Topic: Did Nintendo turn off the creative juices after the N64 Era?

[Pixelated Pixies]

Brilliant, lol.

[EasyCure]

thanks, I decided i needed to make a funny post before someone chews my head off for not finding ricky gervais funny in the Simpsons thread :-P  i know humor dammit! lol

[Caterkiller]

Hahahahaahahah!

Oh oh, now do Broodwars!

I do agree that since the GameCube, Nintendo has had a harder time with coming up with creative ideas. At the same time there are multiple generations of people that have grown up after the N64 era that more or less need a title like NSMB DS. 3D Mario continues the quest for daring new ideas with more of a challenge so I feel we get exactly want. As much as I would love it, every 2D Mario cant be a Yoshi's island, its just too complicated for newer people to get involved. I honestly think the "cookie cutter sequel" is necessary for the dual Mario audience.

Now I personally don't veiw the NSMB series as cookie cutter sequels and /or mediocre except for the DS one, I had a great time with the other 3. Even still, new enemies, locations and themes were done with Sunshine and I remember in those days every character but Petey Piranah was shunned for the tried and true.

We got Sunshine, Pikmin, Jungle Beat and Prime last gen and Galaxy, Epic Yarn, DK Returns and Skyward sword this gen to name a few. I think these games are plenty creative but sometimes the tried and true and not too complocated titles that sell to the masses have to be made.

[broodwars]

Hahahahaahahah!

Oh oh, now do Broodwars!

Hey now, don't lump me in with Ian there.  I haven't done an epicly-long rant on the forums in ages.  You know, I'm generally content to say my piece and move on, yet for some reason people just seem to insist on dragging me back in with you lot. Very well then...

 ;)

Have I mentioned I have a podcast now, from which I can utterly abuse my position as a panelist and demean people who cross me for minutes at a time?  Just sayin'.  :P: : : (yes, j/k)

[Caterkiller]

Link me to this podcast.

[Shaymin]

Ask and ye shall receive.

[EasyCure]

Hahahahaahahah!

Oh oh, now do Broodwars!

I don't know him/her well enough, sorry.

[Khushrenada]

Oh good. This thread continued. There were a few more points I wanted to respond to but I didn't want to double post and keep feeling like I'm taking over the conversation. Anyways, first to this point:

Well, during the 8-bit era, you'd have a point (except for the idea that Nintendo couldn't rely on their past ideas as much, though it didn't really stop them from porting in their arcade titles and rehashing them on the NES and the other way around).  But the 16-Bit era?  Come on!  Super Mario Kart?  Super Mario RPG?  Mario Paint?  Super Mario All-Stars? Yoshi, Yoshi's Island, Yoshi's Safari, Yoshi's Cookie?  Super Metroid?  Zelda 3?  Donkey Kong Country trilogy?  Kirby, Kirby, Kirby?

Anyone who thinks Nintendo didn't run their franchises into the ground during the SNES era either has their head in the ground or was too sidetracked playing all the great SNES games to notice.

Yes, they did release a lot of games under a character's name put most of those games were different from each other and stood on their own except for the Donkey Kong trilogy. All 4 Kirby games were different from each other. None is a sequel of the other. Yoshi wasn't released on the SNES. Just the NES and Gameboy. The other games were all unique and Yoshi's Safari was to help sell the SuperScope attachment and the general attitude is you have to have a Mario Game at launch to succeed. Moreover, gaming was still growing. I never owned an NES growing up. I had a couple friends who owned one and I experienced a few hours here and there playing it but I hardly logged on that much time. The first system my parents bought was the SNES so everything on it was new. So, if I found Super Mario World amazing and I saw another game with Mario called Super Mario Kart, I was going to rent it and try it. And if I was blown away by the graphics and gameplay of Super Mario Kart, I'm going to try this Super Mario All-Stars. What? Not only does it have Super Mario Bros., one of the few Mario games I played on the NES, it also has 3 others? This is incredible. They're making a Super Mario World 2? No way. I'm so getting that. And so on and so on. Having a character in multiple games isn't a bad thing since it helps people who are new to gaming maybe try something they might not have without that name/facial recognition. It's a necessary part of the business. But, at least it seemed more of an effort was made in each sequel to differentiate it.

I know everyone and their dog has gone on about the NSMB franchise being cookie cutter. But it's the fastest way to illustrate the point. At the end of a Super Mario Bros. level, you generally jump on a flagpole. At the end of a Super Mario Bros. 3 level, you enter black space and jump to hit a flashing card. At the end of a Super Mario World level, you try to hit a moving goalpost bar. At the end of a Super Mario World 2 level, you jump through a hoop of flowers.

At the end of a New Super Mario Bros. level, you jump onto a flagpole. Ha! That's great! I hadn't seen a Mario level end like that since the original. Well it is "NEW" Super Mario Bros. What a fun little throw back. At the end of a New Super Mario Bros Wii, New Super Mario Bros 2, New Super Mario Bros Wii U, and Super Mario Land 3D level, you end it by jumping on a flagpole. Seriously?! 4 more games later and you haven't thought of a single new idea to signify the end of a level? You couldn't even bother to reference another games ending even at this point? Is it always going to be flagpoles from now? There's not a single designer in the whole company that can think of a simple new little twist to end a level? That's the problem I have with the NSMB series. I don't mind a reference to a past game IF IT HASN'T BEEN DONE IN AWHILE. But when it just becomes the standard and there seems to be no interest in trying something new, then it just leaves a stale feeling and you begin to stop caring about the franchise. Sure, the ending of levels was just a simple way to signify the end and you could gain a few more points to your score with some timing or earn extra lives or earn the chance to play a game to get more lives. But at least in the NES and SNES era's, Nintendo took the time to make it a little different. There was no standard ending procedure. Suddenly, it is the only way a Mario level can end. Why? You can argue that it was the flagpole since it was used in the first game and The Lost Levels but those games were the first and if it was to be the standard, why change it on all later games and not bring it back until nearly 20 years later?

That is the clearest way I can illustrate the difference between Nintendo sequels now and from the past. Even if the New Super Mario Bros. series is throwing in new elements like multiplayer and rotating surfaces or gold rush challenges, by trying to keep the games so consistent to each other, it just gives the impression that the effort isn't there. Say what you will about the amount of Mario Games from 1985 - 1996, there's no denying each one looked different and it's very easy to look at a screenshot from one of those games and know which one it came from. The appearance/effort looks to be there in making something new based off the tried and true gameplay already experienced.

[Khushrenada]

In regards to Easycure, I agree with him about lack of advertising. When Wii was hot in the first couple years, I always saw plenty of ads for it. Feels like years since I've seen any Nintendo ad on TV now.

When I say I want "new IPs" what I really want is a new gameplay experiences.  Creating a new IP is just an easier way to do it.  If Nintendo makes a Mario game they're going to naturally be influenced by the existing tropes of the franchise.  But if it's a new IP there are no preconcieved notions in the minds of both the players and developers.  This allows for more freedom in game design.  Insisting that Mario be in everything just restricts creativity.  Plus I do like some novelty in new characters and settings.

That is probably the best explaination I've seen someone give in why they want to see new IP's even if sequels are good.

Although I do disagree with another statement about not wanting unessential sequels. Paper Mario 64 and Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door may be very close in gameplay and how they unfold. Even some of the helpers and abilities seem to just be carried over. But would you really want to play Paper Mario 64 say 5 or 6 times over or would you rather play it 3 times over and another game very similar but with new locales and story and twists a couple times over also? I would choose the latter. Otherwise, I would tire of the experience of the former and become indifferent to it.

That's pretty much what has happened to me and most of the early Mario platformers. I've beaten Super Mario World so much, I honestly don't care if I lost my cartridge of the game. I've no need to go back to it. A cousin of mine bought a SNES a year ago and hadn't played the game before. So we took turns playing levels after one person died but it soon just become me zipping through the game and taking the Star Road over to Bowser and beating the game. He didn't mind and liked the fact I showed him all these secrets early on. I hadn't played the game in maybe 5 years before that, yet there was no rust at all when I played it. It's just too ingrained in me. But I think that's why sequels are also necessary even if they don't cover that much new ground.

[UncleBob]

Yes, they did release a lot of games under a character's name put most of those games were different from each other and stood on their own except for the Donkey Kong trilogy. [...] Having a character in multiple games isn't a bad thing since it helps people who are new to gaming maybe try something they might not have without that name/facial recognition. It's a necessary part of the business. But, at least it seemed more of an effort was made in each sequel to differentiate it.

See, that's the thing - some folks keep screaming "New IP" like it means something.  Ian nailed it on the head though, these people don't want a new IP, they want new game play.  Though I wonder how many people saw Mario Hoops and blew it off as another Mario sports title.  Anyway, those are all examples of using existing IPs and franchises in new and different ways.

I think what people seem to forget is that when Miyamoto created Mr. Video, he planned to use him as a generic character in all of his games.  From the beginning, Miyamoto was less concerned with the "face" of the game and put his effort into the gameplay.

This is the foundation on which Nintendo's game making philosophy is built on.

[UncleBob]

And... I totally forgot. Re: Flagpole jumping.  Super Mario Bros., Super Mario Bros. 2 and Super Mario Vs. say "Hi".

[Ian Sane]

I do agree that since the GameCube, Nintendo has had a harder time with coming up with creative ideas. At the same time there are multiple generations of people that have grown up after the N64 era that more or less need a title like NSMB DS. 3D Mario continues the quest for daring new ideas with more of a challenge so I feel we get exactly want. As much as I would love it, every 2D Mario cant be a Yoshi's island, its just too complicated for newer people to get involved. I honestly think the "cookie cutter sequel" is necessary for the dual Mario audience.

This is a really good point.  Though if you're a Mario newcomer and need to start on the simpler gameplay SMB3 and SMW are right there on the Virtual Console.  It isn't like the old games are out-of-print and NSMB is necessary for any sort of retro Mario gameplay to be available on a current system.  But then kids tend to think that old stuff is lame.  So I see the obvious business purpose here: the younger generation would enjoy the classic Mario gameplay but is not likely going to be interested in some 20 year old title so you make new games that stick very close to that same formula.  A bonus aspect of it is that older gamers that are familiar with the old titles are more likely to buy a new formulaic title over a re-release of a game they already had.

However what Ninendo really needs to focus on for longterm survival is to create the "next Mario".  My younger brother was in elementary school when Pokemon came out and the kids talked about it on the schoolyard like we talked about Mario when I was that age.  Nintendo had found the "next Mario", the big game franchise that is a major part of kids culture.  Today Angry Birds is the "current Mario".  That's the game the every kid is nuts over and they'll be talking about it nostalgically when they're adults.

I like NSMB Wii despite its very safe design.  But I already owned a Wii so, yeah, why not get this game that is still good and still fun?  I realized my real lack of interest in the Wii U when Nintendo was pushing NSMB U as the reason for me to buy the system and I just don't see the point.  Yeah, that game's probably great but I'm going to buy a whole new system for a game that offers little beyond what games from 20 years ago were already doing?

[Khushrenada]

And... I totally forgot. Re: Flagpole jumping.  Super Mario Bros., Super Mario Bros. 2 and Super Mario Vs. say "Hi".

As I said in my post:

You can argue that it was the flagpole since it was used in the first game and The Lost Levels but those games were the first and if it was to be the standard, why change it on all later games and not bring it back until nearly 20 years later?

And Super Mario Bros. 2, had doors and bird mouths to go through instead in North America. Lost levels which wasn't released in N/A until All-Stars wouldn't have made an impact on player's minds that this is how levels must end. I never realized it was the original sequel to SMB until years later. I just thought it was stuff taken out of the original game. I was a kid and it was called Lost Levels. Super Mario VS. is just an arcade version blending both of those games together. Hard to call that an original game. In any case, the point still stands that using flagpoles as an ending to a level stopped in 1986 when those two games were made and then Nintendo started using new ideas until 20 years later and now that's all that is used.

[EasyCure]

I do agree that since the GameCube, Nintendo has had a harder time with coming up with creative ideas. At the same time there are multiple generations of people that have grown up after the N64 era that more or less need a title like NSMB DS. 3D Mario continues the quest for daring new ideas with more of a challenge so I feel we get exactly want. As much as I would love it, every 2D Mario cant be a Yoshi's island, its just too complicated for newer people to get involved. I honestly think the "cookie cutter sequel" is necessary for the dual Mario audience.

This is a really good point.  Though if you're a Mario newcomer and need to start on the simpler gameplay SMB3 and SMW are right there on the Virtual Console. 

I stopped reading right there for one reason: Kids (ie the newcomers) are fucking jaded as soon as they learn to express themselves. You give a 5 year old a wiimote and ask if he wants to play SMB3/W or NSMB12W/WU and I promise you that kid will pick NSMB. First of all, if they can read they see the word "new" and think its instantly better, but more importantly, the out-dated graphics of SMB3/W aren't charming to that kid, they're fugly. Just because you're old enough to appreciate the leap in graphics doesn't mean kids can. There are phone apps that turn off all phone features in order for you to throw it to your newborn and let them be amazed by colorful shapes and designs, none of which look anything like the graphics we grew up with. **** I'm an 80s kid and after playing NES for a few years and seeing my cousin dig out his old Atari, I thought "why does it look so ugly".

So yeah, don't think a kid will simply go to to the virtual console to experience a masterpiece.

[Caterkiller]

In Ian's defense he more or less said that in his follow up sentences.

[UncleBob]

And... I totally forgot. Re: Flagpole jumping.  Super Mario Bros., Super Mario Bros. 2 and Super Mario Vs. say "Hi".

As I said in my post:

You can argue that it was the flagpole since it was used in the first game and The Lost Levels but those games were the first and if it was to be the standard, why change it on all later games and not bring it back until nearly 20 years later?

And Super Mario Bros. 2, had doors and bird mouths to go through instead in North America. Lost levels which wasn't released in N/A until All-Stars wouldn't have made an impact on player's minds that this is how levels must end. I never realized it was the original sequel to SMB until years later. I just thought it was stuff taken out of the original game. I was a kid and it was called Lost Levels. Super Mario VS. is just an arcade version blending both of those games together. Hard to call that an original game. In any case, the point still stands that using flagpoles as an ending to a level stopped in 1986 when those two games were made and then Nintendo started using new ideas until 20 years later and now that's all that is used.

Super Mario Vs. is more than just levels from the two games smushed together.  Some parts of the levels have enemies switched around to make them harder. I think powerups and 1-ups were removed as well.

Also, Super Mario Bros. Special, though developed with Hudson Soft., used the flag pole mechanic as well.

But your point about Super Mario Bros. 2 USA vs. Super Mario Bros. 2 JPN somewhat illustrates my point.  From a creative standpoint, SMB2J is the *real* Mario sequel - and it's just more of the same, with minor changes.  From a marketing standpoint (in the USA, at least), SMB2U is a totally unrelated game with Mario characters shoe-horned in just for marketing reasons.

For people to say they want Nintendo to be as creative as they were back in the day... well, SMB2J was their idea of a sequel back in the day.

[EasyCure]

And... I totally forgot. Re: Flagpole jumping.  Super Mario Bros., Super Mario Bros. 2 and Super Mario Vs. say "Hi".

As I said in my post:

You can argue that it was the flagpole since it was used in the first game and The Lost Levels but those games were the first and if it was to be the standard, why change it on all later games and not bring it back until nearly 20 years later?

And Super Mario Bros. 2, had doors and bird mouths to go through instead in North America. Lost levels which wasn't released in N/A until All-Stars wouldn't have made an impact on player's minds that this is how levels must end. I never realized it was the original sequel to SMB until years later. I just thought it was stuff taken out of the original game. I was a kid and it was called Lost Levels. Super Mario VS. is just an arcade version blending both of those games together. Hard to call that an original game. In any case, the point still stands that using flagpoles as an ending to a level stopped in 1986 when those two games were made and then Nintendo started using new ideas until 20 years later and now that's all that is used.

Super Mario Vs. is more than just levels from the two games smushed together.  Some parts of the levels have enemies switched around to make them harder. I think powerups and 1-ups were removed as well.

Also, Super Mario Bros. Special, though developed with Hudson Soft., used the flag pole mechanic as well.

But your point about Super Mario Bros. 2 USA vs. Super Mario Bros. 2 JPN somewhat illustrates my point.  From a creative standpoint, SMB2J is the *real* Mario sequel - and it's just more of the same, with minor changes.  From a marketing standpoint (in the USA, at least), ¹SMB2U is a totally unrelated game with Mario characters shoe-horned in just for marketing reasons.

For people to say they want Nintendo to be as creative as they were back in the day... well, ²SMB2J was their idea of a sequel back in the day.

¹Nintendo's first gimmick, Ian?

² Cookie.. cutter.. sequel.. tsk tsk tsk

[Khushrenada]

For people to say they want Nintendo to be as creative as they were back in the day... well, SMB2J was their idea of a sequel back in the day.

Perhaps but that might also be because nobody really gave much thought to sequels in videogames before. I can't think of too many but Pac-man and Mrs. Pac-man come to mind. The first was so successful that a sequel was made with some new maps and a bit tougher challenge. I can't recall off the top of my head whether Space Invaders had a sequel. But in early videogames, the norm just seemed to be that if a game was doing really well, you just release the same game with slight changes or make it a bit tougher.

It could be that when Nintendo realized that gaming wasn't going to crash again and was something they could keep doing for years that they started giving more thought to sequels and realized the necessity of expanding characters game worlds to keep interest in them going. Plus, as developers found new things that could be done with the tech and came up with new gameplay ideas, I'm sure that also had a factor in deciding to change things up when making a sequel to a game. Of course, this is just speculation on my part but it's something that struck me when I read your point.

I can't help but wonder whether Mega Man may have had an influence because that is the earliest sequel I can think of where the second game surpasses the first and shows how a game can be expanded on while still keeping it's core elements intact. Maybe that influenced how games could be made because Mega Man then went on to have 6 more sequels as well demonstrating the power of a franchise. After Super Mario Bros. 2 Japan, Nintendo really didn't make any cookie cutter sequels as obvious as that for probably a decade and a half.

[UncleBob]

Perhaps but that might also be because nobody really gave much thought to sequels in videogames before.

Well, I'm going to somewhat shoot my own argument in the foot here, but Donkey Kong, Donkey Kong Jr. and Donkey Kong 3 would probably be the best example of early sequels where the game play was really changed up from the initial releases (even more so with DK3).

[Pixelated Pixies]

You give a 5 year old a wiimote and ask if he wants to play SMB3/W or NSMB12W/WU and I promise you that kid will pick NSMB. First of all, if they can read they see the word "new" and think its instantly better, but more importantly, the out-dated graphics of SMB3/W aren't charming to that kid, they're fugly.

I'm only getting around to reading this now, but I have to call bulls*** on this. While it's true that I grew up playing Super Mario Bros 3, my seven year old cousin certainly didn't. Yet, despite the fact that he owns NSMB on DS and NSMB Wii on (you guessed it) Wii, every time I see him he talks my ear off about the 'cool' stuff he's been doing in SMB3 (I gave him a SNES and a few games last year, including the all-stars version of SMB3). I called up to see my aunt shortly before christmas and he regaled me of tales of Giant 'Turtles' and Goombas, lol.
 
He's just as obsessed with the game as I was when I was his age. The use of the term 'new' or the plastic-looking visuals of the NSMB series don't factor into it. He flat out prefers All-Stars, and who could blame him?

[Sarail]

Smart kid.

[TJ Spyke]

I can't think of too many but Pac-man and Mrs. Pac-man come to mind.

Um, Ms. Pac-Man was made by an unrelated company as a arcade mod, but was turned into an official sequel when Midway (who owned the US rights to Pac-Man at the time) saw it and was impressed. Midway and Atari did not develop the game at all. Think of it like Counter-Strike, which started as a fan-made mod to Half-Life.

[ThePerm]

I don't want Nintendo to have a new IP as much as I want them to have diverse genre's and no gaps in quality or their yearly line up. Or if they are going to use all their existing franchises they should treat them with the same type of respect they did when they became hits.

Right now we have

Mario Bros & Yoshi- by this i mean Mario Bros. and all of its spinoffs. Including Yoshi, Luigi's Mansion, Wario Bros. These games are healthy although there are a bunch of spinoffs. The main series is definitely NSMB and Galaxy at the moment. Evey other game is not treated with the same level of perfection. None of the other games are the type of games that would get a 10 rating from any news organization. If Nintendo really made a Luigi game that got the same level of care as a Mario game...it would be like having a new franchise. That is probably about what Nintendo was trying to do with game cube. Nintendo has the opportunity to do something similar withj Wii U because Wii U has power behind it.

Zelda- My issue with Zelda is all gameplay wise. No let me preface I still haven't played skyward sword outside of the store demo, but let me say i have played some games that kind of make Zelda seem too old fashioned.  Thats not to say that I don't like Zelda gameplay, but it would be better applied to a different newer franchise.

Kirby-Kirby is an oddball in that every Kirby game that comes out is pretty different. I have no real complaints about the Kirby series other than that I haven't had a chance to play any recently. I think Nintendo is taking the right approach for this franchise.

Donkey Kong- I'm on the same boat with this and Kirby. need to play this.

Metroid- Metroid: Other M looked like a fucking cliché silly mess of a game. I think they should bring back prime the way it was, and have some super multi player mode, and co-op. I know Nintendo never pushed Metroid as a shooting game, but they should. Metroid single player is under appreciated, and the series could use a jolt of popularity from multiplayer. Nintendo has had this franchise for a while, and its like the one "Mature" franchise that they have.

Star Fox- Starfox is undervalued by Nintendo themselves. They haven't seemed to try to make a legitamate game. This series has really gone cookie-cutter when it has so much potential. The problem lies in how they have approached it. They think just because an off the wall non starfox starfox game like "Dinosaur Planet" didn't get the results they wanted that they can just make some silly basic starfox games. Starfox has potential.

F-Zero-Miyamoyto said recently that he couldn't think of what more they could do with this franchise, too me that is just a plain wrong attitude. Heres our example of them turining their creative juices off. It has so much potential.

Kid Icarus(recently revived)- ill leave it at that. This could be our new IP. I don't have a 3DS so i dont know about this, but I would hope to see a console version.


Pikimin- at least they are doing something with this

Animal Crossing- They need to do more than just re-package this game and call it something different. Animnal crossing was a fun game when it came out. Having played minecraft...i see the potential for hybridization with this game. It would be so awesome.  Animal Crossing has the potential to be this crazy second life addictive game if they would just expand it some. I can imagine hosts of people not having lives because of this.

but Nintendo has lost a few franchises over the year to attrition. We don't have Banjo, Conker, Killer Instinct, and Perfect Dark like we used to. What Nintendo needs is a popular shooter, a popular fighting game, and maybe a really good survival horror game just to keep their variety going. There shouldn't be a time where we're disappointed that some third party is withholding a franchise. If that is a problem then there needs to be some Nintendo grown alternative.

The other issue is that Nintendo doesn't seem to be on the ball ever. You would think that at the end of the Wii there would be some quality games to play so its popularity doesn't falter. You would think there would be a lot more launch titles if there were no games at the end of the last console cycle. Nintendo transitioned from nes to snes and from snes to n64 without a hickup, but n64 to gamecube to wii to wii u have not been flawless.

[EasyCure]

Smart kid.

That's the only response I can give to PixPix, that and perhaps he's not a spoiled brat like the kids I've seen. I would also like to question exactly when did you give him the SNES and how much gaming had he done before the gift? I could understand a kid appreciating it if it was where he started on, like a lot of us here (or earlier!), before moving on to modern gaming machines. A lot of the kids I've seen, especially within family (where I have no qualms about telling their parents, my relatives, that their kid is a spoiled brat) have the kind of attitude I described as opposed to your example; besides I never said it was a definitive consensus amongst youth.

My post was more of a response to Ian's post where he insinuating a child of this day and age would willingly go in to the virtual console shop and purchase SMB2 or SMAS on his own if they wanted to try a classic mario experience - which if they have the means to access the shop and purchase games on their own, likely means they in fact ARE the spoiled brat type that I pictured when he proposed his scenario, and not the beacon of hope that is your cousin. Seriously, keep him on the right track when it comes to gaming, less he became another one of those idiots that make our hobby look bad.

[Pixelated Pixies]

Smart kid.

That's the only response I can give to PixPix, that and perhaps he's not a spoiled brat like the kids I've seen. I would also like to question exactly when did you give him the SNES and how much gaming had he done before the gift? I could understand a kid appreciating it if it was where he started on, like a lot of us here (or earlier!), before moving on to modern gaming machines. A lot of the kids I've seen, especially within family (where I have no qualms about telling their parents, my relatives, that their kid is a spoiled brat) have the kind of attitude I described as opposed to your example; besides I never said it was a definitive consensus amongst youth.

True. The example of my cousin Eadaoin is far from definitive either, but I think it stands as proof that young children can be just as discerning as we are. As you say, alot of that perhaps has to do with upbringing and their history with video games. In the case of my cousin he has owned a DS for at least 2 years (I don't know exactly when it would have been given to him, but it was when I saw him with the DS that I thought he might appreciate the spare SNES I had picked up online). I think he actually got the Wii the same christmas I gave him the SNES, but it might have been the year after.
 
In any case, he seems to enjoy the NSMB games (he apparently loves the propellor suit) but he absolutely adores the All-Stars collection, and that's evidenced by the fact that his school books are covered with doodles of Mario with a cape AND tail, lol

Seriously, keep him on the right track when it comes to gaming, less he became another one of those idiots that make our hobby look bad.

I'll try my best.