Support NeoGAF

[jgminto]

Did that have anything to do with his point though? He was saying that the general public are more than welcoming of full-priced 2D platformers.

I don't think the comparison was warranted, but neither was the "SMB IS BEST EVAR" post.

Yeah I'm just messing around. There both great games that are extremely different. Other than the use of SMB they don't really have much in common.

 

[The_Darkest_Red]

Er, you might want to take into consideration that stages in that game are fundamentally built to be cleared in 5-20 seconds.

So...?

 

[JasoNsider]

New Super Mario Bros. Wii and Donkey Kong Country Returns are probably my number 2 and 3 games of this generation. They can take their dry comments and walk. Incredible game design and a focus on fun will trump any of that nonsense.

Why do we make a thread each time IGN makes a new editorial?

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

I think the problem is not necessarily the new Mario games but rather the lack of new "hardcore" friendly IP.

No offense, but bullshit. It's the same value argument repackaged to reflect the writers views of what should sell in the marketplace.

Essentially, Mario and DK games in their current incarnation are not "worth" 50/60 bucks to the writer. His definition of value has changed, which is fine. Problem is not everyone (clearly) follows the same definition of value.

 

[Chuckpebble]

Last 2D game I enjoyed was VVVVVV. I guess I haven't evolved since the SNES either.

 

[French]

Kind of true.

Nintendo is always milking the same franchises ( but hey, there are underwater sections in MK 3DS, incredible ! ) over and over again and isn't capable of creating some good new IPs.

 

[SonicMegaDrive]

Don't get me wrong, I love Mario, Donkey Kong and Kirby as much as the next guy, but it can't be denied that these games are selling gameplay that hasn't necessarily evolved since the NES and SNES eras, at five times the price of new and original games being released on PSN, Steam and XBLA. These titles don't have the added bonuses of HD graphics, online play, leaderboards, true 5.1 sound and the potential for DLC expansions.

Oh, no. What would I ever do without these things?

And yet, the games sell like gangbusters at a fifty dollar price point anyway. In fact, more people preferred to buy the latest 'unevolved' Mario game for fifty bones than the latest 'evolved' Mario game for the same price. By a lot.

Could it be that many different styles of games, even (oh no!)older ones, can actually coexist and share shelf space with more contemporary and more (ahem) 'evolved' games?

 

[DaSorcerer7]

Kind of true.

Nintendo is always milking the same franchise ( but hey, there are underwater sections in MK 3DS, incredible ! ) over and over again and isn't capable of creating some good new IPs.

Why am I not surprised.

 

[Hyuga]

IGN: "Mario and DK haven't evolved since the SNES"

I'm shocked that finally someone has the balls to admit it....

 

[K' Dash]

I don't know what's worst, the stupid article or the people agreeing with it.

 

[The_Darkest_Red]

I'm shocked that finally someone has the balls to admit it....

Right, because no one ever hates on Nintendo.

 

[orioto]

Eh? There are no HD Kirby games.

No but there are ambitious 2D kirby games with high production value in graphics.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Kind of true.

Nintendo is always milking the same franchises ( but hey, there are underwater sections in MK 3DS, incredible ! ) over and over again and isn't capable of creating some good new IPs.

The new IPs are there, I have no idea what you're talking about.

Nintendo created some of the best selling new IPs ever this generation. Wii Sports, Nintendogs and Brain Age.

 

[Dizzy]

Yeah but when you play one of these $60 2D platformers you can instantly tell that the quality is leagues ahead of the flavour of the month crap on XBLA.

 

[Kacho]

Bleh. I don't like the idea of DLC for my Nintendo games.

 

[DaSorcerer7]

The new IPs are there, I have no idea what you're talking about.

Nintendo created some of the best selling new IPs ever this generation. Wii Sports, Nintendogs and Brain Age.

Those don't count. /sarcasm

 

[TheLastCandle]

Right, because no one ever hates on Nintendo.

Seriously. People saying stuff like this isn't exactly an anomaly, especially at IGN.

Hell, I'm pretty sure it's still the focus of every IGN podcast, including Nintendo Voice Chat.

 

[M3d10n]

Fixed it for you.

But doesn't change the fact that Super Mario Galaxy exists. Nintendo has a completely separate Mario line for people who crave "more" than "old" 2D gaming.

 

[ThatObviousUser]

No but there are ambitious 2D kirby games with high production value in graphics.

And nothing else it seems, coming from some Epic Yarn complaints.

The Galaxy games and DKCR all have super high production values in artwork and graphics, too. And they have good gameplay to boot!

The NSMB series is lacking in this area but its look works very well for it.

 

[The_Darkest_Red]

Seriously. People saying stuff like this isn't exactly an anomaly, especially at IGN.

Hell, I'm pretty sure it's still the focus of every IGN podcast, including Nintendo Voice Chat.

Indeed. It's understandable that people have complaints with Nintendo, I have plenty myself, but there is a difference between having complaints and being constantly bitter at the company. The best example of this is the contrast between the podcast Radio Free Nintendo and IGN's own Nintendo Voice Chat. The RFN crew is quick to point out Nintendo's mistakes but they also appreciate that Nintendo is doing some things worth celebrating.

 

[Tricky I Shadow]

Zero to do with improving the gameplay that he complains about. Hilarious.

Awesome gif is awesome! Thread saved!

 

[Penguin]

Reminds me of this blog post from Rich this past weekend on whether IGN is too negative towards Nintendo:

Oh my. It's been a month since I've blogged. That's what I get for running to Los Angeles, San Diego and Annecy/Montpellier, France for three weeks straight. A bit disoriented and tired still - and it was weird to come home and realize I still, in fact, have a home.

While I was gone, some interesting things happened, all of which centered on Nintendo's dismal performance this year. To be honest, I saw this coming. Anyone should have. When a company isn't releasing games and systematically botches the opening months of a new system, there are bound to be repercussions. You can't simply sit around and let money come in when your current home console has clearly lived beyond its means and you're attempting to bridge generations.

Nintendo seemed to learn the wrong things from Wii and DS. This is likely another editorial entirely, but the key lessons the Wii and DS taught were that games matter to everyone, and that the right games can live far beyond the typical one-month lifespan. (Of course, Call of Duty has also proven that but anyway...) Nintendo seemed to think its evergreen titles would be... ever green. That's not true. Eventually, as the installed bases of Wii and DS saturate the market and age, the quantity of Mario Kart Wii or Wii Sports games being sold will naturally decrease. It's just going to happen. Yet Nintendo didn't seem aware of this, and as we move further and further into 2011, it's painfully clear the company really had no strategy to effectively maintain Wii's lifespan and transition between DS and 3DS. The company just acknowledged that it is "learning this lesson" as a result of its recent performance. That just hurts my brain. A company that has been in this business for over 30 years is learning that it needs a steady release of games in order to thrive. Um. Duh?

At any rate, what has been interesting is that Nintendo's dismal performance has lead to a lot of reporting about said dismal performance. That's a lot of news that is not only painful for the company to see, but painful for fans of the company. No one likes something they love to do poorly. What I've found interesting in all of this is how fans tend to view that reporting as "negative." As in IGN reporting Nintendo's failures means that IGN hates Nintendo. Outside of a couple less-than-cheery editorials, we've simply been bringing you information on what's going on. The editorials are meant to put that in a larger context.

I replied to someone on Twitter today that IGN doesn't make the news. I don't decide what Nintendo is doing. I don't determine how their actions play in the market. I don't determine how much money they make. So it's interesting to see some of the more die-hard Nintendo readers freak out that IGN is very negative.

I'm not actually freaking out or whining about readers' reactions. That happens all the time no matter what I write. There's a larger point to this blog. What interests me is where you draw the line about negativity. My job is to bring you news, and then to bring you context and opinion through editorials down the road. The 3DS is doing poorly. News! But why is it doing poorly and what do I think of that? Editorial! And you'll notice we haven't really been beating the "Nintendo is going to die" drum. We did some historical context, analyzed why the 3DS is in the shape it's in... even wrote a couple pieces about how the 3DS's future is looking brighter. We're trying to look at all sides and discuss the world of Nintendo. Honestly, my primary goal is to make sure you have interesting stuff to read. That's also key.

(And I don't know if you've noticed, but it's not like there's an abundance of killer games to cover right now. That's kind of the entire reason Nintendo is in this situation... I knew it was coming because I have almost nothing to write about!)

Anyway, I haven't been on here in a bit. Curious about your thoughts on what's been going on and what we've been writing about it. Are there angles you're still curious about?

http://www.ign.com/blogs/bullseye2/2011/08/05/negativity-nintendo/

 

[LightOfTruth]

I would love a new IP from Nintendo that appeals to me in the same way Metroid and Zelda appeal to me.

 

[walking fiend]

SMB is practically a glorified version of one of the most underrated platformers of all time, N and doesn't deserve this much credit anyway. But even disregarding this, saying that it has as much content as NSMB is not only factually totally wrong, but it is almost impossible for any small dev to top the content in any normal development time.

Replay value does not make up for lack of content, or vice versa.

 

[Shig]

So...?

Well, he was comparing breadth of content between Meat Boy and a Mario game. The stages in Meat Boy are extremely tiny and intended to be run in a few seconds, whereas Mario presents obstacle courses that take a good minute or two at least.

I know Meat Boy stages last much longer than those few seconds in practice, but it seems a little disingenuous to consider "time the player spent dying" part of the stage's base content.

 

[beril]

Ridiculous article

I guess according to them the genre is the only factor to determine price, because obviously the amount of content and production values have no importance at all. Well except for HD graphics and 5.1 sound of course because obviously this is much more expensive to produce than this because it's in HD.

 

[izakq]

Giving FOX news a run for their money.

Well, they are both under the News Corp. umbrella, so it's not that surprising.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Well, he was comparing breadth of content between Meat Boy and a Mario game. The stages in Meat Boy are extremely tiny and intended to be run in a few seconds, whereas Mario presents obstacle courses that take a good minute or two at least.

I know Meat Boy stages last much longer than those few seconds in practice, but it seems a little disingenuous to consider "time the player spent dying" part of the stage's base content.

1) Meat Boy also has literally hundreds of stages more than Mario not including user-created content.

2) Why wouldn't you count it? Mario is designed assuming you will rarely, but sometimes die. Meat Boy is designed assuming you will die frequently. The games have a variety of consequences as a result of this assumption; Meat Boy with the fast respawning, bite-sized stage puzzles, and the corpse replays at the end of the stage, Mario with being able to repeat a given obstacle, lives, 1ups, checkpoints, powerups, and UX stuff like playing a "you're dead" sound effect and doing a fade out/in or doing the flagpole thing. They both feel substantial as a result of their design decisions.

The PC retail release of Super Meat Boy actually has a few pages of design philosophy that really elucidates how they came about their balance of difficulty and low penalty for death and why they chose to do the corpse replays.

SMB is every bit as substantial a game as NSMBW.

 

[ScionOfTheRisingSun]

Hardly any game series or genre does any sort of significant evolving past the progenitor title.

The difference here is that all of Nintendo's properties such as Zelda, Mario and Metroid have 25 years+ worth of sequels behind them and yet they have somehow managed to keep things fresh. On the other hand the putrid ever changing favourites of today that people parrot praise for their "innovations" are stale by the time the second game rolls around.

Yeah, I know which camp my money is going to. The frivolity with which gamers today thrust their praise and shift alliances really is quite sickening sometimes, the internet really badly needs a huge injection of historical perspective.

 

[Derrick01]

They're 100% right for once. There really isn't a huge difference between Galaxy 1 and Mario 64, or NSMB with the 2D Marios, or the new Donkey Kong from the originals. That's why so many people complain about them using the same franchises in mostly the same games all the time and it's why I got tired of Nintendo.

 

[Wrekt]

I would have agreed if he pushed it to the N64 instead of the SNES.

I found SMG to be highly overrated and all of their franchises follow a formula a little too strictly, imo. But I guess Metroid: Other M was the first time they really broke the mold with one of their core franchies in a couple generations and we saw how that turned out.

 

[walking fiend]

1) Meat Boy also has literally hundreds of stages more than Mario not including user-created content.

2) Why wouldn't you count it? Mario is designed assuming you will rarely, but sometimes die. Meat Boy is designed assuming you will die frequently. The games have a variety of consequences as a result of this assumption; Meat Boy with the fast respawning, bite-sized stage puzzles, and the corpse replays at the end of the stage, Mario with being able to repeat a given obstacle, lives, 1ups, checkpoints, powerups, and UX stuff like playing a "you're dead" sound effect and doing a fade out/in or doing the flagpole thing.

SMB is every bit as substantial a game as NSMBW.

Content does not equal to replay value.

 

[_Alkaline_]

They're 100% right for once. There really isn't a huge difference between Galaxy 1 and Mario 64, or NSMB with the 2D Marios, or the new Donkey Kong from the originals.

How do you garner such a stance?

 

[The_Darkest_Red]

Content does not equal to replay value.

What? Do you know how long it would take to experience all of the content in SMB once, even if you are an abnormally skilled gamer?

 

[Dyno]

I don't even like Mario or platformers for the most part but just from watching some Mario Galaxy I could see that there was a lot going on for people who like that sort of thing. It's creative, nice looking, and has a lot of variety.

It also sells really well and is critically acclaimed, right? So these IGN fools don't even have a leg to stand on.

 

[Penguin]

I would have agreed if he pushed it to the N64 instead of the SNES.

I found SMG to be highly overrated and all of their franchises follow a formula a little too strictly, imo. But I guess Metroid: Other M was the first time they really broke the mold with one of their core franchies in a couple generations and we saw how that turned out.

Then what do you consider the Prime games?

Epic Yarn?

Jungle Beat?

 

[jgminto]

Content does not equal to replay value.

Which game are you talking about? I never replay Mario levels but have run through SMB levels a bunch. Someone could argue the exact opposite. Could you explain your point?

 

[_Alkaline_]

What? Do you know how long it would take to experience all of the content in SMB once, even if you are an abnormally skilled gamer?

He has a point though. If difficulty/dying is included when determining a game's content, Ghosts n Goblins is one of the biggest platformers ever made.

It doesn't really matter though. SMB is factually packed to the brim with content. Not sure why we're arguing this in the first place anyway.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Content does not equal to replay value.

I'm not sure if you're arguing that Super Meat Boy has content but not replay value, or replay value but not content, but it factually has both.

1) Content-wise, it's got about 300 stages, including the hidden warp zones, glitch levels, Dark World stages. Then you have a stage editor, custom users stages ("Internets" content packs on XBL version).

2) Replay value-wise, you can replay any level with 10 unique characters. You can replay to get the unlockables. You can replay to get the achievements on either platform--the Steam achievements have "Finish <x world> without dying" for each world which is really really amazing if you know the game. You can use the stage editor to edit stages. There are leaderboards and replays for sharing online and competing with friends.

I don't think anyone who played the game could doubt either of these aspects.

He has a point though. If difficulty/dying is included when determining a game's content, Ghosts n Goblins is one of the biggest platformers ever made.

Not really comparable anyway. GnG features a high degree of difficulty with a high penalty for dying. SMB features a high degree of difficulty with no penalty for dying. The design doc I mentioned above elucidates exactly how these scenarios differ in terms of user engagement, stress level, enjoyment level, and content, but the gist is that if you have no penalty for dying, mastery or deciphering the puzzle of the level becomes enjoyable rather than a grind and so how we conceive of our time as unique content is different than with something that is more punishing.

 

[Derrick01]

You might want to actually play those games before making those comments.

Cause clearly you haven't.

I have, and they're really not that different. I only played Galaxy 1 and not 2, but I feel safe staying with that comment regardless.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Then what do you consider the Prime games?

Epic Yarn?

Jungle Beat?

I was also going to add we had an on-foot collectathon platforming Starfox game, a cartoon shaded, low dungeon count Zelda, and Mario using a watergun as his main gameplay aspect last generation.

These last generations have been kind of wild with Nintendo trying new things with their games. Some success, some failures. But to deny they've changed many of their IPs genres and focus is just not true.

 

[_Alkaline_]

I have, and they're really not that different. I only played Galaxy 1 and not 2, but I feel safe staying with that comment regardless.

In the end, platformers will always be about running and jumping on obstacles.

But on a more intricate level, to suggest there's little advancement between Mario 64 > Galaxy, or DKC3 > DKCR is a pretty ridiculous stance to have.

I'm not meaning to be an ass btw. Which it probably sounded like in my previous post.

 

[Mdk7]

YEAH, sure.
GG as usual IGN.

 

[Stumpokapow]

I have, and they're really not that different. I only played Galaxy 1 and not 2, but I feel safe staying with that comment regardless.

There's a very huge difference between Galaxy 1 and Mario 64.

Mario 64 is an open world "platformer" (although traversal is key, precision platforming is rare--the game is probably about half-way between Galaxy and something like Ratchet and Clank which is more action adventure in terms of actual platforming) with primarily non-linear or semi-linear traversal open world stages that have multiple objectives.

Galaxy 1 is an extremely linear platformer through contained spaces where most of the challenge is specifically jumping-oriented. While stages have multiple objectives, they typically take place in partially or entirely segmented regions of the level that are inaccessible when pursuing the other stars.

Sunshine, the game released between these two, highlights the difference very clearly. Sunshine's main stages are very much like Mario 64's--actually, even moreso in this direction, but there are little hidden segments that play out like the M64 Bowser Levels or most of Galaxy. The path of innovation from M64 to Sunshine to Galaxy is very obvious and the differences pretty significant.

There are stages, particularly the Bowser stages, where Mario 64 uses the Galaxy model, and the introduction to Super Mario Galaxy takes place in a very Mario 64-esque level design, but otherwise they are very different.

(Naturally, they reuse many of the same enemies, Mario has many of the same moves, there is remixed music, etc.)

DKC and DKC:R are substantially more similar (or SMB->NSMB) While they use different mechanics, they are at least the same type of game. Still, I think there's enough innovation in terms of level design and mechanics that accusing the games of not innovating is pretty silly.

 

[walking fiend]

What? Do you know how long it would take to experience all of the content in SMB once, even if you are an abnormally skilled gamer?

I believe I may know what you are trying to base your argument on, so I will elaborate more.

I have played DOTA and WC3 for almost 10,000 hours, I didn't quit some years ago, it would have increased. I played and finished all Home World games campaigns in probably less than 50 hours. Does this mean DOTA+WC3 has 2000 times more content than HomeWorld series?

SMB is no different. It has a limited set of assets and contents, but its gameplay mechanisms enables it to use these limited content in a an almost infinite different stages; much like you may experience thousands of DOTA games in a single stage without any single of them being old.

But nevertheless, that is replay value provided by the same content and game mechanism.

 

[Entropia]

These titles don't have the added bonuses of HD graphics, online play, leaderboards, true 5.1 sound and the potential for DLC expansions.

Aside from HD Graphics and 5.1 sound - why would you really want those things? Those don't really have a place in platformers.

 

[AbsoluteZero]

If it ain't broke don't fix it.

 

[Stumpokapow]

I believe I may know what you are trying to base your argument on, so I will elaborate more.

I have played DOTA and WC3 for almost 10,000 hours, I didn't quit some years ago, it would have increased. I played and finished all Home World games campaigns in probably less than 50 hours. Does this mean DOTA+WC3 has 2000 times more content than HomeWorld series?

SMB is no different. It has a limited set of assets and contents, but its gameplay mechanisms enables it to use these limited content in a an almost infinite different stages; much like you may experience thousands of DOTA games in a single stage without any single of them being old.

But nevertheless, that is replay value provided by the same content and game mechanism.

Wait, what?

SMB has 300+ levels. The game would last you easily as long or longer than New Super Mario Bros (Wii) or any other retail platformer to complete the first time. In addition to all of that content, there is a ton of extra content in the level editor, custom levels, internets, etc. The base content, playing it exactly once, lasts as long or longer than a retail game.

In addition it's also highly replayable.

There are criticisms to be made of Super Meat Boy, but it being a "small" or "short" game is not one of them. I'm not saying it's the longest game ever made. I'm not saying you'll get as much replay time as you off Civilization or WoW. I'm saying, compared to platformers, which is what we're comparing here, it's more than sufficient.

 

[Foliorum Viridum]

Super Mario Galaxy 2 is as different to Super Mario Bros. as you can get.

How long til IGN are banned on GAF?

 

[The_Darkest_Red]

I believe I may know what you are trying to base your argument on, so I will elaborate more.

I have played DOTA and WC3 for almost 10,000 hours, I didn't quit some years ago, it would have increased. I played and finished all Home World games campaigns in probably less than 50 hours. Does this mean DOTA+WC3 has 2000 times more content than HomeWorld series?

SMB is no different. It has a limited set of assets and contents, but its gameplay mechanisms enables it to use these limited content in a an almost infinite different stages; much like you may experience thousands of DOTA games in a single stage without any single of them being old.

But nevertheless, that is replay value provided by the same content and game mechanism.

What game doesn't have a "limited set of assets and contents"? That restriction certainly applies to 2D Mario games, you can essentially boil every one of them down to a few major themes.

In DOTA and WC3 you are playing through the same content over and over again, and the differences come from the users themselves because the experience is a multiplayer game. We're not talking about that with SMB, we're talking about experiencing all of the stages one time each. If two levels feature the same mechanisms and traps in completely different arrangements it's not fair to say, "oh, this level is just replay value because it's basically the same as the other level." If that were the case than any 2D Mario game could be reduced to a template of 5 levels or less. Regardless, SMB constantly introduces new mechanisms throughout the entirety of the game, and the rate at which this new material is introduced is easily equal to almost any other 2D platformer.

The only way the DOTA and WC3 argument would work in this case is if we were talking about literally playing the same levels in SMB over and over again. If you think that is a legitimate description of the game then I can only say I doubt that you have played it substantially.