| RolStoppable said: Rihanna is an artist, so it's not comparable. The equivalent in video games would be Shigeru Miyamoto and it's pretty obvious that The Legend of Zelda is not a Mario game, for example. I am not familiar with the Bourne movies and don't know how drastic the changes they made are, so I won't comment on it. It's better to keep this to video games anyway. Metal Gear Solid was not on the NES and there really is a notable difference between Metal Gear and Metal Gear Solid which perfectly explains the large difference in sales. Back to Mario. You need to explain the large fluctuations in sales, if you insist that the 3D games are part of the main series. Numbers off the top of my head (check VGC if you don't trust me):
The SMB and SMW numbers are a little bit iffy, because these games were bundled with the NES and SNES, respectively. But SMB3 makes it clear what the series is capable of and NSMB Wii confirmed it. SMB2 is an outlier, but you know the story about it. The Japanese version isn't much more than a ROM hack of SMB and the Western version is a non-Mario game with Mario characters added in, so you are either looking at a bad Mario game or not a real Mario game.
The ceiling for the 3D games so far has been 11m. What's also worth of note is that NSMB Wii was released inbetween SMG and SMG2, on the same console no less. As I've said in my previous post, what do you think is more likely?
1) The 3D games are a seperate series.
2) The 3D games are bad Mario games like SMB2 which is why their sales are low compared to the other games.
3) Something entirely else.
Pyro already acknowledged Super Mario World as a real Mario game in the meantime. And yes, most series that went from 2D to 3D had to make so drastic changes that they can be seen as different games. But in actuality, most 2D IPs didn't survive this step and are long gone now. The fifth generation marked the start of a new era and most games that are still popular today started during that time or last generation.
There is a difference between evolution and redefinition. In some cases it's hard to draw the line, but the move into the third dimension forced most 2D games to redefine themselves. It wasn't just a simple evolution like you make it out to be.
|
You really had me worried for a second that I made another mistake. Man I make a few mistakes each month but I was so worried I had made another one. In this case you did according to the Wikipedia page for Metal Gear "A separate team created a heavily modified Nintendo Entertainment System (NES) port of the game that was released in Japan, North America and Europe" The game definitely was released on NES in fact a sequel and second part of the Metal Gear franchise on consoles was also released "Konami then produced a NES sequel titled Snakes Revenge. Metal Gear as a franchise has existed since the NES days and the franchise remains. I will agree their is a notable difference in the games from Metal Gear to Solid. However they still are the same franchise, the reason for the increase of sales is the fact that 3D made the gameplay elements evolve they became what Kojima had envisioned. They still remain a single franchise.
I have no problem admitting the lack of sales with 3D titles. I am not going to argue against that fact, but with N64 and GameCube you are talking consoles with far smaller consumer bases then NES let alone SNES. Lets compare when the first successful 2D Mario game came out it sold 40-million including bundles correct? With 61-million NES systems in circulation it sold like 2/3rds and that NES title was the biggest Mario title of all time, now lets compare that to Mario64 on the N64 which only had 32-million hardware units it had around a 1/3rd share of the over all market. But is that soully because 3D games were a spin-off? Nope it isn't fact is SuperMarioWorld also saw a huge decline in market share with only 20-million in sales (According to you) yet the console sold almost 50-million units. So if we go by those numbers and factor in Super Mario World's numbers included bundled copies more Nintendo consumers purchased 3D Mario64 with their hardware then Super Nintendo consumers purchased Super Mario World on theirs! This shows Mario64 was actually more popular with Nintendo consumers then Super Mario World was, in fact it also shows it is more popular with consumers then any other Mario game except the NES game. Now I have to admit Sunshine took a nose dive with only 6-million in software sales for GameCube despite over 21-million hardware units on the market. But lets look at software sales in general on the GameCube, Sunshine was actually the third highest selling title on GameCube less then a million in sales apart from the leading title. Now you may wonder how I explain Wii's huge success of 2D Mario over 3D Mario.
Well Wii is a unique interesting story. Nintendo's consoles and fan base has been in a steady decline since NES. Many consumers bailed by N64 and never even got to truly enjoy Mario64. The consumers that left Nintendo for Sony with PSOne did not play the Mario64 game, though sales show Nintendo 64 owners liked Mario64 as much if not slightly more then Super Mario World was liked on SNES. When the Nintendo Wii launched it targetted demographics you don't believe exist as well as former gamers and so fourth. The Wii saw huge success but lets look at the numbers a second there are nearly 89-million Wii's on the market and NewSuperMarioBros:Wii only sold a louzy 22-million copies, why? I mean market share wise less Nintendo customers purchased NewSuperMarioBros:Wii with their Wii system then N64 consumers purchased Mario64. In fact around the same amount of Nintendo consumers purchased NewSuperMarioBros:Wii with their hardware as GameCube gamers purchased Sunshine! Now why did Galaxy fail so miserably? Well simple the decline of 3D Mario fans was steady simply because Nintendo's hardware had decreased in sales. The consumers who bought Wii's either weren't present on Nintendo's platforms for the jump to 3D, Mario64 or were new consumers drawn to the brand and the fact that NewSuperMarioBros was one of very few 2D platformers to release this generation.
What your sales figures prove is that Nintendo lost Mario fans along with their console user base. As the console user base declined so did the Mario sales. SMB3 saw around 18-million in sales I am betting if you took bundles out of the situation that Super Mario World likely sold less then SMB3 if not by much they still did. People got the game free with the hardware and didn't actually seek it out. Then Mario64 shows yet again this decline however you can note that a large percentage of Nintendo consumers still purchased just as many Mario games as ever. This decline went even further when GameCube saw miserable sales. Why did Galaxy sell so poorly on Wii simply put the consumers buying Wii hadn't been around to see the slow evolution of Mario these consumers thought that Mario3Dwas entirely different then 2D Mario. many of these consumers had grown up with the pre-evolved 2D Mario and as such purchased 2D Mario instead of 3D. With Wii Mario has taken a serious blow in the fact that consumers buying Wii weren't doing so for Mario anymore. Proving yet again my point that the people who bought Wii were not the Nintendo supporters but newer gamers who are unfamiliar with Mario and such.
So the sales figures can really be thrown out they are easily explained. To answer your question "so you are either looking at a bad Mario game or not a real Mario game" I would have to say neither, hardware sales are to blame up until Wii and once Wii was launched demographics and the Nintendo fan base were to blame as it no longer existed.
It is far too black and white to judge a titles legitimacy based on software sales that fluctuated directly related to hardware.
P.S- just because you always call me on mistakes I want to make it clear Metal Gear was released on NES even though you clearly stated "Metal Gear Solid was not on the NES"
-JC7
"In God We Trust - In Games We Play " - Joel Reimer
