Topic: Are games really worse or just the expectations higher?

[KDR_11k]

When you look through forums, people often criticise Nintendo's games for not being innovative enough, especially The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker and Super Mario Sunshine. But I wonder, what did they expect?

Let's look back to the "good old times", where everybody agreed that Nintendo was a top-of-the-line developer, before all this talk about "the giant stumbling", etc appeared.

First, Super Mario Bros. I will consider SMB1-3, SMW1-2, SM64 and SMS to be part of this series for this purpose.

SMB1: The first of the series. Not much to be said about its evolution, since it is the first in this chain of evolution .
SMB2: Radically different gameplay. Since almost no ideas from this game made it into later games, we can assume the innovation here wasn't desired.
SMB3: Basically SMB1 with more items, levels, enemies, etc. A sequel.
SMW1: Still a lot like SMB1 and 3, new powerups and the introduction of Yoshi. While this changed gameplay quite a bit again, it didn't change much more than, say, the different weapons in different Quake or Unreal iterations.
SMW2: Could be considered a spinoff. The gameplay was fundamentally different from the main series. Like SMB2, the changes in this game never made it into the main series.
SM64*: While I have never played it, I assume it was a rather huge leap forward. However, this game did the change from 2d to 3d, which naturally offers MUCH different gameplay.
SMS: Not much innovation except for new items. Since the 3d-transition could not be repeated, this game did not differ from its predecessor as much as the latter from its.

If we don't count spinoffs, the changes from game to game are rarely more than more items. While Sunshine didn't deliver as many items as, say, SMB3, going overkill is never good. Did SMS need a boatload of additional items? No, it works fine with the current ones.


Now lets look at the other Series mentioned, Legend of Zelda:

LoZ1*: Well, the first game. Defined Zelda-gameplay, etc.
LA*: I haven't played it, but it looks like a large departure from the previous game. However, this style doesn't seem to have carried over into later titles.
Links Awakening: Basically still LoZ with new levels, maybe additional items.
LttP: Still LoZ with added items and better graphics.
OOT: First 3d game. Of course a lot changed due to the change of perspective.
MM*: Dunno, but it seems to be mostly like OOT with new levels and maybe more items.
WW: Basically OOT with new levels and items, the addition of sailing didn't add a lot to the game and was completely irrelevant in the actual dungeons.


For comparison, the Metroid series did not get any "more of the same" comments:

Metroid*: Defined the gameplay, blah, blah, blah.
Metroid 2*: Doesn't seem too different from the first one. Sure, new enemies, maybe new items, etc.
Super Metroid: New items, levels, etc.
Metroid Prime: Switch to 3d, radically different gameplay.


(note: * marks games I haven't played)

Notice a pattern? The big, innovative titles all were the ones that changed the series from 2d to 3d. Of course that brings a difference in gameplay. The only thing that has changed from back then to now is N's willingness to make the second game in each series a spinoff title.

p.s.: The decrease of writing skill through this post can be attributed to increasing tiredness.

[yellowfellow]

i agree... it also interesting to note the switch from 2D to 3D coincided with the advent of the internet age (read: dawn of whinny fanboys) which lead to a wealth of information at our literal fingertips.  this age of instant updates and constant media (videos, screenshots, editorials), i feel, generates too much hype and outspokeness leading to a mob mentality.  
essentially, with the "innovation" of these past titles the net was a buzz with praises and then when hype and anticipation overcame expectations for the following title, the people first on the boards to acclaim were the first to complain leading to a snowballing mass or whinning people.

[Ian Sane]

I think the reason that people complained so much about Wind Waker and Super Mario Sunshine is because of high expectations.  Super Mario 64 and the N64 Zelda games are some of the best games of all time.  Naturally following up on them is a hard task.  Neither of the Gamecube games were quite as good and thus got, perhaps unfairly, criticized.

I actually think that one of the things that hurt Mario Sunshine and Wind Waker was that they made too much of an effort to innovate instead of just going with the flow and blending in new ideas.  The Wind Waker for example had the big graphic overhaul.  Regardless of whether or not you liked it you have to admit that it was a deliberate change from the direction the series was going in.  To me it was too deliberate like they were changing Zelda for no reason except to be innovative.

With Mario Sunshine they added the water pack which really changed things up and I think ultimately for the worst.  This again was a very deliberate change and again that's why I didn't really like it.  Innovations like flight and Yoshi added to the previous Mario games.  They added to the gameplay and opened up new posibilities.  The water pack was the type of change to the gameplay which is not what people typically want in a sequel.  Typically we want more of the same with some exciting new stuff thrown in.  It didn't add to the Mario style gameplay but rather just offered something different that really didn't fit in.  Mario was now about cleaning up paint which is pretty different then what Mario is about and why people like it.

The problem with these innovations was that they were deliberate and gimmicky and in the end they either didn't really add anything worthwhile to the core gameplay (Zelda's graphics) or didn't really fit with the gameplay at all (waterpack).  Innovation has to be seemless.  It should be such that you can't imagine how the game was played beforehand.  Flight in Super Mario Bros 3 is the ideal type of innovation because it just fits in and opens up the game while not fundamentally changing it into something it isn't or offering something unrelated.

I think what we really want in Nintendo sequels is the Super Smash Bros Melee treatment where the gameplay is roughly the same but all sorts of new stuff is added in.  Metal Mario is cool because it's new and different and adds to the gameplay without directly changing it.  Riding a horse in Zelda is cool for the same reasons.  Cleaning up paint with water isn't as cool because it doesn't really add anything and is just different for the sake of being different.  

[Bill Aurion]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Neither of the Gamecube games were quite as good and thus got, perhaps unfairly, criticized.

I completely disagree with the Zelda portion of this.  I enjoyed WW much more than OoT...

And yes expectations are set way too high by gamers.  Just look around the forums in topics on unreleased games...They expect all this stuff to be included and get disappointed and say the game sucks when it doesn't have everything they dreamed up...

[kennyb27]

Quote
The Wind Waker for example had the big graphic overhaul. Regardless of whether or not you liked it you have to admit that it was a deliberate change from the direction the series was going in.

I disagree.  I think it was changed, not to just be different, but to add to the gameplay experience.  How many other games can you get "hints" for your next move by the way the character's eyes move?  The subtleties in this game make me believe they weren't added to make Nintendo look like an innovator but rather proved Nintendo to be an innovator.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

M39@70N!

WAYNE'S WORLD!

PARTY-TIME!

EXCELLENT!

[Smadte]

The games (I'm assuming you're only talking Nintendo, here) aren't worse. The people are at fault, here. They're just too critical.

[joshnickerson]

The internet has given everybody in America a voice, and unfortunately, they use that voice to bitch about videogames.

I learned a long time ago to just ignore what net nerds have to say and just enjoy the game.

[CaseyRyback]

Should change comments on Mario 2 because that is a radically different game and is not even really a Mario game(mario characters stuck in different game because SMB2=japanese version was way too hard for the american public as seen by Nintendo)

[Bill Aurion]

Japanese SMB2 = Lost Levels...just wanted to add that

[kennyb27]

Casey, just for future reference, sentences include a subject and a verb.

[the_zombie_luke]

I only want Wind Waker to have more dungeons and higher difficulty. Also, Miyamoto needs to direct the Zelda games. For, Mario, I say dump 3D. Make a new 2D game with new and old powerups with fun levels.

[seven_chaos]

Quote
Originally posted by: the_zombie_luke
For, Mario, I say dump 3D. Make a new 2D game with new and old powerups with fun levels.

I thought I remember reading somewhere that the next Mario game was going to be 2D.  If it were that would be amazering!

[kennyb27]

Quote
I thought I remember reading somewhere that the next Mario game was going to be 2D. If it were that would be amazering!

That has yet to be seen.

[Bill Aurion]

*Would rather take a 3d version of Super Mario world*