Mr Khan said:
Osc89 said:
Frequency said:
Just because something is a spinoff does not mean it does not contribute towards oversaturating a market, if anything it contributes more towards it.
You can sit there being pedantic about 'proper' mario vs spinoff all you want but the fact remains that game was created with mario in, spinoff or not thw character is used as a marketing tool and thus a part of a franchise, as such directly contributes to the saturation of said market by said overused character.
If sony were pusjing out uncharted driving games, fighting games, 'drakes party', 'elenas fashion boutique', uncharted chess, dr sully and so on, you'd all cry from the rooftops at how sony was milking the shit out of the franchise but then you sit there with a straight face expecting mario to get a free pass, well it doesnt.
Its an overmilked franchise, has been since the snes, always will be because its all nintendo knows, if all else fails push out more mario.
|
It isn't really the same thing as milking a franchise. If anything they are milking a character, but given that Mario is basically a mascot anyway I'm not sure that applies. You could pretty much substitute "Mario" for "Nintendo" in the game titles, as they do the same job of describing the game.
|
Thank you. This is the point that i'm trying to make.
|
It's the best way I've found of explaining the difference so far. It's pretty clear to most, but it does come up quite often anyway.
