Quote:Smashing Success
How Microsoft created a franchise phenomenon and Nintendo ignored one.


June 29, 2004 - I have a question for you and I want you to roll it over for a second. What will be the biggest game of this year? Throw away your prejudices this once and realistically consider the contenders. Whether you're a Microsoft, Nintendo or Sony fan, I believe there's a good chance that your answer will be the same: Halo 2.

The first-person shooter sequel was, after all, the talk of the Electronics Entertainment Expo 2004, winning a number of awards for its acclaimed Xbox Live-enhanced multiplayer mode, and it dazzled crowds with its single-player element last year. The hype has not died down since May, either. Halo 2 continues to dominate the rankings at GameStats. It's clear the game has the hardcore audience hypnotized with anticipation.

But it doesn't stop there. Walk into your local game retailer and the guy behind the desk, the one with the sweat stains under his arms, will tell you all about it. "Halo 2 is going to kick your ass," he'll say, with a not-so-bright grin on his face. At least, that's what he told me.

Justin Timberlake also wants Halo 2 and he doesn't have any sweat stains under his arms. He's got groupies there -- or, that is, Cameron Diaz. The pop superstar recently traveled to developer Bungie's office to catch a first glimpse of the sequel in motion, and Microsoft was right there to promote that truth. I read about it in Entertainment Weekly along with millions of others. That mainstream audience is there and it has taken notice. Master Chief has become a Microsoft juggernaut.

When you think about it -- when you really stop to examine what Microsoft and Bungie have done -- you can't help but be impressed. Here you had this developer that was originally popular for its Macintosh games. You had this publisher that was completely new to the console market. And the two of them created a title that outsold every last offering on GameCube by at least a million units, including a game with all of Nintendo's mascot powerhouses combined.

But I'm getting slightly ahead of myself so let me hit the rewind button. Three years ago Nintendo, just before the launch of GameCube and Xbox, was sitting in what it thought was a pretty position. It had a powerful, robust piece of hardware. It had a decent launch lineup. But mostly, it had mascots. And to be more specific it had Super Smash Bros. Melee, which was billed as its flagship game -- and, I think, for damned good reason. The fighter, a sequel to the N64 hit of the same series, was absolutely packed full of classic and wholly popular Nintendo icons. Mario. Luigi. Link. Samus. Pikachu. Something for every Nintendo fan, really.




When Nintendo showcased Super Smash Bros. Melee for the first time at 2001's E3 event, fanboys cheered as if their favorite football team had scored the Super Bowl-winning touchdown. This enthusiasm carried over to the Regular Joes. Consumers bought GameCube not because they wanted to play Luigi's Mansion, but because they wanted to fight it out against friends with some of their favorite Nintendo superstars.

Just look at the data. Super Smash Bros. Melee is, even today, GameCube's most popular game. The title has sold through some 2.3 million units in the US alone, according to NPD tracking through May. That figure doesn't quite compete with the success of Halo, which has sold more than 3.3 million copies through the same period, but it's no slouch either, especially when you factor in Xbox's larger installed base. Super Smash Bros. Melee outsold Super Mario Sunshine. Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker, Pikmin, and Metroid Prime. It outsold every Resident Evil title on GameCube. It outsold every Madden title on GameCube. I could go on.

So my question is, in the midst of all this Halo 2 hype, where the hell is my Super Smash Bros. Melee sequel?

Nintendo cannot cling to old answers. It cannot say that it's not a company interested in making "cookie-cutter sequels," a catch phrase company president Satoru Iwata has used in the past. After all, the majority of its big 2004 and 2005 games are, in fact, sequels. Metroid Prime 2. Pikmin 2. Resident Evil 4. A new Zelda for 2005. And sometime after that, a new Mario game.

Has Nintendo chosen to consciously ignore what has been its most successful franchise this generation, and if so, why? I certainly can't come up with a logical answer. I try to imagine the scenario and my brain immediately reminds me that there are 80-plus people working at Hal, the company that created the hit fighter, and there are no announced titles in development by the studio. This leads me to suspect that it could, dare I say it, be working on a major Super Smash Bros. Melee sequel.

It would certainly make sense from a business standpoint. SSBM continues to be one of GameCube's more popular titles on a monthly basis, regardless of its age. But even if a sequel is underway, I can't understand Nintendo's decision to keep quiet on the subject, especially when Microsoft is trumpeting the arrival of Halo 2. Why not do the same? Why not generate some hype? Why not let Nintendo fans know that GameCube's most popular franchise has not been forgotten?




It's not as if Nintendo fans have lost interest. All it took was the inclusion of Link as a playable fighter in Namco's Soulcalibur II to make the GameCube version of the game the highest seller. That's right, it beat out both the PS2 and Xbox builds in sales. In fact, GCN Soulcalibur II outsold the Xbox version by nearly 200,000 units, according to NPD data through May.

Perhaps Nintendo believes that if it shows a Smash Bros. sequel too early, competitors will copy its ideas. Like they did, I guess, for Super Mario Sunshine. Do you all remember the wave of water-backpack-themed games that hit the market after Nintendo released its platformer? Oh, you don't? Well, there's a reason for that. How about all of the real-time strategy games with cute critters that flooded retail shelves after Nintendo released Pikmin? Wait -- that didn't happen.

Whatever the reason, any way you slice it this is bad news for Nintendo and its fans. Nintendo's biggest franchise has seemingly been put away, stored in the closet as it works on something else, and the fans who gobbled up the fighter shortly after system launch can only wait. And why, I have no idea. I can only hope that somewhere a sequel is being worked on, or mulled over, or at least contemplated, and that Nintendo does have a plan to maintain interest and to build hype.

What would be scary to me is the alternative: that Nintendo could simply forget about the franchise that single-handedly sold GameCube to consumers.
-- Matt Casamassina

Quote:July 01, 2004
A reply to Matt Casamassina, IGN

Hi, it's Chris. I think we should talk.

What’s your full first name? Matteo? Matthew? Mattias? Doesn’t matter. I’ll just call you Matt. I read your article, Matt. You criticized Nintendo for not capitalizing on the popularity of Super Smash Bros: Melee, while Microsoft’s Halo 2 is so popular even Justin Timberlake enjoys it. In fact, Justin Timberlake is dating Cameron Diaz. You certainly don’t see Cameron Diaz getting pounded by someone that plays Cubivore.

Matt, I have to be honest. Your article comes across as someone fuming over the fact that their favorite game doesn’t have a new sequel. That’s fine. I mean, I’m not going to write a serious article about why Nintendo should make a sequel to Ice Hockey, but sometimes people get overly excited when talking about something they love. However, you made an assertion that should make everyone pause and wonder - wonder why you think Nintendo is hurting themselves by not releasing another entry in the Super Smash Bros series.

In your tagline, it says that Nintendo ignored a franchise phenomenon while Microsoft created one. Well, kudos to MS, they have one. How many does Nintendo have? Mario, Zelda, Metroid…believe me, I could go on. And I will! Fire Emblem, Custom Robo…oh, those don’t count because they’re only popular in Japan? Okay, how about the newly christened Pikmin, the pink one, Kirby, and the ever popular Pokemon…no, too cute? Well, okay, we’ll stick with Mario, Zelda, and Metroid, then. And not F-Zero, or Donkey Kong, or…ahem. Plus, I promise not to talk about any GameBoy Advance incarnations, or the planned DS incarnations, because your focus was on the Cube.

Mario, through its existence, has seen more spin-offs than anyone could ever have anticipated, plus plenty of straight sequels. This generation, when Mario wasn’t enjoying the Sunshine, he was having a Party, playing Golf or Tennis, or going Kart racing. He’s even going to star in an upcoming RPG adventure that looks good on Paper and will probably be even better in execution. Mario’s brother, Luigi, has even managed to exorcise ghosts in a Mansion.

The Zelda franchise has been healthy. Aside from the popular Wind Waker, the multiplayer puzzler Four Swords and Tetra’s Trackers (the latter seen in Japan), have been released, and Nintendo even had two different promotions which gave free versions of classic Zelda games to gamers. Plus, there’s a new Zelda in the works due out by next year.

Metroid, on the other hand, hasn’t been so hot…unless you count Metroid Prime and the upcoming sequel to Prime. Metroid Prime relaunched a franchise that hadn’t seen a game since rappers wore glittery pants and had clocks around their necks.

You might say Nintendo is neglecting a franchise in Super Smash Bros, but I’m here to tell you Nintendo’s lucky if it has time to sleep with all the attention its been giving their other franchises.

The main point in your argument was that Super Smash Bros: Melee is one of Nintendo’s best selling titles, and Nintendo/Hal should be working on a sequel to it right this very second. Well, sure, SSB:M did well, but don't forget that it was released in December 2001. I think, perhaps, that it has had a head start over other titles, wouldn’t you agree? Super Mario Sunshine, a game released in August 2002, actually outsold SSB:M for all of 2002 (according to NPD Funworld).

Of course, we’d have to look at what else Nintendo released at the same time as SSB:M. Let’s see…Luigi’s Mansion and Wave Race: Blue Storm. LucasArts released Rogue Leader and Sega released Super Monkey Ball, and that about covers it for exclusives. They’re not bad games, but they’re not blockbuster console sellers, either. In fact, some would say Nintendo’s launch titles were a bit weak. Matt, do you think SSB:M would have been the highest selling launch title if a new Mario or Zelda was released at the same time? What about Metroid?

If you want to get down to finances, and you want Nintendo to sell the most, then SSB:M isn’t your answer. A fighting game made up of other game’s mascots isn’t something to build your fortunes on. The big franchise names out of all three consoles, three years in a row, have been Grand Theft Auto and Madden (and Pokémon, but I promised not to talk about GBA games). Would you prefer it if Nintendo and its friends scrapped Samus and Link and focused on trying to top a free-roaming crime game and a football blockbuster? Somehow, that doesn’t scream Nintendo’s style.

Don’t worry, though, Nintendo is doing alright for itself. According to NPD Funworld, Nintendo’s GameCube had a 40% unit sales increase in 2003 over 2002, while the PS2 had a 25% decline and Xbox broke even. Nintendo’s corporate retail revenues increased 16% in 2003 compared to the year before. If you ignore the two Pokémon titles at the #2 and #3 slots in the best selling games list of 2003, you will see a Nintendo game at #5…which is…let me see…why, yes, it’s The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker.

And this is just the U.S. Sure, it’s the largest market for video games in the world, but it’s not Nintendo’s sole bread and butter. Nintendo routinely has games in the top ten for weekly sales in Japan, while Microsoft is lucky to crack the top twenty. Halo sales topped at 75,000 in Japan, by the way (MSN).

Still you persist. Bungie and Microsoft, you claim, are the greatest duo since Sonny and Cher. So, what has Bungie been up to since Halo? Halo 2? Nothing else? What about other MS first party developers? Rare? Micro Forté? Excuse me if I don’t concede victory to Microsoft.

Nevertheless, you say Halo 2 has all of the hype while Nintendo has nothing. You’ll have to excuse me, Matt, if I don’t let Nintendo’s success or failure rest on the shoulders of Justin Timberlake, who is so inept with women that he opened up a can of worms during the Super Bowl. Or maybe it was a can of boob. Either way, he’s an idiot. I will give more consideration to the next fart that passes out of my ass than I will Justin Timberlake’s video game preferences. And excuse me if I’m not dying for preteen queen Justin Timberlake to be associated with Nintendo.

But back to the hype. You ask the readers, Matt, why Nintendo isn’t trying to drown out Halo 2. You were at E3. You heard every jaw drop at the sign of one game. It wasn’t Halo 2. It was the new Zelda title. It’s coming out in 2005, and the few minutes of footage have already caused a bigger stir than all of the months Halo 2 has been in development. If by “dropping the ball” you meant Nintendo is “grabbing our balls and shaking them like a madman,” then you would be correct.

All things considered, I would be willing to say the new “mature” Zelda will outsell Halo 2. It’s a mighty big claim, considering the massive mainstream appeal of the Halo “franchise” that you cling to like a wet t-shirt to a large bosom, but this new Zelda is something fans have been wanting since before the first Halo. Wind Waker was great, to be sure, and it sold tremendously, but it’s not what people desired in the bottom of their hearts.

Soul Calibur II on the Cube outsold the Xbox and PS2 versions because of the exclusive Link addition, as you pointed out. Yet somehow you come to the conclusion that this means Nintendo fans want a new fighting game, and not that they are enamored with the Zelda franchise. If you put Link in MVP Baseball on the GameCube, it would outsell the other console versions, too. It’s not the type of game, but the character. People make connections with characters. There’s only so much that can be done in the First-Person Shooter genre, especially with nameless figures that have no emotional connection with the fanbase. The Zelda universe, on the other hand, is only limited by what the imagination can conceive and how to express that through the technology. Sure, the core values are the same, but Ocarina of Time, Majora’s Mask, Wind Waker and Four Swords are diverse from each other in a way Halo’s sequels could never, ever be.

SSB:M did well because it took our favorite mascots and pitted them together. But it’s a diversion, a treat, a side attraction. It should not be the centerpiece of the system, anymore than Mario Kart. As I said, if Nintendo had launched with a main franchise title, it would have seriously outperformed SSB:M. And don’t get me wrong, Matt, I like the series. But it’s better suited for a once-in-a-console-generation release, like Mario Tennis or Paper Mario. I’d much rather have a new Zelda or Metroid or flagship Mario title than I would a new SSB:M, and I suspect many fans would concur.

I know this Halo 2 thing bothers you, Matt. Don’t worry about it. In ten years, people will still be playing Zelda. If the Halo franchise is doing half as well Zelda, and if it is not just a memory, then that will be a tremendous achievement. If you had bothered to ask which is more important, a 27 year old buying Halo or a 7 year old buying Super Mario Sunshine, I would have answered the latter. I was once a 7 year old, sitting on the floor in front of my TV, jumping and swaying with the action as I navigated a portly plumber over pipes and chasms. I’m still doing that today, although not necessarily on the floor, and in 15 years, that child will still be playing Mario at the age of 22. I somehow doubt the 42 year old will still be playing Halo.

Nintendo builds for the future while satisfying the present. It’s worked for the longest time, and it will continue to work. Trust me. Nintendo and its cohorts are focusing on the parts of its illustrious franchises that need to be released.
Posted by Chris at July 1, 2004 05:57 PM

Quote:Justin Timberlake, who is so inept with women that he opened up a can of worms during the Super Bowl. Or maybe it was a can of boob.

Quote:That read was... interesting. Don't be surprised if IGN never even gets wind of that guy's response though.

Dark Jaguar Wrote:Yeah, concerning KOTOR, it was only an exclusive for a few months, so that doesn't really count as a killer app for the XBox. KOTOR 2 seems the same way. Honestly, I think I'll get the PC version there as, concerning the first one, the XBox version has NOTHING on the PC version, at all, but the PC version has control and graphical superiority (plus, the bugs are actually getting fixed, somewhat).

Quote:Yeah, I really wasn't thinking it should use the duel screen or touch screen modes myself. Anything I can think of would just make it cheap. Honestly, the upcoming Metroid game for DS, where you just point at the thing you want to die and it dies, seems so cheap as to kill all challenge. I mean, aiming should involve SOME level of challenge. Mouse or control stick, you still need to actually point with some level of real aiming difficulty. Here, you just touch the thing you want to die. That's about as challenging as playing Duck Hunt by actually putting the light gun right up against the screen (come on, I know we all did it) rather than actually standing a few feet back and actually aiming.

Quote:Yeah, concerning KOTOR, it was only an exclusive for a few months, so that doesn't really count as a killer app for the XBox. KOTOR 2 seems the same way. Honestly, I think I'll get the PC version there as, concerning the first one, the XBox version has NOTHING on the PC version, at all, but the PC version has control and graphical superiority (plus, the bugs are actually getting fixed, somewhat).

Quote:FF1 on TV!

[07-05-2003 8:15 PM]

Some of you might be lucky(?) enough to get the TV channel G4, an entire channel about video games. Well today they did a brief review of FF Origins. Five minutes at the end of a show, but hey, better than nothing. Some highlights were seeing them have a White Mage cast HARM on Garland for some reason, and seeing a black belt getting killed by an Ogre. :) They also reviewed FF2j which is also part of FFO for those of you who haven't bought it (yet). Apparently they believe that Cecil, Rosa, and Tellah are among the characters in FF2j. Apparently G4's writers have also never played FF2 or FF4 in their lives.

Dark Jaguar Wrote:Mario Party is a great game, but with so MANY, well, I have a hard time justifying buying the latest version when I know a few months will pass and the next will be announced. I just keep thinking "oh, I'll just wait until the next one". For that reason, I don't own ANY of the Mario Party games :D. I would have owned the first, but by the time I got around to thinking about getting it, MP2 was out and MP3 had been announced, so it began. My standing now is that I'll wait until that very first online Mario Party game and that'll be the first I get. Yes, it'll be a while, but I am still convinced that, while not for a few years, Nintendo will eventually have to form an online plan for their console.

Quote:Overall, I'd say the console versions of these two really are better than the PC ports. I'd attribute that to Eidos' failings at that job myself. I don't own either port as you might imagine, but I've seen all I need to see. Now, I have only read a few things about the MMX ports. I downloaded the MMX demo, and found it VERY blocky in appearence, and thus inferior to the SNES version. Now, maybe they did some anti-aliasing for the full version or something, but the demo certainly didn't. I imagine similar things might be wrong with the other X games that made it to PC, but I don't know enough to be certain.

Quote:FF7 and FF8 did indeed get PC releases. Why didn't I go for them? Well, I could point out that my PC at the time SUCKED (though now I COULD play KOTOR for PC and make it look better), but I'll also point out that even if my PC could play those games (which had much higher requirements than they should have), I wouldn't get them for a few reasons.

Quote:The other case for this of course is Pokemon, but I didn't really think that that had to be said.

Quote:but by most other standards just doesn't seem like a very good idea

Quote:I'm sure just about all of us would, but I don't want SSB to become another washed out series with too many sequels like that two. They'll make another SSB when they think they can do something new that'll warrant a sequel, I'm sure of it.

Quote:Street Fighter may not be full of blood but it's still definitely a lot more violent than SSB, and Nintendo cares about stuff like that...