The Classics... Being overused

[pokepotterkhkids]

I loved the originals of Zelda and Mario, but once ps2, Gamecube, xbox, ect came out, it seems like they're only continuing series like these because they want to make more money. Not because they have ideas, which, most of the time, they obviously dont. It just makes me kinda sad, cause its making the video game industry that much more crappier.

What do you guys think?

 

[Nyangoro]

Well, yeah they want to make money. Established franchises are inherently less risky than new IPs.

Similarly, Mario and Zelda use tried and true formulas to provide quality gaming experiences.

I don't think many people would say that Super Mario Galaxy or Super Mario Galaxy 2 are making the industry crappier.

 

[pokepotterkhkids]

Well, yeah they want to make money. Established franchises are inherently less risky than new IPs.

Similarly, Mario and Zelda use tried and true formulas to provide quality gaming experiences.

I don't think many people would say that Super Mario Galaxy or Super Mario Galaxy 2 are making the industry crappier.

Don't they work in an industry built for that though? I mean, the entertainment industry is full of what ifs and taking chances. I have alot of family in that area, most in music, but some in tv, and they're faced with a choice. Keep replaying the same music from 2 years ago, or playing a new song, not knowing if its gonna take off well. Keep reruns of a high rated show on, or pitch a new one. You know?

No thats true, I enjoyed those, but there is a certain wrongness to it. With Mario, the new games almost completely differentiate from the classics, and with zelda, now they're mainly just coming up with crap to keep the series going.

 

[Taylor]

Don't they work in an industry built for that though?

Wishful thinking. Major gaming companies care more about making money than entertaining the dreams of Indie developers. Nintendo demonstrates that quite well.

No thats true, I enjoyed those, but there is a certain wrongness to it. With Mario, the new games almost completely differentiate from the classics, and with zelda, now they're mainly just coming up with crap to keep the series going.

If they make good games, they're going to make money and people are going to enjoy playing their games. There's nothing wrong with that. You just want more variety.

 

[Hero]

You also have the consumers to blame. There have been plenty of games that have tried to innovate or stand out, but have failed miserably in terms of sales. Okami, Psychonauts, Madworld, etc, etc just to name a few.

 

[Shadow_]

well I know alot of games out there now adays are crappier than what they used to be, so I can see why they use the same game over and over again. I mean it depends on how the game presents its self.

 

[Taylor]

You also have the consumers to blame. There have been plenty of games that have tried to innovate or stand out, but have failed miserably in terms of sales. Okami, Psychonauts, Madworld, etc, etc just to name a few.

I almost agreed with this post, but then you mentioned Madworld, which was bland and incredibly boring.

Otherwise, the other two didn't do much to revolutionize the industry from a gameplay level: they just had excellent story-telling elements. The issue is that all games are beginning to feel the same.

Hell, Super Mario Galaxy 2 is a prime example. Nintendo made a ton of revenue off SMG, so they updated it with 120 more stars because, hey, why not? And that's not bad - I love Super Mario Galaxy 2 - it's just the same business over and over. There's no flare.


Then again, most consumers tend to be okay with that. When you like a series, you tend to fall into a niche, and even if you think a certain game in the series is negative, you don't drop the series. You're going to keep buying the games because you have fun with them regardless of whether they're breathtaking in their developments or not.

 

[TheMuffinMan]

Okay, so you cite PS2/Xbox/GCN era as when the series started being the same thing over and over again. Which is where I'm gonna go ahead and mention that you're wrong.

Super Mario Sunshine: Totally same game, rite? Oh wait, except that it pretty much changed everything outside of the concept of collecting stars

Windwaker: totally the same as always, right? Oh wait, except that it basically revolutionized cel-shaded graphics (something that plenty of games still don't mpull off as well as WindWaker)

Super Mario Galaxy: Oh yeah, this concept has totally been done to death, right? Oh wait, except that it won countless GOTY awards for amazing concepts, mechanics, level design, innovation, etc.

Zelda Phantom Hourglass: We totally have 10 games just like this on the DS, LOL. Oh wait, except that it was the first game to even THINK that something like cel-shading stylistic graphics were possible on the DS hardware, not to mention the first 3D handheld Zelda, not to mention the first Touch Screen Zelda, not to mention the first Online-Play Zelda

----

Essentially, the only exception to saying that these franchises are stagnantly continuing the same track would be if you considered Super Mario Galaxy 2 and Zelda: Spirit Tracks the only Zelda/Mario game released in the past 10 years. Because those are the only iterations that took a successful game/engine and did a re-do. Which hardly lasted that long, because now Nintendo are back on track with Zelda: Skyward Sword (which is meant to change the Zelda formula completely, plus 1:1 sword mechanics), and the next Mario edition which will change things up again.

 

[Byakuya]

See: Final Fantasy XIII, most blatant cash cow to have ever been conceived into the universe of console gaming. Not to mention that it was notoriously horrible.

That would have been a really good example for this thread.

 

[Shamdeo]

See: Final Fantasy XIII, most blatant cash cow to have ever been conceived into the universe of console gaming. Not to mention that it was notoriously horrible.

That would have been a really good example for this thread.

ima get a side of derp to go with my herp

 

[XIII Heartless]

See: Final Fantasy XIII, most blatant cash cow to have ever been conceived into the universe of console gaming. Not to mention that it was notoriously horrible.

That would have been a really good example for this thread.

I see I really am alone in actually liking Final Fantasy XIII as a decent enough game (especially combat wise). Hopefully its sequel touches up on its defects.

 

[Zul]

See: Final Fantasy XIII, most blatant cash cow to have ever been conceived into the universe of console gaming. Not to mention that it was notoriously horrible.

That would have been a really good example for this thread.

This thread is about classic models being re-used, although I'm no fan of FF13, why are you citing the FF that was the most different from all the classic FF games as an example fitting for this thread?


I'd say the most fitting example for this thread would be the pokemon games.

 

[lilVon]

To the OP, how do you feel about Metroid Prime compared to the side scrolling metroids games.

 

[lilVon]

Also I loved Final Fantasy XIII. I played it at the same time as Final Fantasy VII, which is my favorite but I've played those to VIII. & I'm half way through IX.

 

[pokepotterkhkids]

Okay, so you cite PS2/Xbox/GCN era as when the series started being the same thing over and over again. Which is where I'm gonna go ahead and mention that you're wrong.

Super Mario Sunshine: Totally same game, rite? Oh wait, except that it pretty much changed everything outside of the concept of collecting stars

Windwaker: totally the same as always, right? Oh wait, except that it basically revolutionized cel-shaded graphics (something that plenty of games still don't mpull off as well as WindWaker)

Super Mario Galaxy: Oh yeah, this concept has totally been done to death, right? Oh wait, except that it won countless GOTY awards for amazing concepts, mechanics, level design, innovation, etc.

Zelda Phantom Hourglass: We totally have 10 games just like this on the DS, LOL. Oh wait, except that it was the first game to even THINK that something like cel-shading stylistic graphics were possible on the DS hardware, not to mention the first 3D handheld Zelda, not to mention the first Touch Screen Zelda, not to mention the first Online-Play Zelda

----

Essentially, the only exception to saying that these franchises are stagnantly continuing the same track would be if you considered Super Mario Galaxy 2 and Zelda: Spirit Tracks the only Zelda/Mario game released in the past 10 years. Because those are the only iterations that took a successful game/engine and did a re-do. Which hardly lasted that long, because now Nintendo are back on track with Zelda: Skyward Sword (which is meant to change the Zelda formula completely, plus 1:1 sword mechanics), and the next Mario edition which will change things up again.

No, I wasn't saying those were the same. Windwaker was okay, but the rest kinda seemed like the people making the games were out of ideas and just threw crap in there.

And I wouldnt know about phantom hourglass, i havent played that one.

 

[Vayne Mechanics]

companies trying to make money? HOW ABSURD! might as well dissolve nintendo, capcom and square enix because they're just trying to make a profit! O: omg

 

[KNightof5orrow]

I see I really am alone in actually liking Final Fantasy XIII as a decent enough game (especially combat wise). Hopefully its sequel touches up on its defects.

I loved this game too. Your not alone man!

 

[Taylor]

Okay, so you cite PS2/Xbox/GCN era as when the series started being the same thing over and over again. Which is where I'm gonna go ahead and mention that you're wrong.

Super Mario Sunshine: Totally same game, rite? Oh wait, except that it pretty much changed everything outside of the concept of collecting stars

Windwaker: totally the same as always, right? Oh wait, except that it basically revolutionized cel-shaded graphics (something that plenty of games still don't mpull off as well as WindWaker)

Super Mario Galaxy: Oh yeah, this concept has totally been done to death, right? Oh wait, except that it won countless GOTY awards for amazing concepts, mechanics, level design, innovation, etc.

Zelda Phantom Hourglass: We totally have 10 games just like this on the DS, LOL. Oh wait, except that it was the first game to even THINK that something like cel-shading stylistic graphics were possible on the DS hardware, not to mention the first 3D handheld Zelda, not to mention the first Touch Screen Zelda, not to mention the first Online-Play Zelda

----

Essentially, the only exception to saying that these franchises are stagnantly continuing the same track would be if you considered Super Mario Galaxy 2 and Zelda: Spirit Tracks the only Zelda/Mario game released in the past 10 years. Because those are the only iterations that took a successful game/engine and did a re-do. Which hardly lasted that long, because now Nintendo are back on track with Zelda: Skyward Sword (which is meant to change the Zelda formula completely, plus 1:1 sword mechanics), and the next Mario edition which will change things up again.

I don't disagree, but I also don't think that most of the games you listed necessarily strayed too far from the path that the series has set up. There hasn't been anything revolutionary, and I think that's his point. I could be wrong.

But if its just in terms of the series themselves, then you're 100% right.

 

[Silverslide]

Do you expect them to abandon the series if it brings in decent cash? I think you all expect too much from developers, doing it for the 'passion' is a nice concept that we don't see from successful and popular developers, and that is an inconvenient truth. And don't expect them to go anywhere since little kids will see "MARIOOOOOO" and auto buy the game, regardless if it is good or not. If you have a problem with it you should probably just not buy them. But usually, the games are decent enough to where it isn't a problem. Even though I think FF isn't what it used to be the games are, and hopefully will continue to be, enjoyable. Ken's post puts it best imo

companies trying to make money? HOW ABSURD! might as well dissolve nintendo, capcom and square enix because they're just trying to make a profit! O: omg

 

[Ip Man]

I loved the originals of Zelda and Mario, but once ps2, Gamecube, xbox, ect came out, it seems like they're only continuing series like these because they want to make more money. Not because they have ideas, which, most of the time, they obviously dont. It just makes me kinda sad, cause its making the video game industry that much more crappier.

What do you guys think?

Uh, ok, give an example of a Mario/Zelda sequel that's made the game industry crappier.