Paper Mario is a spin-off of the Super Mario franchise (not to mention it being a sub-series of Mario RPG). At this point, the idea of needing further spin-off branding seems ridiculous to me. Besides, Sticker Star, unlike SPM, is in the same genre as previous games, so it doesn't necessarily need to be classified as a spin-off. Further, the emphasis on stickers is obvious in the title. But you may have a point here, if only because I like "Sticker Mario" as a title.

Doesn't make sense to whom? Some games have succeded by putting an immense amount of effort into artistry. BioShock and Half-Life are well-regarded as being shooters with wonderful stories. In fact, fans expect new entries of Bioshock to not take place in the same setting, or reuse characters. Only a small amount of defining gameplay attributes are wanted, and there's no objection when one is revamped.

Yes, current fans are a safe market. That's a huge reason why I, a current fan, am getting Sticker Star. I can't wait for more timing-based battling and brillant dialogue. All signs point to me being pleased. But I can imagine some not being so positive. There's always a contingient of fans who prefer a certain game in the series becuase something was changed or added in the next. All long-running franchises have this, no matter how similar each game is.

Unlike TTYD (which was under development as Paper Mario 2), Sticker Star (to my knowledge) hasn't been referred to as a main entry. Franchise spinoffs have often used the "Title: Subtitle" format in many cases, but I suppose Paper Mario is more ambiguous as no entry is labeled under the number system. Personally I think whether or not Sticker Star is a spinoff should be open to interpretation, especially since it's the first handheld entry. It may be the beginning of a new handheld subseries of Paper Mario for all we know, which I think would absolutely kill the notion of it being a "main entry".

Oh yes people buy games based on concepts. I could provide personal examples. Or examples of people I know who didn't buy a particular game based on what is expected of its genre. I didn't buy Scribblenauts because it was a puzzle game - I bought it because I could make God fight a T-Rex. I bought it based on what its individual, unique concept promised be. Sticker Star promises sticker-based battling and world interation. BioShock and Half-Life are arguably better known for their narratives than shooter gameplay. Pokemon is an RPG known better for its gameplay depth than depth of narrative (plus it's possibly the best example of how well a concept can sell a game). The Paper Mario branding doesn't have to impress newcomers, as it only exists to tie it to a familiar franchise. The name is there so players like yours truly will buy it. Besides, there is a the slightest chance that the "Mario" in the title could persuade a few buyers who associate that brand with quality. I wonder if Kirby's Epic Yarn would've broke a milltion sold without the Kirby name on it...

Companies make excuses. But behind the scenes, I'm confident that Nintendo is looking at what did or did not work for each release. Otherwise, their many popular franchises would've lost relevancy a long time ago.

It means, dont ditch it before you tried it.

You have faith in Nintendo to deliver a product that you like. I have zero faith in this because Nintendo burned me with Other M, with Galaxy 2, with Twilight Princess, and with NSMB 2.

Ignoring global business decisions, I buy games for one and only one real reason: soundtrack. If it has a soundtrack like the first two I am buying, otherwise not.

You'll be dissapointed if you're expecting a soundtrack like the first two games, as the composer has retired after TTYD's soundtrack was finished. She still directs sound at Intelligent Systems to some extent, but it will never be the same.

As for me, I have faith because my standards, tastes, and expectations are completely different. I could talk about them in great length, but they're not things that I can quantify in a few sentences. They're dynamic, changing, evolving, and indefinite. And I wouldn't like it any other way.

I didn't know that. But I'm not expecting the same, I'm expecting quality that 20+ past Nintendo composers have been able to achieve. Yoshito Hirano is still around right?

I think so. Hirano composed the Advance Wars: Days of Run sountrack (good work), but I'm not sure of anything afterwards. I think Rei Kondoh did the soundtrack for the new Fire Emblem game. That explains why it's so awesome.

Thats what it comes down to...do you have faith in nintendo? It doesn't matter what anyone thinks about the changes or how they affect the game because it really could go either way. Its up to nintendo to make these changes for the better and whether or not you believe in them will determine your opinion on this game. I believe in them (or more specifically Inteligent Systems). I guess you dont (albeit for mediocre reasons IMO) so i can see why you dont believe in these changes. We'll see when the game comes out whether or not the changes are for the better but until now, all this is is bickering about who is more bias

In response to the argument about whether or not people buy games based on concept. I'm planning on getting this game soley due to the sticker based combat. Just thought i'd throw that out there :).

(The fact that it's a Mario games helps, but it wasn't enough to convince me to try the other turn based games).

Wat?  Rei Kondoh from Capcom? 

And I believe you're talking about Yuka Tsujiyoko, who scored the bulk of Paper Mario.  Hirano was lead for TTYD.  I really want to know who's scoring SS though... 

Hirano is probably working on Wii U Fire Emblem...  *drooool*

Anyways, I think this game will turn out well and won't be the disappointment that Super Paper Mario was.

Also, my optimism could just stem from my being an Intelligent Systems whore.  I don't know yet.

No! that would be just the same old hat with a new gimmick formula.