Something I'd like Nintendo to do

[grayejectbutton]

This is something that's been on my mind for a long time. It may have been mentioned before (probably, actually), but I am gonna ask the question anyway.

Why hasn't Nintendo made a new version of one it's 2D games?

I am not talking about a 3D remake like Mario 64. I mean, many people say that Zelda 3 is one of the best games of all time. It got outstanding reviews when it came out, so it's not like Nintendo wasn't aware of it's popularity. The chief complaint was that it was too short. Now that Nintendo has moved to a CD-based console, they have gigabytes of storage space available. Why not make a 2D, top-down Zelda game with slightly souped-up but similar graphics to Zelda 3? They could make it MASSIVE, involving multiple worlds/kingdoms, a hundred dungeons, etc.

Similarly, they could do a 2D Mario game like Mario World but have hundreds or even a thousand levels.

Really, I already know the answer to this one: it's all about money. Maybe Nintendo has toyed with the idea (surely at least one person at Nintendo would have suggested it), but not enough "new" gamers would buy the discs. Classic games would buy them up like crazy, but that wouldn't be enough to cover costs, even though, in theory, such a game would need a relatively low budget. They could even use the old Zelda 3 engine to save some cash that way.

Apologies if this has been discussed before... it's just something I've thought about for a while and I find it interesting that Nintendo hasn't chosen to at least give it a try.

[zmweasel]

Why hasn't Nintendo made a new version of one it's 2D games?

Because Nintendo is content to repackage its classic 2D games as GameCube pack-ins and best-selling GBA releases. The GBA is an appropriate platform for 2D, which is why Nintendo has also developed original 2D products for that platform; the whiz-bang GameCube is not a 2D venue. (From the perspective of a marketer or developer, of course, not a hardcore gamer.)

Also, I wouldn't want a Zelda with a hundred levels, or a Mario with a thousand levels. Not even the most talented group of level designers could produce that many environments while keeping up the level of quality, not to mention how long it would take to create and playtest and rework them all. (There goes your low budget.)

-- Z.

[Ze_ro]

Similarly, they could do a 2D Mario game like Mario World but have hundreds or even a thousand levels.

Well, if you get Super Mario Bros 3 for the GBA and an e-Reader, you can add new levels with cards... I don't know how many levels are available on cards, but this is about as close as you're likely to get to what you want. You can also add powerups and such with cards if you want.

Personally, I'm holding out for a Super Mario Advance game that isn't a remake...

--Zero

[SoulBlazer]

Closest we've gotten so far is Mario and Luigi, which is a good game in it's own right....although Sword of Mana is getting my GBA SP use right now. :)

[Cmosfm]

Ive been dying for a 3D treatment of Super Mario 3, not exactly the same, but with the different elements like the suits, the tail, leaf, koopa kids, etc.

But no, Instead nintendo seems insistant on trying new ideas, like slapping a damn squirt gun on mario's back! God I hate that thing! Ruined Sunshine for me. :angry:

[Sotenga]

Sounds like a good idea... I'd like to see a Punch-Out remake on the GC or GBA! That would be all-time... imagine, the entire roster of both arcade games, the NES game, and the SNES title, all thrown together with dozens of new faces! Maybe there could be a story mode that includes training like in Ready 2 Rumble Boxing, and there would be a few flashback sequences where you get to fight as Doc Louis! YEAH! That would kick ass!!!

... never gonna happen, though. Pizza Pasta will remain long forgotten by my generation. :(

[grayejectbutton]

I don't think the designers would lost quality with making hundreds of levels. When you factor in all of the 2D Mario games, they have made hundreds of levels already and I can think of very few that were "bad" or "sloppy".

Here is what I want: I want a PLATFORM game. Not Mario Sunshine. That was not a platform game. That was Zelda with a water cannon. I don't want to have to walk around "talking" to other characters or floating above graffiti spraying it with water. I want to run from left to right. That's what a platform game used to be, not some 3D adventure game that's a poor man's RPG.

Mario Sunshine is what inspired me to buy a SNES again and start playing my old favorites. That's how much I despised Sunshine... it didn't play like a Mario game should do. One could argue the same for Mario 64, but at least that was innovative and it still played like a Mario game to some extent.

So yes, this is why I want a brand new Mario game but in 2D. I appreciate that the GBA is the ideal platform for this, but it would be nice to see that kind of release for the Gamecube or Nintendo's next console. Or, as I mentioned earlier, a new 2D/top down Zelda game. I was on the side of those who thought Windwaker was a travesty, a marketing gimmick to try to get more people to buy Gamecube games. I must admit, I am a big fan of Ocarina of Time so I am not adverse to a 3D Zelda game. But I would love a massive 2D one. I'd love Nintendo to take a gamble and try it.

[zmweasel]

I don't think the designers would lost quality with making hundreds of levels. When you factor in all of the 2D Mario games, they have made hundreds of levels already and I can think of very few that were "bad" or "sloppy".

The four 2D Mario games (Super Mario Bros. through Super Mario World) were produced over the span of a decade. It is wholly unrealistic to expect a single new game to contain roughly the same amount of content as FOUR games, and for it to be produced in a reasonable amount of time, AND for it to be produced on anything less than an enormous budget. (Even if you "recycled" assets, you'd still need to pay programmers and designers and testers to assemble and debug several hundred levels.)

It's a nice dream, for sure, but it won't happen for a host of financial and logistical reasons.

I vaguely recall reading a thread in these forums a long while ago about someone who was trying to translate The Ocarina of Time into the top-down 2D perspective of A Link to the Past -- which would be impossible without vast and painful gameplay and dungeon simplifications, but anyway. Anyone know if that project is ongoing?

-- Z.

[Jorpho]

The four 2D Mario games (Super Mario Bros. through Super Mario World) were produced over the span of a decade. It is wholly unrealistic to expect a single new game to contain roughly the same amount of content as FOUR games, and for it to be produced in a reasonable amount of time, AND for it to be produced on anything less than an enormous budget. (Even if you "recycled" assets, you'd still need to pay programmers and designers and testers to assemble and debug several hundred levels.)

Produced over the span of a decade? SMB2 was pretty much a graphics hack of a different game, whereas SMB2j used the same engine as SMB. I would not say it took particularly long to produce those games at all. Nor do I imagine that production of SMB3 began as soon as production on SMB/SMB2 finished.

I imagine that if the resources were committed, it would be quite possible to produce such a game in a reasonable amount of time. The programming may even be easier than it once was, as today's hardware might not be as strained by such a game as the NES or SNES hardware was.

[Spoony Bard]

See Dragon Warrior 7. A game where they used older graphics and filled up 2 CDs with game instead of graphics and movies. I don't think I've ever met anyone who finished it.

[kainemaxwell]

What if this "hundred level dungeon" was a side-quest in a new Zelda title, like the Treasure Dungeon of Lufia 2?

[Ze_ro]

It is wholly unrealistic to expect a single new game to contain roughly the same amount of content as FOUR games, and for it to be produced in a reasonable amount of time, AND for it to be produced on anything less than an enormous budget.

Well, then how about this idea:

1. Port Super Mario World to the Gamecube, and allow the game to handle disc swapping
2. Write a decent level editor so that fans can make their own levels
3. Create an online repository, and let users upload their creations via the internet (remember that broadband adaptor you made Nintendo?)
4. Either pay an employee to weed out the sheer crap, or let users rate levels themselves
5. Allow users to download any of these levels they want
AND/OR
5. Periodically release the highest ranked levels on a new disc, thus allowing people without Gamecube internet access to benefit from this as well

Really, the only difficult part of this plan is doing the whole online repository thing, but other sites have been doing stuff like this for years... Remember all those Quake and Doom compilation discs that were released? You'd also have to make it clear to users that by uploading to Nintendo's servers, you automatically gave them the right to include your levels in such compilation discs.

There's absolutely nothing about this plan that would cost Nintendo much money at all. They would basically get free content from their fans and profit off of it. They could even port the game to the Gameboy Advance so that you could download levels to play on the run if you want, thus selling many people a second copy of a game they already have (seems to be something that works for Nintendo with the GBA already :roll: )

Given the number of Mario fans out there, you could probably release compilation discs every month or two (Hell, make it a subscription thing... I'd go for it) and easily have a few hundred levels on each of them. For extra style, Nintendo could even go and make some new world maps (which shouldn't take too long) so that the disc itself would even feel like a new game.

I'd buy this in a heartbeat. Something like this could even convince me to buy a broadband adaptor.

--Zero

[zmweasel]

Produced over the span of a decade? SMB2 was pretty much a graphics hack of a different game, whereas SMB2j used the same engine as SMB. I would not say it took particularly long to produce those games at all. Nor do I imagine that production of SMB3 began as soon as production on SMB/SMB2 finished.

You guys make it pleasantly challenging to play devil's advocate. Heh.

Yes, SMB2 was essentially a graphics hack, but it took time to develop, as did SMB2j. Levels don't construct themselves. And if those levels weren't overseen by Miyamoto, they wouldn't be as good as the classic Marios.

While I don't have any numbers to indicate the amount of development time placed into each Mario, here's a quote from "Game Over" about the effort required to produce SMB3 (italics mine):

"After the exhausting months of completing 'SMB3,' Miyamoto's team had taken fifteen months off to do nothing but conduct technology experiments to explore the outer reaches of the SNES."


I imagine that if the resources were committed, it would be quite possible to produce such a game in a reasonable amount of time. The programming may even be easier than it once was, as today's hardware might not be as strained by such a game as the NES or SNES hardware was.

Any current console programmer will tell you that while today's hardware is more powerful, it's certainly NOT easier to program; it takes more time and effort and money to produce games than ever before.

Now, a regular-sized Mario, comparable in length to 3 or 4, I can see that. That's a realistic goal in terms of time and quality, although easily a 12-month project, which violates the "relatively low budget" criterion of the original post. A game with "a hundred, or even a thousand levels" is not a realistic goal without a serious degradation in quality (you wanna be the guy who rubber-stamps a thousand levels?) and player exhaustion (rule #1 of entertainment: always leave the audience wanting more).

-- Z.

[Ze_ro]

Yes, SMB2 was essentially a graphics hack, but it took time to develop, as did SMB2j. Levels don't construct themselves. And if those levels weren't overseen by Miyamoto, they wouldn't be as good as the classic Marios.

I don't think Miyamoto had anything to do with the SMB2 (USA) level design... All they did was take Doki Doki Panic and Mario it up a bit. They didn't change the levels at all.

... unless Doki Doki Panic was actually made by Nintendo, in which case I'll just shut my big mouth :P

Of course, SMB2 (Jap) would have been Miyamoto's work... but the point is that SMB2 (USA) is still considered classic even without Miyamoto's influence on the levels.

--Zero

[zmweasel]

1. Port Super Mario World to the Gamecube, and allow the game to handle disc swapping

Considering the industry's current struggle with piracy, anything that allows disc swapping (outside of multi-disc games) is a big no-no.


2. Write a decent level editor so that fans can make their own levels

With all due respect, ain't nobody in the console community ever gonna produce SMW levels of Miyamoto quality. Not even close. No one writes like Shakespeare; no one designs (designed) 2D platform levels like Miyamoto.

Also, Nintendo is notorious about maintaining absolute control over its games and properties. Allowing the public to creatively rape Mario will never happen.


Remember all those Quake and Doom compilation discs that were released?

Indeed I do. I also recall that the unofficial ones with user-created levels were not as fun as the official ones, despite having vast amounts of content. I'll take quality over quantity every time.

It's true that several PC modders have advanced from fandom into the pro ranks, but: 1) PC mod tools would remain vastly more powerful than anything you could do with a console mod tool for the hare-brained masses; 2) PC mod tools allow you to create and construct three-dimensional worlds with limitless possibilities, whereas the 2D genre (especially side-scrollers) has been so thoroughly explored that there's nothing you could create which hasn't been done before.

This is a very neat idea, and it could work for something else, but not for Mario or Zelda. Those games are the best of their genres, created by the best console-game designer of all time.

-- Z.

[zmweasel]

... unless Doki Doki Panic was actually made by Nintendo, in which case I'll just shut my big mouth :P

"Game Over" says surprisingly little on the topic, although there's a line which could be interpreted in two ways (pp. 50):

"'Super Mario Bros.' and the sequels Miyamoto designed..."

That could refer only to 3 and 4, or it could refer to every Mario sequel.

Also, I found a DDP title screen on the Web that says "(C) 1987 Nintendo / Fuji TV," which would indicate that it was developed and published by Nintendo. And, indeed, I can't see Nintendo taking a third-party title and converting it into a Mario game.

The same website also says:

"Actually, a few sources say that it was originally set to be a Mario game, but Nintendo decided to release it in Japan first with totally different characters & plot, to see how the public would respond to it. I'm not really sure how much truth is in this, but it's somewhat believable."

Sounds very sketchy to me -- which "few sources"? -- but there it is.

Incidentally, my apologies for getting the Mario chronology wrong. (Doh!) SMB was '85, and SMW was '91 -- a mere six-year span, not a decade. I must've been subconsciously including SM64.

-- Z.

[calthaer]

2. Write a decent level editor so that fans can make their own levels

With all due respect, ain't nobody in the console community ever gonna produce SMW levels of Miyamoto quality. Not even close. No one writes like Shakespeare; no one designs (designed) 2D platform levels like Miyamoto.

The principles of good level design are not so arcane that there aren't people out there who can do it as well as Miyamoto. In fact, I would go so far as to say that there are probably people who can do it BETTER than Miyamoto.

What IS arcane, however, is the crappiness of the level-editors that most game companies write for their products. Some editors are so awful I'm surprised anybody agrees to chain themselves to it. A lot of level-designers may be good at technically using the programs but they have no creative drive (something that I believe to be true about the level-designers for Unreal 2 - they can't even begin to approach Cliffy B's level of ingenuity and imagination, and to be frank Cliffy B is a good level designer but not a good game designer).

I'm not saying that there won't be a lot of chaff for the few grains of wheat, but I also don't think Miyamoto is some sort of Shakespeare. There are other designers out there who have done things that are just as good, IMO - and maybe even better. Besides, Miyamoto is also in a position where he is virtually unconstrained by either a budget or a time-table. With that kind of leisure, I'd imagine it would be hard for anybody with a modicum of designing talent NOT to turn out an A+ title every time.

[Anonymous]

if we can hack the eReader code, then all of the mario tools will be available to anyone who wants them.

[Ze_ro]

Considering the industry's current struggle with piracy, anything that allows disc swapping (outside of multi-disc games) is a big no-no.

Well, I only intended disc swapping so that you could stick in a disc with new levels on it... of course, any minor security holes could lead to piracy problems I suppose.


With all due respect, ain't nobody in the console community ever gonna produce SMW levels of Miyamoto quality. Not even close.

With all due respect to Miyamoto, this isn't rocket science or anything... the stock levels in the Mario games are definitely excellent (although I always hated that damn Cheese Bridge stage in SMW...), but out of the thousands of people who would probably submit levels, I'm sure at least 5-10% of them would be quite fun.

It would very much help if the level editor was able to prevent you from doing incredibly stupid things too... such as checking to make sure that all jumps were actually possible, and limit you to the number of powerups you put in a level so it's just 1000 blocks with stars in them or something ridiculous.

Although it would take an fairly sophisticated program, it would also be entirely possible to make some kind of random level generator to make quick levels... although I'd be concerned that it would become akin to random encounters in RPG games... just pointless busy work that was never as good as the REAL levels.

--Zero

[grayejectbutton]

Thank you for everybody's comments. I have found both sides of the argument to be very interesting. I see zmweasel's point about the length of time it would take to produce a 2D Mario game with a thousand levels or a 2D Zelda game with a dozen worlds etc. However, that does not mean it can't be done...

I think the points raised (I think by ze_ero) about the latest games & the latest technology are valid ones. Certainly because computers are so much more advanced now than when the NES and SNES were in their prime that I would think half of the process to put together a level would be automatic.

I like the idea of having users design their own levels, but I do agree that disc swapping could lead to piracy. Hey, maybe Nintendo will include a 3 and a half inch floppy drive on their next console so that users can create levels on the console them download them to disk. They can also load other people's levels onto their consoles and download them online and find them on the covers of magazines. Might still lead to piracy but surely less risky than disc swapping.

You know, someone mentioned earlier in the thread that just a regular 2D Mario game would be nice. I agree! Give me a new 2D Mario or Zelda game, it doesn't have to be massive... but most casual gamers wouldn't be interested, for shame!

[Ze_ro]

Hey, maybe Nintendo will include a 3 and a half inch floppy drive on their next console so that users can create levels on the console them download them to disk.

Bulky Drive!!! :D

--Zero

[zmweasel]

The principles of good level design are not so arcane that there aren't people out there who can do it as well as Miyamoto. In fact, I would go so far as to say that there are probably people who can do it BETTER than Miyamoto.

The principles of good level design are hardly simple; game developers are forever discussing them, and yet only a handful of videogames released each year really get them right.


What IS arcane, however, is the crappiness of the level-editors that most game companies write for their products.

A console-based level editor would necessarily have to be simplified -- although a 2D-platform editor would be far simpler in theory than, say, Agetec's Fighter Maker 2 and RPG Maker 2.


A lot of level-designers may be good at technically using the programs but they have no creative drive (something that I believe to be true about the level-designers for Unreal 2 - they can't even begin to approach Cliffy B's level of ingenuity and imagination, and to be frank Cliffy B is a good level designer but not a good game designer).

That's the genius of Miyamoto; he's equally adept at both level AND game design. He has wonderful ideas, and he knows how to implement those ideas within levels.

Miyamoto was also brilliant at teaching you various gameplay mechanics as the game unfolded, as opposed to the lazy-ass method of including a tutorial level or mode in which all the mechanics are thrown at you at once.


There are other designers out there who have done things that are just as good, IMO - and maybe even better.

Okay, then -- in your opinion, which designers produced 2D platformers and/or action/adventures that were equal to or better than the 2D Marios and Zeldas? (I presume 2D games remain the focus of this thread; 3D is an entirely different realm, and Miyamoto has notably struggled to adjust.)


Besides, Miyamoto is also in a position where he is virtually unconstrained by either a budget or a time-table. With that kind of leisure, I'd imagine it would be hard for anybody with a modicum of designing talent NOT to turn out an A+ title every time.

Miyamoto had no shortage of resources during the production of Mario 3, and yet he spent "exhausting months" on its creation. Game development, ironically, is anything BUT leisure.

A+ games are not produced by a "modicum of talent," they're produced by the best of the best: Miyamoto, Meier, Cerny, Wright, Molyneux.

Admittedly, it takes a tremendous amount of money to create a technically sound and visually appealing game for the current generation of consoles, but there still has to be a great game design upon which to build a sparkly 3D engine.

(I still can't quite believe I'm defending the 2D design talents of Shigeru Miyamoto....)

-- Z.

[zmweasel]

With all due respect to Miyamoto, this isn't rocket science or anything...

Allow me to quote from "Chris Crawford on Game Design":

"Games are for kids, right? They're simple, easygoing fun, right? Ergo, anybody should be able to design them, right? WRONG! It takes lots of training and years of practice to become a good game designer. Surprise, surprise. Game design, like any other serious activity, requires expertise. Yet this simple lesson is lost on just about everybody."

No, it's not rocket science, but it's hardly easy.


out of the thousands of people who would probably submit levels, I'm sure at least 5-10% of them would be quite fun.

I wouldn't anticipate thousands of submissions. In fact, Agetec's roll-your-own games (Fighter Maker, RPG Maker) have proven that most console gamers, when they discover how much work is involved (and this, with enormously simplified design tools), quickly lose interest.

Of those people who did submit, MAYBE one or two levels would be good enough to compare to a real Mario game. But the vast majority of the submissions would be slight (and inferior) modifications of existing Miyamoto levels, or stupidly difficult "mega-hardcore" levels, or just plain awful levels with no balance or form.


Although it would take an fairly sophisticated program, it would also be entirely possible to make some kind of random level generator to make quick levels... although I'd be concerned that it would become akin to random encounters in RPG games... just pointless busy work that was never as good as the REAL levels.

I've yet to play a dungeon-hack with a randomly generated dungeon even one-tenth as interesting as the most basic human-crafted Zelda dungeon. Random 2D-platform levels would be much the same.

-- Z.

[Ed Oscuro]

I've yet to play a dungeon-hack with a randomly generated dungeon even one-tenth as interesting as the most basic human-crafted Zelda dungeon. Random 2D-platform levels would be much the same.

Not even those of the game Dungeon Hack (SSI/Forgotten Worlds, '94)? True that it's a Dragon Warrior-esque game, but the level generator was very good.

[zmweasel]

Not even those of the game Dungeon Hack (SSI/Forgotten Worlds, '94)? True that it's a Dragon Warrior-esque game, but the level generator was very good.

My knowledge of PC gaming is very limited, so I know nothing of Dungeon Hack. Thanks for the heads-up -- I'll try to track down a copy. Does it include randomly generated Zelda-ish puzzles, or is it just combat?

-- Z.

[Ed Oscuro]

Not even those of the game Dungeon Hack (SSI/Forgotten Worlds, '94)? True that it's a Dragon Warrior-esque game, but the level generator was very good.

My knowledge of PC gaming is very limited, so I know nothing of Dungeon Hack. Thanks for the heads-up -- I'll try to track down a copy. Does it include randomly generated Zelda-ish puzzles, or is it just combat?

-- Z.

First off, I don't want to be mistaken as saying random dungeons are anything as complex as what you'd need in a sidescroller.

Dungeon Hack is essentially Eye of the Beholder, but with prettier graphics (that repeat a good deal) and unfortunately *no* meaningful storyline outside of a (rather pretty but generic) "go to the dungeon and find me whatever" type story. The one time I played it through it ended with me meeting a Lich, whom I dispatched with great haste. In short, it's one of those ridiculous AD&D crawlers that lets you run through map squares as fast as you can hit the arrow key; combat essentially becomes a matter of running up, whacking once, and then running away as you wait for your attack option to return. It's on 3.5 inch disks, 5 of them or so. You can find it on the AD&D Silver Anniversary compilation, or you can buy a new copy of the original on eBay for not much at all (I know this for a fact--I just checked). Not the best game ever, but rather interesting as it's one of the last of that genre.

[Trellisaze]

I've yet to play a dungeon-hack with a randomly generated dungeon even one-tenth as interesting as the most basic human-crafted Zelda dungeon. Random 2D-platform levels would be much the same.

Not even those of the game Dungeon Hack (SSI/Forgotten Worlds, '94)? True that it's a Dragon Warrior-esque game, but the level generator was very good.

I remember Dungeon Hack being more Eye of the Beholder-esqe (might have even used the same engine) than Dragon Warrior-esque.

The level generator was definitely better than I was expected, or good enough that I played through to the end of a randomly generated game, but not good enough for a replay.

[Ze_ro]

My knowledge of PC gaming is very limited, so I know nothing of Dungeon Hack. Thanks for the heads-up -- I'll try to track down a copy. Does it include randomly generated Zelda-ish puzzles, or is it just combat?

As others have said, it's a Dungeon Master or Eye of the Beholder style game... unfortunately, the puzzles that it creates are rather simple "find the right key" style puzzles. It's actually smart enough to generate puzzles that span several levels (ie, you'll find keys that you needed two levels previously). You can actually alter some of the settings that it uses, but you'll never get levels out of it that are as good as the original Dungeon Master levels.

The same is completely true for a 2D platform games... you'd never get random levels that were anywhere near as good as legitimate levels (and making random Zelda dungeons would probably be even worse). But, a limitless source of levels (even ones that were only moderately good) would be interesting for at least a while. It would only work as a secondary feature of the game though (like, there would be a secret level somewhere that was a new random level each time you played it).

--Zero

[Ed Oscuro]

I remember Dungeon Hack being more Eye of the Beholder-esqe (might have even used the same engine) than Dragon Warrior-esque.


Dungeon Hack is essentially Eye of the Beholder, but with prettier graphics...

Sorry, I had cleared that up in my post six minutes before yours, but yes, you're absolutely right.


The level generator was definitely better than I was expected, or good enough that I played through to the end of a randomly generated game, but not good enough for a replay.

Yes, that's essentially what I did: played it through once. Hologram walls upped the difficulty of navigating a bit, but it was still essentially "find the key." It's still amazing that the game could set up those walls and have you peering through a grating at a room you knew you should get into but couldn't. I remember that the game had a setting to create multi-level puzzles as well. I set options to make hunger virtually a non-issue, if it's not possible to disable hunger altogether. There are some really neat options in that generator; it's a shame they didn't use them all in a new story-driven game. Oh well. Dungeon Hack was a pretty game at the time, but the core engine to it was obsolete. It handled pretty much everything a previous AD&D game had, though...

[Jorpho]

I had the impression that Dungeon Hack was an inferior graphical remake of Hack/NetHack. NetHack seems to be amazingly popular with its users.

(You can get that collection here (http://www.interplay-store.com/product.asp?part_no=FG-C95-1320-1&find%5Fcategory=&find%5Fdescription=&find%5Fpart%5Fdesc=&IPPC=).)

[Ze_ro]

No, Dungeon Hack has nothing at all to do with NetHack except for the fact that both use randomly generated dungeons.

--Zero

[calthaer]

Miyamoto had no shortage of resources during the production of Mario 3, and yet he spent "exhausting months" on its creation. Game development, ironically, is anything BUT leisure.

OK, I'll get to this in a second, but first I want to tackle one of your responses to someone else (and I am not in the habit of creating five different posts just so that I can quote all your stuff, so...)

So, you who think you can quote Chris Crawford and defend Miyamoto - let's tackle this Chris Crawford quote:

"If I go into the forest and eat an orange mushroom,and it makes me so woozy that I actually enjoy Super Mario Brothers, I can come back and tell you, 'Don't eat those orange mushrooms, they'll make you do crazy things!'"

This is from his (in)famous "Dragon Speech" where he lambasts the gaming community for creating twitch games that do almost nothing to engage either the human mind or the human heart. I hardly think that Chris Crawford, when asked his thoughts on Miyamoto, would answer in favor of your position. He's been a regular critic of Nintendo and their "twitch-gameplay-without-any-deeper-meaning" philosophy of game design.

He doesn't like Super Mario, or Zelda, or any of those games - he wants to see games that are about "a boy and his dog, the prostitute with the heart of gold," etc. - games that make you think and feel in deep and meaningful ways. Let's face it - while Miyamoto's games are entertaining run-arounds, his ability to move the heart and mind are limited at best. It's not that he doesn't have any story, but that his story has never really progressed beyond the trite "save the princess!" paradigm and the "oh no but our princess is in another castle! er, I mean, you have to collect eight pieces of triforce! no, wait - you have to collect the medallions of the sages!" model of story-telling.

I never said that the principles of game design were "simple" or that it didn't take talent - but I admire talent like Sid Meier's and Warren Spector's and Peter Molyneux's over Miyamoto's any day of the week. Why? Because, in general, when you play one of their games, you have some sort of exploration of a philosophical issue and / or you have a choice about how you accomplish your goals. Black & White - will you be a good god or an evil, god? Why? Deus Ex: kill people or go in guns blazing? Alpha Centauri: which "civilization" (or "political / philosophical ideology" in this case) will I choose, and how will I live with the practical side-effects of this philosophy?

Granted, games like Deus Ex didn't offer you a complete choice and eventually you had to kill people. I'm guessing that if Spector had had a budget as big as Miyamoto's and all the time in the world like Miyamoto has he could have made Deus Ex a lot better game in that regard (as he's said in interviews that he wanted to). But at least, for most of the game, you had a choice about how you take down the opponent - as opposed to Miyamoto, whose only method of creating a challenging enemy is to make it vulnerable to exactly one weapon and then to have you have to figure out which one it is (and that's not usually too hard because it's almost always the weapon you just obtained).

Furthermore, I never said that game design was "leisure," but that Miyamoto "had the leisure" of an almost inexhaustible budget and schedule. You're good at twisting words, aren't you? I suppose if you do it to Chris Crawford, though, I should feel honored that you'd feel the need to do it to me, too :)

In short: Miyamoto might be able to make good "jump-through-these-hoops" games, and I'm not arguing that when it comes to hiding heart-pieces and making some little block puzzles that he isn't very talented. What I am saying is that this ability doesn't make him Shakespeare - in fact far from it.

Shakespeare's genius was not just putting together a bunch of words to make it sound pretty, but making it sound pretty AND injecting some hefty and meaningful statements about the human condition into the work as well. Miyamoto's work is entertaining, but any deeper meaning drawn out of his games would be really scraped together - it's not like the games are rife with it. As such, no matter how talented he may be with what he does, there are other game designers out there who are better than he is, because they can hide their heart pieces (or Augmentation canisters) and make their block puzzles (or their creature islands) just as compelling while also managing to insert meaningful choices and / or dialogue on the human condition into the bargain.

[zmweasel]

I hardly think that Chris Crawford, when asked his thoughts on Miyamoto, would answer in favor of your position. He's been a regular critic of Nintendo and their "twitch-gameplay-without-any-deeper-meaning" philosophy of game design.

My "position" is that game design is a bitch, but far too many people think it isn't. I don't think Crawford would disagree with that position.

I'm well aware of Crawford's distaste for the current state of game design, and discussed those views with him in a lengthy interview shortly after the release of "Game Design." While I certainly don't agree with everything he has to say -- in particular, his writing off GTA3 as "sleaze" -- I have the utmost respect for him, and I certainly had no intention of twisting his words.


Let's face it - while Miyamoto's games are entertaining run-arounds, his ability to move the heart and mind are limited at best.

Absolutely true. I was referring strictly to his unrivaled skill at the art of 2D action/platform and action/adventure level design.


I never said that the principles of game design were "simple" or that it didn't take talent - but I admire talent like Sid Meier's and Warren Spector's and Peter Molyneux's over Miyamoto's any day of the week.

I don't have a problem expressing equal admiration for Miyamoto and Spector, because I appreciate Miyamoto's light-hearted romps as much as I appreciate Spector's thought-provoking efforts. They have vastly different approaches to game design, but they're both masters of their craft.


Furthermore, I never said that game design was "leisure," but that Miyamoto "had the leisure" of an almost inexhaustible budget and schedule. You're good at twisting words, aren't you? I suppose if you do it to Chris Crawford, though, I should feel honored that you'd feel the need to do it to me, too :)

While I don't feel that I "twisted" Crawford's words in any way, I apologize for misinterpreting yours.

What I didn't clearly state was that an inexhaustible budget and schedule don't guarantee an A+ game. Daikatana and Tomb Raider: The Angel of Darkness cost millions of dollars and untold man-hours to produce, but they were atrocious. It comes down to design talent, as always.


As such, no matter how talented he may be with what he does, there are other game designers out there who are better than he is, because they can hide their heart pieces (or Augmentation canisters) and make their block puzzles (or their creature islands) just as compelling while also managing to insert meaningful choices and / or dialogue on the human condition into the bargain.

As before, I welcome anyone to cite examples of 2D action/platformers and 2D action/adventures which they feel are equal or superior to Mario and Zelda.

My quoting Crawford obviously struck a nerve with you, and I apologize for doing so. I should've simply stated that game design is a bitch, instead of inadvertently introducing PC designers into the discussion.

-- Z.

[Ze_ro]

He's been a regular critic of Nintendo and their "twitch-gameplay-without-any-deeper-meaning" philosophy of game design.

Well, Nintendo has already announced that they plan on focusing on making "simpler" games that are easier to learn, and play, so I hope this guy wasn't holding his breath.

Personally, I don't really care much what the story is... as long as the gameplay is fun (which is the case in just about all Mario and Zelda games), I'll enjoy it. If I want deeper meaning, I'll go read a book.

--Zero

[zmweasel]

Well, Nintendo has already announced that they plan on focusing on making "simpler" games that are easier to learn, and play, so I hope this guy wasn't holding his breath.

Crawford is hardly just "this guy." Check out http://www.erasmatazz.com and read up on his career and accomplishments. His most recently posted articles, "The Education of a Game Designer" and "The Tyranny of the Visual," are typically brilliant observations. He's also kind of an asshole, which appeals to me.

-- Z.