Some people are worried that Nintendo is just cashing in with the New Super Mario Bros. series. While Iwata has already said that there will only be one 'New' title on each platform, there's a crowd that says that's more than enough. Does the New series have its place in Nintendo history, or is this line of games hurting Mario more than helping?
Article here
Goriginal Content
NFD 5/17 outtakes
NFD 5/17 - video
ND 5/17 - full info
EoD - Bye, EA
EoD - 3rd party love
GN Mailbag 5/14
RSS Feeds:
Honestly, I think the only reason people think Nintendo is just cashing in is because NSMB2 and NSMBU are releasing so close together. If NSMB2 had already been out for, say, a year at this point, or NSMBU wasn't announced for another year or so, I don't think anybody would be complaining.
Oh Jesus, this again.
It DOES have a place, as much as people don't want to admit. It resurrected the 2D formula Mario had. I think people just want the games to do something a little different when it comes to plot, which isn't exactly the point when it comes to Mario. People forget that the Mario series has no fucks to give when it comes to plot.
While I do admit that the Big N could do better with the 'New' titles, it still doesn't hurt for each console/handheld to have at least one. They aren't bad games in the least.
Folks just being negative nancies, I suppose. Getting their pants in a bunch over one series... Yeesh.
Of course they're cashing in with this series.
They spent a lot on a new handheld which needed an app that would help cushion and cover their expenses... Same as with the WiiU and NSMBU.
The WiiU will get its own main Mario title eventually while the 3DS has Super Mario 3D Land already, but Nintendo makes sure they throw in their cash cow for the masses.
Are the "New" games cash-ins? Without a doubt.
Are the "New" games boring to play? Nope.
Do I blame Nintendo for wanting to make money? Of course not.
Do I wish Nintendo would do something new, creative, and exciting with the Mario franchise instead of releasing slight tweaks to the same formula? Definitely.
If Nintendo wanted to, they could have made Super Mario World 2 for the N64 in 2.5D, but instead, they made the completely revolutionary Super Mario 64 in 3D.
If Nintendo wanted to, they could've made Super Mario 64 2 or Super Mario 128 for the Gamecube instead of making the very different Super Mario Sunshine.
In the past, Nintendo has almost always chosen to do something new and interesting with Mario. Each game was new, each game had its own style, each game was its own unique adventure, with few exceptions (such as the Japanese Super Mario Bros. 2). I haven't really felt that uniqueness since the original Super Mario Galaxy. I wish I could feel that uniqueness again with Mario, but it just hasn't happened. That's why I, along with some other fans of Mario, aren't huge fans of the "New" series.
I suppose that they are just cash-ins to an extent, if only because Nintendo knows that a retro throwback 2D sidescroller Mario is going to move units. And Nintendo DOES need the New Super Mario Bros. series right now to help move the 3DS, 3DS XL, and Wii U. NSMB2 and NSMBU are going to help Nintendo sell the systems they need to make their goal for this fiscal year, and perhaps even surpass it. And I think we need to remember what Iwata said the other day: the "New" series is one game per console. Also, I think it's pretty obvious that they'll start work on a 3D installment once they wrap up production on the fourth game.
You don't solve it because there is no problem.
Ok. So a single New SMB game per platform is a problem.
But no one is saying anything about multiple Call of Duty games or Need for Speed games, etc.!
Sounds like the problem is with Eurogamer more than Nintendo. Relying on meta scores from critics whose bias has been discussed before as an indicator of quality is more of an error than trying to serve different groups with a similar game.
Mike from Morgantown
I wonder if you all keep repeating this and pretending it's true will it magically become true?
They made Super Mario World 2 for the SNES, it's called Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island. As for Sunshine being different then 64, it's actually the closest Mario game to 64 that there is.
Anyways, I have no problem with the New series. I've only played the Wii one and it was a lot of fun. I've said it before, but Nintendo revived not only 2d Mario platformers with the new series, but 2d platformers in general. There would be no Rayman Origins or Legends if it wasn't for NSMBW.
I'll wrap up my comment by saying that Nintendo should try something new artistically with 2d Mario, like they did with Yoshi's Island & Kirby's Epic Yarn.
If I remember correctly, Yoshi's Island only had the "Super Mario World 2" subtitle in the US; it was just called "Yoshi's Island" in Japan. And Yoshi's Island was drastically different from Super Mario World in many ways - the gameplay was focused on Yoshi's egg-throwing, and the art style was fresh and very different from Super Mario World.
You're right that Sunshine is the closest thing to 64 there is, but it's still a very different game - the FLUDD changed the gameplay a ton, and the tropical setting and new characters really shook things up.
I completely agree with you that the art style could use a change, and I agree that the New Super Mario Bros. series played a part in the revival of 2D platformers, but in my opinion that doesn't justify making so many NSMB titles.
How DO you solve a problem like Mario?
And...how do you pin a lakitu down?
If they stick to one per platform I don't have a problem with it.
The fact that the New Super Mario Bros. games are only going to be one per platform makes the situation even worse, in my book.
Given how much time Nintendo has between releases, there's no excuse why they resort to just porting and reusing assets from older games. It's not like they desperately need money right now, and we all know that, no matter what they did with the sequel, it would sell just because it's called Mario. That said, there is no justifiable reason why Nintendo can't afford to take a risk and try something completely different.
It really is sad that each New Super Mario Bros. game is just as 'new' as each Call of Duty game.
I think these will be the last in the "New" series. I don't know what they will do to change things up, but expect big changes after these two.
I think the reasoning is that if there isn't a standard New Mario game on the platform, some casual people will say, "I like Nintendo, but there isn't a 2D Mario game for me on this console/handheld.". Nintendo is getting that out of the way from the start.
The Truth has been spoken!
I get tired of ppl whining about rehashes.
It leads to games where the game is no longer like the series started. Like spm.
If you want to play a different game that's what other genres are for. The point of a sequel is to continue ideas that work.
I mean why not just make a game like say super mario sunshine a new ip with new characters?
Everyone at 3DS Launch: Where's Mario?
Everyone at Wii U Launch: Damnit, Nintendo, stop rehashing Mario!
Poor Nintendo. They just can't win sometimes.
I agree there is an issue here, an issue of priority.
The fact that NSMB2 re-uses so many visual and musical assets from NSMBWii and was entrusted to a team of less-experienced developers so that they could learn how to make Mario levels, doesn't just speak of conservatism on Nintendo's part. You don't have to cheap out and literally recycle huge chunks of a game to ensure it will sell, that's a cop-out. This strategy says that to Nintendo, their best-selling series is a low priority, and not worth the same level of time, effort, resources, or talent as the 3D series their best developers say they have so much fun making.
@Jerome Visuals and music doesn't mean the games are the same. Besides, just about every canon platform Mario game ever has tons of borrowed music and visuals. Super Mario Galaxy 1 and 2 both borrowed a ton from previous Mario games.
The team wasn't that inexperienced, it just seemed like they were more afraid of creating the next Final Fantasy XIV than they were hoping to make the next Super Metroid. As the old cliche goes "you miss 100% of the shots that you don't take." Granted, the team took some shots, but they were few and far between each other.
Besides, this is the first real "rehash" Mario games (in which they usually just borrow a lot of gameplay from previous games, but build it upon new features, modes, levels, and level design) are usually followed by unique titles. Super Mario Bros.: The Lost Levels was followed by Super Mario Bros. 2 and 3. Super Mario Galaxy 2 was followed by Super Mario 3D Land. This isn't like Mega Man where you get a dozen copy games for every original game.
@NintendorkZ
Exactly. Everyone is treating Super Mario 3D Land (an excellent Mario title) and NEW Super Mario Bros. 2 (a title that was what we expecting) like trash. And quite frankly, the Mario series can "repeat" itself a bit.
Make games based off of Super Mario World instead of the original Super Mario Bros.
I would gladly play Super Mario World 3 or New Super Mario World over New Super Mario Bros. anything
There's a difference between including elaborate re-mixes of old tunes and specific visual cues from older games, and basically ripping art assets directly and re-using the same music with more "wah! Waah!" noises added.
I think you're kind of missing the point. If this game is going to be the flagship Mario game in terms of sales and popularity for the 3DS (as it should be, barring disaster), why did it get farmed out to a less-experienced team?
Not quite the same thing. Sure, they made too many Mega Man games, but every one of those offered more original content than NSMB2. They each had new robot masters, settings, regular enemies, weapons, etc. This game offers different level arrangements and a bunch more coins, but barely anything new in those regards.
Well I know I'm disappointed with both of them, and I have a right to be. But no, not everyone is treating them like trash. In fact, there's lots of critical praise for 3D Land.
Seriously, there's no problem with the NSMB series, oooo, one goddamn game borrowed assets, so f***ing what? Have you ever looked at NSMBU? Of course not, it would disprove your argument.
Im fine with it -_-
@DonnyKD,
1. Sheesh, you don't need to get so offended. If you disagree, just state why, you don't have to get all mad about it.
2. I haven't heard any lyrics at all in all the NSMB2 footage I've seen (which is a lot). Unless, that is, you consider "La La La" lyrics.
3. I wasn't saying the exact same people had to work on this as NSMBWii, I was just asking why the game on which a lot of their success and profit for a number of years will depend was given lower development priority. I think it should have been pretty high on their priority list.
4. I don't know what ignorance you're referring to. I've played through every Mario platformer up until NSMB2, and have seen a signficant amount of gameplay footage of that game. I've also played all the original Mega Man games. I have seen for myself that there are few new environment types, bosses, enemies, power-ups, etc. in NSMB2, while all the NES Mega Man games had a pretty healthy compliment of them. I don't know what's astounding about my saying that.
View the full discussion!