| Michael-5 said: Again, I'm not saying 3DW will be a bad game, just more of the same. I know Mario isn't as recycled as COD, but I think it needs more diversity, more creativity and innovation, like the older games. You're missing my point because you're spending more time defending Nintendo then reading what I have to say. Nintendo depends a lot more on their big franchises now then they used to. If you look at the best selling SNES games DKC and Mario Kart rank high, and they were completly new experiences. N64 had Smash Bros and Mario Party to push numbers, but GCN and Wii only had a few small volume new IP's. Nintendo's devs are out of idea's, that's why they are focusing more and more on sequels. Here's a perfect example, take New Super Mario Bros. U. What new environments/suits did it introduce? Underwater was already done, Racoon suit was also done, same with the Fire suit. So what did it bring other then the exact same game, but with different levels? Compare this to Yoshi's Island, and Super Mario World....Nintendo has lost their creative edge, and I blaime aging senior developers which get final say in everything. |
Mario has more diversity then most games this is apparent in Galaxy and 3DW seems to have much more then Galaxy I don't really get what you're looking for exactly that's the problem in your point it's very vague, Galaxy is the most creative and innovative of the Mario platformers even more then the older game and all this stems from it's design.
Your contradicting yourself all over here so how can anyone of us get your point, you're busy there saying it's Mario so it's not new then you turn around and say Galaxy is new and innovative which contradicts everything in your stance and proves my point the in house team are fine, it's not me defending Nintendo it's more your point is inconsistent and not clear and is coming across as trying to be selective and restrictive in making your stance gain ground but is instead contradicting it. You're not getting the point about new IPs a number of them are still made, W101 for example is one of the best action games I've played, but you're never going to get going to get as many new big IPs on a console that is released 20 years after the second console in a company's journey into gaming because the latter is when the company is still new the comparison is flawed in the context you're giving. It's like saying I had more food when I did my shopping a few days a go.
I think you should take a look back on your view as you seem to be misguided in what something new is and only looking on the surface of games, you know why Nintendo did away with all the power ups from previous games? It's because in the long run they're not practical and like Metal Mario many of them got few uses to the point they couldn't even be classed as a gimmick, the modern Mario games instead focus on level design as levels are what what drives the games and sticking only with a few practical power ups, Skyward Sword did this as well in dropping loads of items for a few practical ones. In NSMBU you can see the design and understand the concept behind each level whether it's swimming underwater avoiding a Sea Dragon's movements to get through or manipulating lift platforms to navigate a castle the idea and creativity behind each level is clear. Their games have as much new ideas as before it's just focused else where innovation and such aren't just power ups.
Seniority really has nothing to do here as Miyamoto and other older members haven't had a final say in development since the GC days that's now down to the appointed chief officers of each franchise in Aonuma, Koizumi, Konno and so on
