RolStoppable said:
I'll go through this, but I probably won't reply to other posts of yours in this thread, because it just isn't worth it. 1) I never said you had no support. 2) I never said that Nintendo should rely entirely on Mario. 3) Super Mario Bros. would not have been bundled with the system, because it can sell on its own. Wii Sports would have been just as big, because it was an amazing game. Demand for the Wii would have been even bigger. It was only in America where the Wii was sold out for over a year. This wasn't the case in Japan and Europe. Mario would obviously have helped in these regions. 4) No. The 3DS is Nintendo's least profitable system to date. Nintendo will post their first annual loss since they make video games. That's how well Nintendo is doing without 2D Mario. The facts still support my point. 5) I don't recall saying that. You will have to provide proof when making such a bold statement. 6) Certainly not. Have you ever looked at the sales of NSMB on the DS? Probably not. 7) The 3DS isn't in good shape. Again, financial report. The rest is misinterpretation on your part, that's something you are known for by now. 8) The DS and Wii both hugely benefitted from the release of their respective NSMB game. The DS finally took off in America when NSMB released and NSMB Wii revitalized the Wii all around the world. |
Okay I'd like to jump in here guys if you don't mind.
1) I'd just like to ask you guys to stop the popularity contest, please.
2) Joel, you are advocating for new IPs and core games rather than Mario. You are saying this because you are afraid bigger titles would over-shadow them. Why would Mario 2D overshadow them more than say Wii Sports? Because it targets the core? We all know 2D Mario has now become a flagship for the casual audience, why so afraid that it will overshadow blatantly core IPs such as F-Zero and other new ones?
The only other possibility I see is that you envision a new IP targeted at the casual audience that can be overshadowed by Mario. But the truth of the matter is that's not how it works. Rol claims the DS took off when NSMB came out. That simply isn't true. The DS takeoff was the result of a one-two-three punch release. To demonstrate,
Sales of Japanese DS games 2007:
| Pos | Game | Weeks | Yearly | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
15 | 4,473,692 | 4,473,692 | ||
| 2 |
|
32 | 3,960,355 | 3,960,355 | ||
| 3 |
|
53 | 3,410,055 | 3,837,386 | ||
| 4 |
|
58 | 2,412,341 | 3,814,703 |
Mario has friends.
Sales of DS games worldwide 2008:
| 8 |
|
190 | 5,408,016 | 16,485,645 | ||
| 9 |
|
138 | 4,841,639 | 17,420,795 | ||
| 10 |
|
194 | 4,614,988 | 21,623,290 | ||
| 11 |
|
164 | 4,580,397 | 13,689,119 | ||
| 14 |
|
158 | 4,096,651 | 13,022,246 |
You catch my drift.
In other words, Mario cannot and no game for that matter can overshadow anything that needs to sell a ton. If it is a hidden evergreen, it will make its own way, like a plant would.
3) See 2, here I agree with Rol.
4) 2D Mario would have propelled an overpriced 3DS into a reasonable measure of profitability. Think of it this way, the tighter the space, the greater the content, the more that content will tend to want to make the container expand. The container in this context is the 3DS userbase. In other words, 2D Mario would've been a sure-hit system seller.
5) What was your argument for 3DS failing to succeed, it didn't have core IPs? Well, we don't know if your scenario would've worked on the 3DS, but it doesn't look rosey for the Vita (which is adopting your strategy), nor was it too amazing for the N64 or for the cube. Of course there were millions of other factors back then, but it's quite clear now that core IPs do not sell a system. The purpose of core IPs is to secure the core userbase and nothing else.
Capturing the Core and refraining from alienating it: Is it worth the sacrifice?:
This is actually what I would like to talk about, and the only area I agree with you in. Though Mario 2D would never overshadow a hidden evergreen, it may overshadow a core game. Also, sales of casual titles affect the perception of the console to the core audience and can cause their alienation. Is their purchase worth the sacrifice? I sure believe so, and MH + RE:R sure say so at the moment. If Nintendo wants to achieve success, it doesn't need the sacrifice. If it aims Nintendomination, it needs to ensure they capture the core. Even then, having said that, would 2D Mario truly alienate? I believe not. 2D Mario is that evergreen that is compatible with the core games. I don't believe the same can be said for the Wii Series.
6) The shortages you mention are likely due to the pricecut (which leads to profit loss), and of course to heavy hitters such as SM3DL. SM3DL's performance is somewhere sweet right between 2D and 3D Mario sales, and still has alot of potential. However, if SM3DL is pushing consoles, you can be certain that 2D Mario would have pushed them even more.
7) Had the 3DS launched at a more profitable and reasonable happy middle, maybe you would be right. As it is, Nintendo is losing money, and Nintendogs failed to sell. Now they need to remarket it sadly; the timing when it launched was wrong.
You continue to support your claim that Mario doesn't sell consoles at launch due to 3D Mario. You need to drop that. 3D Mario and 2D Mario have radically different selling trends.
8) See 2. Though Mario did not propel the DS single-handedly, it sure didn't hurt. Of course Nintendo is not doomed without Mario, BUT one thing we know for sure about mario, is that his 2D offerings (so far) are certain hits. We can't say that about the other evergreens (even Nintendogs).
To be continued folks!
