Nintendo's "Overused" Franchises

To the people who keep saying Nintendo overuses it's franchises, I offer you this challenge:

List the games that are centered around the character being so frequently used, and how many times they are used per generation.

As an example:
A sport game that includes Mario characters. The game is not about Mario's adventures, hell he plays with Bowser in friendly games of tennis. The game is tennis, not a Mario game. The same applies to Mario Kart, in the storyline that involves Mario saving Princess Peach, no where is kart racing a part of the story or even part of the game. These games may use the characters, but it's a different game, it's a different franchise that doesn't build at all on other games that feature Mario characters. The *only* connecting feature is that Mario's in it.

An example of a game that builds on the same franchise, but it fundimentally different would be the Metriod Series and the Metriod Prime series. Game mechanics totally different, but the storyline is connected, and the games are about the adventures of Samus, not about Samus playing tennis.

-

Of course, this is SW, and using SW logic, if the game has Mario in it, it is automatically a Mario game, regardless of how utterly unrelated to the story of the Mushroom Kingdom it is.

So to put it in a few words. You spun the whole thing so all of Nintendo's Mario milking don't count.

:lol: What a joke.

So to put it in a few words. You spun the whole thing so all of Nintendo's Mario milking don't count.

:lol: What a joke.

NobuoMusicMaker

As I said, it's SW logic.

You're missing the point.

"Mario" tennis is still a Mario game. Nintendo milks Mario, Zelda, and Metroid for all they are worth. Mainly the first two. Mainly Mario.

Don't blame us, blame Nintendo for putting Mario's name on 50% of the games they make (exaggeration but you get it).

If Nintendo didn't want the game to be considered a "Mario game", they would have called it "Tennis", or "Nintennis" or whatever silly name they could think of. Its based off the Mario universe/characters. Therefore its a Mario game.

Thank you.

You're missing the point.

"Mario" tennis is still a Mario game. Nintendo milks Mario, Zelda, and Metroid for all they are worth. Mainly the first two. Mainly Mario.

Don't blame us, blame Nintendo for putting Mario's name on 50% of the games they make (eggaduration but you get it).

If Nintendo didn't want the game to be considered a "Mario game", they would have called it "Tennis", or "Nintennis" or whatever silly name they could think of. Its based off the Mario universe/characters. Therefore its a Mario game.

Thank you.

0rin

Howis ita Mario game? Is it about Mario? Is he the protagonist? Is he the hero? Does he have more screentime than the other characters? Does the game revolve around him? It might as well be Luigi Tennis, or Bowser Tennis, or Wario Tennis.

But as I said, it's SW logic being used.

TheMario Kart gamesare the best Mario games outside the adventure games. How dare you say they "don't count."slothboyadvance

I think you forgot SSB :P (Or maybe you didn't :o)

You're missing the point.

"Mario" tennis is still a Mario game. Nintendo milks Mario, Zelda, and Metroid for all they are worth. Mainly the first two. Mainly Mario.

Don't blame us, blame Nintendo for putting Mario's name on 50% of the games they make (eggaduration but you get it).

If Nintendo didn't want the game to be considered a "Mario game", they would have called it "Tennis", or "Nintennis" or whatever silly name they could think of. Its based off the Mario universe/characters. Therefore its a Mario game.

Thank you.

0rin

Now I agree with you on Mario but Metroid and Zelda are not milked. With the exeption of Metroid Prime Pinball, every Metroid and Zelda game has stayed true to their roots.

(And don't even pull out the CDi Zelda games argument, they weren't even made by Nintendo)

You're missing the point.

"Mario" tennis is still a Mario game. Nintendo milks Mario, Zelda, and Metroid for all they are worth. Mainly the first two. Mainly Mario.

Don't blame us, blame Nintendo for putting Mario's name on 50% of the games they make (eggaduration but you get it).

If Nintendo didn't want the game to be considered a "Mario game", they would have called it "Tennis", or "Nintennis" or whatever silly name they could think of. Its based off the Mario universe/characters. Therefore its a Mario game.

Thank you.

0rin

Nintendo milks Zelda? Zelda Tennis FTW!!!

Nintendo is using its big franchises to base games off of, not a bad idea, but they've gone a bit far. There are too many mario's, too many mario karts, too many mario parties, etc, doesn't matter how you word it, they are all over used. Nintendo needs a new franchise, mario is an old man now and he isn't as great as he used to me. Mario 64 was cool, I guess, but I think that was the point I realised Mario's glory days were pretty much over.falconclan

On the assumption I give that Nintendo inserts Mario into far too many games, anyone care to list off any other franchise that they've overused? Anyone?

Nintendo is using its big franchises to base games off of, not a bad idea, but they've gone a bit far. There are too many mario's, too many mario karts, too many mario parties, etc, doesn't matter how you word it, they are all over used. Nintendo needs a new franchise, mario is an old man now and he isn't as great as he used to me. Mario 64 was cool, I guess, but I think that was the point I realised Mario's glory days were pretty much over.falconclan

Mario Party is an annual thing, just like sports. I admit it seems like too much but it's not like I'm forced to buy it. However, to say there are too many Mario Karts is, IMO, just plain awful because there's just one kart game per generation. Look at the other franchises from Sony and Microsoft and they usually have sequels within the same generation.

[QUOTE="falconclan"]Nintendo is using its big franchises to base games off of, not a bad idea, but they've gone a bit far. There are too many mario's, too many mario karts, too many mario parties, etc, doesn't matter how you word it, they are all over used. Nintendo needs a new franchise, mario is an old man now and he isn't as great as he used to me. Mario 64 was cool, I guess, but I think that was the point I realised Mario's glory days were pretty much over.RahnAetas

On the assumption I give that Nintendo inserts Mario into far too many games, anyone care to list off any other franchise that they've overused? Anyone?

Where are the new characters dare I ask? Hell how bout we bring back the old ones for games other then super smash bros.

Nintendo is using its big franchises to base games off of, not a bad idea, but they've gone a bit far. There are too many mario's, too many mario karts, too many mario parties, etc, doesn't matter how you word it, they are all over used. Nintendo needs a new franchise, mario is an old man now and he isn't as great as he used to me. Mario 64 was cool, I guess, but I think that was the point I realised Mario's glory days were pretty much over.falconclan

I think you're talking about Mario Party. Because every other Mario Game only gets one per generation.

[QUOTE="RahnAetas"]

[QUOTE="falconclan"]Nintendo is using its big franchises to base games off of, not a bad idea, but they've gone a bit far. There are too many mario's, too many mario karts, too many mario parties, etc, doesn't matter how you word it, they are all over used. Nintendo needs a new franchise, mario is an old man now and he isn't as great as he used to me. Mario 64 was cool, I guess, but I think that was the point I realised Mario's glory days were pretty much over.falconclan

On the assumption I give that Nintendo inserts Mario into far too many games, anyone care to list off any other franchise that they've overused? Anyone?

Where are the new characters dare I ask? Hell how bout we bring back the old ones for games other then super smash bros.

How many times do they use it per generation?

[QUOTE="0rin"]

You're missing the point.

"Mario" tennis is still a Mario game. Nintendo milks Mario, Zelda, and Metroid for all they are worth. Mainly the first two. Mainly Mario.

Don't blame us, blame Nintendo for putting Mario's name on 50% of the games they make (eggaduration but you get it).

If Nintendo didn't want the game to be considered a "Mario game", they would have called it "Tennis", or "Nintennis" or whatever silly name they could think of. Its based off the Mario universe/characters. Therefore its a Mario game.

Thank you.

slothboyadvance

Now I agree with you on Mario but Metroid and Zelda are not milked. With the exeption of Metroid Prime Pinball, every Metroid and Zelda game has stayed true to their roots.

(And don't even pull out the CDi Zelda games argument, they weren't even made by Nintendo)

Howis ita Mario game? Is it about Mario? Is he the protagonist? Is he the hero? Does he have more screentime than the other characters? Does the game revolve around him? It might as well be Luigi Tennis, or Bowser Tennis, or Wario Tennis.

But as I said, it's SW logic being used.

RahnAetas

[QUOTE="RahnAetas"]

[QUOTE="falconclan"]Nintendo is using its big franchises to base games off of, not a bad idea, but they've gone a bit far. There are too many mario's, too many mario karts, too many mario parties, etc, doesn't matter how you word it, they are all over used. Nintendo needs a new franchise, mario is an old man now and he isn't as great as he used to me. Mario 64 was cool, I guess, but I think that was the point I realised Mario's glory days were pretty much over.falconclan

On the assumption I give that Nintendo inserts Mario into far too many games, anyone care to list off any other franchise that they've overused? Anyone?

Where are the new characters dare I ask? Hell how bout we bring back the old ones for games other then super smash bros.

Zelda and Metroid overused? :O Those games come out at near the same rate of every other non-Nintendo franchise. The only reason they have more games is because they've been around for more generations. Pokemon... eh, the main games are also per generation, I believe. The spinoffs are wacky, but it's fricking pokemon. There's pokemon of everything, even non-game related products.

[QUOTE="RahnAetas"]

[QUOTE="falconclan"]Nintendo is using its big franchises to base games off of, not a bad idea, but they've gone a bit far. There are too many mario's, too many mario karts, too many mario parties, etc, doesn't matter how you word it, they are all over used. Nintendo needs a new franchise, mario is an old man now and he isn't as great as he used to me. Mario 64 was cool, I guess, but I think that was the point I realised Mario's glory days were pretty much over.falconclan

On the assumption I give that Nintendo inserts Mario into far too many games, anyone care to list off any other franchise that they've overused? Anyone?

Where are the new characters dare I ask? Hell how bout we bring back the old ones for games other then super smash bros.

Kirby, Smash, F-Zero, Emblem, Advance Wars andStarFox and many others I can't be bothered listing disagree. Are you telling me you want MORE Nintendo franchises?

If Mario Kart had been "Ribbit Kart" featuring some no-name frog and a bunch of weird animal friends, it wouldn't have sold as well as it does with Mario. So it's Mario milking.NobuoMusicMaker

That's like saying "Halo Wars" wouldn't be getting as much attention if it was called "Hemet People Wars."

Mario Kart series rocks. It's only milking when they roll out almost the exact same thing as before (Mario Party). Every Mario Kart game has had a major difference from the last.

[QUOTE="falconclan"][QUOTE="RahnAetas"]

[QUOTE="falconclan"]Nintendo is using its big franchises to base games off of, not a bad idea, but they've gone a bit far. There are too many mario's, too many mario karts, too many mario parties, etc, doesn't matter how you word it, they are all over used. Nintendo needs a new franchise, mario is an old man now and he isn't as great as he used to me. Mario 64 was cool, I guess, but I think that was the point I realised Mario's glory days were pretty much over.RahnAetas

On the assumption I give that Nintendo inserts Mario into far too many games, anyone care to list off any other franchise that they've overused? Anyone?

Where are the new characters dare I ask? Hell how bout we bring back the old ones for games other then super smash bros.

How many times do they use it per generation?

Really, nintendo has so many games and characters with potential from back in the day, but I think they are neglecting any type of new input. They just want more mario, metroid and zelda, and you people keep buying them so why shouldn't they.

People don't care to look at anything with any sort of perspective. I'll list off the consoles Nintendo has put out there:

NES
SNES
N64
GC
Wii
GB
GBC (questionable of this one counts as it's own system)
VB (doesn't really count due to how short lived it was)
GBA
DS

Now list off all the non-Mario franchises and see how they stack up against that list. Odds are, it won't be longer than that list. Even for the Mario Spin off games, you really won't see the game more than once on the same system. Main exception being Mario Party.

Well pokemon, probably about 2-3 different versions of the exact same game per generation. Mario when they put his name on everything, yeah.. (Why not just go back to doing it NES style, Mario can be in a game without him being in the title you know) Metroid, depends on how you look at it, we had 2 on the gamecube, 1 on snes, 1 on nes, 2 on gb,2 on advanced, 1 so far on ds, 1 coming to wii.

Really, nintendo has so many games and characters with potential from back in the day, but I think they are neglecting any type of new input. They just want more mario, metroid and zelda, and you people keep buying them so why shouldn't they.

falconclan

So you suggest boycotting good games just so Nintendo will decide to reuse old franchises until they become overused and we flipflop back and forth?

[QUOTE="RahnAetas"][QUOTE="falconclan"][QUOTE="RahnAetas"]

[QUOTE="falconclan"]Nintendo is using its big franchises to base games off of, not a bad idea, but they've gone a bit far. There are too many mario's, too many mario karts, too many mario parties, etc, doesn't matter how you word it, they are all over used. Nintendo needs a new franchise, mario is an old man now and he isn't as great as he used to me. Mario 64 was cool, I guess, but I think that was the point I realised Mario's glory days were pretty much over.falconclan

On the assumption I give that Nintendo inserts Mario into far too many games, anyone care to list off any other franchise that they've overused? Anyone?

Where are the new characters dare I ask? Hell how bout we bring back the old ones for games other then super smash bros.

How many times do they use it per generation?

Really, nintendo has so many games and characters with potential from back in the day, but I think they are neglecting any type of new input. They just want more mario, metroid and zelda, and you people keep buying them so why shouldn't they.

Are you counting the versions as a seperate game? It's more like "pick your favourite colour"... And 1 or 2 Metroids per system is milking? I guess we can say GTA is milking because there're 3 on the PS2 alone.

And I agree with your last paragraph, why should they stop? Just because Nintendo-haters are whining? We love Mario, Zelda and Metroid. So just keep giving them to us :\

[QUOTE="falconclan"][QUOTE="RahnAetas"]

[QUOTE="falconclan"]Nintendo is using its big franchises to base games off of, not a bad idea, but they've gone a bit far. There are too many mario's, too many mario karts, too many mario parties, etc, doesn't matter how you word it, they are all over used. Nintendo needs a new franchise, mario is an old man now and he isn't as great as he used to me. Mario 64 was cool, I guess, but I think that was the point I realised Mario's glory days were pretty much over.Eponique

On the assumption I give that Nintendo inserts Mario into far too many games, anyone care to list off any other franchise that they've overused? Anyone?

Where are the new characters dare I ask? Hell how bout we bring back the old ones for games other then super smash bros.

Kirby, Smash, F-Zero, Emblem, Advance Wars andStarFox and many others I can't be bothered listing disagree. Are you telling me you want MORE Nintendo franchises?

Yeah, over the course of 27 years of video games I would...

Kirby isn't used enough

Fire Emblem made it to the US only recently

Smash has made 3 games, and frankly I don't see the mass appeal.

Advance wars... I hated it so much it would be unfair to comment

and starfox just isnt the same.

New franchises would only help them, they just have to do it right. They've done it before, they can do it again, whether they want to is the question.

On another note, Kirby is the only other Nintendo franchise that was ever 'overused.' Used inpuzzle games, golf, pinball, but these days we don't see poor Kirby anymore.RahnAetas

Pink balls don't sell.

[QUOTE="falconclan"][QUOTE="RahnAetas"][QUOTE="falconclan"][QUOTE="RahnAetas"]

[QUOTE="falconclan"]Nintendo is using its big franchises to base games off of, not a bad idea, but they've gone a bit far. There are too many mario's, too many mario karts, too many mario parties, etc, doesn't matter how you word it, they are all over used. Nintendo needs a new franchise, mario is an old man now and he isn't as great as he used to me. Mario 64 was cool, I guess, but I think that was the point I realised Mario's glory days were pretty much over.Eponique

On the assumption I give that Nintendo inserts Mario into far too many games, anyone care to list off any other franchise that they've overused? Anyone?

Where are the new characters dare I ask? Hell how bout we bring back the old ones for games other then super smash bros.

How many times do they use it per generation?

Really, nintendo has so many games and characters with potential from back in the day, but I think they are neglecting any type of new input. They just want more mario, metroid and zelda, and you people keep buying them so why shouldn't they.

Are you counting the versions as a seperate game? It's more like "pick your favourite colour"... And 1 or 2 Metroids per system is milking? I guess we can say GTA is milking because there're 3 on the PS2 alone.

And I agree with your last paragraph, why should they stop? Just because Nintendo-haters are whining? We love Mario, Zelda and Metroid. So just keep giving them to us :\

If you truly don't think all these things are getting old then you.. ugh.. I think Halo is getting old for gods sake, thank god they are finishing the fight.

[QUOTE="Eponique"][QUOTE="falconclan"][QUOTE="RahnAetas"]

[QUOTE="falconclan"]Nintendo is using its big franchises to base games off of, not a bad idea, but they've gone a bit far. There are too many mario's, too many mario karts, too many mario parties, etc, doesn't matter how you word it, they are all over used. Nintendo needs a new franchise, mario is an old man now and he isn't as great as he used to me. Mario 64 was cool, I guess, but I think that was the point I realised Mario's glory days were pretty much over.falconclan

On the assumption I give that Nintendo inserts Mario into far too many games, anyone care to list off any other franchise that they've overused? Anyone?

Where are the new characters dare I ask? Hell how bout we bring back the old ones for games other then super smash bros.

Kirby, Smash, F-Zero, Emblem, Advance Wars andStarFox and many others I can't be bothered listing disagree. Are you telling me you want MORE Nintendo franchises?

Yeah, over the course of 27 years of video games I would...

Kirby isn't used enough

Fire Emblem made it to the US only recently

Smash has made 3 games, and frankly I don't see the mass appeal.

Advance wars... I hated it so much it would be unfair to comment

and starfox just isnt the same.

New franchises would only help them, they just have to do it right. They've done it before, they can do it again, whether they want to is the question.

They're producing new franchises like they've never done before. And don't destroy arguements with opinions, that never works.

They've been selling me these games for years, and chibi-robo wasn't even a try at making a new series. Gamecube had many tries at new games that could have become big, but you know what, I think Nintendo realised that their fans truly are blind sheep willing to follow whatever course you take them on. Forget new things, we'll just keep making more adventures about a plumber trying to save a princess.

If you truly don't think all these things are getting old then you.. ugh.. I think Halo is getting old for gods sake, thank god they are finishing the fight.

falconclan

Basically you're saying that all the current 'good' franchises are only good simply because they are younger by a good 5-10 years.

[QUOTE="falconclan"]They've been selling me these games for years, and chibi-robo wasn't even a try at making a new series. Gamecube had many tries at new games that could have become big, but you know what, I think Nintendo realised that their fans truly are blind sheep willing to follow whatever course you take them on. Forget new things, we'll just keep making more adventures about a plumber trying to save a princess.

If you truly don't think all these things are getting old then you.. ugh.. I think Halo is getting old for gods sake, thank god they are finishing the fight.

RahnAetas

Basically you're saying that all the current 'good' franchises are only good simply because they are younger by a good 5-10 years.

And while all consoles have their "flagship" titles, The big 2 also have many other new IP's. (Heavenly Sword, Lair, Motorstorm, Folklore, Uncharted.. .the list of Sony first party exclusives goes on, Someone help me out with MS's new IP exclusive first parties, i don't keep up on that stuff) whilst the wii...

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say almost all of nintendo's first party titles are sequels/use the same characters.
0rin

It's a bad limb to stand on. For the most part any new games Nintendo introduces are ignored and the only games they see are Nintendo's oldest franchises.

And while all consoles have their "flagship" titles, The big 2 also have many other new IP's. (Heavenly Sword, Lair, Motorstorm, Folklore, Uncharted.. .the list of Sony first party exclusives goes on, Someone help me out with MS's new IP exclusive first parties, i don't keep up on that stuff) whilst the wii...

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say almost all of nintendo's first party titles are sequels/use the same characters.
0rin

[QUOTE="RahnAetas"][QUOTE="falconclan"]They've been selling me these games for years, and chibi-robo wasn't even a try at making a new series. Gamecube had many tries at new games that could have become big, but you know what, I think Nintendo realised that their fans truly are blind sheep willing to follow whatever course you take them on. Forget new things, we'll just keep making more adventures about a plumber trying to save a princess.

If you truly don't think all these things are getting old then you.. ugh.. I think Halo is getting old for gods sake, thank god they are finishing the fight.

falconclan

Basically you're saying that all the current 'good' franchises are only good simply because they are younger by a good 5-10 years.

If the games are still good games, then why must Nintendo create new franchises? I'm not saying I don't want new franchises, but I'm not going to complain at Nintendo for delivering quality titles.

[QUOTE="RahnAetas"]On another note, Kirby is the only other Nintendo franchise that was ever 'overused.' Used inpuzzle games, golf, pinball, but these days we don't see poor Kirby anymore.slothboyadvance

Pink balls don't sell.

I'm sure Kirby 64 did. And if you didn't buy that, I laugh at your face :x

And while all consoles have their "flagship" titles, The big 2 also have many other new IP's. (Heavenly Sword, Lair, Motorstorm, Folklore, Uncharted.. .the list of Sony first party exclusives goes on, Someone help me out with MS's new IP exclusive first parties, i don't keep up on that stuff) whilst the wii...

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say almost all of nintendo's first party titles are sequels/use the same characters.
0rin

We don't even know what half of the titles, Nintendo's development teams are working on. And Retro is suppose to make a new ip, after Prime 3.

[QUOTE="0rin"]And while all consoles have their "flagship" titles, The big 2 also have many other new IP's. (Heavenly Sword, Lair, Motorstorm, Folklore, Uncharted.. .the list of Sony first party exclusives goes on, Someone help me out with MS's new IP exclusive first parties, i don't keep up on that stuff) whilst the wii...

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say almost all of nintendo's first party titles are sequels/use the same characters.
RahnAetas

It's a bad limb to stand on. For the most part any new games Nintendo introduces are ignored and the only games they see are Nintendo's oldest franchises.

[QUOTE="falconclan"][QUOTE="RahnAetas"][QUOTE="falconclan"]They've been selling me these games for years, and chibi-robo wasn't even a try at making a new series. Gamecube had many tries at new games that could have become big, but you know what, I think Nintendo realised that their fans truly are blind sheep willing to follow whatever course you take them on. Forget new things, we'll just keep making more adventures about a plumber trying to save a princess.

If you truly don't think all these things are getting old then you.. ugh.. I think Halo is getting old for gods sake, thank god they are finishing the fight.

DaAznSaN

Basically you're saying that all the current 'good' franchises are only good simply because they are younger by a good 5-10 years.

If the games are still good games, then why must Nintendo create new franchises? I'm not saying I don't want new franchises, but I'm not going to complain at Nintendo delivering quality title.

Mario and Metroid and Zelda are all fun and whatnot, but its unnessecary to keep making them over and over and over to where it seems as though its ALL nintendo has left. I mean for gods sake man. I know new games don't always help but nintendo knows how to sell games if they do it right. Pikmin and other franchises failed because of nintendo and no one else. Not even hardcores buy all games that are good, even we sometimes depend on adverts and stuff, but they only do that for their main franchises.

[QUOTE="RahnAetas"]

[QUOTE="0rin"]And while all consoles have their "flagship" titles, The big 2 also have many other new IP's. (Heavenly Sword, Lair, Motorstorm, Folklore, Uncharted.. .the list of Sony first party exclusives goes on, Someone help me out with MS's new IP exclusive first parties, i don't keep up on that stuff) whilst the wii...

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say almost all of nintendo's first party titles are sequels/use the same characters.
0rin

It's a bad limb to stand on. For the most part any new games Nintendo introduces are ignored and the only games they see are Nintendo's oldest franchises.

"They" as in us Nintendo lovers.

And you didn't say which type of game :twisted: (The countless training games in Japan are mostly Nintendo and IE Institute).

No, they are good because they took a chance and did something new. People didn't want that though and that is why nintendo can choose to keep making sequals of games and no one cares. Most killer titles on next gen systems are new titles, stuff we've never seen, what does nintendo have... Super mario galaxy and SSBBfalconclan

And how long will they stay "new." Mario actually has a pretty decent track-record for longevity. Mario 3 was great, then it was outdone by the 4th game, Super Mario World, and then again with the 5th Mario 64. It took till Sunshine, the 6th game before the Mario game failed to properly outdo it's predecessor.

How many of the new "they took a chance and did something new" franchises will be able to pump out 5 games in a row that are better than the last? How many iterations of the new franchises need to be created before they are considered overused? The GTA series has been going on for sometime now for example, and they certainly were not doing something new. All they did was take their 2D overhead game and turned it into a 3D game. The Halo series is just another FPS shooter, and there have been a lot of FPS shooters and few ever improve that much (ifat all)from one game to the next.

Because eventually the same old same old is going to get old, it may take a long time, but eventually it will happen.

Mario and Metroid and Zelda are all fun and whatnot, but its unnessecary to keep making them over and over and over to where it seems as though its ALL nintendo has left. I mean for gods sake man. I know new games don't always help but nintendo knows how to sell games if they do it right. Pikmin and other franchises failed because of nintendo and no one else. Not even hardcores buy all games that are good, even we sometimes depend on adverts and stuff, but they only do that for their main franchises.

falconclan

I don't get the problem if Mario, Metroid, and Zelda are still fun. Milk them until they're not, then, I don't care. I'm not going to stop playing them just to let Nintendo know I want them to make a new IP.

[QUOTE="0rin"][QUOTE="RahnAetas"]

[QUOTE="0rin"]And while all consoles have their "flagship" titles, The big 2 also have many other new IP's. (Heavenly Sword, Lair, Motorstorm, Folklore, Uncharted.. .the list of Sony first party exclusives goes on, Someone help me out with MS's new IP exclusive first parties, i don't keep up on that stuff) whilst the wii...

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say almost all of nintendo's first party titles are sequels/use the same characters.
Eponique

It's a bad limb to stand on. For the most part any new games Nintendo introduces are ignored and the only games they see are Nintendo's oldest franchises.

"They" as in us Nintendo lovers.

And you didn't say which type of game :twisted: (The countless training games in Japan are mostly Nintendo and IE Institute).

[QUOTE="Eponique"][QUOTE="0rin"][QUOTE="RahnAetas"]

[QUOTE="0rin"]And while all consoles have their "flagship" titles, The big 2 also have many other new IP's. (Heavenly Sword, Lair, Motorstorm, Folklore, Uncharted.. .the list of Sony first party exclusives goes on, Someone help me out with MS's new IP exclusive first parties, i don't keep up on that stuff) whilst the wii...

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say almost all of nintendo's first party titles are sequels/use the same characters.
0rin

It's a bad limb to stand on. For the most part any new games Nintendo introduces are ignored and the only games they see are Nintendo's oldest franchises.

"They" as in us Nintendo lovers.

And you didn't say which type of game :twisted: (The countless training games in Japan are mostly Nintendo and IE Institute).

Hammer, Disaster, Sadness, Endless Ocean off the top of my head.

[QUOTE="Eponique"][QUOTE="falconclan"][QUOTE="RahnAetas"]

[QUOTE="falconclan"]Nintendo is using its big franchises to base games off of, not a bad idea, but they've gone a bit far. There are too many mario's, too many mario karts, too many mario parties, etc, doesn't matter how you word it, they are all over used. Nintendo needs a new franchise, mario is an old man now and he isn't as great as he used to me. Mario 64 was cool, I guess, but I think that was the point I realised Mario's glory days were pretty much over.falconclan

On the assumption I give that Nintendo inserts Mario into far too many games, anyone care to list off any other franchise that they've overused? Anyone?

Where are the new characters dare I ask? Hell how bout we bring back the old ones for games other then super smash bros.

Kirby, Smash, F-Zero, Emblem, Advance Wars andStarFox and many others I can't be bothered listing disagree. Are you telling me you want MORE Nintendo franchises?

Yeah, over the course of 27 years of video games I would...

Kirby isn't used enough

Fire Emblem made it to the US only recently

Smash has made 3 games, and frankly I don't see the mass appeal.

Advance wars... I hated it so much it would be unfair to comment

and starfox just isnt the same.

New franchises would only help them, they just have to do it right. They've done it before, they can do it again, whether they want to is the question.

So when nintendo uses a franchise more sparingly than mario you complain? And seriously its pretty hard to badmouth Advance Wars since all of the games have been AAA

[QUOTE="falconclan"] No, they are good because they took a chance and did something new. People didn't want that though and that is why nintendo can choose to keep making sequals of games and no one cares. Most killer titles on next gen systems are new titles, stuff we've never seen, what does nintendo have... Super mario galaxy and SSBBRahnAetas

And how long will they stay "new." Mario actually has a pretty decent track-record for longevity. Mario 3 was great, then it was outdone by the 4th game, Super Mario World, and then again with the 5th Mario 64. It took till Sunshine, the 6th game before the Mario game failed to properly outdo it's predecessor.

How many of the new "they took a chance and did something new" franchises will be able to pump out 5 games in a row that are better than the last? How many iterations of the new franchises need to be created before they are considered overused? The GTA series has been going on for sometime now for example, and they certainly were not doing something new. All they did was take their 2D overhead game and turned it into a 3D game. The Halo series is just another FPS shooter, and there have been a lot of FPS shooters and few ever improve that much (ifat all)from one game to the next.