Topic: Editorial: PlayStation or Xbox?

[ssj4_android]

I didn't really like Metroid Prime. Don't know why, never actually finished it either. I liked Fusion a lot more. One thing Halo and Halo 2 have over Metroid Prime and Metroid Prime 2 is multiplayer. Multiplayer in the Halo games includes co-op. Now, how's Metroid Prime 2's multiplayer? I know it actually has multiplayer, unlike the first. A HUGE thing about Halo 2 is Live support. 16 people vs. Echos' 4. Besides that, the two games are two different genres. Personally, I really like Paper Mario 2, and I wouldn't be too surprised if I liked Paper Mario and Halo 2 about the same.

[Kairon]

Certainly you can argue that Nintendo should market better, but you have to realize that marketting will never make up for the fact that Nintendo simply isn't making the games that people consider relevant anymore. So what if Nintendo marketted Metroid Prime, Metroid Prime 2, ED, RE0 and RE4, and Rogue Leader? That's only 6 games over the majority of the GC's lifespan. Meanwhile, the PS2 has 3 games in the GTA series alone, plus an immense amount of third-party culturally relevant titles. Even if Nintendo did do a better job advertising, there would be so few games worth advertising to the public that it wouldn't do much to change public perception of the GC's total relevance to their modern lifestyles.

No, the fact is that even if Nintendo did advertise better, they'd never be able to have the mindshare of Sony or Microsoft specifically because Nintendo games, the only guaranteed reason to buy a Nintendo system,  AREN'T relevant to today's consumer culture. Nintendo's very strength is an irrelevant issue to the vast majority of today's gamers.

That's just the way it is, and I don't think it's something that Nintendo fans should obsess over. The game industry has changed, and styles have changed. Heck, if I made games, my games would differ VASTLY from nintendo's style, and my games would probably be better off on the PS3 or XBox2. But despite the climate for videogames having changed, and despite my own differences in personal game design, I'm still buying Nintendo systems and games exclusively. Why? Because as culturally irrelevant as Nintendo games may be to everyone else, they're the only games I want to play.

There's no question that advertising could help Nintendo gain mindshare. No question at all. If you throw enough money at the problem, you can get people to acknowledge that "yes, Nintendo exists." But will this result in people buying a GameCube over a PS2? No, because no matter how much marketting exists, the PS2 would have a vastly superior library of culturally relevant sports titles, movie-based licenses, games with mature and complex themes, and import racing titles.

Sure, with better marketting the GC would perform a little better. But Nintendo innately lacks the cultural relevance that will make the masses of modern gamers of today choose the GC over the PS2. That's why even with great marketting, the question would only change to: "I know that the GC exists, but still: PS2 or XBox?" All the marketting in the world can't make people buy things they don't want to buy (and what self-respecting inner-city football fan would buy a game about controlling ant-things in a garden?), and marketting can't sell games that don't exist.

Marketting simply can't change the fact that the time for Nintendo games to be culturally dominant in the videogamer's mindset has come, and gone.
Again, not a good thing or a bad thing, it's just that the world is an ever-changing place.

Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[nemo_83]

I've said it a thousand times.  Nintendo's advertising sucks.  I thought the Pikmin 2 commercial was the only good one they have had in a long long time.  Most of their commercials only show boring gameplay clips that are melodramatic and easy to make fun of.  They also cant just try to use attitude to sell something to Americans.  They have to sell a lifestyle or Americans are just going to see them as posers and old suits in a corporation.  They are trying to sell to the youth market, don't let statistics fool you.  13-25 is still a youth market, I dont care if they show full on penetration in a game, it only makes it more obvious that the game is aimed at youth minded people.  The best thing about Nintendo is they do make games that people who know about games can respect and enjoy.  They don't make games for sex hungry 17 year old virgins.  The content of their games can be made to appeal though to the MTV generation and still retain the quality of their other games.  Look at the Daily Show, which has already been brought up once I think in this topic, it definatly appeals to young males; but it is also very smart.  And it didnt take a single ounce of blood or a single piece of leg to get that show where it is in the ratings.  It took very intelligent writing.  Satire is always a great way of appealing to the attitude and independence generated in the youth of America by all of isolation that they endure.

Nintendo doesn't get that they are not being successful at all in their aim to play to the masses and make games for everyone.  The most obvious things missing are the ORIGINAL mature titles (coupled with heavy advertising campaigns).  But the solution I believe lies in Nintendo making games for everyone that can be advertised and sold to everyone.  They have been making their games easier on the Cube.  The hardest games they ever made, like Super Mario Bros which sold 80 million copies (oh, they have fallen far) could be just as hard to a six year old as they were to a twenty eight year old.  At the same time the six year old could plausibly stomp the twenty eight year old's butt at the game.  That is how accessable old Nintendo was.  Now games are difficult due to complicated combat and camera (instead of keeping combat simple and limited by the buttons developers have tried to simulate combat through complex button combos when they should have just waited for the next innovation, like gyration, to translate straight forward character actions without complicated digital commands).  Games are difficult in this way now because Nintendo changed.  Nintendo did change.  They put 'space' in their games.  Games like Mario and Zelda that before never had space.  In Zelda before, you could see in every direction because gameplay was heavy on fighting on ground level.  There was no vertical in the combat of Zelda before 3d.  Why do you think now they are going to have the camera more like the old 2d games in the new Zelda coming out.  They can take the space out of things so that the game is easier to control and easier to look at.  It makes the visuals and lighting more graphic when the camera is backed away from the back of your character's head.  The limits of 2d games provided developers with answers, 3d games make problems and give developers too much rope, enough to hang themselves with.  Look at how Mario has been simplified down to this easy scavenger hunt game.  Mario was once 2d and there was no turning left or right or falling off the left side of a platform.  There was forward, backward, up, and down.  The view took out the space and allowed gamers to control the character acurately.  Look at Mario Kart though.  It is basically 2d in gameplay.  There is forward, backwards, left, and right; but no up and down aside from the hills in the courses which don't affect your control.  The behind the character view is best for games like Mario Kart, not games like Mario Bros or Zelda.  Now Zelda has so much sculptural 3d space that people can't play the game without having to lower the camera so they can see the horizon or look up so they can aim their arrows.  Couldn't this be solved with Link automatically, like in the 2d games when something was flying and we couldnt aim up or down only left and right, doing the work of the vertical axis of aiming so we dont have to go in first person mode or something?  I know what your saying to yourself probably, lock on, but I said automatically.  In other words without having to lock on either.  Ive also wondered for a long time what Zelda would look like right now if on the N64 it had stayed 2d.  Im sure the game wouldn't have stayed in stamp style but rather it would have evolved into something with backgrounds that looked like Mana on the PSX.  

I dont know if I can believe that NOA actually believes there is nothing wrong with their advertising though.  We always say in America, oh its because the Japanese section of the company holds them back.  If they really dont have a clue that their advertising has sucked aside from say some of the suits commercials and that one Mario Bros 3 commercial for GBA then someone does need to get fired.  The MP2 commercial blows and it is better than the MP commercial.  They think they can sell it to us with flashy graphic design and zipping camera work and they are totally wrong.  Look at the epic GTA commercials.  The GTA commercial elicits nostalgia for the decade and the past games for those who love them.  Nintendo has a problem of not taking advantage of its thick heritage in the industry.  Music is one strong suit they have with themes from Mario and Zelda for example.  It is just like the best Star Wars commercials don't show much gameplay but rather play off of the Star Wars history and music.  For example I was sold Shadows of the Empire on the N64 with the music alone.  That was back when Star Wars hadn't had many underwhelming titles under its belt.

Nintendo's passiveness has only lowered their place in the chain every year.  You can't launch a console on the market giving away the impression from the word go that it is a secondary console because then it becomes the third choice or less.  In order to get second you have to put out the perception that you are going to win or at least come close.  You cant just say, "Well we're not competing with them."  That lets MS say, "Look they aren't even serious about this.  They aren't even trying to go against Sony let alone us.  They're giving up.  How can they provide you, the complicated American consumer, with what you want.  They're kiddy.  They're a sinking ship!"

Lets get serious, MS is Nintendo's competition and Nintendo thinks Nintendo is its own competition.  Something is fishy.  MS knows it can't beat Sony without outing Nintendo first.  Same way Sony knew they couldnt take on Nintendo until they blew away Sega.  Nintendo though doesn't even want to play ball with MS let alone Sony.  

[seen33]

well i enjoy my gamecube and xbox and would love it if they merged/ where bought out.  I suppose when your a nintendo only fanboy u wont want m$ anywhere near nintendo.  

Halo2 is gonna be way better then MP2.  WHY?  cause halo 2 will still be played online 16 players after 1 week.  MP2 will be played once through by me.. maybe 10 mins of multiplayer if i can convince my sister to play it and never again (well maybe 5 years later when i get into my classic games phases.  see as an older gamer i dont have friends who come over and play xbox or gamecube.  My friends are always working/busy and if they do get a free moment they want to go out and meet girls.. not play games.  I myself like games tho (well girls too heh).. so online play is a huge factor for me cause it keeps a game going

although I must admit.. mp1 single player was WAY better then halo1 SP and i have no doubt MP2 will have a better SP then halo2.  But unfortunetly.. Sp only lasts a short while and i dont like games that make u play through it again to unlock stuff.  So in the end mp1 had about 20 hours of gameplay total in it for me and halo 1 had over 2000... thus u can see which one is more worth the $.  I am still gonna buy both games however.

[Ian Sane]

"For example I was sold Shadows of the Empire on the N64 with the music alone."

I loved the Shadows of the Empire ad.  It showed tons of in-game footage (and that game looks like crap compared to Cube titles) and had this cool voice over from the main character.  The voice over talked about the main characters experiences, experiences that the player could have.  You would see that ad and say "wow that sounds cool and I can do the same thing in the game."  That's the type of ad that creates hype.  Nintendo during their peak used to always shill key features in their ads.  Remember the ad for Yoshi's Island that made a big deal about "morphmation"?  What the f*ck is that?  Who cares I'm going to buy that game.  The current ads don't say ANYTHING about the game.

[idgaf]

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
idgaf: Do you even know what an engine does? You cannot provide an engine for everyone, every type of game requires a different engine and you cannot expect Ninty to offer an engine for every thinkable type of game for free, especially since these things go from a few hundred thousand to a few million dollars.

Yes, I do know what an engine, I've written a couple of basic ones myself.  I did not suggest that a single engine can be used for all games which is why i suggested a few big title games such as metroid (for fps) and zelda for (third person adventure type games).  I did not suggest that the engines are to be offered for free either.  While counter strike got to make their game for free by adding on to the half life engine, several games use the quake engine beneath the surface, and they DO pay for it.  I said they should license out the engine, not only would this be another oppertunity to make money directly, they would likely increase the number of games developed for nintendo, and hopefully increase the install base.  

[idgaf]

nemo_83: "MS knows it can't beat Sony without outing Nintendo first. Same way Sony knew they couldnt take on Nintendo until they blew away Sega.!"

Not sure about what MS thinks now, but when i worked for them a couple of years ago, they said their competition is Playstation, and did not mention Nintendo at any point either.  I do agree with you about the GTA commercials, I thought they were great commercials.

[Gackt]

at first, when i heard that the gamecube was first coming, i thought "oh great... another kid console..." but when i was playing the zelda ww demo at ebgames, i got totally addicted. i thought i had a lot of PS2 games in my collection, but now my gamecube library is dominating. true, they do have a lot of kid games, but that's what i love about my GC. it's not like i'm rejecting adult games. they can be fun and all, but i also love the games that brings the child out in me. i mean, that's what nintendo was somewhat made for, right? i had my first famicon when i was 5. i have no idea where i'm goign wtih this. i am happy with the things nintendo have done things with in the past years, but i would be greatly over-joyed if they changed some things for the better of the company AND it's comsumers. there were somethings that they should have done (i.e. network and internet games). who wouldn't want to have metroid prime 2 a multi-player game but to do it over the internet? that would've been outstanding. the same goes for mario kart, and the games of the like. and tell me if anyone of you would've loved to have zelda 4swords an internet game as well? if they ran it like microsoft live, i definately would pay monthly just to play those games online. i got a GC for it's games, and it's quality of the games. this is part of the reason why i haven't gotten a xbox. there are hardly any games that i want for it. i'm gonna end my rant now... as i can't see a point in what i'm trying to say. i know i'm definately gonna get a DS before, or if, i get a PSP. not that i don't want a PSP, but teh DS just seems to be a more solid hand held. anyways... nintendo just has to get that groove back, and things will be golden again.

[MaleficentOgre]

What nintendo should do is take a year off.  Save up money to pay its employees.  Give them work to do on the next system and series of games.   Nintendo can work with developers on the new system so they can have a stellar launch.  Next generation (after revolution) just take some time out.  Show everyone a world without nintendo.  The old saying you never know what you had until you lose it will come true.  Parents will have no games for their children to play safely.  Sure they'll buy them GTA rio grande and super death and sex 400, then they'll realize hey, there is nothing for the kids to play safely.  Where's mario? where's DK? where's peach?  Nintendo's stellar gameplay and light hearted attitude will be gone, leaving nothing but depressing violent games for peopl to play.  Game sales will drop dramatically and the industry will go into a recession.
And after the appocalypse happens and nintendo returns everyone will say.  THANK GOD!  It may not seem like it now, but without nintendo there is no industry.  Sure they're not the big dog in the game anymore, but they are the most important part.  If sony stopped making games we'd be okay, if microsoft stopped making games we'd be okay,  If nintendo stops making games we'll say we're okay, but we won't be.  

[Ian Sane]

"What nintendo should do is take a year off."

They sort of did with the N64.  They released Mario Party 3 in May 2001 and didn't release another console title until the Cube launch in November.  This made the transition between consoles very difficult and it really allowed the PS2 to build up some momentum.  People don't miss Nintendo when they're gone, they forget about them.  Nintendo has to stay in people's minds.

However I do think they should give Mario a year off.  They did this with the SNES in 1994.  As far as I can tell no Mario themed SNES titles were released that year.  This gave DKC a bigger focus and that certainly turned out well.  In 1995 they released Yoshi's Island which was a Mario but not quite since it was Baby Mario.  Adult Mario didn't return until 1996 and that built up HUGE hype for Super Mario 64 and Super Mario RPG.  Mario CAN'T build hype right now because they release like 4 Mario themed titles a year.  To the average person Super Mario Sunshine was not a big deal because in their eyes Mario released a title only a few months before.

I think "taking a break" would be a good idea for a lot of Nintendo's major franchises.  They've just been cranking out too many sequels lately.  If each franchise takes a break for a year or two (not at the same time) it would give Nintendo a chance to make some brand new stuff and would create more interest in the franchises when they return.  Part of why Ocarina of Time had so much hype was that it was the first Zelda in five years.  I say they shouldn't release any more Mario titles on the Cube so thus his debut on the Revolution will seem like a really big deal.

So a year off is good but just for the major franchises, not Nintendo themselves.

[cryforlife]

I disagree that Nintendo has major deficiences in its marketing department (aside from the mario sunshine ad which was atrocious), I've been seeing gamecube ads on tv forever now. The problem is much deeper and more systemic than this. Nintendo thinks that with the right marketing it can make childlike fare like Mario and Donkey Kong "cool" with the mainstream. These games may be enjoyable and innovative, but they are hardly seen as being cool, and likely never will be again. This may seem arbitrary, but it's true, Nintendo is like Michael Jackson in the extent of their delusion that they can take an innovative idea that might originally sell respectably, slap what the mainstream public sees as tired, stale characters onto the box, and turn it into a "cool" "cutting edge" innovation.

Gamers aren't stupid, they know when a company pulls a Disney on them, constantly recycling the same ideas and or characters for years. Unless they know they have a chance at getting something completely new and fresh on a regular basis, they just wont bite. They want original mature games... or even original family games for that matter, but for gods sakes they want some new content. Good luck trying to reach new markets with the DS when everything is plastered with the same stale nintendo characters (and stigma) that they can find in almost every other game nintendo releases. Nintendo has flooded the market with its beloved characters to the point where many people no longer care anymore.

They do this because nintendo has become a risk averse company, having made some serious screwups in the 32/64 bit generation they have never fully recovered, in many cases going the safe route of endless sequels. Now nintendo doesn't remember that taking risks is what keeps a company vital and fresh. Theyll say they took risks with Eternal Darkness and it didn't sell well, but its easy to figure that one out, the system had already been pegged as a kids toy from launch. One game isn't going to change that, because almost no one buys a system for just one game that doesn't come from an established franchise when every other game for the system turns their stomach. Nintendo needs to go beyond halfhearted attempts, saying things akin to "oh yeah, we've got that one game coming out, so we're covering all the bases", Metal gear solid and resident evil remakes of 5 year old games dont cut it either. Don't get me wrong, i love nintendos classic characters, but for gods sake, OVERKILL people!

Nintendo needs a concerted effort to make original, cutting edge first party content, and they need it quick! Star Fox Adventures was an insult, as Dinosaur Planet it would have been somethng new and fresh, but the way they tacked on Star Fox seemed forced from the start. RARE may have taken forever to make their games, but by letting them slip thru their fingers, Nintendo helped kill the golden goose, as now that Silicon Knights is gone all they have is Retro Studios. Problem is, all this is a moot point by now, as these things need to be factors AT LAUNCH, when the hype machine is at its highest and public perceptions are conceived.

Now we have Metroid Prime 2 coming, which undoubtedly has a huge potential cool factor along with it despite its classic nintendo status because the fresh take on the series is very modern and cutting edge, unsurprisingly this is being developed by Retro Studios in America, where Nintendo's developers arent addicted to mario and donkey kong like crack cocaine as they are in japan. It will sell reasonably well, but still underperform in the grand scheme of the industry because the Nintendo name is a pariah to anyone who wants to be taken seriously by their peers.

Then we have Geist, which looks like it has majorly serious potential, but you ask anyone beyond nintendo fans and i bet dollars to donuts they havent even heard of it. Then there's resident evil 4, which could be a massive seller, however i fear that the mainstream public has moved on, at a certain point (somewhere around code veronica i think) people got over shooting zombies in the same way they got over Lara Croft's mammaries. It will probably sell phenomenally well for a gamecube title, but still underperform by any serious industry standards.

The #1 problem with nintendo is a lack of percieved cutting edge innovation, that sounds like a marketing thing, but marking doesn't begin with the marketing department, marketing starts with the developers. If you ask me, Nintendos marketing is TOO good, they believe their own hype, and talk about "leveraging properties" and "demographics" more than they do about fun new games. No matter how many ads they run in Maxim and Blender, Nintendo DS will never reach its highest potential, simply because the launch lineup is too kid oriented. BALANCE people!

This having been said, maybe nintendos marketing department could do better than pasting mario faces on peoples heads in their ads and trying to be cool if they actually had something to work with. Even the most cutting edge gameplay ever devised in the history of videogaming won't sell if it's got Barney the Dinosaur on the box.  

[Mario]

I thought Nintendo were doing this with Donkey Kong, it had been ages since there was a Donkey Kong released, I thought they had a huge new DK platformer planned for the GC, but no, they blew it and re-released freaking DKC on GBA. Even Zelda games are becoming a common thing now, Four Swords and Minish Cap this year, and the new Zelda next year, and i'm not even remotely excited about any of them.

In a way though, Nintendo are "taking time off". In the publics eye they haven't had a massive hit since Super Mario 64, OoT or Goldeneye, and they've kind of faded into the shadows without that "killer app" for either GC or GBA. if Nintendo have a massive hit up their sleeves, and it's good enough for people to take notice, they'll think "hey, this reminds me, Nintendo makes good games!", when it comes out. I would suggest the next Zelda had the potential to do that, but with the milking that series has gotten, it won't make that much of a splash. A revolutionary new Mario platformer is all I can think of that would do the trick. I'm not suggesting that the GC lineup of games is lacking, because it certainly isn't, GC is my favourite console of all time, it's just that in the publics eye, there is no defining game that makes them want to pick up the system like Grand Theft Auto or Halo.

Also, I think all this "kiddy" and "cool" stuff is bullshit, that isn't why Nintendo is behind. If someone calls a Nintendo game kiddy, it's just their way of saying it's a crap game.

[Famicom]

Quote
Originally posted by: Mario
if Nintendo have a massive hit up their sleeves, and it's good enough for people to take notice, they'll think "hey, this reminds me, Nintendo makes good games!", when it comes out. I would suggest the next Zelda had the potential to do that, but with the milking that series has gotten, it won't make that much of a splash. A revolutionary new Mario platformer is all I can think of that would do the trick.

While I have no doubt a return-to-the-roots Mario platformer would be a huge killer-app for Ninty, I wouldn't count Zelda out exactly. Despite the "kiddie-fied" Wind Waker (which I enjoyed BTW), if the internet traffic surrounding any new newsbit about the next Zelda game is any indication, Zelda still has tons of drawing power and respect from the gaming community. With a steady stream of good hype from Ninty (or maybe even without it?) it'll easily be the best selling GC game ever, but I agree it won't be a mega splash on the mainstream like a new GTA or Halo could produce. Although I'd HATE it, it would probably be in their best interests to hold it back and retool it for the launch of the Revolution, but that's highly unlikely and feasible at this point.

[Bill Aurion]

No, Zelda has been shown and confirmed for the Gamecube launch, and I really doubt Ninty will pull back from that...On the other hand, Mario 128 hasn't been shown at all, making it a much more likely possibility for the Revolution launch...

(And despite all the angst around WW, it sold a LOT...So there are many Zelda fans, cel-shaded or not)

[Ian Sane]

"I would suggest the next Zelda had the potential to do that, but with the milking that series has gotten, it won't make that much of a splash."

Considering that each Cube Zelda game is quite different I think it might still make a big splash.  It looks completely different from Wind Waker and Four Swords Adventures.  Plus unlike Mario it's not like 4 games a year.  I think Zelda (as well as Metroid) has been milked too much lately but it's not like Mario which has basically turned into Mega Man.

The new Cube Zelda has one thing that most Cube games don't have: hype.  It's been created pretty much by accident.  Nintendo created massive hype for the title when they "switched" the Spaceworld footage with Wind Waker.  We're all aware of the huge backlash that resulted.  Sure Wind Waker was great and sold well but it has always been in the shadow of what could have been.  Deep down there's been a long desire for the realistic Zelda.  The fact that we didn't get it has made it a more desired title.  I've talked about Nintendo taking a break from their key franchises.  In a way they have with Zelda.  They've taken a break from the style seen in Ocarina of Time for a couple of years and now it's coming back.  It seems entirely accidental but it's created hype.

[Bill Aurion]

"Considering that each Cube Zelda game is quite different I think it might still make a big splash."
"I think Zelda (as well as Metroid) has been milked too much lately"

These two contradict each other...The fact that each game is completely different gives reason to their existence...

[KDR_11k]

The fact that each game is completely different shows that Nintendo could just as well have created a new franchise. Keeping franchises alive is one thing, plastering them on everything that isn't on a tree by three is something completely different. NOE declared November as Mario Month because three Mario games are coming out. This is going too far. Seeing familiar faces once in a while is good but they also need a regular influx of new faces. I'm going as far as claiming that a game with minor changes but a completely new setting would be perceived as fresher than a game with major changes but the same characters. Had they madeup a new franchise for Super Mario Sunshine, I'd bet nobody would have complained about the game being too similar to Mario 64.

[Ian Sane]

"These two contradict each other...The fact that each game is completely different gives reason to their existence..."

In reality yes.  However most Mario games are quite different and they still come across as stale to the general public.  That's because if you don't play them they look like the same stuff over and over again.  I'm talking about public perception and how it will affect sales.

Plus as different as most of Nintendo's franchise games are I don't see the need to release them so frequently.  In theory if they release a Zelda related game every year they're going to run out of ideas faster.

[Bill Aurion]

"The fact that each game is completely different shows that Nintendo could just as well have created a new franchise."

Completely different in a Zelda sense...If you make a "new franchise" it would just be Zelda with different characters, which kind of defeats the purpose making the new franchise in the first place, as well as sees decreased sales due to lack of consumer recognition...Ninty saves new characters/franchises for new gameplay, as they did for Pikmin and Animal Crossing, and as they are doing with Another (DS)...

"That's because if you don't play them they look like the same stuff over and over again."

That didn't stop people from buying Vice City and San Andreas...

[TheYoungerPlumber]

I agree that Nintendo overuses the Mario image--even though I eat it all up.  For a game like Mario Tennis it is perfect, and injects a lot of personality into a sport that can often look very dull.  Mario Kart has a similar fit, and kart racer wannabes will alaways be just that.  Mario & Luigi practically redefined the Mario franchise, paying little attention to previous games when defining itself, and that was fantastic.

On the flip side, we have games like Mario Pinball, where the franchise just limits the included bosses.  Mario Party needs to be killed.  And although I'd love to see another golf game from Camelot, they've done everything they can with Mario and should create a new golf franchise.

I wouldn't call Mario a "Mega Man"--most games Mario appears in are at least decent.  I have no problem with the Zelda games.  Except for Navi's Trackers, which was ditched in the U.S., each modern Zelda game I've seen fits perfectly with the series.  That new Minish Cap game will finally give the 2D series a graphical overhaul, which will be nice.

[Hostile Creation]

Mario is overused.  If they released one Mario golf and Mario tennis, one or two Mario parties, and one big Mario platformer over a five year period, that'd be fine (maybe one or two extras, along the lines of Paper Mario 2).  But this is a bit too much.  They should also definitely cut down on the Zelda usage.  I've enjoyed all the Zelda games that have come out this generation, and intend to play Minish Cap and the next cube Zelda, but four is a bit too much.  N64 releasing four (OoT, MM, and Oracle games) didn't seem bad, perhaps because I didn't play the Oracle games, but I could manage with two Zelda games per generation.
Metroid is showing signs of getting out of hand, what with Hunters coming out.  But that's mainly because of the long gap and the remake of the original.  Besides, the side-scrolling and 3D Metroids play very differently.
Some examples of franchises that are not out of hand:
Kirby
F-Zero
Earthbound
Ice Climbers (bring em back!)
Fire Emblem
Pikmin (I think a DS version of Pikmin could be absolutely awesome)

Thing is, despite all these games, I still feel like I'm playing pure, unmilked Nintendo whenever I actually play all of them.  So I can't complain too much

[Ian Sane]

"If they released one Mario golf and Mario tennis, one or two Mario parties, and one big Mario platformer over a five year period, that'd be fine"

What?  You would keep Mario Party but not Mario Kart?

I disagree about F-Zero since it's going to have THREE GBA games in total which is absolutly ridiculous but I will agree that that rest of those franchises mentioned are not out of hand.

[Hostile Creation]

I don't trust handheld racing games, so I wasn't aware that three GBA F-Zero games were out. You're right, that is too many.

Egads, Mario Kart.  That's why I left room for extras, I guess, because I knew I'd forget something.  Yeah, a Mario Kart per gen is fine, too.  But between an excellent Mario Party game and Mario Kart, I'd probably go with Mario Party (if it were one per generation, taking time to make it excellent, all the best qualities of the different party games without all the crap).  But it'd have to be a better Mario Party than any of those that exist so far.
They need a Mario Party compilation that takes all the not crap minigames and puts them together.  They wouldn't even need the board game, if they didn't feel like it.  Just give me those games and I'll play for hours.

[xts3]

The reasons Nintendo is losing is the same reason they are winning in the handheld market:   The number of games and system selling exclusives.  They need to start bribing developers whose games sell in the millions, its that simple.

The fact is they need their former heavy hitters back like Konami, Square enix, etc.  Without them they will wither and die a horrible, horrible death.  I've seen brand new  games going into new territory, brand new franchises invented from the ground up on PS2.  Nintendo is still re-hashing games based on properties it made a long time ago.  They can't support the ship themselves because games take enormous amounts of money and time to make just one.