61 Frames Per Second

How can anyone want Mario to bow out when under a year ago he starred in one of the greatest video games ever made? He's not like Sonic, where he's just there because it'd be too sad to see him go. Mario games are still awesome.

Indeed, Mario is still new to a new generation of gamers. The only ones that want to see him go are people who've already loved him all they could. In which case, he's NOT FOR YOU anymore.

Though it probably wouldn't hurt if Nintendo didn't release a bajillion spin-offs every generation (Mario Sluggers being the latest).

I think Mario Galax was one of the best, most fun games ever, but I also think Mario's role was immaterial and that a less froofy premise and character are long overdue.  I for one am sick to death of storybook "role model" crap I grew up having foisted on me and having myself attempted to be crammed into the perfect little box they represented, and I think kids would do better without that kind of thing to begin with.

I think the idea is that Mario should quit while he's ahead. How long does he have before he goes the way of Sonic with non-stop terrible games? And what about a Miyamoto-less Mario? Would that ever be acceptable?

Of course, if we are looking at Sonic then we have to recognize that despite his track record, there are still people that get excited every time Sega says they are going to turn around and make the right choices. Does every franchise have fans that are eternal optimists?

Super Mario Galaxy, all things considered, was probably pretty close to a Miyamoto-less Mario.  Sure, Miyamoto did have input, as he does in just about everything Nintendo.  But the story came from the game's director (I think that was his role), and a lot of the nostalgic aspects came from the staff.

Meanwhile, Miyamoto brought us Sunshine.

The difference between Sonic and Mario is quite obvious: Mario isn't rushed.  Literally.  Sonic Unleashed is looking shakey to those who have played it, and in spite of SEGA saying they'll take as long as needed to get it right, no one believes they're going to pass on the holiday rush, even in spite of many other games through 2008 doing just fine without that mess.

And I wouldn't exactly pigeonhole Mario as a "storybook role model," either; he's admittedly not the deepest character in the world, relying more on the player's whims to make him as innocent or as mischievious as they want him to be.  And as the (mostly) silent protagonist, he goes along for the ride.

Incidently, can't help but notice that the blog in question was a MSN/Microsoft one.  Hmmm...

(Yeah, I know, it's probably nothing.)

Amber, I totally agree with your first paragraph. Why would anyone want to end a series of games that's consistently good and always has something to feel fresh? It's not like the Sonic series, where he's just a cash cow and release dates are more important than effort. It's not like Mega Man, where each game is more like an expansion pack of the last game.

I don't think anyone expects it to be good for Nintendo to retire a money tar-baby like Mario is.  I mean, I always thought whatever makes companies the most money is best for society /sarcasm

I absolutely do think Mario can -- and should -- be pidgeonholed as a storybook character.  Him and Zelda and Sonic, the lot of them.  They worked in the 1980s because it was parents and family and go-go money and hegemony and the next generation of the "best" country in the world, all of which is, if you'll notice, the hubristic, self-righteous attitude that's dragged this generation's future into the state of our previous two generation's financial sights.

I think it's entirely valid to condemn one-dimensional, heroic characters and equally vapid premises as storybooks writ "multimedia".

I don't think Zelda needs to disappear either, it just needs a VERY HARD reset.

They release one Zelda that's a lot like a previous Zelda and all of a sudden the series is stale?

You can say pretty much every series has been structurally the same forever. Hell, Zelda is one of the few games that changes a LOT between games. Phantom Hourglass, Wind Waker, Ocarina of Time, Majoras Mask, they all feel really different. Sure, if you boil it down to it's simplest form, they're all based on solving puzzles in dungeons and collecting equipment and important items, but that's because that's what Zelda IS. Zelda is one of the few series' that doesn't need any serious overhauls to feel fresh, because that happens in every entry in the series. (Except maybe Twilight Princess.)

Well of course Zelda 2 felt different, most of the action took place as a side scroller. :P And that kind of illustrates the point that if you change things too much, it doesn't feel like the same series any more. A lot of fans don't like Zelda 2 because it's more like Metroid than Zelda 1. (I personally don't hate it, but I would rather play pretty much any other Zelda.) Still, there is a need to change things up to avoid things from getting stale. At the risk of repeating myself, this is what Nintendo realizes and tried to do something with each new entry to make it feel more distinctive from a gameplay standpoint, while still keeping the charm of the basic Zelda series. Link to the Past had the alternate worlds, Ocarina of Time was 3D (which obviously isn't a big deal any more, but it was definitely a huge change for the series at the time) and time travel, Majora's Mask had a much darker tone and the focus on the daily lives of the inhabitants of Termina (not to mention the masks and various versions of Link that came with them), Wind Waker changed the whole art style and overhauled the world to turn it into an ocean, Oracle of Ages/Oracle of Seasons linked together to form one huge game, etc. etc.. Perhaps the first game in the series that didn't add much new was Twilight Princess (transformation had been done in Majora's Mask and the light/dark world had been done in Link to the Past to a greater extent) and even that managed to add something with the Wii controls, albeit not a whole lot. Plus, since Twilight Princess, there has been Phantom Hourglass, which controls entirely with the touch screen.

Anyway, I think Zelda is one of those series' that does a good job of mixing things up and giving each game it's own identity, and manage to make them consistently good, which is definitely a real accomplishment.