Topic: New Nintendo mascots?

[Mario]

http://n-philes.com/php/epvuevaalkeayyufuapa.php

Satoru Iwata says that Nintendo's developers are hard at work on next generation stars to replace Mario and Pokemon! Read the article.

[Artimus]

Weird article. Seems rather poorly written too. PGC just spoils us in quality.

[Michael8983]

I'm glad Iwata sees the need for new Nintendo mascots.
Mario and Pokemon certainly won't be retired but new mascots will join them and may even "replace" them as Nintendo's top franchises.
I'm a little worried about Iwata's obsession with Nintendo retaking control of the console market though. How driven for dominance of the console market is he? Enough to start sacraficing Nintendo's uniqueness and innovation for the sake mainstream appeal. One look at his history makes me think he'd never resort to that but it may very well be the only way Nintendo could ever retake control of the market.
Hopefully Iwata will realize that, though winning the console war would be nice, it's far more important that Nintendo remain Nintendo even if that means it will have to settle for the silver or bronze.

[Nintendo Gamecube]

I still think there is some translation error. I don't think Iwata, or even anyone at Nintendo would dump Pokemon and Mario franchises, for some hip new ones. I do beleive we may see additions of some, but Mario will always remain the flagship title that represents Nintendo.

In addition, I don't think Iwata is thriving to become #1, but gain some hold on the console market. I think both Nintendo and Microsoft are upset that PS is owning them, so I think they want to cut back into Sony's lead.

[Mario]

Well obviously Nintendo arent going to completely dump Mario and Pokemon, i think he means they are going to create new franchises that could possibly eclipse Pokemon and Mario in popularity. Or something like that...

[GoldShadow1]

Woohoo! It's about time.  I want some innovation!  That's not to say I don't want Pokemon or Mario, but I want lots of new stuff.

[joshnickerson]

How can you replace a mascot who is more recognized than Mickey Mouse? I'm sure they'll come out with new mascots that are just as popular, but no one mascot could replace our favorite plumber.

[Armed]

If they do make another mascot i hope they don't make another cutesy (is "cutesy" even a word) character, so their reputation of being a kiddie console can start to die down instead of rising with another pikachu, or pikmin looking thing; maybe make one like ViewtifulJoe  colorful, but also tough and funny looking, very very good game it exceeded my expectations (in demo disk only 10$)!!!

[Ninja X]

A ninja for their next mascot would be sweet.

Seriously, nothing will replace Mario or Pokemon for the time being.  They are Nintendo's "money mascots."  You can't just kill off your cash cow like that.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

I want Riqa back.

[Nintendo Gamecube]

Mario is the only character you see and automatically associate it with Nintendo. Not even Halo has that power with X-Box. I can definitely tell you, every gamer has played Mario one way or the other, NES, SNES, N64, or NGC.

There is no chance they will "replace" him. MARIO IS NINTENDO.

[Uncle Rich AiAi]

I didn't like the quote from Microsoft's Xbox chief saying that Nintendo "are a toy company."
That's another way of saying Nintendo is for kids.

But that's expected from MS.

[Darc Requiem]

Quote
Originally posted by: Michael8983
I'm glad Iwata sees the need for new Nintendo mascots.
Mario and Pokemon certainly won't be retired but new mascots will join them and may even "replace" them as Nintendo's top franchises.
I'm a little worried about Iwata's obsession with Nintendo retaking control of the console market though. How driven for dominance of the console market is he? Enough to start sacraficing Nintendo's uniqueness and innovation for the sake mainstream appeal. One look at his history makes me think he'd never resort to that but it may very well be the only way Nintendo could ever retake control of the market.
Hopefully Iwata will realize that, though winning the console war would be nice, it's far more important that Nintendo remain Nintendo even if that means it will have to settle for the silver or bronze.

Actually this is what I like about Iwata, he shows the fire and desire to get Nintendo to the top of the game. He also seems to be exploring options and doing things that Yamauchi would never consider. This is the type of leadership Nintendo needs to regain the top spot in the gaming industry. I read the article and from what I gather he's basically saying that Nintendo's hard at work on brand new titles that will gain more of an audience with gamers and help sell Nintendo consoles.

Since the launch of the N64, Nintendo has been making a living off of Gameboy and a eroding diehard fanbase. I think Iwata realizes what Yamuachi didn't. Times have changed and gamers  tastes have changed. While Mario, Zelda, etc. will always sell a huge number of titles, they won't pull in a new audience for Nintendo. They are going to sell to us the diehard Nintendo gamer. New franchises will not only be great for us because, speaking for us all, I know we enjoy Nintendo quality. It will draw in gamers that traditionally wouldn't even give Nintendo a second thought.

Iwata seems to have a lot of things up his sleeve. From what I gather he will continue to produce the old franchises for us the diehard fan, but to gain new Nintendo fans. He is having Nintendo come up with new ideas and new franchises to garner the attention of the current generation of gamer that has no memory of Nintendo's dominance, the generation of gamer that only knows Playstation. If Iwata can manage to produce new AAA franchises, new sequels to the old franchises, a free online play system with Gamespy, and launch the GC's successor along sides the PS3 with Nintendo's new third party partnerships....Nintendo just may when the war next generation. Thats a lot of ifs but then again...I'm sure there are even more cards up his sleeve.

Darc Requiem

[ShockingAlberto]

Iwata has promised a lot of crazy things during his tenure thus far and has usually not lived up to expectations.  I think he overhypes too much and is more worried about the "now" than the "later".  But, off the subject of Iwata, and let us hear how an old-school gamer feels about this.

I, personally, don't like the idea of Nintendo pushing a new mascot.  Super Smash Bros. Melee has shown that Nintendo's franchises are key to its success.  Not many casual gamers will recognize Miyamoto's name on a game like a casual moviegoer would recognize "Spielberg" or "Lucas" attached to a movie.  People recognize names like "Mario" or "Link".  

Do you think Mario Party would have sold as well if it were just "Party"?

It will take years for Nintendo to build up a new mascot.  Nintendo has been VERY fortunate in establishing its mascots (Sega was only successful with Sonic, Sony and Microsoft have both had failed attempts) and I don't think now is the time when it should be taking focus away from what works.  Plus, there's the "Nintendo Fanboy" perspective.  A lot of us grew up with Mario and would not take kindly to a new, hipper mascot (in the vain of Crash or Bug?...hah!).  Iwata damn well better know what he's doing, because he could be making a huge mistake here.

-- ShockingAlberto

[PIAC]

even if they are just coming up with loads of new titles, the lads and lassies over at nintendo will be well busy making games for the new franchises as well as old, either way this excites me

[Nephilim]

Nintendo have new moscots in the west thu now, because of melee
Marth and Roy are now popular
Link is Holding Nintendo more at the moment then mario
maybe they should look into action rpg more

[K-Man]

A good mascot would be like an adventure guy that doesnt use guns and stuff. But uses the environment to his advantage, and like a martial artist. He would be hardcore and have smart remarks but not like duke nukem remarks over and over again, they would only appear in cutscenes. The idea needs work but it would be good none-the-less.

[Termin8Anakin]

"In other news today, Sony has announced plans to release a system called the PSX for early next year, it will be a beefed up PS2 hardware with TV tuner, hard disk drive and DVD recorder. Go figure, I thought the PSX was already released… confusing name. Sony also says that they are going to work more on their gaming division to increase profits for the entertainment company. Microsoft's Xbox chief today fires off a comment about Nintendo saying "I don't think Nintendo is here for the digital-entertainment revolution. They are a toy company." "

What the F**K?
I'm really getting pissed at M$ now!!!!!
And a beefed up PS2? Uh.....you beefed up the PSX to the PSOne, and now the PS2 to the PSX? I think names at Sony don't really get more creative than, say PS99, PSZ or PSO (d'oh, already taken!). BUt the features...are Sony seriously a gaming company? I mean, what the hell features are those on a game syst...oh wait, yeah, teh PS2 was an entertainment system already. Never mind. But do Sony seriously have to rebuild an existing console all the time? I think it's becoming a trend now. And a really stupid one. Sure, it's probably successful, but we'll practically have six gaming consoles by 2005/6: GC2, Xbox2, PS3, PS2 remake, PSOne (which I'm sure is STILL being sold, and I know that people STILL make games for it), and the PSP, which is really a smaller version of the PSOne with better hardware.
The industry is getting so stupid. Just because you CAN put all these features in, doesn't mean you should. Sony and M$ will be obsessed and spend big $$$ on other features, while Nintendo rakes in big $$$ by focusing on games (they may put in CD/DVD playback on their next console, but hey, they might not). I mean, I understand the internet-ready stuff on consoles, but what the hell does TV tuners and DVD recorders do for a gaming system?
Losing focus? I think so!

Phew! Now onto the topic at hand.

If Nintendo made some character that was radically different from Mario or the rest, then it wouldn't be good. I can imagine NCL's PR:
"Ninjaboy is here, and he's gonna kill Mario and take us to new heights in gaming! He's mature, he's got attitude, and he swears! H'es the coolest thing in games, and he will have the best games on the planet!!! Yeah yeah, cool cool!"
The should make him/her different enough to star in a non-kiddy game, but just sane enough to be able to fit alongside Mario and the gang. I mean, Marth and Roy are doing pretty good jobs in holding their own.

[The Doc]

 In my opinion, I feel that Nintendo could use some new mascots. Satoru Iwata seems to be driven to take Nintendo in to a new direction, and the introduction of new mascots will yeild new first party games which could appeal to older gamers. Keep in mind, almost half of current Nintendo fans are 18 or older, and having new mascots will likely help to increasure Nintendo's older fan base while they continue to focus on their current mascots. Mario and pokemon games are great for Nintendo and they are their "cashcows", however Iwata may feel that that Nintendo is milking the Mario and Pokemon franchises, and that they just need to have some new first party stars to widen their first party software lineup. Mario and Pokemon are not going to disappear over night, instead they will gradually be replaced by these newer, hipper stars. Satoru Iwata understands that it is not the 80's and 90's anymore and Nintendo needs to change in some areas to better combat Microsoft and Sony. Nintendo is doing better with the GameCube then they did with the N64, however many gamers were put off by the fact that Nintendo launched with what many coined a "Purple Lunch Box", and that did not sit well with a lot of people. Times are changing and Nintendo knows it.  

[joeamis]

I can't stand people complaining when Nintendo decides to create new mascots...
For one they're not going to stop making games for their existing mascots so there's no reason to worry that these mascots will replace the existing ones
Secondly mascots like pokemon are new and have they been bad for Nintendo?, NO WAY, more mascots means more games you care about playing...
Third, Nintendo has been creating new mascots all the time, in the early to mid 90s they resurrected Donkey Kong and created Diddy Kong, and it really helped them sell games/systems, Kirby also recieved a lot of games too in that era.  Then they came up with baby mario around the same time, and it also was received very well.  Then theres Wario...
Now they're coming up with new mascots in the SSBM series... and Fzero GX, Mario Kart DD, and Starfox Adventures...
if you look at the history of introducing new mascots it's been probably the most lucrative deal for Nintendo, other than the games for the mascots we've had since the NES days

[ShockingAlberto]

You guys misunderstand.  I don't mean to say there shouldn't be new mascots or that I'm worried that the old ones will be replaced.  I was saying that Nintendo has been fortunate thus far in creating recognizable mascots.  They created most of these guys when they had almost total market share (and Pokemon was created during a GB Monopoly which, so far, hasn't ended).  There wasn't really any competition, so they could experiment all they wanted.  Now, they're facing heavy competition, and one error could cost them dearly.  Mascots are not easy things to simply push on to the public.

Take Sony, for instance.  They really tried to push Crash, and it worked for a while.  Then, eventually, people got tired of him.  Now, you could argue that this won't happen to Nintendo, because they keep their licenses strong with good games.  If people don't accept them to start with, though, there's really no point.  Plus, when given the choice of a Mario game or New Mascot Game X, most people will choose Mario.  Of course, Nintendo won't put them in direct competition, but it's a small scale version of what could really happen on a fanboy level.  Because Nintendo won't put them in direct competition, we could be getting mascots we don't like in place of a new Mario or Zelda come any given Christmas.  Nintendo has a habit of pushing something until they are hit on the head with a mallet that it does not work.  Who's to say that public disinterest will not cause something even more unwanted?

Of course, this could all be a moot point if they come up with a super ingenious license that appeals to everyone (again).  However, what business in the world is that lucky?

-- ShockingAlberto  

[Mingesium]

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666
I want Riqa back.

I heard that Riqa is now known as Rogue Ops and it comes out for all systems this fall.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Quote
Originally posted by: Mingesium

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666
I want Riqa back.

I heard that Riqa is now known as Rogue Ops and it comes out for all systems this fall.

Well, problem solved.  But it'd better really be Riqa.

[Ian Sane]

Nintendo shouldn't focus on new mascots.  Mascots don't sell consoles anymore, game series do.  Sony and Microsoft don't have mascots and they're the ones ahead of Nintendo.  Look at the titles that really sold the original Playstation and made Sony a gaming powerhouse: Tekken, Final Fantasy, Resident Evil, Gran Turismo, Metal Gear Solid.  No one would consider any of those titles to be "mascot games".  Besides Metal Gear none of the those series even has a "star" character.  Today it's much the same way.  GTA is the big hit of this generation and it had completely different characters in both PS2 games.  Halo doesn't sell because it has Master Chief in it.  It sells because it's a great FPS and a "cool" game.  The Mario series is often accused of being rehashed even though each "real" Mario game is quite unique and "real" Mario platformers usually have a few years between releases.  Meanwhile these same critics love Final Fantasy which argueably has changed very little over the years and has a new title released nearly every year.  However the difference is that there aren't a million FF spinoff titles to overexpose the franchise.  Plus each Final Fantasy has unique characters thus giving the illusion of a new experience.

What Nintendo has to do is create new game series that are self-contained and are more attractive to an older audience.  The day games started targetting to adults is the day that mascots were no longer system sellers.  Mascots are considered childish to most people.  A mascot game is a kiddy game in the eyes of the casual gamer.  Nintendo already has enough "kiddy" franchises and creating more mascots is just going to reinforce their image of a kiddy company.  The kids already have Mario, Pokemon, and Kirby.  They don't need anymore kids franchises.  They need to get a foothold with the adult market and they can't do that with mascots.

I think for the next generation Nintendo should hold back a bit on their usage of mascots.  Restrict Mario to the real Mario games and Mario Kart, make Pokemon only an RPG series, restrict Kirby to real Kirby games and Zelda to real Zelda games.  The only time of them leaves their normal series is for Smash Bros.  Then focus new content on games that are more attractive to the adult gamer.  Nintendo already has the kids market so they don't need to create new kids franchises.  They do need to create new mature franchises.  Therefore they should concentrate on creating new game series instead of new mascots.

[Andi 28]

Like most people i think that is just enough franchise as say the Pokemon franchise espeacially in England has lost appearly.
And as far as getting rid of Mario that would be sucidely as they would loss some of the best loved titles in the world such as Mario Kart