By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - Mario games are 12 for 12 this gen -- All million-sellers

LordTheNightKnight on 21 December 2007
Erik Aston said:
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...

Now does Nintendo magically make them sell a million by putting Mario in the name, or is it CONSUMERS who make those games sell better with Mario in them?

Put the blame where it belongs. 



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

Around the Network
LordTheNightKnight on 21 December 2007
Famine said:
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.

BULLSHIT! Nintendo has RRECORD PROFITS! Do your damn research!

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

The point is that they DID use a character, but that they TRIED. Square uses Chobcobo in quite a few FF spinoffs, even a Mario Kart clone. You honestly think this isn't an attempt at making a popular character? Or what about Sonic? Mega Man? The Street Fighter series, and the King of Fighters series?

Those games may not be as much as those with Mario, but that's because they DON'T SELL AS WELL. If any of those sold a million copies over half the time, they WOULD be as used as Mario.


 



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

Erik Aston on 21 December 2007

Of course Mario has been in more games than any other character in history. No person will argue otherwise. Well, actually, I've seen people argue otherwise, and they need to STFU.

And of course the Mario name helps the games sell.

Starting with Mario Kart, people started to expect a certain type of gameplay from Mario games... The sports titles, then the party titles... And Nintendo largely delivered that type of gameplay consistently. Other than the yearly Party iterations, they still protect their star by only doing sequels once per generation. Paper Mario, Mario and Luigi, Mario Tennis, Mario Golf, Mario Kart, and the rest have only appeared once each gen so far, and have never really been low quality titles. And so they've managed to avoid wearing out consumers on the brand. And when they do something new like Mario Strikers (or whatever), consumers still trust the brand more than they would "We Love Soccer" (or whatever).

I'm not sure there's really any "blame" at all. Mario games sell. The developer (rarely Nintendo), the publisher (Nintendo), the whole distribution chain, and the consumers are all a part of making them sell. And that's just a fact; it isn't necesarily a bad thing. The games are what they are and people shouldn't lament it.

Nearly 100 million games sold over the last two generations alone is obviously a winning strategy.



"[Our former customers] are unable to find software which they WANT to play."
"The way to solve this problem lies in how to communicate what kind of games [they CAN play]."

Satoru Iwata, Nintendo President. Only slightly paraphrased.

LordTheNightKnight on 21 December 2007

Erik Aston said:
Of course Mario has been in more games than any other character in history. No person will argue otherwise. Well, actually, I've seen people argue otherwise, and they need to STFU.

And of course the Mario name helps the games sell.

Starting with Mario Kart, people started to expect a certain type of gameplay from Mario games... The sports titles, then the party titles... And Nintendo largely delivered that type of gameplay consistently. Other than the yearly Party iterations, they still protect their star by only doing sequels once per generation. Paper Mario, Mario and Luigi, Mario Tennis, Mario Golf, Mario Kart, and the rest have only appeared once each gen so far, and have never really been low quality titles. And so they've managed to avoid wearing out consumers on the brand. And when they do something new like Mario Strikers (or whatever), consumers still trust the brand more than they would "We Love Soccer" (or whatever).

I'm not sure there's really any "blame" at all. Mario games sell. The developer (rarely Nintendo), the publisher (Nintendo), the whole distribution chain, and the consumers are all a part of making them sell. And that's just a fact; it isn't necesarily a bad thing. The games are what they are and people shouldn't lament it.

Nearly 100 million games sold over the last two generations alone is obviously a winning strategy.

Not to some. They say Mario's being whored out, as though no other developer would use a character that sold that consistently.


 



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

Famine on 21 December 2007
LordTheNightKnight said:
Famine said:

Using and reusing the same character? No.

BULLSHIT! Nintendo has RRECORD PROFITS! Do your damn research!

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

The point is that they DID use a character, but that they TRIED. Square uses Chobcobo in quite a few FF spinoffs, even a Mario Kart clone. You honestly think this isn't an attempt at making a popular character? Or what about Sonic? Mega Man? The Street Fighter series, and the King of Fighters series?

Those games may not be as much as those with Mario, but that's because they DON'T SELL AS WELL. If any of those sold a million copies over half the time, they WOULD be as used as Mario.

 


Jeez! First, take a pill Robocop!

Second, I totally forgot about Sonic (And I even mentioned him in an earlier post!). Also, the Chocobos maybe had 2 games at most where the games revolved around them, and Mega Man, while multiple in the franchise, only appeared in one franchise that took him out of his world: Capcom vs. series.

As for Street Fighter and King of Fighters, yeah, I agree, those franchises just keep on coming and are becoming jaded, and there are numerous other franchises that are still being continued that I can list, but the fact still remains that you are not seeing Ryu or Iori outside of the fighting genre.

Afterall, isn't that the whole reason for this discussion: Mario appearing in games that are really running the gamet?



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 21 December 2007
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).


An abundance. I wouldn't say an over abundance. The point is... what sells sports games are stars... more importantly current stars. Mario is always a current star. He doesn't lose his luster like sports stars do. Can't say i've played Pinball land, Hoops or Touch N go... are those DS games? As for Mario Party, i'd say they've all gotten better until 8. Which sucked.

Kasz216 on 21 December 2007
Famine said:
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?


Megaman isn't as many but it's gotta be up there. Mega Man soccer is still one of the better soccer games i've played. The problem with the Megaman games is that they don't alter them as much. Lets look at this another way though. Name one character who is bigger then Mario. Mario gets used more because he's that much above pretty much any character out there, aside from the few other Nintendo characters who don't lend themselves as eaisly outside of their genre and Master Chief who would just look silly in other games. Other characters have been greatly reused, however they tend to fail either because the characters don't have a wide enough aplicability or because the gameplay gets old. (See Megaman games.) When you think about it. Mario playing golf makes much more sense then mario fighting a giant dinosaur/dragon monster guy. I mean he's a freaking Italian Plumber from New York. The fact that the mario games are spread about among many genres is one of it's greatest strengths.

LordTheNightKnight on 21 December 2007
Famine said:
LordTheNightKnight said:
Famine said:

Using and reusing the same character? No.

BULLSHIT! Nintendo has RRECORD PROFITS! Do your damn research!

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

The point is that they DID use a character, but that they TRIED. Square uses Chobcobo in quite a few FF spinoffs, even a Mario Kart clone. You honestly think this isn't an attempt at making a popular character? Or what about Sonic? Mega Man? The Street Fighter series, and the King of Fighters series?

Those games may not be as much as those with Mario, but that's because they DON'T SELL AS WELL. If any of those sold a million copies over half the time, they WOULD be as used as Mario.

 


Jeez! First, take a pill Robocop!

Second, I totally forgot about Sonic (And I even mentioned him in an earlier post!). Also, the Chocobos maybe had 2 games at most where the games revolved around them,

There are more than two. Again, do the research. 

and Mega Man, while multiple in the franchise, only appeared in one franchise that took him out of his world: Capcom vs. series.

Out of his world? What kind of criterion is that? NO DEVELOPER uses that criterion. The fact is that the OFFICIAL Mega Man games are pretty numerous, and infamous for that.

As for Street Fighter and King of Fighters, yeah, I agree, those franchises just keep on coming and are becoming jaded, and there are numerous other franchises that are still being continued that I can list, but the fact still remains that you are not seeing Ryu or Iori outside of the fighting genre.

So it's the fact that Mario is used in various generes that is the problem? When has that EVER been a law of game design?

Afterall, isn't that the whole reason for this discussion: Mario appearing in games that are really running the gamet?

NO! The discussion was HOW MANY SOLD A MILLION. Or do you mean your discussion, which NOT UNTIL THIS POST did you use ANY words indicating it was the multiple generes that was bothering you.


 



A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.

Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs

Erik Aston on 21 December 2007
LordTheNightKnight said:

Not to some. They say Mario's being whored out, as though no other developer would use a character that sold that consistently.

 


Well maybe "whored out" isn't the nicest way to put it, but it's sort of true.

It's only that he's like the Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman of videogame whores.



"[Our former customers] are unable to find software which they WANT to play."
"The way to solve this problem lies in how to communicate what kind of games [they CAN play]."

Satoru Iwata, Nintendo President. Only slightly paraphrased.

Famine on 21 December 2007
Kasz216 said:


Megaman isn't as many but it's gotta be up there.

Mega Man soccer is still one of the better soccer games i've played. The problem with the Megaman games is that they don't alter them as much.

Lets look at this another way though. Name one character who is bigger then Mario.

Mario gets used more because he's that much above pretty much any character out there, aside from the few other Nintendo characters who don't lend themselves as eaisly outside of their genre and Master Chief who would just look silly in other games.

Other characters have been greatly reused, however they tend to fail either because the characters don't have a wide enough aplicability or because the gameplay gets old. (See Megaman games.)

When you think about it. Mario playing golf makes much more sense then mario fighting a giant dinosaur/dragon monster guy.

I mean he's a freaking Italian Plumber from New York.


And I forgot Mega Man Soccer, but that's all the way back during the SNES days. So let's say Mega Man appeared in a fighting game and a soccer game.

I shouldn't have asked:

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

What I should have asked is:

"Can you name me one game developer that has used one character in so many genres of gameplay?"

And from an earlier poster, Sonic most certainly would be up there.

I'm not questioning the popularity around Mario, nor am I discrediting it, I'm just saying that there are an abundance of Mario games out there, and more are on the way.