Nintendo's frustration with 3D Mario

Glowsquid

Glowsquid

Shine Sprite
Retired Forum Mod
Retired Wiki Staff
'Shroom Consultant
I recently came across this interesting piece and I figure I might as well share it. It's about Nintendo's perception that SM64 "split" the fanbase and how Sunshine's underperformance pushed Nintendo sto shift to the more linear design of Galaxy and (more overtly) the 3D __ series.

The Register spoke to Satoru Iwata [in 2003] and reported the following: “Iwata blamed falling games sales on overly complex titles that are too tough for newcomers and casual gamers. They’re also bad for the business, [Iwata] added – gamers can spend months playing them, and while they’re doing so, they’re not buying other titles. Those who find they can’t win get so fed up with the experience, they don’t feel inclined to buy an alternative title. Nintendo’s message to the industry seems to be: forget about discs jam packed with ever more complex levels and involving gameplay, and give the punters something they can complete quicky – and get out to buy more of the stuff. Iwata wants Nintendo to focus on games that have a broader appeal.”
Click to expand...

More importantly though, it's a perhaps uncomfortable reminder that Nintendo make games for consumers, not fanboys.
 
Tough games should be a good thing, IMO. People these days, they get baby fed by some games.
 
So....Nintendo makes these games because most gamers suck ass at video games?
 
Bilbo Baggins said:
i knew a guy who said NSMB for ds was hard
Click to expand...
I found it hard when I was a kid.

Now it's easy for me.
 
if their real goal is to get people to buy a multitude of shorter games, wouldn't it make sense to lower the price from $60 a pop?
 
Nabber said:
if their real goal is to get people to buy a multitude of shorter games, wouldn't it make sense to lower the price from $60 a pop?
Click to expand...

That.

I don't love the 3D Mario games (64, Sunshine, Galaxy), whether they are hard or not; I love them because they feel like there is a place to explore, an excitement of the reality and creativity of it all.

I honestly don't care about difficulty when I play video games; I just love the asthetics of the game and the plot and basically everything else. Gameplay is great and all, but I feel that plots and design really run my personal preferences for what I get and don't get. It's why Zelda is always my favorite series, since it basically does that.

While I am glad that they are making games for consumers and not fanboys, I still wish that they would stop making these small rehashes of the same game. It's one thing to try and make money, but it's another to just basically relabel the same game and then expect the same amount of money for it.
 
I wonder why they didn't apply this precedent to the new Donkey Kong games?
 
I really do prefer Galaxy's linearity to SM64 and Sunshine's open-worlds. Because, let's be honest, a lot of stars are very hard to get. When I used to play SM64DS, I used to play it on my cousin's file, where he had all the worlds open, because I wasn't good at finding stars at all. I never beat SM64DS on my own, whereas I beat Galaxy and Galaxy 2 easily.

It's about accessibility. Mario games are catered to a young audience, and they find it more difficult to work out a goal without instructions. I'm not saying they should hand-hold them every step of the way, but they should make it reward exploration while making the goal clear. The Galaxy games were very good at that in some big levels. Like how some planets had rewards on the underside. And the Comet Medals in Galaxy 2. And the secret missions.
 
Chuck Ballymoo said:
I wonder why they didn't apply this precedent to the new Donkey Kong games?
Click to expand...

Because Retro is a better studio than Nintendo when it comes to making platformers.

I love Super Mario 64 DS to death and I beat it many times (I 100%'ed the game in about 12 hours or so in my last play-through). And, coming from a gal who doesn't give much damn about difficulty, it's pretty neat to adventure through the game with also a sense of tension and danger, something unlike the Galaxy games where they just often throw the star and where you should go right in your face. Getting lost? That's just part of the adventuring fun.
 
Xerneas said:
While I am glad that they are making games for consumers and not fanboys, I still wish that they would stop making these small rehashes of the same game. It's one thing to try and make money, but it's another to just basically relabel the same game and then expect the same amount of money for it.
Click to expand...

Their expectations aren't unreasonable since that's exactly what's happened.
 
DragonFreak said:
Apparently so. It's so sad.
Click to expand...
Yeah, how dare people not be extremely hardcore master gamers.

Seriously, not everyone is good at video games. Nintendo's not gonna make intense platformer for the fanboys who cry for the days of the NES era. Ninetndo's target demographic is little kids, they know that's what makes money so that's who they're gonna sell to.
 
Bilbo Baggins said:
i knew a guy who said NSMB for ds was hard
Click to expand...
In his defense, the (hidden) seventh world was pretty tough.

[size=1pt][Even I've never completed it./size]
 
Solar Blaze said:
Bilbo Baggins said:
i knew a guy who said NSMB for ds was hard
Click to expand...
In his defense, the (hidden) seventh world was pretty tough.

[size=1pt][Even I've never completed it./size]
Click to expand...

The sky world? I guess I haven't played the game in a few years but I had more trouble unlocking it then anything else.

I did think the Pipe maze stage was pretty fun to play, along with the giant wiggler stage.
 
LN1 said:
Xerneas said:
Galaxy
[...]
there is a place to explore, an excitement of the reality and creativity of it all.
Click to expand...
Lol.
Click to expand...

You can shut up. I said Galaxy and not Galaxy 2 for a reason.

Galaxy had awesome exploration abilities, especially since you could travel to all these amazing and vast planets, and easily you could lose yourself in which way to go. Hello, Purple Coin levels on some of the galaxies like Good Egg?

Granted, it's definitely more linear than the other ones, but it still holds a lot of great value to it. Galaxy 2 though just basically sucked in comparison. So yeah, I do believe I am putting 64, Sunshine, and Galaxy all in the same boat. Galaxy 2 is just a linear wannabe.
 
I still don't understand why everyone thinks linear=bad. Sure, the first 3D Mario was non-linear at places, but that doesn't mean EVERY 3D Mario game from now on has to be like that.
 
Purple Yoshi said:
I still don't understand why everyone thinks linear=bad. Sure, the first 3D Mario was non-linear at places, but that doesn't mean EVERY 3D Mario game from now on has to be like that.
Click to expand...

Linear =/= Bad.

Linear after being rehashed a hundred times =/= Bad.

Basically picture a game where it's the same concept - Running from Start to finish - with each level, where each level is slightly different, but still 2D and no variant and you have to do each level in order. No jumping from this area to that area.

Now picture it being dupilcated over and over, with slight but very insignificent changes to each game. It was fine in the early days when video games were 8-bit, and being able to have a linear game was basically a showstopper.

However, games are a lot more enjoyable when you have a world to explore. It doesn't feel so much as a job having to try to do this all in order and that there is only one way to do it, and there is nothing else that you can't do.

Super Mario 64, Super Mario Sunshine, and Super Mario Galaxy all have linear parts to it (as you can't just jump to the next area until a certain number of stars/sprites or a new item or beating Bowser), but you aren't forced to do each level in a certain order, and there was freedom! Instead of going just left or right, you can go in any direction, explore any area, and really get a feel for the world then having to cut through it in a 2D plane. Plus, you can visit worlds, then go to others, and then come back to get the rest of the stars, and it's not like you have to do one place in order to defeat the entirety of it.

Non-Linear in full terms is not that great either. I mean, it gets to a point where you want a little bit of an anchor telling you that you got to move on, or else the game is just a sandbox for just gameplay. That is why games usually have plots, and cutscenes, and bosses, and all that good stuff.

What makes Linear Mario games annoying is that there is linear, but there is no plot to really guide the game, so basically it is like a linear sandbox.
 
Xerneas said:
Linear after being rehashed a hundred times =/= Bad.
Click to expand...

lol what
 
Michael Myers said:
DragonFreak said:
Apparently so. It's so sad.
Click to expand...
Yeah, how dare people not be extremely hardcore master gamers.

Seriously, not everyone is good at video games. Nintendo's not gonna make intense platformer for the fanboys who cry for the days of the NES era. Ninetndo's target demographic is little kids, they know that's what makes money so that's who they're gonna sell to.
Click to expand...

That excuse never really made sense to me, though, because weren't the original NES games also engineered for young children?

If kids in the 80's can battle through tough games, why can't kids in the 10's?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back