(Also, isn't it strange that Metroid is getting almost as much play as the other two, since it has never sold on the same level as those franchises (or many less notable franchises (that, admittedly, might not lend themselves to sequels))?)I'm definitely not one of those people who thinks that Nintendo keeps remaking the same game over and over again, just because they use the Mario character in so many games, and he has to save the princess, or whatever, but Nintendo has been focusing a HELL of a lot on mainline-ish entries in their "Big 3" series. At first, we thought they were just getting it out of the way, so they could focus on new (and second-tier) IPs, but now it seems that those franchises are being developed to the
exclusion of certain other 'traditional' titles.
Maybe that's a smart move, since 'gamers' still repeat the where's-the-next-Mario/Zelda/Metroid mantra. And don't get me wrong. They've been cranking out some phenomenal stuff in these serieseses. But I feel like Nintendo used to be a bit more courageous in bucking the expectations of fans and doing what they wanted to do. It seems like they've been playing it a bit safe, fiscally and developmentally speaking. Sticking with what works. There didn't even seem to be much thought to the art style of the new Zelda, which is kind of a shame. The old Nintendo only rarely reused assets from sequel to sequel. Iwata seems to have taken Nintendo in a more streamlined, efficient direction, but was there something lost in the transition? Are the crazy days of Super Paper Mario and Pac-Man Vs. and Roll-o-Rama behind them? Or is that just perception? I mean, the Zelda team always works on Zelda games, right? (Has that team been significantly expanded to handle the DS output?) Other M is being handled externally, and Retro has finally shifted onto something else (presumably). EAD Tokyo could certainly handle other properties, but does anyone really consider Galaxy 2 a waste of time? Still, it does seem that a large percentage of resources are being funneled into the Big 3.
I have more to say, but what do you guys think? Has Nintendo fragmented into an innovative, risky, expanded branch and a safe, reliable Mario/Zelda/Metroid factory, or is that too reductionist? Would you want them to branch out more?
Would you be willing to sacrifice Galaxy 2 for that exploration?
URL to share (right click and copy)