On Remakes and Nostalgia

[DrDeath3191]

A snip of Biblical proportions

The reason that those imitators failed and the others succeeded is because the imitators were inferior. Sonic the Hedgehog is eternal, Bubsy the Cat is not. Mortal Kombat (1) is eternal, Kasumi Ninja is not. None of the games mentioned have much along the lines of a story. However, two are still adamantly played to this day. Because they are good games. Games which stand the test of time to be part of our gaming nexus. Not all games remain this way: newer Mortal Kombat and Sonic games have fallen by the wayside, but that does not change the fact that the originals were and are great games.
All games inherently have a 'why'. Why do I want to kick this guy's ass? Because I want to win. Why am I shooting asteroids in space? Because I want the high score. This is what seperates games from other forms of art: we don't need a motivation beyond winning. Pacman didn't need a huge narative to be one of the most commonly played games ever. Nor did Pong or Asteroids. They did what all devs should focus on: make the game fun. You can do this with or without the presence of a story, making the story nothing more than a frill. Story-telling in games can be great (it usually isn't, but it can be) but the game has to be fun before you actually care. To take your Mass Effect and Bioshock examples from eariler, yes they had good stories. But they were also good games. They were actually fun to play. That's why I played through them multiple times: they were fun.

 

[SAMAS]

You know how you introduce classic Mario to a new audience? You make them play classic Mario!

It's the 4-player co-op that makes it an unique new experience (as in, one that cannot be had with an older mario title)

I'd like to add something to this.

Not that I think it's a big game-changing experience. It's not. That wasn't the point of this game. New Super Mario Bros Wii is basically taking New Super Mario Bros for the DS with sharper graphics, new stages and powerups, and four-player simultaneous action. It has never claimed to be any more, or any less.

And that is the one thing Yahtzee has failed to grasp here. He's judging the game as if it were supposed to be the followup to Super Mario Galaxy. It's not. It's the equivalent to Super Mario Land 2: 6 Golden Coins.

 

[ArabianShark]

Belano beat me to it. Counterstrike would be the epithome of a story-less, gameplay based game and it still has been enjoying widespread success for a decade.

 

[Gindil]

Actually, you have your analogy the other way around. Games are meant to be played, hence why games without stories can be great (ie Tetris, Pokemon, Mario, etc.) and those with great stories can absolutely blow (Yakuza, Final Fantasy 12, and others. I haven't played many of these games due to crappy reviews) due to having shitty gameplay. Games, unlike movies, are not required to be a narrative medium. We don't need strong characters to be engaged in a videogame. We need strong gameplay and level design. Just like movies require a story to be engaging and not necessarily special effects.

I'm at odds on the need for a strong character. Mario is strong because of his versatility. He's done everything including whoring himself out as a doctor. We can imagine him as whatever Nintendo needs him to be. But if what you're saying is true, we wouldn't have many RPGs that tell compelling stories with decent gameplay such as Disgaea or Parasite Eve.

So, in answer to Michael B's question, "what would I do with Mario," I would leave Mario exactly where we left him: doing aeroplane impressions somewhere out in deep space. And hope he can't find the way back.

OMG YES! I thought I was the only one who believed Mario needed to take some time out of the spotlight and allow other characters to push up to the front. After Super Mario Galaxy, I believe they should have just retired Mario for a while. Tell the world "Look, gimme a break. Bowser's on vacation and so am I" then let Luigi pick up a game or two with Waluigi.

It's not that I hate Mario, but when has Nintendo focused on other characters or *gasp* creating a new one out of all of the ones that they have? Where's Donkey Kong been hiding nowadays? I'm not asking for much, just to be able to see some progress in what's done with their IP.

 

[DrDeath3191]

Actually, you have your analogy the other way around. Games are meant to be played, hence why games without stories can be great (ie Tetris, Pokemon, Mario, etc.) and those with great stories can absolutely blow (Yakuza, Final Fantasy 12, and others. I haven't played many of these games due to crappy reviews) due to having shitty gameplay. Games, unlike movies, are not required to be a narrative medium. We don't need strong characters to be engaged in a videogame. We need strong gameplay and level design. Just like movies require a story to be engaging and not necessarily special effects.

I'm at odds on the need for a strong character. Mario is strong because of his versatility. He's done everything including whoring himself out as a doctor. We can imagine him as whatever Nintendo needs him to be. But if what you're saying is true, we wouldn't have many RPGs that tell compelling stories with decent gameplay such as Disgaea or Parasite Eve.

So, in answer to Michael B's question, "what would I do with Mario," I would leave Mario exactly where we left him: doing aeroplane impressions somewhere out in deep space. And hope he can't find the way back.

OMG YES! I thought I was the only one who believed Mario needed to take some time out of the spotlight and allow other characters to push up to the front. After Super Mario Galaxy, I believe they should have just retired Mario for a while. Tell the world "Look, gimme a break. Bowser's on vacation and so am I" then let Luigi pick up a game or two with Waluigi.

It's not that I hate Mario, but when has Nintendo focused on other characters or *gasp* creating a new one out of all of the ones that they have? Where's Donkey Kong been hiding nowadays? I'm not asking for much, just to be able to see some progress in what's done with their IP.

The reason Mario is versatile is because nothing has truly been set in stone about the charcter besides the fact that he saves the Princess. I have no problem with this. With regards to RPGs, stories are nice, but in the end not necessary.

And I take it you refuse to count Brain Age, Wii Sports, and Endless Ocean under new Nintendo IPs?

 

[Spacelord]

He makes a good point about nostalgia being an increasingly bigger attraction since the internet. On the other hand: the notion of nostalgia is of all ages... especially later in life.

Maybe we're just getting old?

 

[S-Unleashed]

Yeah go die.

 

[Cocamaster]

It supports both actually You just want to call it a different word saying "setting" instead of "story". What do you think gives you said goals? Would a game be very much fun if you do what you have to do for no other reason that the dev said so? No! You need something more to hold the game together.

Bollocks.

No story holds Tetris together; you form lines to make them disappear. The game plainly says that is your goal without further ado and, you know what? It's fun, challenging and timeless. So is Chess.

So there goes your argument:

A game where there is a goal without a story can be fun.
A game does NOT need a story to have goals. And...
A game's developer can define said goals without compromising the fun of the game's design.

And a "Story" has a flow and a narrative that moves forward. A setting is static, unchanged and unaffected by your actions. You can play all 50 levels of Pacman and the setting won't change; no story has been told, no narrative advanced.

Stories and settings may enhance the experience, but they are not required, let alone equally important to gameplay.

So there: gameplay = required; story = not required.

Those games have SETTINGS, not STORIES. Arkanoid is a Breakout clone with a "story", and that's not even the reason why it's better. Most people don't even know that Arkanoid even HAS a story; that's how pointless it is in that game.

 

[Cocamaster]

You can't try to compare board games and video games, the gap is too wide there. Sure they can be fun, but its usually because of the people you play with. Try playing monopoly by yourself. Still fun? No, because you lose out on what makes them fun.

I found this comment to be very ironic, considering the extreme popularity of online deathmatch games which, traditionally, feature no story or narrative whatsoever. Fighting games are the same when it comes to Vs matches. The story becomes irrelevant.

Videogames have a lot more in common to board games than to movies.

Seriously, does anyone honestly believe people bought Modern Warfare 2 for its story?

 

[VampireCat]

Super Mario Bros is the best selling game of all time. Yes, ever, in the history of all videogames. Go ahead, look it up.

Since you challenged:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games

# Wii Sports (50.54 million)
# Super Mario Bros. (40.23 million)


Both had the benefit of being bundled with the consoles of course.

It's no coincidence either that all of the top 12 selling games of all time are first-party Nintendo titles.

I have too many games on my plate already right now, but I'll get NSMBW eventually - likely after the price goes down.

As for story, one of the things I've always liked about simpler games is that you're free to project your own story and motivation on to the game. That's very often more compelling than what the designers spoon-feed you.

 

[Gindil]

The reason Mario is versatile is because nothing has truly been set in stone about the character besides the fact that he saves the Princess. I have no problem with this. With regards to RPGs, stories are nice, but in the end not necessary.

And I take it you refuse to count Brain Age, Wii Sports, and Endless Ocean under new Nintendo IPs?

Isn't it the story that keeps most people wanting to fight the Big Bad in the end? I'm pretty sure you don't slog through RPGs because of some need for open exploration. Rather, they're for getting enough experience to tell a story in a medium much closer than a movie or a book could do.

I find all of those odd choices in looking at Nintendo's IPs. Brain Age is Sudoku on steroids, Wii Sports is fairly similar to the old school Track and Field on Nintendo, and Endless Ocean I didn't hear about until your post. Granted, they may be "new" IPs. But I was looking more in the direction of taking an established character such as Donkey Kong and expanding on his mythos. For example, why not have a game where he and Bowser are fighting to kidnap the Princess? Better yet, use the other Kongs and expand on that.

Another option is to create a few new characters, which they did with Wario and Waluigi. There are a lot of options in a large company such as Nintendo. But as I see it, and Yahtzee has correctly surmised, they are averse to risk. Hence why we have Mario's regression in his newest game.

 

[DrDeath3191]

The reason Mario is versatile is because nothing has truly been set in stone about the character besides the fact that he saves the Princess. I have no problem with this. With regards to RPGs, stories are nice, but in the end not necessary.

And I take it you refuse to count Brain Age, Wii Sports, and Endless Ocean under new Nintendo IPs?

Isn't it the story that keeps most people wanting to fight the Big Bad in the end? I'm pretty sure you don't slog through RPGs because of some need for open exploration. Rather, they're for getting enough experience to tell a story in a medium much closer than a movie or a book could do.

I find all of those odd choices in looking at Nintendo's IPs. Brain Age is Sudoku on steroids, Wii Sports is fairly similar to the old school Track and Field on Nintendo, and Endless Ocean I didn't hear about until your post. Granted, they may be "new" IPs. But I was looking more in the direction of taking an established character such as Donkey Kong and expanding on his mythos. For example, why not have a game where he and Bowser are fighting to kidnap the Princess? Better yet, use the other Kongs and expand on that.

Another option is to create a few new characters, which they did with Wario and Waluigi. There are a lot of options in a large company such as Nintendo. But as I see it, and Yahtzee has correctly surmised, they are averse to risk. Hence why we have Mario's regression in his newest game.

It really shouldn't be your motivation. If the game itself cannot hold your interest enough for you to advance, the game fails. The story in RPGs is to compensate for gameplay that is less than stellar. As I said earlier, RPGs minus the story become a huge math equation. But even in these instances a minimalist plot can be found and greatly appreciated: see Pokemon and the Mario RPGs.

Despite the fact you consider them odd, that does not revoke them of their status as Nintendo IPs; and quite popular ones at that. Regarding the whole 'expansion of the mythos' thing: there really isn't much to stretch out. [sub]Besides, DK has no interest in the Princess: he wants Pauline.[/sub]

Nintendo has created new characters: the Miis. While they may not be deep in any sense of the word, they still have a sense of personality. That and the majority of their games are actually fun.

[sub]Incidentally, if you want a Mario game where DK is the villain, you might want to check out the March of the Minis games, one of which should be appearing (if it hasn't already appeared) on the DSi downloadable service. You can also check out the GCN offering, which is actually a damned fine game if I recall correctly.[/sub]

 

[Pimppeter2]

Damn, now I too am hungry

 

[K_Dub]

Yahtzee makes a valid point in this article. Many gamers worship Mario as if he were a god. But my question is "Why?" Why is it that people worship Mario as if he were the creator of the wheel in a prehistoric society (New game idea for next Mario game)? What is so appealing about Mario that people will buy remakes of the same game several times? I could understand parents buying the games for their children, but what about the consumers that know who Mario is, and own all of his games? It really confounds me.

 

[lacktheknack]

I guess Yahtzee can get away with religious comments like that simply because nobody dares question him. Or because he is in fact, God.

No, he gets away with it because people just let him. I just bawl crocodile tears all over my keyboard and forget it.

Thanks for reminding me.

 

[Gindil]

The reason Mario is versatile is because nothing has truly been set in stone about the character besides the fact that he saves the Princess. I have no problem with this. With regards to RPGs, stories are nice, but in the end not necessary.

And I take it you refuse to count Brain Age, Wii Sports, and Endless Ocean under new Nintendo IPs?

Isn't it the story that keeps most people wanting to fight the Big Bad in the end? I'm pretty sure you don't slog through RPGs because of some need for open exploration. Rather, they're for getting enough experience to tell a story in a medium much closer than a movie or a book could do.

I find all of those odd choices in looking at Nintendo's IPs. Brain Age is Sudoku on steroids, Wii Sports is fairly similar to the old school Track and Field on Nintendo, and Endless Ocean I didn't hear about until your post. Granted, they may be "new" IPs. But I was looking more in the direction of taking an established character such as Donkey Kong and expanding on his mythos. For example, why not have a game where he and Bowser are fighting to kidnap the Princess? Better yet, use the other Kongs and expand on that.

Another option is to create a few new characters, which they did with Wario and Waluigi. There are a lot of options in a large company such as Nintendo. But as I see it, and Yahtzee has correctly surmised, they are averse to risk. Hence why we have Mario's regression in his newest game.

It really shouldn't be your motivation. If the game itself cannot hold your interest enough for you to advance, the game fails. The story in RPGs is to compensate for gameplay that is less than stellar. As I said earlier, RPGs minus the story become a huge math equation. But even in these instances a minimalist plot can be found and greatly appreciated: see Pokemon and the Mario RPGs.

Despite the fact you consider them odd, that does not revoke them of their status as Nintendo IPs; and quite popular ones at that. Regarding the whole 'expansion of the mythos' thing: there really isn't much to stretch out. [sub]Besides, DK has no interest in the Princess: he wants Pauline.[/sub]

Nintendo has created new characters: the Miis. While they may not be deep in any sense of the word, they still have a sense of personality. That and the majority of their games are actually fun.

[sub]Incidentally, if you want a Mario game where DK is the villain, you might want to check out the March of the Minis games, one of which should be appearing (if it hasn't already appeared) on the DSi downloadable service. You can also check out the GCN offering, which is actually a damned fine game if I recall correctly.[/sub]

I never revoked them as IPs. I gave you that point. I know that both of us are stretching these out a little far in regards to the minimalist approach: putting a game down for the genre it represents. I understand that gameplay is one part of the equation. I do like a good story, which fills in another part of said equation. It's just that similar to how Yahtzee describes L4D2 as a sandwich, it gives a game a lot more filling when there's a little more to digest.

I don't think Miis necessarily count however. They're more player avatars than something that Nintendo is creating. It's almost as if saying I made the race in Dragon Age without filling any background history. It's there for me to interpret.

Speaking of which, where HAS Pauline gone off to? It'd be great if she would come back.

I thought March of the Minis was on the GBA or DS?

Yahtzee makes a valid point in this article. Many gamers worship Mario as if he were a god. But my question is "Why?" Why is it that people worship Mario as if he were the creator of the wheel in a prehistoric society (New game idea for next Mario game)? What is so appealing about Mario that people will buy remakes of the same game several times? I could understand parents buying the games for their children, but what about the consumers that know who Mario is, and own all of his games? It really confounds me.

Your question answered [http://screwattack.com/blogs/DestinRLs-blog/The-Game-OverThinker-Continuum]. Yes, it is pretty valid. Take what you can but it fairly explains your question.

 

[DrDeath3191]

The reason Mario is versatile is because nothing has truly been set in stone about the character besides the fact that he saves the Princess. I have no problem with this. With regards to RPGs, stories are nice, but in the end not necessary.

And I take it you refuse to count Brain Age, Wii Sports, and Endless Ocean under new Nintendo IPs?

Isn't it the story that keeps most people wanting to fight the Big Bad in the end? I'm pretty sure you don't slog through RPGs because of some need for open exploration. Rather, they're for getting enough experience to tell a story in a medium much closer than a movie or a book could do.

I find all of those odd choices in looking at Nintendo's IPs. Brain Age is Sudoku on steroids, Wii Sports is fairly similar to the old school Track and Field on Nintendo, and Endless Ocean I didn't hear about until your post. Granted, they may be "new" IPs. But I was looking more in the direction of taking an established character such as Donkey Kong and expanding on his mythos. For example, why not have a game where he and Bowser are fighting to kidnap the Princess? Better yet, use the other Kongs and expand on that.

Another option is to create a few new characters, which they did with Wario and Waluigi. There are a lot of options in a large company such as Nintendo. But as I see it, and Yahtzee has correctly surmised, they are averse to risk. Hence why we have Mario's regression in his newest game.

It really shouldn't be your motivation. If the game itself cannot hold your interest enough for you to advance, the game fails. The story in RPGs is to compensate for gameplay that is less than stellar. As I said earlier, RPGs minus the story become a huge math equation. But even in these instances a minimalist plot can be found and greatly appreciated: see Pokemon and the Mario RPGs.

Despite the fact you consider them odd, that does not revoke them of their status as Nintendo IPs; and quite popular ones at that. Regarding the whole 'expansion of the mythos' thing: there really isn't much to stretch out. [sub]Besides, DK has no interest in the Princess: he wants Pauline.[/sub]

Nintendo has created new characters: the Miis. While they may not be deep in any sense of the word, they still have a sense of personality. That and the majority of their games are actually fun.

[sub]Incidentally, if you want a Mario game where DK is the villain, you might want to check out the March of the Minis games, one of which should be appearing (if it hasn't already appeared) on the DSi downloadable service. You can also check out the GCN offering, which is actually a damned fine game if I recall correctly.[/sub]

I never revoked them as IPs. I gave you that point. I know that both of us are stretching these out a little far in regards to the minimalist approach: putting a game down for the genre it represents. I understand that gameplay is one part of the equation. I do like a good story, which fills in another part of said equation. It's just that similar to how Yahtzee describes L4D2 as a sandwich, it gives a game a lot more filling when there's a little more to digest.

I don't think Miis necessarily count however. They're more player avatars than something that Nintendo is creating. It's almost as if saying I made the race in Dragon Age without filling any background history. It's there for me to interpret.

Speaking of which, where HAS Pauline gone off to? It'd be great if she would come back.

I thought March of the Minis was on the GBA or DS?

While stories are nice, I sill think they should have nowhere near the level of attention that gameplay does. Yahtzee suggesting an equal focus is a foolish way to design games, and in the end I think a volatile one.

I'm not certain about that argument about Miis not being characters. Nintendo technically made all Miis possible by giving us the tools to do so. To many, the Miis are becoming the face of the console.

Pauline is in every version of March and the Minis as Mario's co-CEO of a toy company. And there was a GCN version as well to my recollection.

 

[psychic psycho]

This quote from the article kind of bothers me.

Story is and remains equally as important as gameplay. Left 4 Dead never really had a story - it had a setting, and strong characters, but it didn't have a plot. Nothing wrong with that, there are plenty of games that get by on pure gameplay, but they don't have the lastability, and they'll never be anything more than a quick bit of fun.

... Left 4 Dead is a piece of toast, and that's fine. But Left 4 Dead 2 is just another piece of toast from a different loaf of bread. With a sprig of parsley.

I don't know if anyone has mentioned this yet but the L4D series definitely has a storyline. The games seem to have a pretty simple plot, however there is a ton of back story. It's told similarly to the way the Half-Life games are told; through the environment and through conversations, not cutscenes. In a way L4D's story does give it some replay value. You'll notice things you didn't see in your first play through such as, graffiti messages in more hidden areas, and characters comments on certain areas. One thing I found that was particularly interesting is that in one level there are piles of dead bodies of people who are NOT infected. Through careful examination you can learn more about the infected, CEDA, the military, and the survivors.

I think the storytelling L4D is fantastic. If I were in a zombie apocalypse no would tell me what was going on through cutscenes. It's a multiplayer game and it's meant to be played many times, so cutscenes would be annoying. The story is there for the people that are interested and does not impede the gameplay at all.

Imagine a grilled sandwich. The gameplay is the bread and the story is the filling. Separate the two elements and they're both still fine to eat alone, they're just not as good as they are together.

I agree that a story is important and can greatly enhance a game, but what if the story just stinks? I don't think games should try to attempt a storyline if they can't pull it off. A piece of toast is much tastier than a sandwich with crap smeared all over it. Just imagine having to be forced to watch the storybook segments in Mario Galaxy. A good story line can improve a game but a bad one can hurt it as well.