I just read through the second part of the Iwata Asks about SM3DLand, and you do seem to be correct about the reason for the 3D Mario series being pushed so hard. Here’s a very insightful passage:
Miyamoto: That’s right. I’m so happy about the new things we came up with that I can barely stand it. It was like I fed on that as we worked.
Iwata: Doesn’t hearing that remind you of when the two of you made Super Mario 64 and other games together?
Koizumi: Yes, it does. When it comes to new things, there’s no right answer because no one has done those things before. So the dilemma arises of whatever you do looking right. But Miyamoto-san decides what is right, so I relied on him on decision-making.
And another:
Koizumi: I’ve been involved since Super Mario 64…so it has been 15 years. Like other coworkers this time, I was young back then, but it was fun coming to work every day. It was the experience rather than the games themselves that was fun.
And another:
Miyamoto: Don’t let anyone fool you who says 3D Super Mario is difficult. If you play it for yourself, a more fun future awaits—and for us as well! (laughs)
Everyone: (laughs)
They also say they want to blend the 2D and 3D Mario games together into one series, and you can guess which will win out.
Iwata: It is a mysterious game. Until now, we’ve talked about 2D Super Mario and 3D Super Mario as if they are separate, but Super Mario 3D Land may put an end to that. Both 2D and 3D Super Mario came about as the result of making games while thinking, “I wonder if we could make something cool by doing something athletic in that kind of world.” I hope this game removes the borders in our brains between 2D and 3D Super Mario. It would be funny if in the future archeologists say, “You know, they used to talk about the two as if they were separate.”
How this will start becomes clear with these statements from Tezuka:
“I want to reflect what we gained from Super Mario 3D Land in the next 2D Super Mario game.”
“Yes. I think we can get all kinds of ideas from what we used here and try to take them the other way into 2D Super Mario games.” (laughs)
And the intention of a 3D future is confirmed by Miyamoto:
“We made it so that you don’t have to play in stereoscopic 3D, but they’re more fun if you do. So first I hope players will get used to playing in 3D. That is an important point with regard to this project.”
“it isn’t exactly wrong to say, “Super Mario in 3D is difficult, so we made an introduction that is like 2D Super Mario,” but that isn’t quite true—it’s just that not everyone is used to it yet.”
I’ve been under the impression lately that they would push out new 2D games without trying very hard, and hope those paled in comparison to the 3D games they lavish so much attention and resources on, but instead it seems they’re going to start making the 2D games more like the 3D ones until the two series combine. That way, even if you don’t like the 3D ones, you’ll still be shepherded in the direction of their vision of the future.
With this blurring of lines, the concrete definitions of the two game types get hazy, and you have to go back to the fundamental concepts involved. I like the 2D games made so far for a number of reasons, including tight, action-based gameplay, and the sense of an adventurous journey across a vast, magical land. The developers, though, don’t seem to value these things very much, or for that matter the idea of fleshing out that world more with fresh content, instead focusing on fun-to-make and “surprising” easter-egg-hunt gameplay and tinkering with myriad new mechanics and special effects, to the extent of minimizing, warping, or fragmenting the world and content to suit them. These issues were around before 3D came along, that just seems to have amplified them.
The games are still well made because the developers do quality, polished work, but the philosophy and direction have shifted away from that of the originals and the games aren’t realizing their potential. I’m also personally ticked off at the idea of developers trying to force their desires on customers and even getting sneaky about it. In the interview, they talk about researching the development of the older games to understand and replicate their success, but I don’t think that will work as hoped because they’re still looking at individual mechanics instead of the whole, and from the developer’s perspective instead of the customer’s.
If Nintendo’s sales decline enough due to issues with their developers, they’ll be forced to address the situation somehow, but the only change I can see really fixing things would be replacing Iwata with someone who will make the devs do what they need to do, even if they don’t enjoy it.
The reason why I didn’t do a write-up of the second part of the Iwata Asks for Super Mario 3d Land is because I get so angry that I cannot write anything.
You have the points and quotes that I would have put down. I know some people were thinking, “That’s a little extreme to say Miyamoto and the rest of the gang hate 2d Mario and desire its demise.” But what else can you conclude? The market is excited for games Nintendo does not wish to make, and the market does not get excited for games does wish to make.
Based on this, we can examine the Wii Era in a new light. The purpose of the DS and Wii, along with games like Wii Sports or Brain Age, were ultimately about creating a trail of breadcrumbs to Gamecube-esque games. Why else were there ‘mini-games’ included in 3d Mario and Zelda? Why is Nintendo talking so excitedly about ‘bridge games’? Why does it matter if a Wii Sports player never tries out Mario Galaxy? That person is buying a Nintendo product and is now a gamer.
I think Nintendo is extremely disappointed in that the DS and Wii success never translated to 3d Mario and Aonuma Zelda success. The ‘bridge’ games were Mario Kart and 2d Mario. But those games don’t have anything to do with the Gamecube-esque philosophy of video games but everything to do with the arcade-esque philosophy of video games.
Journalists keep writing the wrong story on Nintendo. Stories require a sort of conflict. So journalists (or analysts) talk up a conflict between Nintendo and Apple, or Nintendo and Microsoft/Sony, or even Nintendo and their own fans. But the real conflict that is going on is between Nintendo and the Arcade School. Nintendo arose in entertainment (not just video games) through the arcades. The home console was nothing more than just playing arcade games at home. Nintendo is trying to divorce itself from its arcade roots. But every time Nintendo tries, the sales fall off a cliff. The DS and, especially, the Wii performed so well was because of the embrace of the arcade roots. No one is interested in Nintendo’s ‘creativity crap’ with their ‘integrated hardware and software’.
Nintendo doesn’t see Microsoft or Sony as the problem. Nintendo doesn’t see disinterest as the problem. Nintendo sees us as the problem that must be solved. People who loved arcade gaming and know that game consoles were just playing arcade games at home are the problem.
Nintendo is fighting the wrong war. Microsoft and Sony do not have any ties to the arcade roots. Nintendo is one of the last gaming companies that does. I don’t think many people like the idea of a game console to be a dumbed down PC gaming machine with a controller. Gamers still talk in a reverential tone about the Atari Era or the early Nintendo consoles or about Sega. The great thing about Sega is that it forced Nintendo to embrace its arcade roots or else watch its marketshare be devoured.
Anyway, emailer, you are very smart to point out that Nintendo’s plan is to dissolve the differences between 3d Mario and 2d Mario with each new iteration until they become one (i.e. a 3d Mario). It is a compromise between food and poison. Which is the victor? The poison.
They assume 2d Mario fans are the proverbial frog that waits in warming water about to be boiled. If you warm up the water slowly, the frog will not jump out. That appears to be the plan for the Mario franchise. The problem is not that 2d Mario fans rejected 3d Mario. Oh no. There were too many changes too fast! So if Nintendo gradually warms up the water, 2d Mario fans will eventually wake up to find themselves playing 3d Mario.
This is wishful thinking and a blatant disregard of the facts on the ground. I have zero interest in Super Mario Mii and I suspect most 2d Mario people do as well. People will likely cause both the ‘warming’ 3d Mario and ‘warming’ 2d Mario games to decline as a form of pushback.
Gamers are like water and go for the easiest course downstream. You do not fight a river and try to go against the flow. This has always been Blizzard’s core philosophy and look where it led them in the last fifteen years. I’m constantly amazed how Nintendo keeps fighting the market’s flow on this. It is incredibly amateurish, behavior you’d see from indie game makers. The good news is that we have gotten this conflict out in the open. Everyone can see it today.
Malstrom's Articles News 