Paper Mario Sticker Star 3DS

[F0X]

Soleron said:

F0X said:

There's a huge problem with making a new game with a different formula. Branding. It's almost always riskier to create a new IP than to apply a new concept to a familiar name, and shouldn't publishers try to minimize said risks? It's all about the money.

OK, true. So make it a spinoff. Super Paper Mario was pretty much branded as a spinoff and I'm OK with that. This new one is branded as main series and I am NOT happy with that because it implies we will never get a game like the original again.

Games are not funded because of art, but they sell because of it (as you said, it holds artistic value to the consumer). As such, it would be unwise to not invest in the artistic qualities of a game.

Invest in them up to the point on the curve it no longer makes sense to, yes.

Figuring out the desires of the consumer is not an exact science. What you describe is the process of finding what current fans possibly want (if you argue that fans have a hive mind). However, Nintendo is in the business of making games for as many consumers as they possibly can.

Indeed. However current fans also provide a safe market, which businesses always want. If they made another Paper Mario like the original, they could be very confident it would sell like the original. Why are they changing it on the mere promise that the changes will bring more customers? How could you say these changes are made for that purpose? All I see is some lead dev saying, "Wouldn't it be cool if XYZ?" and not thinking about markets at all.

As such, it is natural to try different approaches to see if results improve.

Yes. As spinoffs. It's worked many times in gaming history. But changing the definition of a franchise while branding it as core is pure betrayal, and Nintendo has to bear the negative sales impact and PR issue that comes with that. How is it worth it to piss off an established market?

In this case, one must ask the question why Nintendo wouldn't stick with the exact same formula as previous games. From what I see, Nintendo is attempting to move in that direction (it's certainly less of a departure than SPM) but continue to play with certain aspects. It's an attempt to find a better balance between what is expected from the franchise and bringing in newer consumers who like the sticker concept.

People buy games based on concepts? Any evidence for that? I thought people buy based on something the game does for them - an FPS because they want to shoot things, and RPG because they want to play through a story. Changing the window dressing doesn't persuade anyone who isn't already persuaded. And if it is new customers you are targeting, the Paper Mario branding does nothing for them.

Will it succeed? Only time will tell. If it doesn't, Nintendo has a few options: Give up and axe the franchise, go back to basics, or try another idea that seems appealing.

What they usually do: change something, it sells badly, blame (paraphrasing) "declining popularity of the series" (Metroid) or "customers not understanding what we want to deliver" (Wii Music) and never make a core entry again. It happened with 2D Mario, they just kept trying 3D Mario from N64 -> early Wii and when they finally made a 2D Mario again, turns out the demand had existed all along (insane NSMB sales).

Paper Mario is a spin-off of the Super Mario franchise (not to mention it being a sub-series of Mario RPG). At this point, the idea of needing further spin-off branding seems ridiculous to me. Besides, Sticker Star, unlike SPM, is in the same genre as previous games, so it doesn't necessarily need to be classified as a spin-off. Further, the emphasis on stickers is obvious in the title. But you may have a point here, if only because I like "Sticker Mario" as a title.

Doesn't make sense to whom? Some games have succeded by putting an immense amount of effort into artistry. BioShock and Half-Life are well-regarded as being shooters with wonderful stories. In fact, fans expect new entries of Bioshock to not take place in the same setting, or reuse characters. Only a small amount of defining gameplay attributes are wanted, and there's no objection when one is revamped.

Yes, current fans are a safe market. That's a huge reason why I, a current fan, am getting Sticker Star. I can't wait for more timing-based battling and brillant dialogue. All signs point to me being pleased. But I can imagine some not being so positive. There's always a contingient of fans who prefer a certain game in the series becuase something was changed or added in the next. All long-running franchises have this, no matter how similar each game is.

Unlike TTYD (which was under development as Paper Mario 2), Sticker Star (to my knowledge) hasn't been referred to as a main entry. Franchise spinoffs have often used the "Title: Subtitle" format in many cases, but I suppose Paper Mario is more ambiguous as no entry is labeled under the number system. Personally I think whether or not Sticker Star is a spinoff should be open to interpretation, especially since it's the first handheld entry. It may be the beginning of a new handheld subseries of Paper Mario for all we know, which I think would absolutely kill the notion of it being a "main entry".

Oh yes people buy games based on concepts. I could provide personal examples. Or examples of people I know who didn't buy a particular game based on what is expected of its genre. I didn't buy Scribblenauts because it was a puzzle game - I bought it because I could make God fight a T-Rex. I bought it based on what its individual, unique concept promised be. Sticker Star promises sticker-based battling and world interation. BioShock and Half-Life are arguably better known for their narratives than shooter gameplay. Pokemon is an RPG known better for its gameplay depth than depth of narrative (plus it's possibly the best example of how well a concept can sell a game). The Paper Mario branding doesn't have to impress newcomers, as it only exists to tie it to a familiar franchise. The name is there so players like yours truly will buy it. Besides, there is a the slightest chance that the "Mario" in the title could persuade a few buyers who associate that brand with quality. I wonder if Kirby's Epic Yarn would've broke a milltion sold without the Kirby name on it...

Companies make excuses. But behind the scenes, I'm confident that Nintendo is looking at what did or did not work for each release. Otherwise, their many popular franchises would've lost relevancy a long time ago.