21 replies to this topic

[bball1515]

I am not sure if you were planning on doing this, but assuming you plan on talking about Super Mario Galaxy soon, could you talk about doing it like your Zelda Wii review. ie Super "Frank" galaxy, or what would this game really score if it didn't have the Mario characters involved.

[willardhaven]

Good idea.

[ratzombie]

I don't get why Cheapy always attacks Wii games with his "Frank" theory. What about Halo? Final Fantasy? The same theory could be applied to any other popular franchise.

[youruglyclone]

I don't get why Cheapy always attacks Wii games with his "Frank" theory. What about Halo? Final Fantasy? The same theory could be applied to any other popular franchise.

well Halo is a relatively new IP, the FF franchise traditionally don't use the same protagonists. (not every FF game has cloud on the cover...)

I mean until a publisher has the balls to put out 2 identical games, 1 with an established character as the main, the other a generic character, we'll never know if this theory hold water.

[ratzombie]

well Halo is a relatively new IP, the FF franchise traditionally don't use the same protagonists. (not every FF game has cloud on the cover...)

I mean until a publisher has the balls to put out 2 identical games, 1 with an established character as the main, the other a generic character, we'll never know if this theory hold water.

That's really splitting hairs, it doesn't matter if Halo is a newer franchise, it still has the name "Halo" on the cover and "Final Fantasy" on its cover.

I don't think people go "Hmm... I'll only buy Halo if it has Master Chief in it." Nintendo could release a game called "Super Happy Mario Adventures 3" and not even have Mario in it and people would still buy it. I thought his theory was that reviewers will be more lenient on review scores when it comes to an established franchise, meaning whatever name is on the box; not about which characters are in it.

Unless I'm totally wrong here?

[Rei no Otaku]

Actually I think Cheapy did mention that it applies to every franchise. He merely used Zelda because it was out at the time.

I pretty much agree with him btw. Most of these games are getting by on name recognition.

[ratzombie]

Actually I think Cheapy did mention that it applies to every franchise. He merely used Zelda because it was out at the time.

I pretty much agree with him btw. Most of these games are getting by on name recognition.

Yeah, I think he did. But I swear I've heard him apply this to other Nintendo franchises beyond Legend of Zelda. Anyway, I totally agree that reviewers very rarely will give those established franchises with rabid fan bases a low score. Having "Mario" or "Halo" on the cover is at least an automatic point added to the overall score.

[Javery]

I'd still buy Super Mario Galaxy over Super Frank Galaxy if they were sitting side by side in the store. Character design does matter and does add to the enjoyment (or non-enjoyment) of a game. Super Mario Sunshine was an otherwise great game that they made highly annoying to play simply due to the Piantas - they totally sucked and totally dragged down the game.

[Rei no Otaku]

Yeah, I think he did. But I swear I've heard him apply this to other Nintendo franchises beyond Legend of Zelda. Anyway, I totally agree that reviewers very rarely will give those established franchises with rabid fan bases a low score. Having "Mario" or "Halo" on the cover is at least an automatic point added to the overall score.

Yeah, he applied it to Metroid once too.

[MorPhiend]

Actually, many reviewers are harder on established franchises. GP ripped Zelda:TP. And Matt at IGN specifically stated that there was no way he would give Mario Galaxy a 10, no matter how good it was. And he didn't.

Then look at the Mario Party and sports titles. They are highly scrutinized simply because they are Mario "re-hashes", which doesn't make sense since they usually are not an every year title and have more updates than Madden.

I don't claim the same happens to Halo/GTA/etc... But I know that in general, Nintendo established franchises are more highly scrutinized than original IPs.

[ratzombie]

Well I guess it's not always going to be true: http://www.gamespot....=result;title;1



I think for the most part though, the traditional Mario games will almost always get a positive review. Is it because the reviewers feel like these franchises deserve higher scores despite what the game is really like? Or is it just because every traditional Mario game is good?

[willardhaven]

Well Mario Sunshine was a very splendid game.

Mario 64 was pretty groundbreaking as far as a good realtime 3d platformer.

Mario World 1+2 were solid and extensive 2d playformers.

Mario 1 and 3 set really high standards for games in general.

Mario 2 was good too (even if it's not really mario).

So yeah, they've all been good.

[msdmoney]

I agree with Cheapy on his Frank theory, but frankly.....I don't think he throws the term around as freely with other big franchises as he does with some of the big Nintendo franchises. His first impressions of a Halo game don't immediately trend toward the Frank theory. I think most big franchises get the special treatment.

Cheapy, I think you need to get past one star before throwing out the Frank theory. At one star in, you haven't really gotten into how much the gravity aspect of galaxies changes the platforming.

[H.Cornerstone]

Maybe it's because Nintendo has been using the same characters for 20 years now and he would like some new IP's from them?

[msdmoney]

Maybe it's because Nintendo has been using the same characters for 20 years now and he would like some new IP's from them?

New Ip is a misleading term in todays console market, sure it means new characters and a new storyline, but the games typically follow very conventional standards for gameplay. It is espcially misleading for Mario considering the amount of different game types the Mario brand is used to create. A Portal or Katamari Damacy which combines a new Ip with new gameplay is very rare.

I always quote this article when somebody mentions Nintendo reusing the same characters, especially Mario.

http://www.lostgarde...n-strategy.html

Companies that value brands over genres: People often look at Nintendo’s releases of a half dozen Mario games a year and assume that they are all clones. In fact, they are typically radically different games across a wide variety of genres. Nintendo gains their value from the Mario brand, not ownership of a specific genre. Brand-based companies rely on the creation of new genres since they can take that brand into the genre for a low risk profit opportunity.

[Kendal]

Maybe it's because Nintendo has been using the same characters for 20 years now and he would like some new IP's from them?

If Sony or Microsoft make it 20 years in the video game industry, they will too.

[Bloodbooger]

Slightly off topic, but Microsoft basically has the Chief to represent over the years, but did Sony ever have a successful mascot? I remember a purple head, and they tried to give us Crash Bandicoot... I think I answered my own question.

I'm under the impression that the PS brand loyalty associated with FF and Metal Gear may be swayed if either title ever goes full multi-platform. I doubt Master Chief will be going to far away, but with the Bungie split, it may be the same story for the Xbox.

Maybe an extra point for successful sequels isn't completely unwarranted, if having a "Mario" in the game is a stamp of longterm quality.

[KingBroly]

Some non-Nintendo Frank ideas (Since Cheapy only uses Nintendo franchises for this):

1 - Frank's Fantasy
2 - Franko
3 - Call of Franky
4 - Frank Gear
5 - Frank of War
6 - Frank the Hedgehog
7 - Frank Man
8 - The Elder Franks

And don't give me this crap that Halo is exempt because it's "fairly new". It's the most overhyped series in gaming, and that makes it acceptable to all forms of fire.

[dim2192]

All the new Zelda games suck, along with Mario Galaxy and Metroid Prime 3. These games are so overrated beyond belief. I was bored with Mario Galaxy for the full 3 hours I spent playing it, I am considering trading it in now because I was fooled by the press. Game of the year....my ass. Zelda Twilight Princess is an ugly long game that most people wouldn't want to play from start to finish. Metroid is just an average FPS that relies on its name to get by. All these games I mentioned suck! If you want a real experience try Shadowrun on . Its probably the most underrated game of all time. Guys, grow up and realize that Nintendo's most important franchises are going downhill, lets just hope that Super Smash Bros Brawl is going to be good.

About Halo, it is like these Nintendo games. It started out amazing and is going downhill....steadily. People are starting to get tired of Halo, but will we ever except the fact that Zelda and Samus are boring? I hope so.

[The Crotch]

Mmm. Flamebait.

EDIT: What the hell is "Frank Man"?

EDIT2: Stuntman? Superman? Man Man?

EDIT3: Oh. Mega Man. Gotcha.

[Blitz]

Maybe it's because Nintendo has been using the same characters for 20 years now and he would like some new IP's from them?

Nintendo does bring out other IP's but they usually get ripped from the graphic whore crowd. Or the Nintendo is for kids crowd, etc. etc.

Sony and M$ are both doing the same thing as Nintendo but haven't been out as long. It's called good business. I know it's weird but you bring out games that people want.

[The Crotch]

I know it's weird but you bring out games that people want.

False. It's been over a decade since the last Mutant League game. Get fucking to it, EA!