| Samus Aran said: Sunshine, Galaxy and Super Mario 3D World are all different enough from each other. Much more innovative than GT, COD, Killzone, sports games, GoW, Uncharted, etc if you ask me. |
The difference there is in the mechanic, the mechanics have to be changed otherwise theres little reason to actually buy another mario game, they cycle the mechanics and return to old ones with a few extra skills or special moves once they wear the other mechanics thin.
Most of the games you mentioned are formula based, but saw advancements in their own right, track editors and kart racing, gps tracking and physics improvements, are advancements to games like GT that are just as valid an innovation as switching up the format on mario games.
For first person shooters theres no need to deliver a monumental shift because that isnt what its fanbase wants, they want incrimental shifts but above all "more online, more maps", and they get that, and theyre happy - and as a games purpose is to provide enjoyment then it has fullfilled its purpose regardless, innovative? not often, but they have their moments.
Sports games innovate in the features they provide inside and outside of the game, features which expand and enhance the experience for the type of people who like sports games, innovations in fluidity of movement, AI and so on, while you may look at the game and see no difference, people that PLAY it will see major differences.
For uncharted the goal is to provide more of the same in a more compelling way, but because it is bound in many ways to reality, they have to draw the line in certain areas, while its perfectly okay for Mario to headbash a block, pick up a power up then have a tail sprout out of his backside to fly, or for gravity to take a day off, or to spend eternity trying to rescue a borderline stockholm syndrome princess from the bad guys, if you tried this in a game that tries to be based at least losely on reality and all youre going to do is detach what little relation you have built with the player.
Mario games can change and in many cases HAVE to have, because he was designed as a blank canvas, he has no meaningful back story, he does not age, he does not do anything close to reality, so mario games are bound to very little other than being child friendly.
Look at these scenarios and tell me which one you think sounds out of place.
Mario picks up a powerup, grows bat wings and can fly, and see in the dark to access areas previously hidden.
Nathan drake picks up a artifact, grows bat wings and can fly, and see in the dark to access areas previously hidden.
Mario gets pushed into a corner and, breaking the attackers nose, disarms him and uses his gun to shoot his way out of the prison.
Nathan drake gets pushed into a corner and, breaking the attackers nose, disarms him and uses his gun to shoot his way out of the prison.
These games are largely based on reality, as such they are largely bound by expectations of a reality we know.
Mario games are based solely on a fictional world where anything the designer wants to do, can be done, so long as its child-friendly.
I don't think i need to point out which of the two is more open to dramatic changes.
