skin. Doki Doki Panic was originally supposed to be a Mario game, but later Nintendo made non-Mario characters the game protagonists. Then Nintendo brought Doki Doki Panic to America by releasing the game in the format it was originally intended to be: as a Mario game. I know that Super Mario Bros. 2 was a re-skin, but it was a creative game and Super Mario Bros. 2 and Doki Doki Panic weren't meant to co-exist. Doki Doki Panic was originally meant to be Super Mario Bros. 2, and since they're supposed to be the same games, they are creative games, even if they co-exist as different games with different character and object skins. I usually think of Doki Doki Panic as a publically released Super Mario Bros. 2 prototype. You can go ahead and keep defending your point on why you think Super Mario Bros. 2 is uncreative, but I believe what I believe, okay?
Also, I never said the NSMB franchise is uncreative because of its art style. The NSMB franchise is uncreative because of re-using ideas and concepts from past Mario games in each NSMB game, like Super Mario Bros. 3 and Super Mario World, then adding a few new details here and there and calling it a new Mario game. And honestly, are you really comparing the NSMB franchise to Skittles? Skittles and video games are from two completely different worlds, and one is to satisfy your taste buds, and one is to entertain you. I want Skittles to be the same because that's food, and Skittles are a $1 package. I want Mario games to be different because those are video games, and I don't want to go buying the same $40-60 dollar package with a minimal amount of new details per game.
No, you can't do that. You said "Later, because Nintendo disliked Super Mario Bros.: The Lost Levels's difficulty, they released Doki Doki Panic in the form of Super Mario Bros. 2, the way they originally intended it to be" but once I said "All I'm saying is that they were probably going to let Doki Doki Panic stay the same if SMB2 wasn't as difficult" you changed your mind and said "Doki Doki Panic was originally supposed to be a Mario game, but later Nintendo made non-Mario characters the game protagonists. Then Nintendo brought Doki Doki Panic to America by releasing the game in the format it was originally intended to be: as a Mario game." Now, unless you just forgot the part where they thought Lost Levels was too hard, you just lied to me. Now, maybe they WERE going to release this as Super Mario Panic, that still makes Lost Levels the real Super Mario Bros. 2, and that was a game sorely lacking any creativity. They released OUR Super Mario Bros. 2 because they didn't want to take the chance of it being too hard for us. Now, we have the internet. Nintendo knows how skilled American gamers are, and now they can comfortably release NSMB2 with all it's insanely difficult DLC and (this is gonna sound stupid) "sameyness." Once again, I DON'T want to stop the whole discussion about creativity, I want creativity in my Mario games too. but could you at the least wait for the next 3D console Mario game?
Formerly MickeyTheGreat and MickMick. Now I'm Mickey again!
Play a Mario game...or don't. Either way, if I'm playing something fun — whichever character's name is on the box — that's enough for me.
I don't have to play Mario games. If they stop appealing to me, I'll move on. And if I do, I'll play something else that does appeal to me. There's no problem here at all, especially when I'm choosing, to use your phrasing, between one thing that I find fun and something else that I find fun.
Well, now your point at least makes sense, and I can agree with it. But, I think what Classic's trying to say is that it's an issue for Nintendo if their games, especially Mario, their Key franchise, aren't being creative Eventually, people will no longer find a reason to keep playing Mario games, because they all seem the same.
Personally, I also think Nintendo has been a great creative drive for the AAA gaming industry, one that seems to be becoming completely bankrupt of new ideas, and if even Nintendo comes off as being out of ideas, how will that effect the industry as a whole? I certainly can't see anything good coming out of it, that's for sure.
It's good that you can think small, but I just don't think this is the time for it. There's more at stake than your own personal enjoyment, here.
There's more at stake than your own personal enjoyment, here.
I'm aware, but "my own personal enjoyment" is all I really have the right to lay claim on. It's all anyone has the right to lay claim on.
Nintendo's titles are selling just fine. For every "Mario is boring now" thread on the internet, that same "boring" game sells a million copies. It's nice to think that a lack of creativity will cause the company / series / industry to fall apart, but that's never been the case in any industry. Unless you really think the best selling albums represent the best music, the highest-grossing films represent the best writing and directing, and the most popular TV shows are also the most creative.
It doesn't hold true in any medium. Creativity isn't as important to profitability as people would like to think.
I'm mostly talking about AAA gaming, which is a different beast. It's more expensive and very risky, especially when it comes to new things, and if there's less people proving that risk is worth it, I can imagine it would become more and more difficult for creative games to be made at all.
If we're talking about our own personal enjoyment, then personally, I'd hate to be forced to stop playing AAA games simply because no one's coming up with anything new anymore.
Unless you really think the best selling albums represent the best music, the highest-grossing films represent the best writing and directing, and the most popular TV shows are also the most creative.
It doesn't hold true in any medium. Creativity isn't as important to profitability as people would like to think.
I hope people actually read and digest this. If they could realize this they would finally shut up about how "unoriginal" Mario games are.
A person without a sense of humor is like a wagon without springs. It's jolted by every pebble on the road.
Zelda alone is proof that the assumption that similar games in a series have to feel uncreative and dead is false. Super Mario Galaxy 2 is just Galaxy again for the most part, but was brilliantly made, interesting and just a freaking great video game. The New Super Mario Bros. games were a fun nostalgia idea that quickly fade once you realize that they are not really that great and the art and music seem to exist to try to swallow what quality there is into a black hole of blandness. Granted, it is not the worst example of this despite my complaints, just far below normal Mario standards. The main problem I have with it though as that it breaks my one rule about games and greediness, I should not feel the marketing team in the product. Even just playing the game, makes it apparent to me that barring the DS game, these games exist without any creative spark or interest in good gaming and mainly to make more money because Mario. There is a big difference between knowing what sells, and blatantly not trying. At least 3D Land I can kinda believe was the 3D Mario that's a 2D Mario that Miyamoto and friends wanted, because that's at least KINDA interesting and it had some great use of 3D. And I'm certain what I'm saying, even as someone whose not an expert on game development or anything, is true. It fits too well and I'm not sick of any other Mario, even older Mario games I don't have nostalgia for like Mario Land 2 are at least not boring.
If they want Mario to be a shameless sellout, they have a billion stupid spinoff ideas they could make, but leave it out of the important games.
And I'll fully admit, this is entirely for my personal enjoyment for my favorite video game series and nothing else. But that alone is a good enough reason for anything so yeah, screw everyone else's opinions.
My real worry more than some disappointing games now (this was my reaction to Mario Sunshine, though I appreciate it more now), is that Nintendo doesn't have to try anymore. They could literally do nothing new with Mario for the next decade and make as much money as usual, perhaps more because of it. Like SMB1 on the NES was the first game I ever played, so I'd hate to turn against the series in any real way.
Since the first New Super Mario Brothers game in 2006, going by main titles, New Super Mario Brothers Wii, Super Mario Galaxy 2 and New Super Mario Brothers U drifted from creativity more so than New Super Mario Brothers 2, Super Mario 3D Land and obviously Super Mario Galaxy. I'm going by game themes, the first three didn't do a thing, where as NSMB2 had the heaviest emphasis on coin collection in the series, Super Mario 3D Land made a field day of the Super Leaf power-up and of course Galaxy took Mario fully into space bringing back the variety of 64 in new "planetoid" forms. I hope there are more games like New Super Mario Brothers 2, Super Mario 3D Land and of course Super Mario Galaxy in the future, games that stick to a new theme and just run with it in their design.
I would like to see more of the Mario universe used though. A major problem with the mindset of Mario developers is the fact that they separate the franchise up, rather than considering the character's entire universe to draw ideas from. For example, there are tons of ideas just waiting to take off from within the RPGs for future Super Mario games. The potential there can lead to brand new stories where Bowser is no longer the main antagonist and rather could be part of the co-op mayhem. It would be nice for them to venture beyond the Super Mario name in the franchise for their ideas. Hopefully, the next 3D Mario does do this.
"The secret to ultimate power lies in the Alimbic Cluster."
@Philip_J_Reed - good point, the series' profitability can't be denied. There is very low incentive for innovation - sadly, as I find the games to be creatively bankrupt.
I'm very curious as to what Mario U will be like. Hopefully, it will be a surprise to everyone and be a true innovation using Wii U's functions to the fullest.
Actually I should take back what I said about Galaxy 2. While it is in a lot of ways just Galaxy again with new levels, most of those new levels don't just feel like old levels again. They feel like new levels in another game that's like Galaxy. Another problem I have with NSMB games is that you could take pretty much any level from the games, put them into a different one and barring any difference in graphical ability or a green coin area, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Its like NES Megaman, except no where near as enjoyable levels or music (music is also a big thing for me in gaming). Also Galaxy 2 had all new powerups with mostly minimal use of older powerups, and Yoshi, and a ton of random, often one-off new gameplay ideas too.
I don't want to spend eternity ranting about this, I've done that enough quite frankly and to be a bit fair to Nintendo, they seem to be nice enough to keep the series as a once per console thing like Mario Kart. Good.
Forums
Topic: The importance of creativity in Mario games.
Posts 21 to 32 of 32
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.