[QUOTE="Madmangamer364"]
Who cares how long ago it's been since it's been done? The fact is that this isn't the first time a Nintendo console has seen multiple Mario platformers, and it has worked out well each time. If anything, it should be a compliment to the series' longevity and ability to release multiple installments in a gen without losing an edge moving forward, something not many franchises can say. The only difference between now and the NES days is that somehow, it's now considered to be a desperate act by Nintendo, instead a celebrated event where the entire gaming universe can't wait to their hands on more Mario. Perception aside, it's the same exact circumstance.
kenakuma
This statement, "Who cares how long ago it's been since it's been done?" contradicts aaaaaaaaaaaaall of this,"The fact is that this isn't the first time a Nintendo console has seen multiple Mario platformers, and it has worked out well each time. If anything, it should be a compliment to the series' longevity and ability to release multiple installments in a gen without losing an edge moving forward, something not many franchises can say."
Obviously the fact it was last done in the Nes era 1,2,3,4 gens ago very much is a testament against all the reasons you listed.
"If anything, it should be a compliment to the series' longevity and ability to release multiple installments in a gen without losing an edge moving forward"
^ Yeah if only that where true :| The truth is Ninty DOSEN'T release multiple marios in the same gen in fears of the franchise losing both its longevity and edge, the last two own up to that N64 and GC. The only exception they would make is if they were certain that the sequel was 10,000 miles ahead of its predecesor and was a next gen game within itself which is basically what SMB3 was, waaaay ahead of its time.
So far from what I've seen SMG2 to SMG =/= SMB3 to SMB, not buy a long shot and definetly not the same exact circumstances!
I fail to see how those two statements contradict each other. You're the one trying to make the argument that somehow it's a bad thing for Nintendo to release multiple Mario games in a gen, even though it's been done before successfully without damage, and that it's also a bad thing that it's been so long since Nintendo has used such an approach for its consoles. That this somehow all smells like some desperate act for the company, when the two times it has happened, the company was in the best position it was ever in at the time prior to it. Desperation would make more sense if we were talking about the GCN here, but not the NES and especially not the Wii. In any case, seeing as how Nintendo has been around that long and can do this again does indeed speak volumes that Mario has the longevity in qualtiy and consumer trust that Nintendo would consider this again. We're talking about an industry where franchises seem to live and die by the gen, so it is a compliment that there is something that can be successful at any time and do it multiple times a gen and still have the power to move on.
Once again, you're going to have to elaborate in detail where you found a contradiction in my previous statement, as I'm just not seeing it.
Who says the reason the N64 and GCN didn't see multiple Mario games was because Nintendo was fearful of the series losing something? Have you worked for Nintendo or something in the past, because that's a rather bold thing to say without any solid proof. Heck, Zelda did see multiple installments in both of those gens, so maybe that's where the attention was being focused on instead. Furthermore, there's no rule that a sequel has to make an SMB3-like jump in order for it to be justified. The only thing that matters is if Nintendo wants to put forth the work to develop more than one Mario game a gen or not, and obviously, they've decided to do so with the Wii. You're trying to use the N64 and GCN as evidence that making one Mario game a gen is the only way to go, and the problem is that in the other gens, the series has held up just as well with multiple installments, if not significantly better in terms of quality and sales. Where exactly are you getting these unwritten rules that Mario has to be developed and used a certain way each gen?
I'm really trying hard to understand your logic here, but the more I look at it, the less I get out of it. To put it simply, what exactly is so harmful about Nintendo deciding to release more than one Mario game this gen on the Wii? I could see if it was simply something you didn't desire, and I would respect that, but you're acting like this is an unjustified coporate panic move by Nintendo when it's anything but that. If Galaxy was sufficient enough and if the Wii is still a successful console, where exactly is the desperation coming from for Nintendo to release another Mario game? Perhaps they're doing this because it's what they WANT to do, and not what they NEED to do?
Log in to comment