Famine said: TWRoO said: Mario = win because he is in some incredible games. And i find it funny when people keep complaining about Nintendo re-hashing characters when other developers seem to re-hash whole games (but with new characters) I do think Mario has seen too much though. (Mario baseball?) In one year, the Wii has saw 5 games with Mario in it, and there still will be more (Although SSB should get the freebie as it includes other Nintendo greats and is just an awesome franchise). Can you tell me what characters have been almost overused to such a capacity from Sony and Microsoft?

I don't think it matters. Reused characters don't matter unless the gameplay is overly reused like Street Fighter 2. If it's a good game who cares if it's Mario, Crash Bandicoot or those two guys from Urban Fight... so long as the gameplay stays fresh.

^Bull's eye!!

Kasz216 said: I don't think it matters. Reused characters don't matter unless the gameplay is overly reused like Street Fighter 2. If it's a good game who cares if it's Mario, Crash Bandicoot or those two guys from Urban Fight... so long as the gameplay stays fresh.

Well that's the thing, if it's a good game then why plaster Mario into it? Even last generation, Dance Dane Revolution for the Gamecube had Mario in it. Mario has become a "safety-net" for Nintendo.

@Zucas:

Can't they be both: Playing it smart and putting Mario onto a lot of games?

Famine said: Kasz216 said: I don't think it matters. Reused characters don't matter unless the gameplay is overly reused like Street Fighter 2. If it's a good game who cares if it's Mario, Crash Bandicoot or those two guys from Urban Fight... so long as the gameplay stays fresh. Well that's the thing, if it's a good game then why plaster Mario into it? Even last generation, Dance Dane Revolution for the Gamecube had Mario in it. Mario has become a "safety-net" for Nintendo. @Zucas: Can't they be both: Playing it smart and putting Mario onto a lot of games?

Why waste money developing new characters who are just likely going to be generic looking anyway? Aside from that people assosiate Mario games as games that have had a lot of extra time and care put into them because there have been so few poor Mario games. Mario Party 8... and... Yoshis Island and... that's all I can think of right now. As for Dance Dance revolution... that was the gimmic wasn't it? It had mario songs in it or something? That just seemed more relevent in that generation, for example the Soul Caliber game with a mascot from each company in it. Some third party developers seemed to focus on making slight differences in games to see if they would sell more copies to see if someone buys the PSP version of Marvel Ultimate Alliance just so they could play Hawkeye or something. As long as the games arn't bad it's not going to hurt the bankability of your characters. So you can't really "overuse" said characters unless the games are bad or too similar.

Also, i'd argue "Sports" games are basically star based. The gameplay rarely changes but you get the new versions every year because you want updated stats and characters. Even in college basketball games where they specifically hide the names of the players.

I know even I needed a new basketball game after Lebron James hit the league.

You just can't make a Sports game without stars it doesn't work.

Even "Hall of Fame" games do horrible, look at the latest 2K football game that used Hall of Fame players.

Sports games NEED stars to be successful. So it only makes sense to go with your most bankable stars... and Mario baseball makes more sense then Samus baseball or Link Baseball.

Famine said: Kasz216 said: I don't think it matters. Reused characters don't matter unless the gameplay is overly reused like Street Fighter 2. If it's a good game who cares if it's Mario, Crash Bandicoot or those two guys from Urban Fight... so long as the gameplay stays fresh. Well that's the thing, if it's a good game then why plaster Mario into it? Even last generation, Dance Dane Revolution for the Gamecube had Mario in it. Mario has become a "safety-net" for Nintendo. @Zucas: Can't they be both: Playing it smart and putting Mario onto a lot of games?

Take a look at most of the games with Mario. How many could have stood on their own? Furthermore, of the few that did, how many could be sure hits? Fire Emblem is one of the oldest, and still one of the most hardcore, RPG series,* but the sad thing is if Mario was somehow made the star of one game, it would likely sell a lot more.

In other words, it's the CONSUMERS FAULT for BUYING all those Mario games.

*And I mean the whole RPG genre, not just strategy RPGs. 

Kasz216 said: Why waste money developing new characters who are just likely going to be generic looking anyway? Aside from that people assosiate Mario games as games that have had a lot of extra time and care put into them because there have been so few poor Mario games. Mario Party 8... and... Yoshis Island and... that's all I can think of right now. As for Dance Dance revolution... that was the gimmic wasn't it? It had mario songs in it or something? That just seemed more relevent in that generation, for example the Soul Caliber game with a mascot from each company in it. Some third party developers seemed to focus on making slight differences in games to see if they would sell more copies to see if someone buys the PSP version of Marvel Ultimate Alliance just so they could play Hawkeye or something. As long as the games arn't bad it's not going to hurt the bankability of your characters. So you can't really "overuse" said characters unless the games are bad or too similar.

Actually, there are quite a few "not up to snuff" games with Mario in it: A few of the Mario Party games, Mario Pinball Land, Mario Hoops 3-on-3, Yoshi's Touch and Go.

The majority of games are good, but you still can't claim that Nintendo is not banking on Mario; it ensures Nintendo of making a quick buck, which is nothing wrong, but you can't deny that there is an abundance of Mario.

Also regarding your post about sports games, you aren't going to see Terrell Owens in a baseball, soccer, tennis, or basketball game. With sports games, the rosters now can get updated, and different players are available with each new incarnation. With the Mario sports games, the roster doesn't change; you are still stuck with Nintendo characters (Mario and Sonic proving otherwise with the introduction of Sega characters).

Famine said: Kasz216 said: Why waste money developing new characters who are just likely going to be generic looking anyway? Aside from that people assosiate Mario games as games that have had a lot of extra time and care put into them because there have been so few poor Mario games. Mario Party 8... and... Yoshis Island and... that's all I can think of right now. As for Dance Dance revolution... that was the gimmic wasn't it? It had mario songs in it or something? That just seemed more relevent in that generation, for example the Soul Caliber game with a mascot from each company in it. Some third party developers seemed to focus on making slight differences in games to see if they would sell more copies to see if someone buys the PSP version of Marvel Ultimate Alliance just so they could play Hawkeye or something. As long as the games arn't bad it's not going to hurt the bankability of your characters. So you can't really "overuse" said characters unless the games are bad or too similar. Actually, there are quite a few "not up to snuff" games with Mario in it: A few of the Mario Party games, Mario Pinball Land, Mario Hoops 3-on-3, Yoshi's Touch and Go. The majority of games are good, but you still can't claim that Nintendo is not banking on Mario; it ensures Nintendo of making a quick buck, which is nothing wrong, but you can't deny that there is an abundance of Mario. Also regarding your post about sports games, you aren't going to see Terrell Owens in a baseball, soccer, tennis, or basketball game. With sports games, the rosters now can get updated, and different players are available with each new incarnation. With the Mario sports games, the roster doesn't change; you are still stuck with Nintendo characters (Mario and Sonic proving otherwise with the introduction of Sega characters).

We know Nintendo is banking on Mario for some games. The point is IT PAYS OFF. You think other developers haven't tried to make their own cash cows? 

For the record: I only counted games with the word "Mario" in the title... No Yoshi's Island DS, no Super Princess Peach, etc. However, "Super Mario Advance 3: Yoshi's Island" was counted. No point in spliting hairs; I just relied on how the game was named.

So every game with the word "Mario" in the title this gen has been a million-seller... But there's been several spin-offs that won't reach the mark...

LordTheNightKnight said: We know Nintendo is banking on Mario for some games. The point is IT PAYS OFF. You think other developers haven't tried to make their own cash cows?

Using and reusing the same character? No.

Can you name me one game developer that has used one character in as many games?