Mario is crap!
A few months back, to show how often I put my thoughts on here anymore, I was thinking that Mario and Mickey Mouse are the same character. They are both happy, go-lucky guys who are helpful and potentially heroic. Aside from that, there isn't much to say about them. This is understandable in the case of Mario, where you project yourself onto the character you're playing -- something that seems to be a forgotten technique. So, there isn't much to them. Why are they popular. I think the answer is simple: they were in quality products.
Mario's games were always among the best of their time, up through the 8-bit era. He became the posterboy for the NES, which redefined gaming for its generation. His games continue to be of at least average quality, though we've kind of been in the Roger Moore era for a while now, if you know what I mean. Mickey Mouse was a product of the most talented pool of animators the industry has ever seen. After he was developed a bit and they had honed their craft to near-perfection, Mickey Mouse was one of the primary tools they used in their storytelling. It's no wonder he was popular.
This goes along with something I sort of picked up from John K.'s blog: intellectual properties aren't valuable, talent is. Most of the attempts to redo Mickey Mouse or the old Looney Toons are them going through the motions, using the old gags, the old music cues, etc. but without the talent and understanding of why they worked. They are valuable intellectual properties to their respective companies, who want to keep them out of the public domain forever and in the public's mind. So they hire guys who loved these characters as kids, but who make lifeless hackneyed cartoons. I see this whenever someone tries to do the Wile E. Coyote and Roadrunner stuff -- it is just is lacking what made the old Chuck Jones cartoons so darn funny.
I see the same thing with Mario. Mario was the tool Shigeru Miyamoto and company used when they were creating their early games. After Mario 64 I think Mr. Miyamoto lost interest in Mario and let him go, moving on to different things. The company continued to use Mario, but that organic zest to make those games was gone, replaced with a corporate need to make more Mario games. Mega Man IX was good because the old creators were creatively invested in making that game.
This sort of was brought to my mind when discussing creating your own D&D game world with flyinglandon, as I had been thinking that Greyhawk and the Forgotten Realms are really kind of dull worlds. I think their initial appeal is the fact that Gary Gygax and Ed Greenwood are (allegedly) excellent dungeon masters. I suspect most people with the creativity to be a dungeon master can make a world that's better than or equal to those two, but it seems like few do anymore. This doesn't explain the mass appeal of these two worlds, though, since few players have played under those dungeon masters. We have a mediocre world supported by bad novels. I have to say, I'm mystified by the appeal. The other campaign worlds at least had gimmicks to set them apart.
Mario's games were always among the best of their time, up through the 8-bit era. He became the posterboy for the NES, which redefined gaming for its generation. His games continue to be of at least average quality, though we've kind of been in the Roger Moore era for a while now, if you know what I mean. Mickey Mouse was a product of the most talented pool of animators the industry has ever seen. After he was developed a bit and they had honed their craft to near-perfection, Mickey Mouse was one of the primary tools they used in their storytelling. It's no wonder he was popular.
This goes along with something I sort of picked up from John K.'s blog: intellectual properties aren't valuable, talent is. Most of the attempts to redo Mickey Mouse or the old Looney Toons are them going through the motions, using the old gags, the old music cues, etc. but without the talent and understanding of why they worked. They are valuable intellectual properties to their respective companies, who want to keep them out of the public domain forever and in the public's mind. So they hire guys who loved these characters as kids, but who make lifeless hackneyed cartoons. I see this whenever someone tries to do the Wile E. Coyote and Roadrunner stuff -- it is just is lacking what made the old Chuck Jones cartoons so darn funny.
I see the same thing with Mario. Mario was the tool Shigeru Miyamoto and company used when they were creating their early games. After Mario 64 I think Mr. Miyamoto lost interest in Mario and let him go, moving on to different things. The company continued to use Mario, but that organic zest to make those games was gone, replaced with a corporate need to make more Mario games. Mega Man IX was good because the old creators were creatively invested in making that game.
This sort of was brought to my mind when discussing creating your own D&D game world with flyinglandon, as I had been thinking that Greyhawk and the Forgotten Realms are really kind of dull worlds. I think their initial appeal is the fact that Gary Gygax and Ed Greenwood are (allegedly) excellent dungeon masters. I suspect most people with the creativity to be a dungeon master can make a world that's better than or equal to those two, but it seems like few do anymore. This doesn't explain the mass appeal of these two worlds, though, since few players have played under those dungeon masters. We have a mediocre world supported by bad novels. I have to say, I'm mystified by the appeal. The other campaign worlds at least had gimmicks to set them apart.