Quote
Originally posted by: Mashiro I just don't understand why.
Let me put it this way...
I've enjoyed realistic violence, partaken in realistic violent acts, laughed at realistic acts of violence which others find horrifying and played realistic violent games without ever thinking twice about it. Looking at me and my track record, you'd never in your life think that violence of ANY kind would even begin to bother me.
But the one place where it does irk me is when it's placed into a context where it doesn't belong.
Aside from the fact that Mario is an icon known far and wide, he, Luigi, Yoshi, DK, etc. are all characters who have endured despite the fact that their games do not feature the kind of realistic violence that many of the angsty teenage types desire in their gaming experiences. They stand as exceptions to the rule, not succumbing to the pressure of the mainstream gaming market which so frequently dictates that games which lack that level of violence aren't "mature" enough. It's not uncommon to see franchises start to turn dark and moody simply because of the perception that it'll help them sell better (ie Bomberman 360, Dak and Jaxter's darkening, Prince of Persia, etc.).
Yet the Mario series endures, proving that it can still outsell both Halos with New Super Mario Bros.
Games which attempt to appeal to all ages are basically the last holdout in a market where insecure male teenagers won't buy a game unless the M sticker is on the box, and Mario and co. have always struck me as one of the bastions of the ideal that games don't need to be violent and gruesome in order to be fun and have wide appeal.
The only time Mario is ever involved in any kind of realistic violence has always been in
parodies, and the only reason these parodies are funny is because it's so immensely out of place for Mario. In my eyes, when you take that level of violent interaction and put it in an ACTUAL Nintendo game, it's certainly not entertaining.
I understand this opinion seems outlandish and bizarre to others, but Nintendo's fame is basically built upon the principle that their games are what they are and they wouldn't give their characters a darker makeover in an attempt to sell to a market which craves more and more violence and controversy. I've always respected that about them.
For me, when Snake snaps Mario/Yoshi/DK's neck, even if the character gets up a moment later, it's basically spitting into the face of all Nintendo stands for. To have built an empire on the ideal of mascots which are E for everyone and then release a game where you can violently snap their necks just makes no sense.
I do seriously question if they didn't give Sakurai absolute free-reign with the game. Otherwise, it just feels like Nintendo sold out their mascots (something they're practically legendary for not doing) for the sake of a cheap laugh.
Topic: The more I think about it... (Read 43403 times)
