@Pulfasonic @cachinscythe @meatz666 Okay, if his point is that Mario shows up more places than many other mascots from other companies, then he has a point. But what I read there is, "Nothing gets released except Mario games from Nintendo." I find that ridiculous, so I called BS.
And believe me, I'm not happy about the oversaturation of Mario games either. I enjoy many of them a great deal, but the 4 NSMB games with almost identical gameplay are clear evidence that Nintendo needs to slow that gravy train down. But I still think that most other companies are just as bad offenders. I read you saying that there is somehow more originality in COD than in Nintendo games. At least in terms of story. Perhaps, but that only proves my point that story doesn't amount to anything if the gameplay sucks. New story or not, COD is taking a huge lashing for more of the same old gameplay year after year, whereas the biggest offenders that fit into that category at Nintendo--Mario and Zelda--are not getting main franchise releases every year. And I'm pretty sure that if Soap McTavish was anywhere near Mario's popularity, Activision would demand he be in every COD game too.
Now in response to an earlier reply you posted, I'm curious to know what games YOU'RE playing that manage to scratch the itch for both gameplay and story. Here's what I've been playing lately, and please note that I tend to be a few years behind most other gamers in terms of what I'm playing:
-Red Faction Guerilla (gameplay)
-LA Noire (tilted on the side of story over gameplay)
-Bioshock 2 (tilted on the side of gameplay over story, probably because there's too little of it early in the game and I'm playing on Hard mode without Vita Chambers)
- Final Fantasy XIII (story over gameplay, though I find it an EXTREMELY satisfying experience)
-Sonic Colors (gameplay over story)
-de Blob (gameplay over story)
When it comes to games I can think of that DO scratch both itches well, I lean towards the first two Dead Space games, and even those took about an hour before I was completely immersed in them. And Zelda tends to scratch both itches for many gamers too.
For me, games that balance both elements out perfectly are so rare that it's not even worth the time to wait for them. But then, I'm a gamer who has lower standards than most and thinks many in my subculture expect too much from their hobby. This is partially the result of psychological issues, and partially the result--in my eyes--of just having more patience and tolerance. But in the end, if enough gamers cry foul, Mario and Zelda will stop getting reiterated all the time. Until then, I'll keep enjoying them when I can.
@meatz666 Okay. I feel the same way. I picked up my Wii and had to grab a 360 one year later. My gaming needs are not met by a single console either. But I didn't see Mario everywhere I looked. Perhaps that's just because I wasn't looking in the same places as most people.
As for my earlier comments, though I stand by the spirit of them, I apologize that I didn't pick up on the "baby" comment being a joke. I tend to have difficulty picking up on context, and I have a SERIOUS problem with elitism in almost any form, not just in gaming, but in politics, science, religion, and society. My bad. :)
Now if you haven't played any of those games I mentioned, I personally think you're missing out. Many of them are very different from the traditional mold. Most of them are not as polished as Nintendo releases, but they are very unusual and enjoyable IMO. There isn't a survival horror game quite like Cursed Mountain, where you play as a mountaineer scaling a haunted Himalayan summit. And Excite Truck's sequel--which I should have mentioned in its place--is actually one of the coolest racers I've ever played. It's EXTREMELY quirky to boot. So whenever I think of Wii, I think of far more than just Mario games. Whether that's the result of Nintendo's marketing or the blindness of gamers, I think it's too bad. Cause there's a LOT of cool stuff there that people just don't know about.
@SurlyPotato @cachinscythe @meatz666 Well they aren't. No More Heroes is actually pretty badass, which is expected coming from Suda51. Deadly Creatures--though rough around the edges--allows you to play as a giant spider and a scorpion, with an unusually tense atmosphere and a story to follow. Nothing else quite like it. de Blob is about restoring color to a black and white world. It's a pretty cool platformer that has only a couple significant problems--like lack of variety in the missions. It's pretty fun. Cursed Mountain is a survival horror game about climbing the snow-topped mountains in the Himalayas. Not the scariest game by any means, but fairly creepy and unusual, particularly since it incorporates aspects of mountaineering into the gampelay.
Yeah, a lot of them sound kiddie, and several of them are, but there's still nothing quite like them, and that's why I mention them. Also, Excite Truck's sequel--Excitebots--is one of the coolest, quirkiest racers I've ever played. :)
@Tiwill44 @cachinscythe @Scarab83 LOL Well I guess that comes down to how you define the term, which is another thing I don't hear gamers acknowledging: that nobody has a clear grasp on WHAT "innovative" actually MEANS.
Let me clarify then: I'm not saying Infamous is bad; I actually enjoyed what I played of it a lot. But when I look at it, here's what I see:
-Sly Cooper's tightrope walking
-Prince of Persia's ledge platforming
-a superhero sandbox mostly like all other superhero sandboxes
-a morality system that limits what abilities you can get based on choices you make, which was done in plenty of other games before Infamous came out
Perhaps I haven't played far enough into it to find the "innovation," but if the above is what the game amounts to, then I don't count it as "innovative," because to me "innovative" means showing me mechanics that it's difficult to compare to those in other games. And that comes back to another point I often make that innovation isn't all its jacked up to be. What's important is FUN. But FUN and INNOVATIVE are not "always-inclusive" terms. Something can be wildly innovative--like Unlimited SaGa--and completely suck.
@trdrstv @cachinscythe Actually, I was aware of those games, though I tend to combine them all into one franchise, rather than several separate ones. But I think I misspoke. What I'd like to see is a new IP from Nintendo with a new character and some depth, or just something not quite so casual. Not that I don't like many of those games; I'd just love to see a new character from Miyamoto.
And let's be clear: I'm not saying it makes Nintendo bad that they don't create new IPs, because they HAVE done some new, groundbreaking gameplay with their existing ones. I just wish I could see something ENTIRELY new from Nintendo. Either way, they make quality stuff, and I'm not abandoning them so long as they KEEP making quality stuff.
@meatz666 'Sigh' You're gonna pull that tired old card out? You know that most of the time, when people DO play that card, it makes THEM sound insecure and immature, even as it paints the opposition the same way. Buddy, I PLAY 360 games that are very violent and "grown up" all the time. The difference is that I don't look at the labels on the outside and judge the games based solely on that before I try them. And honestly--meaning no offense--I didn't find the joke that funny. But if others did, I'll admit I'm the outlier.
I'll respond to the other part of your comment in a few minutes. Gotta check some other replies...
@Pulfasonic @cachinscythe @meatz666 Yeah, you're right. That was pretty stupid of me. But I could STILL disprove his point with only Nintendo games. Kirby's Epic Yarn, Donkey Kong Country Returns, Metroid Prime 3, Zelda: Twilight Princess, Zelda: Skyward Sword, Wii Sports/Resort, Sin and Punishment 2, Wii Fit/Plus, Wii Music, and a few I'm probably forgetting.
So yeah, it was a cheap shot, but it was in response to a comment that I found rather stupid. Either way, my bad. :)
Okay so first of all, Nintendo, I'm tired of Mario, Zelda, and Pokemon appearing everywhere. I'm glad that Pikmin 3 is on the way, but that's the only other franchise you've put a spotlight on recently. I love these games, but PLEASE give us some new installments in one of your other series like F-Zero, Star Fox, or even Metroid. Or better yet, do what you did on the Gamecube: finance some riskier fare like Odama, Chibi-Robo, and Geist. Not necessarily the most consistent quality titles for the system, but at least they were something different.
Having said all that, there are several things about innovation and creativity that I think most people don't get, and I think they need to do some introspection to figure out what they really want from "original" games.
For instance, some people have implied that if sequels stopped being made, we'd start to see more original content. But I disagree. We'd only see more "original" content in the sense that the games wouldn't have the same characters or setting. As an example, if a law suddenly passed that prohibited the making of sequels--extreme and hypotehtical, but hear me out--it would mean Insomniac could no longer create more Ratchet and Clank games. Now imagine this happened back during the PS2 era after Going Commando was released. Would we see a new and innovative game from the minds at Insomniac? It's possible, but what I find more likely is that we'd see Whipple the Mouse and the Lost Tiki, where Whipple uses a bunch of goofy gadgets similar to Ratchet's guns, and the Tiki functions in much the way Clank did. So basically, you get an original IP...and it's not what people really wanted. And so we ended up with a ton of "original IPs," but the same complaints about a LACK of originality start to show up. Because it might not be that hard to come up with original characters--just pick a random animal, make it sentient, and give it some sort of personality--but it is EXTREMELY, if not INSANELY hard, to come up with original GAMEPLAY.
The other thing that many gamers seem to miss is the distinction between "original" and "fun." And we need look no further than our industry's past to see evidence of this. Anybody ever played a "SaGa" game? Like Frontier or Unlimited? Those games were VASTLY different from anything else on the market...and they sucked. Generally, the way people get around these "anomalies" is to act like there's somehow a difference between "innovation" and "experimentation." (I'm not kidding. That's the EXACT wording that EGM used to describe Unlimited SaGa.) Far as I'm concerned, they're living in a vacuum of denial.
So people, when you decide whether a game is "original" or not, make sure you're considering everything. If the gameplay feels the same--as I admit it does in most of the New Super Mario titles which Nintendo needs to slow down on--then you've got a case. But if it somehow feels different--or even mechanically IS different--then stop looking at the paint on the outside--which amounts to the characters, story, setting, etc--and admit that what you're looking at is different and/or unique.
But let me reiterate: Nintendo, give Mario and Zelda a rest, and if you're not going to do a new IP, at least give some others the spotlight for a change.
@meatz666 Do you REALLY want me to show how ridiculous this claim is by listing every game on Gamecube and Wii that didn't have Mario in it, let alone in the title? Well here's a sampling:
@Pulfasonic @cachinscythe Perhaps, but don't look to the gamers to tell you where precisely that sweet spot is, cause if they actually DID know, they'd either make the games themselves or communicate clearly where that sweet spot it. And that's the point. No disrespect to my subculture, but we have a long track record of inconsistency, and while that isn't necessarily bad, it DOES make it harder to cater to us.
So yeah, you don't need to have two extremes, but don't pretend that it's "easy" to fall between them. When combined with other things--like where your strengths lie as a developer--it's not easy at all.
cachinscythe's comments