Surprisingly though, Nintendo has revitalized one of the most ignored and antiquated game design elements that, I thought, had gone by the wayside - points. Yes, points matter, or at the very least, are supposed to matter. The first Mario game on the NES had a point system, but it wasn't paid attention to very highly. The high score would always reset whenever the console was turned off, and frankly, the only reason they were there in the first place was a shadow of the "high score" mentality from the arcade days. Arcade games used points as a means to drive competition/sales. It's my theory that when home consoles hit the market, the consumer stopped caring about points, because, well... who's there to beat? Your family? Your friends who come over? Having your initials immortalized in a public arcade box was one thing, but on your own tv? Not nearly as impressive.
Coins are a huge element in this game, but it's hard to explain why... Coins have always been a means of rewarding free lives (which I'll talk about later) but collecting them was always a consequence of the level completion, not the game's main focus for the player. Each individual level has a high score of coins collected, which contribute to a cumulative total for total play time. In an afternoon of owning this game, I've collected approximately 14,000 coins. There is something... primal about gaming for the sake of seeing numbers rise. It's almost the same sort of "addictive" quality about prestiging in the COD games... something of a bragging right, even if no one around you truly cares.
 |
| "This actually happens in the game... I wish I was lying to you." |
Something that creates the drive to make that number rise, is how your personal cumulative total contributes to a global/regional total. Players from around the world are collecting coins with you, creating a pool that Scrooge McDuck would love to dive headfirst into. Nintendo has been somewhat quiet about the overall purpose of collecting all these coins... maybe free DLC? Unlockables for all involved... who knows. I do know that it puts a slight sense of purpose behind playing this game. It sure isn't the narrative structure that keeps bringing me back to Mario, and it's kinda cool to see Nintendo acknowledge that.
The big N hasn't only changed it's focus, but it's almost gotten sort of post-modern about itself. Everyone knows that sometime around Super Mario World, lives / 1ups in a Mario games have felt sort of unnecessary. Most players know multiple tricks to make the number of lives they have so high, the number itself becomes meaningless. Similarly to the coins, lives work the same way. I think I have 86 lives at the point of writing this, but the counter has spots for three digits... giving Nintendo the benefit of the doubt, that means they are anticipating me to wrack up lives somewhere in the hundreds.
Talk about sending a message... "Oh what's that? Our lives are meaningless? I guess we'll roll with that... here's 30 free ones on us." It's almost like they are deliberately making fun of themselves. Or they are finally catching on to what people need. I don't mean need as far as in the difficulty of the game, but need as in desire of gameplay. We like to see big numbers, and be impressed with ourselves. Does it make the game easier? Of course! But that's part of the charm, the allure, the... Mario-ness.
It's a fun game, but you all new that. It's rare these days that Mario gets a game all about him that doesn't fit the bill. I don't anticipate anyone here playing this one (I'm almost certain I'm the only one with a 3DS), but I found this new twist intriguing. I thought the coins would be distracting, and frivolous, but instead I found that it supports a design strategy that Nintendo has been using for a while, it just ups the ante a little, and a new sort of attention to one of the most tried and true Mario elements - getting them coins.
Not surprised that you got or liked this game. Btw, TJ got it specifically for his wife as she really likes Mario. TJ doesn't play his 3DS, though.
ReplyDeleteIt's funny that you said points don't really matter, but then went on to explain how coins, a type of point keeping, are what makes the game so fun.
The jaded gamer in me doesn't think N did any of the stuff you mentioned to add to the game. It's just another element that has always been there. The only reason I ever picked up coins in Sonic was for extra men, which weren't as easy to come by as Mario.
I would argue that a points system is more fun that coins. If all the coins are "findable" and in the open then it's really only a matter of jumping to get them. With a points system you could also factor in coins, speed, deaths etc. This would give a better indicator at skill than a base coin number. Unless you count the "hidden" areas with coins which only need a wikiguide to find and therefore remove skill again.
Add a leaderboard to the skill system and THEN you have something fun. Whether you're competing globally or just with friends it's more fun to see where you rank. I think of Batman: Arkham Asylum's leaderboards when I think of this.
I've watched my wife play Super Mario World (the first one with Yoshi...I probably botched the name) and she's fucking awesome at it. There are numerous levels she still speed runs through to this day and nabs a ton of extra men all at once.
Mario gets a lot of grace, but CoD doesn't?
I guess to you it's a refreshing update, but to me it's like...really...again?
I have pretty mixed feelings on Mario. For how similar all the 2-D Mario games appear to be, I think they've each added something significant or different to the gameplay despite having the same framework and storyline (if you want to call it that).
ReplyDelete"Super Mario Bros. 2" gave us four characters to choose from, each with different abilities.
"Super Mario Bros. 3" added the ability to store up items and use them at your leisure.
"Super Mario World" was Yoshi's first appearance, giving you the ability to eat enemies and "double jump," among other things. Also, this game had certain stages where there were two exits: the normal one reached by simply just "going to the right," and the secret exit, which added a lot of replay value and a hint of mystery.
"Super Mario World 2" added a scorekeeping mechanic, where you got a certain score out of 100 for each stage, depending on how many stars, hidden red coins, and flowers you were able to collect and maintain. This was the most addicting game for me out of the whole bunch. Getting a perfect score on EVERY level proved fiendishly difficult and extremely satisfying.
I never played any of the games for Game Boy, so I can't speak for those, but I have played "New Super Mario Bros." for the DS. Here's one where I really felt like they were just going through the motions. They added the Giant Mushroom power up (I haven't been counting new powerups as additions for the other games) and the ability to wall-slide.
Maybe they're running out of ideas, maybe not. However, it doesn't seem nearly as "criminal" to me as Call of Duty simply because we don't get a new 2-D Mario platformer every November like clockwork.
Well, I probably shouldn't have made a COD comparison, because I wasn't trying to compare anything other than both being addictive stimuli, but even that is different in nature.
ReplyDeleteI don't think I explained my perspective on how this game works, or my point was missed. The way your wife plays Mario World is the sort of stimulus that this system creates... trust me, I know, I play Mario World the same way. At some point in Mario's history, "secrets" like the levels that reward speeding through and getting a bunch of extra lives became standard. This game just furthers that process...
I'm in world 2 (of 8, I would presume) and have 159 lives. Of course that number means nothing! But that's sort of the point... It's become a sort of "scoring system", as it were. I just played a level and by getting the correct power-ups, and using them in the right place, I walked away with 1,356 coins. Ludicrous.
It's not laziness, it's just a switch... Way back when, replay value was defined by a games difficulty, so a real simple way to up the difficulty was to limit how many extra men you got. As our game design has gotten more... complicated, so has what makes a game challenging. Every now and then we get a game with that old school difficulty and challenge, one that requires mastery of the systems in place (Ninja Gaiden Black, which you rocked by the way), but most of the time designers are using new gimmicks to make it more fun.
Like leaderboards - what an easy way to push our buttons! Compare your score globally... It takes little to no extra programming or design, and it draws out that super competitive nature that so many gamers have. Nothing has intrinsically changed about the game, but the whole thing feels fresh, and new, probably because the purpose for playing has changed. At that point it's not about playing the game, but beating your buddy.
I'm not giving this game praise because it's a masterpiece of game design. I'm not giving it praise for the breakthrough in graphic technology it's pioneering. I'm sure as hell not giving it praise for the deep dialogue (Mama Mia!). But I am giving it praise for taking something solid and consistent, that they know would sell well, and changing the perspective to something more culturally relevant... Every game has a ranking system now... Goodness, the consoles do it for us - we measure our general worth as gamers in terms of achievements, trophies, and gamerscores. I think this is a great way for Mario to chime in on that conversation, even if what he's saying is old news.