Editor’s note: I imagine this is the type of feedback that drives developers nuts. Scott talks about how the Zelda series needs some reimagining, while Mario’s been on the right track, innovation-wise (and for the record, I totally agree). But what he considers to be rehashes in Zelda, someone else probably finds revolutionary. It just goes to show how completely subjective our tastes are. -Shoe
“A²+B²=C²,” I have heard my math-teacher wife say before. It’s a formula called “The Pythagorean Theorem.” It’s a constant — it never changes. It’s been that way since before most people knew what math even was, really.
Why am I boring you with mathematical formulas and theories? Well, to paraphrase Crow T. Robot, “I smell a rant coming on.”
Game franchises have become far too formulaic. They may look better these days, but all games come from basically the same genes. One could argue that without Pitfall, there would be no Uncharted 2. Or how without Pong, there would be no Geometry Wars. Granted, these examples demonstrate huge leaps in technology, but nevertheless, the originals were the seeds laid early in the fertile ground that have grown into the games that we love so much today.
Innovation is a buzz word in the video game industry that is probably used too much, but it is exactly what we need today. Now, I understand that from radical innovation often comes horrible things, including, but not limited to, crappy or broken games. For every Metroid Prime you’ll get 10 Bubsy 3Ds. Just walk down the Wii aisle of any major games retailer, and you’ll see a wide range of shovel-ware.
Some series have become so stuck in their ways that their developers seem to see innovation as a bad thing. Usually the cash cows are most guilty of this, simply because their owners see them as part of the “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” genre. However, after a certain number of iterations — and years — something’s got to give.
Take the Zelda series, for instance. Before the Internet bursts into flames here, let me start by saying that I love Zelda. I have owned most every game released with any connection to Nintendo’s other princess that can’t stay out of trouble.
But honestly, how much has the series changed on a fundamental level since its inception? Very little. Sure, we’ve seen graphical updates — even a control-scheme change or two — but at the heart of every chapter is the same thing: mostly the same characters and the same exact weapons and items. Even the bulk of the locales are the same.
Much like Nintendo’s other juggernaut series, Zelda games will always feature water worlds, fire worlds, as well as some wind and earth themes.
But let’s change it up a bit. Don’t make me go searching for the Heavy Boots again just to trudge around in the sunken palace. Let’s give Link some new weapons and do away with searching for the same tired ones. Or for god’s sake, let me keep the ones I had in the previous nine games (I’m looking at you, too, Metroid!) and create new weapons for me to use. I don’t expect Zelda to become a “loot drop” game, but at least gimme something fresh. Variety is the spice of life, right?
Some games do change over time. You might say that the Super Mario Bros. series has remained static, and in some respects that’s true — you’re still essentially just running down Bowser for kidnapping Princess Peach. When you look at individual games, however, they start to show major differences. I don’t want to spend too much time on this, but just take a look at the original, then the Tanooki suit, moving to 3D, then trekking around from planet to planet…not to mention all the Mario offshoots, like Mario vs. Donkey Kong, Super Mario RPG, Mario and Luigi, and — like it or not — Luigi’s Mansion. All of them have their own unique feel and drastically different gameplay styles.
I’m not saying that every game has to be totally different, to the point of alienating the fan base. I’m just asking for something fresh once in a while — change the gameplay mechanics, add in new weapons and items, maybe switch up the characters…that’s all.