Compare a game like Super Mario Bros. to Super Mario World. The original SMB was a simple side-scroller with little in the way of flourish. Meanwhile, Super Mario World introduced multiple paths, secret exits, new power-ups, Yoshi, and other big changes. Super Mario World was not completely like Super Mario Bros.. It was also nowhere near alike to Super Mario 64, which was not similar to the gravity-based levels of Super Mario Galaxy, which was not like Super Mario 3D Land's structure, etc. The point is that each release felt fresh and innovative by introducing new gameplay elements or being a total departure from the previous game.
Nintendo is too focused on being self-referential-- building games closely following the foundation set by its past titles. It is trying to recapture its old glory. In this process, the games simply do not have the same "wow" factor or "I gotta buy a system for this" that past titles the company has released have done. There's too much of a reliance on older ideas and not the groundbreaking ones, such as Super Mario Galaxy's gravity mechanic, to pick a quick example randomly out of a hat. It's a "been there, done that" feeling in a lot of its games lately.
Nintendo gets a lot of flak for continuing to create sequels to its 20+ year-old franchises. However, most of the time each main entry in the series offers a unique gameplay hook that makes the series seem fresh again. Basically, if, let's say, Mario was not in a game called Super Mario 3D World and a new character was, it would be a totally different and new IP. Instead, Nintendo likes to put its well-known stable of recognizable characters into its games, even when they are quite different from each other, offering a type of gameplay mechanic not seen before.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/76f0e/76f0e6670ec0970a7038230d7d81b9fa7039d31c" alt=""
Now, there are new IPs that Nintendo puts out. Taking a look on its digital marketplaces will have one coming across a plethora of new IPs with new ideas. There's Pushmo, Sakura Samurai: Art of the Sword, Steel Diver, Ketzal's Corridors, Dillon's Rolling Western, among others. The Wii U even has the excellence of The Wonderful 101, developed by Platinum Games. However, even with these titles, Nintendo hardly allocates much effort in spreading the word of them. Instead, it pushes its main bread and butter franchises rather than successfully cultivating new fans with games that have new concepts to them. Thus, the risk isn't anywhere worth noting.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f969c/f969c1729d409b9ed0fa428ec22dddf6565b628d" alt=""
Consider the original Xbox, which launched with Halo: Combat Evolved. Microsoft published the title, and it gave the Xbox brand some ground to work with. The user base was thus made up of those who enjoyed FPS games, which just so happened to be becoming popular among console gamers. This resulted in third-parties finding success on the Xbox brand. This is not what Nintendo has done. It has not created the types of titles that built a user base that third-parties could sell games to.
It's heartbreaking to see that even with Nintendo putting out software of excellent quality, sales of the Wii U are pitiful. The quality of games doesn't seem to matter when it concerns whether the Wii U succeeds or fails. I would personally love to see new franchises that can rival the scope of the next Mario or Zelda in budget and marketing. Even the return of series that have been on hiatus for years or decades would be something exciting instead of the games that step on all too familiar ground. It's clear that the Wii U will be known as a sales failure and a distant third place in this generation. I can only hope that Nintendo and its management learn the right lessons from this failure and works hard to ensure that its next console attempt is a success.
No comments:
Post a Comment