SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic - Y'know what? Sometimes I just want the exact same game.

Joined: Feb 24 2006 Posts: 2578

I'm tired of constant complaining about new games in a series not being completely original. You know what? Bite me.

Here's a game I loved: New Super Mario Bros. Wii. You know what would be great? Sell me the exact same game, but with different levels. Don't overhaul the engine and the graphics. Just give me more levels to play.

I feel like this is taboo in the game development world. Like there's something wrong with taking a good game and just doing that again. Hell, why couldn't a small team of developers crank out another NSMBW game while a bigger team works on the next "original" Mario game? Is that madness?

It's done to some extent with FPSes and Madden, but why not more platformers? Am I missing something?

Posted: Nov 30 2010 01:27 pm

It's been done with Mario Vs. Donkey Kong. The DSiWare game they released was basically just MvDK2 Remix.

And let's not forget Mario Galaxy 2.

And if anything, people were upset that Sonic 4 WASN'T just new Sonic 2 levels.

But I do understand your point.

I was very upset that "Super Mario World 2" wasn't just new Super Mario World levels. I mean, come on, there was what, ONE level with Torpedo Teds?

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

It seems as though DLC is the answer that most companies have been using to extend the life of modern games. On the Wii it is a bit more difficult, but on the PC, if I enjoy a game, I can get more of the same with a release of additional content.

At the largest level, MMOs thrive on DLC and expansions.

So, I guess this exists already. The question is, why aren't more games employing what seems to be a successful technique. I really wish I had an answer on this one.

So, I definitely agree that this should be done more and I share the desire to have more of the same.

Example:
I think games like The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion could have released a second full game on the same engine and people would have been exceptionally happy with it. If they had fixed a few more of the bugs in the engine it would have been even better. Why not just keep improving it?

Example:
Far Cry 2 was awesome. They had a map editor already and all the talent they needed to make more content. Why not fix bugs in the engine and release a full blown expansion?

Example:
Borderlands. The DLC is great, but why stop with 4? Why create another new game with a new engine instead of just making more content with the same one?

Posted: Nov 30 2010 01:55 pm

Eight Metal Slug games isn't enough for me.

Posted: Nov 30 2010 02:47 pm

Seriously, I've thought the same thing. Everytime I read a review that whines a new game isn't completely original in every single way, I want to tell them to go to hell. I'll play 100 8-bit Mega Man games if they keep dishing them out.

Posted: Nov 30 2010 03:21 pm

This.

DarkMaze wrote:

I'm tired of constant complaining about new games in a series not being completely original. You know what? Bite me.

Here's a game I loved: New Super Mario Bros. Wii. You know what would be great? Sell me the exact same game, but with different levels. Don't overhaul the engine and the graphics. Just give me more levels to play.

I feel like this is taboo in the game development world. Like there's something wrong with taking a good game and just doing that again. Hell, why couldn't a small team of developers crank out another NSMBW game while a bigger team works on the next "original" Mario game? Is that madness?

It's done to some extent with FPSes and Madden, but why not more platformers? Am I missing something?

and this

Sidewaydriver wrote:

Seriously, I've thought the same thing. Everytime I read a review that whines a new game isn't completely original in every single way, I want to tell them to go to hell. I'll play 100 8-bit Mega Man games if they keep dishing them out.

Posted: Nov 30 2010 03:27 pm

If they want completely original, shouldn't they play different game franchises? If you don't want to play Mario 7658 because it is similar to Mario 7657, why not try something else?

Joined: May 22 2008 Location: Goshen, VA Posts: 6544

GPFontaine wrote:

Example:
I think games like The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion could have released a second full game on the same engine and people would have been exceptionally happy with it. If they had fixed a few more of the bugs in the engine it would have been even better. Why not just keep improving it?

Fallout 3 used the exact same engine as Oblivion, holmes. That is a second full game on the same engine and people were exceptionally happy with it.

Anways, DarkMaze is talking about platformers, and I wholeheartedly agree with him. I could play Mario levels until I'm too old to hold the controller.

Posted: Nov 30 2010 04:19 pm

I would love to just keep playing new Brawl stages with new characters, however Nintendo seems vehemently against DLC (not openly... just that they for some reason don't make it ever)... It's either a nice shiny new $50 game or nothing. If nintendo could upgrade the wii with some kind of extensive memory storage (like a hard drive that connects with a USB cable to the back of the wii, and the drive is actually the wii stand. I think that would work out well) then we could finally get some unbelievably badass wii DLC so we can just keep on playing games! DLC for brawl, DLC for NSMB wii, DLC for Galaxy, DLC for EVERYTHING! It took Nintendo a generation and a half to embrace online play, who knows how long it will take them to even think about DLC.

Posted: Nov 30 2010 04:28 pm

Eh, the storage isn't really a problem. I'm pretty sure SD Cards can hold up to 32 GB at this point. I think a big reason why Nintendo doesn't embrace DLC is because they cater a lot to casual gamers/young kids. Casual gamers aren't going nuts checking DLC or actually buying it. Kids don't have the access to do it and if they ask a parent, I'd say many would just say " I bought you the damn game, that's plenty" or the likes.

Posted: Nov 30 2010 04:30 pm

I think DLC is a scam.

Posted: Nov 30 2010 04:31 pm

sidewaydriver wrote:

I think DLC is a scam.

This is also a good point. Why the hell can't this shit just already be in the $50, $60 game I just bought?

Joined: Feb 24 2006 Posts: 2578

Rydog wrote:

sidewaydriver wrote:

I think DLC is a scam.

This is also a good point. Why the hell can't this shit just already be in the $50, $60 game I just bought?

Chill. We're not talking about that kind of DLC.

I'm talking about actual new additional levels, whether DLC or even as a standalone game. And as Josh mentioned, I'm predominantly talking about platformers, since other genres do have that to some extent.

Posted: Nov 30 2010 04:35 pm

It can't be in the original game because...
A. It doesn't go with the game's storyarc and they just want to have a fun adventurous sidequest in the DLC
B. The ideas were thought up after the game was created.
C. The success of the game was unprecedented. So they are trying to cash in on this.
D. MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY!

Posted: Nov 30 2010 05:16 pm

I wish they'd re-release the SMB3 e-Reader levels as a stand alone game. An e-Reader is cheap enough, but those SMB3 cards are too rich for my blood.

And I mean, why not? If they were willing to make all new levels for a crappy peripheral, why not just make a whole new game on the engine? Why doesn't the Wii version of All-Stars have Super Mario Bros: The New Levels? Would it really have cost that much to R&D 32 new levels?

Posted: Nov 30 2010 05:43 pm

I'm totally on board with this. I have classic games that I love, and somebody adding on to that game and making more of something I loved sounds really great. If somebody made a sequel to Chrono Trigger with the exact same gameplay but a new story, I would buy that in seconds. Hell, I bought the DS remake of Chrono Trigger just because I loved the original so much.

I feel the same way about Zelda games. Reviewers always complain about new Zelda games being too much like the classic Zelda formula, but if that formula has been awesome for like a dozen games already, why wouldn't you try to stick with it?

Joined: Sep 25 2009 Location: Bergen, Norway Posts: 395

There is also not a lot of other games out there that plays like Zelda, which makes it perfectly fine that at least Zelda does it. Reviewers should complain more about originality in shooters, and less in adventure-games like Zelda since they play so different from most of the crap that is out there.

And for plattformers: Give us New Super Mario World!

2010 SLF Tag Champ Joined: Jun 07 2006 Posts: 12294

I agree with this train of thought fir most games, but at the same time, we all know that in this new world of multimillion dollar games, mountain dew tie ins, and Gamestop preorder bonuses, that nobody will make any real money if they don't make high profile sequels to high profile games.

Personally though, I feel that if it isn't broken, just give me more of what I enjoyed in the first place. Make sure that it comes packed with enough new content to warrant a purchase.

Wizard Joined: Jun 12 2009 Posts: 4209

taterfyrings wrote:

There is also not a lot of other games out there that plays like Zelda, which makes it perfectly fine that at least Zelda does it. Reviewers should complain more about originality in shooters, and less in adventure-games like Zelda since they play so different from most of the crap that is out there.

This, pretty much. People were complaining about TP's unoriginality, somewhat, and I wanted to kill some of them.

Posted: Dec 01 2010 12:50 am

Drew Linky wrote:

taterfyrings wrote:

There is also not a lot of other games out there that plays like Zelda, which makes it perfectly fine that at least Zelda does it. Reviewers should complain more about originality in shooters, and less in adventure-games like Zelda since they play so different from most of the crap that is out there.

This, pretty much. People were complaining about TP's unoriginality, somewhat, and I wanted to kill some of them.

Well, it is Ocarina 2.0, though I do love Twilight Princess (maybe most), I see their argument.

Posted: Dec 01 2010 01:17 am

Dark Maze is so right it hurts. It can take several tries just to take full advantage of the game mechanics, so this hyper new fixation platformers-wise is unhealthy.

Castlevania is for the most part the exception, and has done well for it.

Posted: Dec 01 2010 05:44 am

Encouraging originality encourages gimmicks. I wholeheartedly approve of this thread.

Joined: Sep 25 2009 Location: Bergen, Norway Posts: 395

Rydog wrote:

Drew Linky wrote:

taterfyrings wrote:

There is also not a lot of other games out there that plays like Zelda, which makes it perfectly fine that at least Zelda does it. Reviewers should complain more about originality in shooters, and less in adventure-games like Zelda since they play so different from most of the crap that is out there.

This, pretty much. People were complaining about TP's unoriginality, somewhat, and I wanted to kill some of them.

Well, it is Ocarina 2.0, though I do love Twilight Princess (maybe most), I see their argument.

It is, but the wolf mechanics and the motion control makes it more different from Ocarina than most shooters are from their predecessors, and we never hear that whining when they arrive.

Of course I want Zelda and all franchises to evolve, but if they continue on the awesome path they already are, than I am actually fine with that as well.