Before you read this you might want to head over and read
Mario is unmarketable by Aaron Linde. It's an awesome article and gave me the inspiration to write this one. The idea of mascots these days is getting more and more pathetic. The emergence of recent titles like Sonic the Hedgehog on the XBOX 360 and PS3 just proved how over the era of franchise mascots selling games really is. The problem is when you look at a game like Super Mario Galaxy and realize that Shigeru Miyamoto, the creator of Mario. Has some serious game designing chops and yet again he has turned the platforming industry on it's ear and made developers look again at the little plumber for ways to improve their own games.
Sadly though, Super Mario Galaxy has no real requirement of said plumber at all. The game could easily have worked using Luigi or even a new made up character. One reviewer said that it being Mario made the game better. I disagree. I think it just makes the game more pat. Making it Mario, made people instantly compare it to all the other Mario games. Which is exactly what happens with all of Nintendo's franchise mascot games.
How many years have there been Sonic, Mario, and Zelda games. Zelda of course, being the worst example of a worn out mascot. Because not only does Link do the same story types over and over we aren't even introduced to brand new franchise characters in these reruns. Once I would like to see a true sequel for Link where he starts with all his weapons or even better where Link has completely different weapons. Like an uzi... Just kidding...
Critics have said that this industry is moving away from sequels and going more towards remakes of old games so that these classics can be brought into a new era. Why not? After all, Nintendo has been doing it for years with their franchises. Few Nintendo franchises get new games that are wholly and completely different. How many times have we played the original Legend of Zelda or the Super Mario Bros?
There certainly seems to be an audience for these games. But it has all ways been about the characters. "Oh I love Zelda and Mario." A Nintendo Fan might exclaim upon hearing of a new title coming out featuring one or the other. Yes, the impact of these characters has been historically very important to selling games. The problem is that recycling old titles into new ones, isn't the same thing as making sequels. Sequels try to be better than the originals. Remakes are the originals, just with better graphics...
These days however, with the ever decreasing list of franchise characters and the people who loved them growing up. It's hard to imagine a new Mario or Zelda game making an impact on a whatever console follows the Wii. Certainly on the Wii, any quality titles will be latched on to whether they feature a franchise character or not. As all the games on the Wii are aimed widely at a younger audience or a much broader audience than those games that have come out recently. Everything seems to work with varying degrees of success. But the future can be a hard master or please. Just look at Lara Croft...
In a time not too long ago. A pixelated busty version of Indiana Jones could do no wrong. She explored every kind of tomb imaginable over four different games and even a movie or two. Yes, this was the most powerful franchise in video game history. She epitomized everything the modern game industry wanted to be seen as. Cutting edge, sexy, and action oriented. But it didn't last very long... By the time the PS2 reached customers in 2001 most people were more than a little over Tomb Raider.
Even with new editions like Tomb Raider Legend, last year. And Tomb Raider Anniversary Edition this year; the big draw of Lara Croft seems to have worn off. Which is too bad considering Legend was arguably the best Tomb Raider game ever. Angeline Jolie probably doesn't want to hear this as shooting begins on the next Tomb Raider movie in around 3-6 months. But it's true...
The world of iconic characters is beginning to dry up like a shallow river bed. I have to apologize to Marcus Fenix and Master Chief. Sorry, guys by 2010 nobody will even remember your names. As hard as developers are trying to bring their characters to the fore and sell them like it was 1999. It's just not working in most cases.
With titles like Mario and Sonic at the Olympics most gamers just shake their heads and ask, "Why?" But Nintendo takes the popularity of games like Super Mario Galaxy and Super Smash Brothers Brawl as signs that they can still use their characters to financial advantage. But is Mario selling Galaxy? Or is it super hype that has been going on for all most a year with the following statements in it: best graphics on the Wii, gameplay like that from Super Mario 64 but with a new twist, and plenty of journalists giving this game scores so high that it makes the rest of the Nintendo Wii's titles look like bargain bin crap.
No, I think that if this was Super Luigi Galaxy it would be selling just as well. I think that with the kind of buzz that this game has generated it really doesn't matter who the main character is. I have to say here that this is probably the best Mario game I've ever played and certainly the best platformer.
Having said that however, Insomniac's Ratchet and Clank Future Tools of Destruction also came out this year. The game is like a Pixar movie on crack and is probably the most fun I've ever had with the series. Was it Ratchet and Clank with their world and cast of characters that made this game great? Not really, it was the incredible commitment on the part of the best Sony developer out there to make a quality title. If Mr. Miyamoto could be allowed to make something else, perhaps everyone would see that the same holds true for Nintendo. But Japanese development being what it is, it's hard to imagine that ever happening.
So is this some sort of prophetic report on the new trend in the video game industry? Certainly not, it is more to show that these mascots are silly and that the video game industry is holding to them not to keep quality up or have iconic characters. It's rather to try and insure some kind of revenue stream. If the games are really as good as they hope they are; then they don't need their mascot crutch. And if they aren't, well then a hollow, "It'ssss a me... Mario!" Won't sell you too many more copies anyway. With the ever increasing price of creating games these kinds of tactics seem to be the fall back for publishers and developers in need of revenue. But just like reality programming on television, crap only plays so long until the publics starts to react. Unfortunately with video games, it takes a LONG TIME to change direction, so you folks might want to start doing that now. Before it's too late...
Oh by the way. Just so that none of you hardcore XBOX fans out there won't feel like your sacred cow is safe. Judging by the way the story ended and the fact that Bungie separated itself from Microsoft. Master Chief is next on the chopping block. The fight's finished, the mascots lost. Someone please tell the developers...
