As the celebration continues, we come to a most important reason to celebrate Miyamoto’s Retirement.
Reason Two: Miyamoto made it company policy not to create sequels.
Sequels are about making more of what the market loves. Nintendo once made sequels to its games. There was Donkey Kong and then Donkey Kong Jr. and finally Donkey Kong 3 (which was more of a shooter than a platformer). There was Mario Brothers and then Super Mario Brothers. Then there was Super Mario Brothers 2 and Super Mario Brothers 3. There was Zelda and Zelda 2. There was Metroid I and II. There was Super Mario Land 1 and 2. Then something changed.
Up until release, Super Mario World was called Super Mario Brothers 4. Super Mario Brothers 4 can still be seen in small on the Japanese box and is displayed as the primary title in early demos sent to retailers. Why was the most popular video game series in the world breaking from the sequel number? Why call it Super Mario World?
At this point, almost all Nintendo games lost their sequel number. Instead of Zelda 3, we got Link to the Past. Instead of Metroid III, we got Super Metroid. The lack of continuum with these escape orientated games was primarily a reason for me to stop buying Nintendo machines. Every game was a reset button on the series. Why play it anymore? Many of the exceptions such as Donkey Kong Country 1, 2, and 3 or Metroid Prime I, II, and III came from outside NCL. The ones that did such as Mario Galaxy I and II are very much exceptions of the rule. It is clear that with Super Mario 3d Land, Nintendo approach is to not have a series but to continually keep pressing the reset button on every reason you loved to play the game with keeping only the iconic mechanics and imagery intact (e.g. 3d Mario still has Mario fighting Koopa while he jumps around).
There are only two reasons not to do sequels when there is such demand for them. The first reason is the Frank Herbert problem. Frank Herbert happened to write a very successful novel (Dune). The publisher demanded more Dune books because they sold very well. So Frank Herbert ends up spending his life doing little more than just writing Dune books. The problem with this is that Frank Herbert should have been allowed to make something other than Dune. He might have made something even more successful. We’ll never know.
Is this problem prevalent in video games? The answer is no. Unlike a novelist, video games require a team of people to make. Sequels can and have been made to games with a completely different team than the original ‘creators’. In many cases, these sequels end up being more successful than the original (e.g. Street Fighter II being extremely more popular than Street Fighter I). The idea of sequels trapping game developers into constantly making the same type of games has nothing to do with the concept of sequel but the concept of Game God. If you believe in the concept of Game God, you believe the game is an expression of that developer’s personality and ‘aura’ which cannot be replicated by any other developer. Mario Kart has had different developers down the road, and it is more popular today than ever. The reason why is because Mario Kart never suffered from the ‘Game God concept’.
It should be important to note that the ‘Artist as God’ concept doesn’t apply to other media as well. As much as Nintendo and video game companies rave about Star Wars, are they aware that Lucas did not direct films like Empire Strikes Back? And when Lucas did direct Episode I, II, and III, there is huge disappointment despite the direct involved of the ‘Great Artist’. Aliens had a different director than Alien, and many do believe Aliens is a better film.
For all the talk of Gene Roddenberry and his ‘vision’, did you know he was essentially fired after Star Trek: The Motion Picture? Roddenberry disagreed with everything about Star Trek II especially the Captain Ahab type villain of Khan. The creative team ignored him. How ironic that the rise of Star Trek came from ignoring Roddenberry’s ‘vision’ while when the vision was focused on, we end up with the boring and lame Voyager and Enterprise, complete with wooden characters, to end interest in the series.
The second good reason why sequels can be a bad idea is that it might alienate new audiences. It is a legitimate concern from marketers that a game titled ‘Alien Assassins 9’ might frighten off new consumers because they feel they might have to understand the previous eight versions of the game.
Ironically, the sequel numbers have proven to be more attractive to new audiences. The new audience wants security in their consumer choice. If a game has nine sequels, someone must really like it. Therefore, they take a chance on buying it.
The most popular Final Fantasy game, Final Fantasy VII, found plenty of new customers that were not scared off by the ‘seven’ number. This is important to note because there was great emphasis to display the number ‘VII’ at this time. When Final Fantasy was brought to the West, Final Fantasy IV was changed to Final Fantasy II and Final Fantasy VI was changed to Final Fantasy III. Apparently, Westerners had no confusion going from “Final Fantasy III” to Final Fantasy VII as well as not being scared from the number seven.
You can see Call of Duty and Modern Warfare sell more the higher its sequel number goes up. There is absolutely no truth that sequel numbers scare away customers. Everything is showing the opposite.
As Miyamoto grew with influence over Nintendo’s products, ‘sequels’ became a thing of the past. The idea of making a game just to make another ‘Zelda’ or ‘Mario’ actually became something to be detested. No. Each game must completely be different. We cannot have a sequel to Mario 64. We must have Mario fly around on a water jet pack in Super Mario Sunshine.
Miyamoto’s ‘vision’ was wrong. We will have sequels. We can make games just for the sake of having another game with no new ‘gameplay reset button’. Everyone else is doing it and succeeding. Nintendo does not do this and their sales fall. What if Wii Sports Resort was called Wii Sports 2? It probably would have sold better. This entire ‘we must make something new each time’ is ridiculous when you are using existing franchises. When I buy a new Mario game, I want it to be Super Mario Brothers.
And now you know why I insist on calling New Super Mario Brothers Wii as Super Mario Brothers 5.
Malstrom's Articles News 