-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
I have noticed a correlation between a Nintendo Console's success and its flagship 3D Mario title.
- Thread starter perfectchaos007
- Start date
Also Knack's LTD is counting its Japan sales, I believe.
Where it was a pack-in.
It sold two million its first winter. It was not the LTD.
I don't agree with the correlation, but I think 3D World was a great game, but not exceptional.
For me it was far too easy and didn't have the exploration element, or lots of stuff to find etc.
Was still my GOTY, but just didn't have that certain special something that the Galaxy games had. If Amazon hadn't cocked up sending out Odyssey I might have done clue about that too!
For me it was far too easy and didn't have the exploration element, or lots of stuff to find etc.
Was still my GOTY, but just didn't have that certain special something that the Galaxy games had. If Amazon hadn't cocked up sending out Odyssey I might have done clue about that too!
Can't really agree with you on art style (though I love 3D World's appeal towards a classic SMB3/World appearance), but 3D World does have a far higher quality and quantity of focused platforming challenge that is unmatched by the other 3D games. I understand that many don't prefer that, but I found it highly enjoyable compared to the weird half-measure that Galaxy 2 was, or the admittedly basic level design of 3D Land. I think it's been pretty clear for a while now that a lack of game quality compared to it's predecessors is not what determined the failure of the Wii U, it was largely a failed system with an unappealing premise and bloated pricepoint that did it in. It's unfortunate that those excellent games seem like they're gonna be unknown in the public eye and die with the system.
Back to the topic at hand, I really feel that correlating game quality to system success is largely a fool's errand in a lot of cases, especially here when the "difference" in quality doesn't look far off to statistical noise. The Wii U was already sputtering out by 3D World's release, and Switch and the Wii were already on track for major success prior to the release of their respective 3D Mario games. Not to say that these games didn't affect sales in a significant fashion, but the momentum or lack thereof were already in place.
It seems like a neat coincidence at first glance, but it doesn't hold much weight, especially when disappointment is so nebulous that it causes disagreement, as the thread clearly shows. N64 really only feels like a success when compared to the GameCube, which isn't high praise. Then again, the N64 had the vast majority of it's sales in America, so it probably looks a lot more successful here than it really was.
Last edited:
Couldn't agree more. Galaxy is my favorite Mario game, maybe my favorite game of all, and to see a handheld "kind-of-port" of 3D Land become the main console 3D Mario game after Galaxy was really disappointing.
I was expecting something like Odyssey for the Wii U. And now that I can see Nintendo didn't abandon the sandbox style, I can look at 3D World with other eyes and see it as some sort of semi spin-off title, like the New Super Mario series. When you look at it, the Wii U missed a lot of franchises and game styles we were expecting to see after Nintendo made the jump to HD.
Damn lol. Why is everybody attacking the OP here so vehemently? All he did was just share a fun little pattern that he discovered. Nothing more, nothing less. I don't understand what all the drama is about.
This site definitely feels like a successor to GAF 100% lmao
This site definitely feels like a successor to GAF 100% lmao
Where does 3D Land fit into all of this. It's the weakest 3D Mario not named Sunshine but sold gangbusters and basically saved the 3DS.
I saw this same point made in a review recently. Gotta say it seems completely wrong to me. SM64 was absolutely amazing and is still considered one of the best games of all time, yet the N64 did rather poorly (despite the game selling very well). 3D world is currently the 9th best reviewed game ever on Opencritic (started tracking reviews in 2013), and the Wii U was a failure. Citing Galaxy 1 and 2 is a bit disingenuous since NSMB Wii sold so much better than them and is a much better representation of what the Wii was and what kind of audience it attracted. But even letting that slide, you're dealing with 5 generations, and your generalization works for at best 3 of them. Seems to me there's very little correlation at all, though it's largely irrelevant since the quality of the 3D mario titles has always been extremely high across the board.
But it's not a pattern if it doesn't make sense.
Mario 64 is one of the venerated games of all time. The N64 sold twelve million more units than the Gamecube, which is universally considered a huge failure.
Mario 64 and Nintendo 64 are really the weak link in this theory. On what grounds is the N64 a success? Or at the very least, a success on the same level as the Switch or Wii?
N64 did not outsell its competitor, or even come close to doing so. It sold significantly less than its predecessor. The net result of its existence is that nearly all of Nintendo's 3rd party support evaporated......a situation that they still struggle with today (even after the success of the Wii). Nintendo did the best with what they had on the 64, but I think it's clear that it did not meet their desires or expectations.
N64 did not outsell its competitor, or even come close to doing so. It sold significantly less than its predecessor. The net result of its existence is that nearly all of Nintendo's 3rd party support evaporated......a situation that they still struggle with today (even after the success of the Wii). Nintendo did the best with what they had on the 64, but I think it's clear that it did not meet their desires or expectations.
The contrast between Galaxy and NSMB Wii (approx. 8 mil vs. 31 mil) is kind of what defined Nintendo's output for the next five to six years.
Very rarely for the better.
Disagreed with everything you said about 3D World.
Nothing about it was below average and it certainly wasn't forgettable.
Nothing about it was below average and it certainly wasn't forgettable.
I don't really believe the N64 was as much of a failure as people say it was. Relative to the PlayStation? Sure. But on its own, it was still a very popular console. Especially in the US. It also dominated the console multiplayer scene back in the day. It was home to some of the best and most groundbreaking games of all time and so many people have so much nostalgia for it to this day. Even if it was losing, it was still a very relevant console in the grand scheme of things. It was certainly in no worse position than the Saturn, that's for sure.
I'd say the GameCube is when Nintendo really started to fall behind the competition. The N64 was when the cracks first started showing. The GameCube is when the cracks burst open.
The N64 was at 32 million with an incredibly low attach rate.
The Gamecube was 20 million with a slightly higher attach rate.
It is way less about belief of whether or not it's a failure as much as it is the numbers saying it was a failure.
Seems pretty clear to me they whipped out a 'lower ambition/party multiplayer' Mario for Wii U (HD development growing pains and rushing a 'system saver' out meant using the tuned-for-portble 3D Land setup) and were planning a big new breathrough entry, but delayed the big one because it would have died on the vine on Wii U.
I just don't think 3D world, with it's NSMB set-up (three big coins, pole etc, generic Mario settings), and being designed to be played on a Wii Remote was ever seen as the 'next big step' game for Mario, as opposed to the dramatic new setting and mechanics in each of 64, Sunshine, Galaxy and Odyssey.
I just don't think 3D world, with it's NSMB set-up (three big coins, pole etc, generic Mario settings), and being designed to be played on a Wii Remote was ever seen as the 'next big step' game for Mario, as opposed to the dramatic new setting and mechanics in each of 64, Sunshine, Galaxy and Odyssey.
Sorry OP, but no
There's no pattern. If anything, OP is looking to add fuel to the fire of the 3D World is not a real 3D Mario discussion.
3D World is a Super Mario Galaxy 2 case, just with 3D Land. It's literally a bigger, better, meatier Super Mario 3D Land, and that's Ok, since the game was not only good, but also beautiful
- N64 was a failure
- Super Mario Sunshine wasn't scored much lower than Super Mario 64.
- Super Mario 3D World is a great game a 3D Mario worthy of its name
There's no pattern. If anything, OP is looking to add fuel to the fire of the 3D World is not a real 3D Mario discussion.
3D World is a Super Mario Galaxy 2 case, just with 3D Land. It's literally a bigger, better, meatier Super Mario 3D Land, and that's Ok, since the game was not only good, but also beautiful
Still, it was definitely more successful than the GameCube and the Saturn and it was still a very popular console in its heyday. I'm not claiming it was some kind of mega popular worldwide success like the PlayStation was, but let's not act like it was a total bomb of epic proportions. I did say the N64 was when Nintendo first started showing signs of falling behind, but then they doubled down on all the problems the N64 had with the GameCube, and that console was in an even worse state because of it.
I just think ignoring the console's influence and popularity during its heyday is being kind of disingenuous.
Last edited:
No. N64 was a qualified success. It was a failure in Japan. But it was a big success in the US, basically matching the SNES. It made Nintendo pretty much as much money as the SNES too, as they sold much more first party software on it.
It's outsold every single console made by anyone except Nintendo or Sony with only one exception, the Xbox 360.
The OP doesn't make any sense though, I agree on that.
I'm sorry but I find it funny that people are say a game that not Galaxy 3 is some how safer then Galaxy 3. Oh yes, not make another sequel to one of their most critically acclaimed Mario game was playing it safe. Paring back all of the flash, all of the style and all of the spectacle that sold Galaxy was safe.
Galaxy take place in space. There no form of fiction that can be safer then space. Nintendo also dumb down a lot about 3D Mario to try and appeal to the blue ocean. Mario lost a lot of movement and the level got more linear while still be easy challanges. Nintendo focused on awe.
The Wii success came from Nintendo going out of there comfort zone and targeting a different audience. The N64 was only somewhat successful in the US. The GCN fail because Nintendo's reputation as kiddy (Not helped by it design). The WiiU was just a bad product and had bad marketing. I mean 8 is consider the best Mario Kart and people love Melee. The Wii and Switch are just good product that have mass appeal.
Galaxy take place in space. There no form of fiction that can be safer then space. Nintendo also dumb down a lot about 3D Mario to try and appeal to the blue ocean. Mario lost a lot of movement and the level got more linear while still be easy challanges. Nintendo focused on awe.
The Wii success came from Nintendo going out of there comfort zone and targeting a different audience. The N64 was only somewhat successful in the US. The GCN fail because Nintendo's reputation as kiddy (Not helped by it design). The WiiU was just a bad product and had bad marketing. I mean 8 is consider the best Mario Kart and people love Melee. The Wii and Switch are just good product that have mass appeal.
This doesn't make any sense at all. Why wouldn't Nintendo hold back Mario Kart and Smash too? Heck, Zelda was astonishingly ambitious, even if it didn't get released until the Switch.
It may not have been the "next big step", I'd agree, but I don't think it was ever really meant to be.The team just wanted to build on what they started on with 3D Land, and probably thought consecutive multiplayer would be a big draw, seeing as how no other 3D Mario game had effectively accomplished it before. It probably would've been too, had it not released on a system that might has well have been a packaged curse.
I guess what confuses me is the thought that 3D World was low ambition. I could see the argument for 3D Land, but the level design in 3D World was incredible with a lot of new ideas. It wasn't particularly flashy like Odyssey, but it's clear the developers put in their all from start to finish.
As a lifelong fan of the Mario platform games, there's a lot I could say about this. Most importantly is: 3D World and Sunshine were excellent games.
The games got pretty good reviews upon release, though not as good as Galaxy. Still, Sunshine aged incredibly well (love to see a remaster) and 3D World's multiplayer was such a great experience.
The games got pretty good reviews upon release, though not as good as Galaxy. Still, Sunshine aged incredibly well (love to see a remaster) and 3D World's multiplayer was such a great experience.
Well I guess that is where your theory falls apart. 3d World is a amazing game and anything but forgettable.
I'm not seeing this - the N64 didn't really do well at all outside the US, Sunshine was to the standard of the rest of the series and Galaxy had zero barring on the Wii's success. The Wii U just sucked, no Mario game was going to make it sell better.
Exactly. Here in spain there was one person with a N64 per 10 PSOne. It was crazy.
Everyone got a Playstation because Er FIFA y Er Pro
I think many forget that the N64 was the start of Nintendo's decline in the console business. It's telling that the games mentioned for it are almost always first party or second party and it's Japanese support was, to my knowledge, worse than the Wii U actually. It might be even counting regional exclusive games.
Because they already had two Marios out by then, but no MK/Smash. I mean they likely had Odyssey planned for Wii U, maybe for 2016. By 2015 they were already moving to NX plans, so moved it.
Basically I just doubt they only planned a kind of multiplayer semi-spin-off as their big new Mario game for the generation, but the generation got cut short by the Wii U.
The SNES sold less than the Famicom/NES so that was the start of that decline. Gamecube was the end of that period of decline, since the next console sold as much as their previous three combined.
Because it's not as good as 3 of it's 5 predecessors but it's still is a 9 out of 10 game
It's fine to defend the game's quality, but it's pretty obvious why people would see it as a letdown. Conceptually it was much lower ambition as a big new single player game. Mario 64 was a whole new design for Mario games in a whole new setting, Sunshine was another whole new setting with many new mechanics, Galaxy was another whole new setting with many new mechanics (Galaxy 2 was a sequel but it didn't matter since that gen already had its breakthrough Mario), and now Odessey follows that tradition. Even the titles of these games showed they were something new (unless they were not, like Galaxy 2).
3D World was a console copy of a portable spin off, has a generic name, generic Mario settings and had... multiplayer and some new power ups. They nailed what it was, but people have a problem with it conceptually, not the execution.
Fair enough if you believe that, but I just don't think there's any evidence of that being the case; just seems like wishful thinking to me. Personally, I feel like they expected 3D World to be a breakout hit, although the system had already crashed and burned by the point the game came out.
I feel like if they were planning a new Mario, it was planned for the Switch from the get-go, especially considering how long the game took to make. Wii U would probably be on it's last legs even if it was a success at this point, so it seems doubtful to me that they would plan for it there rather than as launch title for their new system. But I suppose we'll never know unless Nintendo says as much, or if there's suggestion in the code of it starting on Wii U hardware or whatever.
Not like it matters, in any case. We got a damn fine Mario game just the same.
Profoundly disagree with the assessment of Mario 3D World being underwhelming and not standing the test of time. As someone who played through the game with my partner and again with my nephew it was able to give me memories that frankly, current darling Odyssey hasn't. Its a classic that unfortunately landed on a console a lot of people didn't want to own. Its more accessible than Odyssey too, camera control isn't necessitated by the levels as much, which definitely helped my girlfriend play it. Funnily enough, it'd be a great fit on Switch - which better nails local multiplayer. I'd love a rerelease.
Odyssey was never planned for the Wii U the Tokyo team said back in 2014 that the platform for the next 3d Mario was a secret.
There's really no correlation here. Mario platformers sells well regardless of Nintendo platform (no pun intended). And just about every game, whether if it's 2D or 3D, has received pretty positive reception from critics and fans alike. Only the sales potential is really affected, because had 3D World been on a more successful hardware, it would have sold on par with the Galaxy games.
No. Games sell hardware, not the other way around.
3D World was supposed to make people buy Wii U's. It didn't. It is partly to blame for Wii U's failure.
Thankfully, Odyssey and the Switch erased 3D World and the Wii U from history. All is forgiven.
Mario Kart 8 and Smash Wii U are the best games in their respective series, and they didn't make people buy Wii Us. They're not to blame all for the system's failure. It was just a terribly thought out console with features no one wanted. The games on it were fantastic.
3D world is good but felt like a chore at times. The game is tailored for cat suit and if you lose it, well then fuck you I guess ?
The momentum feels like shit too, speed is capped in a weird way and jumping fucks up your speed sometimes. There's some cat suit tricks to build up high speed but it doesn't seem intended and is not hinted at by the game at all.
The momentum feels like shit too, speed is capped in a weird way and jumping fucks up your speed sometimes. There's some cat suit tricks to build up high speed but it doesn't seem intended and is not hinted at by the game at all.
i would agree if mario 3D world wasnt there. the game is pure bliss and i would even go so far and say its better than galaxy or odyssey
Definitely agree with you there. No desire at all to go back to 3D World. 64 and Galaxy felt way more special to me.