Topic: Mario Isn't Missing

[oksoda]

Are we approaching Mario fatigue? 

http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/editorial/31239

Earlier this week, I wrote a news story detailing the cooperative multiplayer mode in the upcoming (or already released, depending on where you live) New Super Mario Bros. 2. The story highlighted how the mode almost didn’t make the final cut, as the team working on the game didn’t think it would be possible to implement it in the time they had to complete the product. This story spawned a great deal of conversation, stretching from Nintendo’s “laziness” in almost abandoning the co-op mode because it seemed too difficult, to their overall stance on multiplayer gaming, especially online. However, a different topic stuck out to me: whether or not we have too much Mario right now. It's something I felt, too, after this year's E3, when Nintendo announced a pair of 2D Mario games for 2012.

So what’s the problem? There was a time when Nintendo could have announced a new Mario game for each of the 128 Marios in that old GameCube tech video and I would have started counting out the thousands of dollars necessary to buy them all. Are we really suffering from Mario overexposure, or is this apathy (if not worse) for the upcoming games a reaction to the quality of the games themselves?

By the end of this year, Nintendo will have released a total of seven traditional Mario games since 2006: New Super Mario Bros. (2006), Super Mario Galaxy (2007), New Super Mario Bros. Wii (2009), Super Mario Galaxy 2 (2010), Super Mario 3D Land (2011), New Super Mario Bros. 2 (2012) and New Super Mario Bros. U (2012). So that averages to exactly one standard Mario platformer per year over a span of seven years. Now let me stop you right there, guy who is beginning to argue that the 3D and 2D Mario games should be considered in a different light: the games are all platformers, differing only in dimension. Thematically they are the same, and as such, I am putting them together.

So, seven games in seven years. That trails Call of Duty by only one entry, a series that will see its eighth game in that same timespan released later this year. Indeed, Mario games have been coming out like clockwork. But using that figure alone to argue that Nintendo is annualizing Mario as a means to make a quick buck falls flat when you look at the number of Mario games released in the same amount of time during the ‘80s and ‘90s.

From 1985 to 1991, Nintendo released six Mario games (going by the Japanese release date unless otherwise noted): Super Mario Bros. (1985), Super Mario Bros. 2 (Japan 1986), Super Mario Bros. 2 (US 1988), Super Mario Bros. 3 (1988), Super Mario Land (1989), and Super Mario World (1990). That’s six games in seven years, and I don't think anyone would argue those games suffer from coming out too rapidly. The issue, then, wouldn't appear to be quantity.

With the exception of the Japanese version of Super Mario Bros. 2, each of the other five games released from 1985 to 1990 felt drastically different from its predecessor. From level selection screens to the ability to fly, friendly dinosaurs to drivable submarines and airplanes, no two Mario games were the same. They didn’t look or sound the same, either. Each game featured new worlds and unique soundtracks that set them apart from the others. In other words, each Mario game stands on its own as a momentous and noteworthy addition to the series.

The same can’t be said for the recent Mario games, not entirely anyway. The Galaxy games are the shining example of what happens when Nintendo gets creative and defies what is expected of them. Up, down, left, and right are only a matter of perspective as Mario manipulates, and is manipulated by, the gravity of the different planetoids he finds himself on. Nintendo took the familiar and expanded upon it, not unlike during the ‘80s. Even Super Mario 3D Land, which is essentially a marriage between Super Mario 64 and Super Mario Bros., was inventive enough to stand on its own.

New Super Mario Bros., though, as a series, is sort of like a prolonged Metroid game, where Mario has been stripped of all his familiar and most beloved abilities, only to gain them back one by one across four different games. Yoshis; the ability to fly; expansive world maps—New Super Mario Bros. purposefully de-evolved Mario. One could argue that was the point; it wasn't "Super Mario Bros. 4," it was a rebirth of the franchise, a new beginning that could tread its own path. That argument doesn't hold weight, though, as each subsequent game after the original has included something from Super Mario Bros. 3 or Super Mario World as if to say, "Look! We are getting closer to making the game you wanted from the start." (That game being a continuation of 3 and World, of course.)

More egregious, though, are the recycled assets. Each New Super Mario Bros. game looks and sounds exactly the same. The series now spans four different systems, and apart from some anti-aliasing and improved geometry, there is no differentiating between them. Nintendo has picked one style and decided it's all Mario needs. Meanwhile, other 2D platforms, such as Kirby's Epic Yarn, Donkey Kong Country Returns, and Rayman Origins, play with lighting, perspective, and level design in a way that exudes creativity.

New Super Mario Bros., as a series, is stuck in neutral. The games function well enough and there is fun to be had, but if you've played one, you've played them all. That couldn't be said about the games in the ‘80s. That's the problem right there: Nintendo has become complacent, implementing only incremental upgrades from game to game. In the latest Iwata Asks, the team behind New Super Mario Bros. 2 talked about the Mario Cram School, where employees from several different departments come to learn how to create 2D Mario levels. It would appear to me the Mario Cram School needs to offer some extra courses, because the students have been turning in the same assignment for the past seven years. It wasn't that noticeable before, but in a year with two strikingly similar games coming out just a few months apart, it's impossible to ignore.

[Pixelated Pixies]

Agreed.

[C-Olimar]

Next we'll see New Super Mario World or Land, I think, and I hope they will actually put some effort in.

I never owned the first two NSMB games (borrowed 1 for a short time, only played Wii twice), so I'll be getting 2 and probably U, but if there's another near identical games, they can forget aboot it!

On a side note, there needs to be a Wario Brothers game. We've had Land 1-4 and Shake Dimension, as well as World, so I want Bros. next! Waluigi needs more attention.

[Eyothrie]

I really enjoyed the DS and Wii versions, but to me the "new" series should have probably ended after the Wii version.  As big of a Mario fanboy as I am, I'm really having a hard time getting excited for NSMB2.  I've never had this feeling before in regards to a Mario game.

[Pixelated Pixies]

I really enjoyed the DS and Wii versions, but to me the "new" series should have probably ended after the Wii version.  As big of a Mario fanboy as I am, I'm really having a hard time getting excited for NSMB2.  I've never had this feeling before in regards to a Mario game.

Same here. Not to be a downer, but this will probably be the first Mario game that I don't buy at launch. I might pick it up in a sale (although that's not very likely given that these games tend to retain their price point for years) but certainly not for full price.

[Caterkiller]

I love NSMBW to death! I found that finding and collecting some of the coins were legitimately challenging and playing with a competent friend or 3 is down right fun! Note I said competent.

NSMB for the DS really did nothing for me at all, aside from the koopa shell power up. I culdnt even breing myself to finish it.

Now NSMB2 and U are coming and as much as I am looking forward to them I do agree with the points about all of them looking and sounding too similar. I will give a little credit to U though, it does have at least some unique looking back grounds and enemies. But why do they all share the same main theme? I would think they would create something else to differentiate it from the past games. When I looked at Galaxy 2 screens shots, if Yoshi was not present, I could not tell the games apart. But when Galaxy 2 released it blew my butt away and I was pleasantly surprised.

When I look at NSMB2 if a massive amount of coins aren't present or the Tanooki suit, it really does look like the past 2 games. I really hope it surprises me with content, but I know it won't be as zany or fulfilling as DKCR. I don't expect expect super crazy complex level design from either of these games at least until the lone special world is unlocked.

All I hope for is that these 2 2D Mario games are the only ones for this generation, leaving more anticipation for the next title in 5 or 6 years on the Wii Z and 4DS. 3D Mario can show up next year with a sequel a couple years after, no worries there.

[HeyItsMe]

The only problem I have with the Mario games. Is that they give you tons of lives, just a minor compliant. But come on now. For New Super Mario Bros. 2 I can't wait to have 999 lives in World 3. (-_-)

[Caterkiller]

I'm only assuming you mentioned too many lives as in it makes the game easier. Lives really mean nothing in Mario anymore aside from starting form a check point. Yoshi's island is tough and by the 2nd world you can easily get 99 lives. It hardly makes the game easier. The fact that we can save up to the current level makes lives absolutely worthless. They are basically around since it's tradition.

[Luigi Dude]

Once again, Nintendo only releases one 2D Mario per system now.  Since both NSMB are coming out this year for the 3DS and Wii U, there won't be another one til at least 2017.  So no we aren't getting to many 2D Mario games since after NSMB U this Fall, they'll be at least a 5 year gap before we get a new one.

Oh and once again the 2D and 3D Mario are completely different gameplay wise so it's beyond idiotic to count the 3D with the 2D games just so you can compare Mario platformer's to Call of Duty.  Just because they're both platformers doesn't mean sh!t when they're both played completely different vs Call of Duty were all the games play the exact same.
 

[Pixelated Pixies]

Oh and once again the 2D and 3D Mario are completely different gameplay wise so it's beyond idiotic to count the 3D with the 2D games just so you can compare Mario platformer's to Call of Duty.  Just because they're both platformers doesn't mean sh!t when they're both played completely different vs Call of Duty were all the games play the exact same.

I don't know. For me, the Galaxy games and 3D Land gave me the same kick that I get from 2D Mario games. They were expanded in scope, sure, but they're still linear platformers which involved bopping stuff and jumping. Are 2D and 3D Mario platformers exactly the same? No, but they're certainly similar enough that people might feel fatigued from playing them.
 
I have done nothing but praise the Galaxy games and 3D Land, but even I am feeling a little...I don't know...wearisome of the Mario series right now. It's not even just the platformers. It's everything. The Karts, the Partys, the Olympic Games, the Tennis, the New, the Old. They're all different from each other, yes. But, they're all exactly the same as what has went before. Mario 3D Kart is a Mario Kart game. Mario Tennis Open is a Mario Tennis game. NSMB 2 is a NSMB game. For me, this is a larger problem. I used to get excited for the release of a new Mario game. Now? I'm kind of over it.

[HeyItsMe]

I'm only assuming you mentioned too many lives as in it makes the game easier. Lives really mean nothing in Mario anymore aside from starting form a check point. Yoshi's island is tough and by the 2nd world you can easily get 99 lives. It hardly makes the game easier. The fact that we can save up to the current level makes lives absolutely worthless. They are basically around since it's tradition.

It's just weird to me collecting a lot of lives. It really doesn't make the game any easier. I don't remember how much times I died to get the (very) final star in Super Mario Galaxy 2 but it seriously took over 6 hrs. ARGHH RAGE..

[Ceric]

Just going to pop in and say the Super Mario Land stole tons of assets from Galaxy games.

[Luigi Dude]

Just going to pop in and say the Super Mario Land stole tons of assets from Galaxy games.

Wow, Nintendo really does have a time machine.

[NWR_insanolord]

I'm pretty sure any art asset from either Galaxy game would be larger than the cartridge Super Mario Land came on.

[ThomasO]

I don't remember how much times I died to get the (very) final star in Super Mario Galaxy 2 but it seriously took over 6 hrs. ARGHH RAGE..

6 hours? Took me around 12 minutes.

[DonnyKD]

Once again, Nintendo only releases one 2D Mario per system now.  Since both NSMB are coming out this year for the 3DS and Wii U, there won't be another one til at least 2017.  So no we aren't getting to many 2D Mario games since after NSMB U this Fall, they'll be at least a 5 year gap before we get a new one.

Oh and once again the 2D and 3D Mario are completely different gameplay wise so it's beyond idiotic to count the 3D with the 2D games just so you can compare Mario platformer's to Call of Duty.  Just because they're both platformers doesn't mean sh!t when they're both played completely different vs Call of Duty were all the games play the exact same.
 

This. I can't believe people can cry so much just because a bunch of platformers with Mario in the names are released.

I'm also going to post this:

Oh, and by the way, I didn't see anyone bitch that we got SMB (1985), SMB:LL (1986), SMB2 USA (1988), SMB3 (the same year), SML (1989) and SMW (1990), so why bitch now?
 
 What's even worse is that, all of the games I listed? They're all 2D platformers.

Know what's funnier? Unlike the NSMB series, which only appears once a console, the 6 games listed? Yeah, 4 of them are on the SAME CONSOLE.

Nobody f***ing cried then!

Mario 3D Kart is a Mario Kart game. Mario Tennis Open is a Mario Tennis game. NSMB 2 is a NSMB game.

Yeah, Mario Kart 7 should have been a football game and NSMB2 a Mario Party game!

Once again, you're crying that the games have "Mario" in them.

[NWR_insanolord]

I get the impression that if Nintendo had chosen four different visual styles for the NSMB games (and maybe a different naming scheme) we wouldn't be hearing anywhere near as much complaining about this, which just doesn't make sense to me. What happened to the old "gameplay over graphics" argument that used to be a staple of Nintendo fans?

The original NSMB wasn't great in terms of gameplay, but the Wii version blew it out of the water and brought greatness back to 2D Mario. Do we ignore the great game design because they used the same art style? I'm really excited for NSMB2 after playing it, because it has great level design and the coin mechanic is something very new to the series that excites me a lot as a high-score junkie. I'll admit, I'm not crazy about NSMBU, and it was easily the weakest game in Nintendo's booth in my opinion, but I'll still probably end up buying it.

I'm not saying Nintendo shouldn't be more creative with the visuals and the music, but they're creative where it counts, in the gameplay and level design, so I let it slide.

[Chocobo_Rider]

Are we suffering from Mario fatigue? No.

Why? All the reasons people have already listed in this thread.

Good luck with your molehill, other people.

[broodwars]

I don't see insisting on separating 2D and 3D Mario so you avoid facing undesirable comparisons with other milked franchises being any less disingenuous than combining 2D and 3D Mario so you can make them.  To me, they are all Mario platformers that follow the same formula and pull from the same bank of old enemies.   I don't see one being "faster" than the other as a significant enough departure to distinguish between games based on what dimension you view them in.

As for the common go-to excuse by some that "well, the NES had THREE Mario games" and so on, the Mario platforming franchise was brand-new on the NES.  Much as it really doesn't bother me that new-to-this generation franchises like Uncharted; Gears of War; or Resistance have had 3 games on one console, it really didn't bother me that there were 3 Mario platformers on the NES.  It was a new franchise with new worlds to explore and characters to see, and it felt like a fresh experience (especially in comparison to the usual crap that flooded the NES' software library).  Then Super Mario World pushed the boundaries of that world further and showed us things we hadn't really seen before, and Yoshi's Island made a radical departure to do the same.

However, the Mario platforming franchise is over 25 years old now, and it feels every day of it now with its reliance on outdated mechanics; the same old music; the same visual design; and formulaic structure.  The New Super Mario Bros. series in particular feels like a soul-less, derivative, nostalgia-reliant, designed-by-investors, creatively bankrupt product.  "'New' Super Mario Bros., indeed.  While there have been admirable attempts to push the series in potentially new directions (some purely cosmetic), they just haven't been enough to make the series feel "new" and "fresh" to me.  I recently finished Super Mario 3D Land, and while it is a very well-made game there isn't a single aspect of it that excites me.  Playing the game still feels like I'm going through the motions, and that's the feeling I've been getting from Mario for quite some time.  And because Nintendo whores out the Mario characters to so many spin-off franchises (Mario Kart, etc.), I never get the chance to miss them and in the end I just end up wishing they'd all go away.  I don't get the same feeling from franchises like Zelda or Metroid because their characters generally don't appear outside their respective games, with the exception of Smash Bros. and Soul Calibur 2.  Perhaps so many wouldn't feel franchise fatigued over Mario if it wasn't Nintendo's go-to franchise whenever they're in a financial jam.

Are the Mario games consistently good?  Yeah, for the most part.  For as much criticism as New Super Mario Bros. 2 is receiving for being just another New Super Mario Bros. game, it's still garnering fairly decent scores from reviewers.  But I can't help but think that 10-15 years ago the announcement of a new Mario game would have made me ecstatic, whereas nowadays I just shrug and think "yep, it's another one of those. I'm pretty sure I know exactly how it will play out.  That will make the investors happy.  Now where are the more interesting games?"   

However much it would anger the investors, I think the Mario franchises need to take a break for a while.  Let us start to miss them again, and give Nintendo's designers a chance to rejuvenate their creative juices working on other projects.  Hey, maybe we'd even get a new IP or two out of it, and in the end would that be a bad thing?

[NWR_insanolord]

Now that EAD Tokyo's taken over the series the 3D Mario platformers are a lot more like the 2D ones than 64 or Sunshine were, but they're still significantly different from the 2D games. I wouldn't separate the two categories entirely, but I wouldn't lump them all together completely either.

Speaking of EAD Tokyo, I think the odds are pretty good that they're going to be showing off a new 3D Mario for Wii U at next year's E3, so I don't think we're going to see Mario take a break too soon.

[broodwars]

Speaking of EAD Tokyo, I think the odds are pretty good that they're going to be showing off a new 3D Mario for Wii U at next year's E3, so I don't think we're going to see Mario take a break too soon.

I don't think we're going to ever see Nintendo take a break from Mario either because he does make Nintendo such ridiculous amounts of money in his various franchise incarnations, but I really wish they would from a purely creative standpoint.  It's pure fantasy, of course, so long as our generation is so driven by nostalgia, but it's a nice fantasy.  It's nice to imagine a world where Nintendo doesn't churn out a new Mario game because the Investors started whining for one.

[NWR_insanolord]

Well if they do stick to the "one per system" model for the NSMB games things should slow down at least. One every couple years, from the team that does the best job with the series, doesn't sound so bad.

[motdelbourt]

Yes, I'm done with 2D Mario. Rayman Origins set a bar for art style and gameplay that I just don't see these NSMB games meeting.

[NWR_insanolord]

Rayman Origins certainly looks better, but I'm not sure it's better from a gameplay perspective. I definitely liked what I played of Rayman Legends better than NSMBU, but that may just be because I really didn't like NSMBU. I'm definitely more excited for NSMB2 than Rayman Legends, though.

[Pixelated Pixies]

I'm also going to post this:

Oh, and by the way, I didn't see anyone bitch that we got SMB (1985), SMB:LL (1986), SMB2 USA (1988), SMB3 (the same year), SML (1989) and SMW (1990), so why bitch now?
 
 What's even worse is that, all of the games I listed? They're all 2D platformers.

Know what's funnier? Unlike the NSMB series, which only appears once a console, the 6 games listed? Yeah, 4 of them are on the SAME CONSOLE.

Nobody f***ing cried then!
 

The article aknowledges that in fact the quantity of Mario games being released is not the issue. The problem lies with the fact that whereas Super Mario Bros 1 - 3 were relatively different from each other, each NSMB game is pretty much identical.

Mario 3D Kart is a Mario Kart game. Mario Tennis Open is a Mario Tennis game. NSMB 2 is a NSMB game.

Yeah, Mario 3D Kart should have been a football game and NSMB2 a Mario Party game!

Once again, you're crying that the games have "Mario" in them.

You completely missed my point. I'm not 'crying' because these games have Mario in them. In fact, I'm not 'crying' at all. I was merely making a point, one which surely everyone would acknowledge as being true. That Mario 3D Kart is a very traditional Mario Kart game. That Mario Party 9 is a very traditional Mario Party game. That NSMB 2 looks to be very similar to the two games that went before it. It's not exactly a controversial statement, lol.

Neither am I suggesting that Nintendo should do anything as drastic as change a Kart racer into a football game. All I was saying is that all these games are incredibly similar to their predecessors. If you would just read my post again you'd see that I was trying to explain why I am feeling a little exasperated with the whole massive Mario behemoth. All these different branches of the Mario tree are separate from one another, but for me they're all suffering from the same problem, which is that they're not evolving fast enough and in some cases not evolving at all.
 
I appreciate that because each of these series are only seeing one release per system, that for some people they might not feel Mario fatigue, and for you that's great. For people like myself, however, who play every release, surely you can admit that fatigue might be a suitable reaction to the release of NSMB 2. It might be the third NSMB game released, it might be on a different system, and it might have Coin Rush Mode, but the glacial speed at which these games are evolving has meant that some people, myself included, now view them as being more of the same.