By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
happydolphin on 02 May 2012
Edit Thread
noname2200 said:
happydolphin said:

I know you must be facepalming from my last post to Trucks, but bear with me.

Now it's true that you can't compare commonality between an apple and a broccoli in terms of texture. That's true. But one thing you can do is compare their nutritional values.

That's why I was going abstract. Ultimately these are video games, and what metric we can use to measure their appeal is sales.

The question was, what is more profitable for Nintendo. So whether one is a racer and one a platformer really is non-relevant to the matter at hand.

I can't say I agree completely with this line of thought, especially for a hardware company that has an acute need to sell as much hardware by pushing software with broad appeal. 2D Mario is Nintendo's ace in the hole, but if it wants to keep selling its systems it will need to offer additional compelling games beyond just those platformers. 2D Mario makes a fantastic cornerstone, but you need more than just a cornerstone to build a structure.

Put alternatively, players can not live on Mario alone. That's why other series, like Kart, are invaluable in sustaining a platform.

Additionally, damned few series can do as well as Mario, and certainly not with the same consistency. The Kart games are big, but until the Wii they did not sell as well as their platformer counterparts. Even MK 64 sold worse than Mario 64 (the same doesn't hold true of the GC games, though). I expect the Wii's going to continue being the anamoly, and that it's because Mario Kart Wii launched at the height of Wii Mania in addition to having had an extra 18 months of sales time over NSMBWii.

With all that in mind, do you see why the question you pose is hard to answer with the data provided, and why isn't as important as it seemed at first?

 

I understand that games can sell on their own, but gain much more of an advantage when coupled with a game of the same of likely caliber. It's what we call a one-two punch. We're both familiar with the phenomenon, so I do see where you're coming from.

But having said all that, I still fail to see how, while DS Mario challenging 3DS 3D Mario is relevant, the standard can't be held when it comes to Mario Kart...

I understand that MK takes its strength from its peers, but the same can clearly be said for 2D Mario. It's the one-two punch. Maybe you can argue that 2D Mario is more self-sufficient, but to what extent? Even so, whether dependent on peers or not, there is no doubt that Mario Kart is a powerful franchise ever since gen 7, and went viral even before NSMB came out on the Wii, like you said. It is strong on its own, but certainly the Wii series helped to propel it, there's no doubt about that.

I'm not sure I understand your PoV. Maybe what you're trying to say is that MK7 is challenged by NSMB DS precisely because 2D Mario was not there to give it wind in its sails. I can understand that. So you're saying that SMB3DL was not the answer that would give MK7 wind in its sails, and hence MK7, as an entry in the series, is struggling to fly past NSMB DS.

Am I understanding you right?