• Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.

    However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.

    We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure.
  • Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

Nintendo releasing the same thing over again. What?

Born Better

God of Lightning
Not really sure if this the place for this, but here goes.

What is it with this? Let's take a look at Mario, Zelda, and Pokémon; the series commonly accused of this, and see whether or not they're all just the same things under a different name. For Mario and Zelda, I'm gonna start with the 3D games, because those are the ones people seem to have a problem with.

Mario:
64-First 3d Mario game

Sunshine- Completely different setting. Completely different stages. Different gameplay that utilizes FLUDD

Galaxy series- new setting and gameplay that uses the gravity gimmick

3D Land-...haven't actually payed attention to it, so I can't say

3D World-new setting, new gameplay that's a cross between the 3D and 2D games, co-op play with other characters besides Mario, and you don't even have to rescue Peach.

New Super Mario Bros.- I guess I can give them this one, but from what I understand, the whole point of this series is to basically be 2D Mario in 3D, and I'm pretty sure there's only one per console anyway baring Super Luigi U, though I may be wrong.

Zelda:
Ocarina of Time- First 3D Zelda

Majora's Mask- New setting, new story, masks, completely different format that has absolutely nothing to do with saving Zelda or any girl for that matter.

Wind Waker- new setting and story( which, for a very story driven series like this, is really enough), no Zelda in sight until near the end

Twilight Princess- new setting, new story, Wolf Link

Skyward Sword-new setting, new story, motion control gameplay, upgradable equipment, sprinting, Hero Mode

Pokémon, AKA the one that gets it the worst. This should be fun:
Gen 1- The beginning, Gary. Mother. *censored*ing. Oak

Gen 2- New pokemon, new setting, new story, Dark and Steel type, berries, breeding, gender, female player character, day and night

Gen 3- New pokemon, new setting, new story, abilities, a revamped berry system, battle facilities, non-battle related activities, double battles,

Gen 4- New pokemon, new setting, new story, physical/special split( considered by many as the most significant addition to the series), wifi, GTS

Gen 5- New pokemon, new setting, 2 new stories ( the first of which becoming champion actually takes a back seat), Hidden abilities, triple and rotation battles, the, supposed, end of HMs...for the main story anyway.

Gen 6- New pokemon, setting, and story, 3D, Trainer customization, Fairy type, other changes to the type chart including electic types being immune to paralysis, grass types being immune to spore moves, etc., GTS anywhere, wonder trade, super training, pokemon-amie, Mega evolutions

So there you have it. ...Most of the signicant changes between the games for Nintendo's big 3 that so many people like to claim as being the same thing over and over. At most, the only thing any of these series have in common between games is a formula and even then, there's at least one game in each that breaks the formula to extent. Mario- save Peach, Zelda- save Zelda, Pokémon- beat gyms, become champion. But if that really makes them all the same thing, then I guess you could call God of War the same thing over and over because you're just killing Gods.
 
You can say the same about call of duty with there being different weapons and maps and a completely different story.
 

Jb

Tsun in the streets
You're kidding yourself if you don't think that Zelda and Pokemon are pretty much the same things over. Now that being said, that doesn't mean it's a bad thing.

Mario has a different problem, the character himself is too out there. He's in too many games. People are tired of it.
 
Zelda no. Pokemon....kinda. Mario, not really only the new super mario games and the spinoffs.
 

Jb

Tsun in the streets
Zelda no. Pokemon....kinda. Mario, not really only the new super mario games and the spinoffs.

Zelda yes. Every game, beat a few dungeons, get master sword, beat the rest of the dungeons. It's a formula that works.

The difference between these games and Call of Duty is that these release years apart of the previous one. Call of Duty on the other hand has been running on the same engine since forever so it doesn't benefit from updated hardware.
 
Last edited:
Yeah but they all have a completely different story and the dungeons are different. The items change from time to time and the setting is totally different. The only two zelda games that feel like clones are twilight princess and ocarina of time. Just because the structure is the same doesn't mean the game is.
 

Born Better

God of Lightning
Zelda yes. Every game, beat a few dungeons, get master sword, beat the rest of the dungeons. It's a formula that works.

The difference between these games and Call of Duty is that these release years apart of the previous one. Call of Duty on the other hand has been running on the same engine since forever so it doesn't benefit from updated hardware.
I'm guessing you missed the part I admitted that the formula was the same.

Really if anything is the same thing, it's the crap ton of capcom fighter rereleases. Exact same game with new characters and some rebalances that, for the most part, only hardcore competitive players are gonna actually notice.
 
Oh my... so much burn around to all my favorite games XD but yes I do understand what you mean.. but that will not stop me from buying them and playing my 3 favorite games EVAH!
 

Chalis

Victorious
Well, you cant expect them to release completely new games which are completely different. The only things supposed to make the games different are new gameplay, graphics/3d, story, characters etc.
 

tomatohater

Golden Sun 4?
That's like saying CoD or FIFA is an completely new game each time a new on releases, but it isn't. They just add either new guns and maps, or updated graphics and other little things that aren't usually that noticeable...

But, I guess, if it 'ain't broke, don't fix it...

If rereleasing the same thing gets Nintendo £Millions, then they aren't gonna change it are they?
 

MidnightMelody

Hopeful for Gen 8
TBH mots games are the same thing over and over except maybe change of people and setting. Not saying it is bad or anything
 
I think the only games that feel the same thing over and over again is Call of Duty and the New Super Mario Bros games. Anything else has a similar structure or formula, doesn't make it the same.
 

arized

#hsb
They could remake every legacy title for every new platform with various sequels if they pleased and I would still buy every single one. I love Star Fox, F-Zero, Metroid, Zelda, Mario, Donkey Kong, Kirby, Bomberman, etc. It could even fundamentally be the exact same game but with new levels. There are tons of non-legacy originals that I would love to see come back like Jet Force Gemini, Conker, Mystical Ninja, Castlevania, Chameleon Twist, Blast Corps, Snowboard Kids... there's another that currently eludes me.

I still play my Super Nintendo and any virtual console/ported games that I have. Super Mario World is like therapy for me. Nintendo just means fun.
 

Bolt the Cat

Bringing the Thunder
Haven't really played much Zelda, so I have nothing to say about that series. But as far as the other two go,

If you're in the crowd that says Pokemon is the same thing over and over again, you're looking at the wrong gameplay elements. The main games are meant to be about becoming the best trainer in the region, that's the reason they keep the Pokemon League structure. But the series does change in other ways, which is what's important. Look at some of the things they did in XY, they used a new graphical style that opens up new ways to design regions, a new movement system to go along with that new graphical style, a new type, a new kind of evolution, new features that improve the battling (Pokemon Amie and Super Training). The Pokemon series changes by tweaking battle mechanics and changing how you interact with the overworld, and that's enough to keep it from being the same thing each game.

Mario though, I agree that it's basically the same thing over and over. Ever since Galaxy, it seems that the series has stagnated, never adding or changing elements that add anything significant gameplay wise. Usually the only thing a new game adds is a new power up, which usually has little impact in the game and often functions similarly to an existing power up. Other than that, it's mainly the same gameplay, right down to the moves that Mario can perform and the obstacles Mario has to navigate through. The NSMB series is especially guilty of this, but even 3D Land is just a mishmash of past gameplay elements. 3D World I don't really know, but it doesn't really look that different.

I think Donkey Kong Country is close to doing this as well. I haven't seen anything in Donkey Kong Country Tropical Freeze that changes anything in the gameplay, most of the gameplay changes they're promoting don't really add anything new either. The 3D graphics only seem to be used in barrel cannon sections and mine cart sections, in places where they add nothing more than spectacle. Swimming is nothing new for the series, it was simply something that wasn't included in DKCR. The closest thing to new gameplay elements would be playable Cranky Kong and Kong POW, and those don't seem to add much either.

I think one of Nintendo's problems is that the settings are similar. Most Mario games take place in the Mushroom Kingdom (or equivalent area) with the same kinds of environments every game. Most Zelda games take place in Hyrule (except for the one timeline in the story containing Wind Waker, Phantom Hourglass, and Spirit Tracks). Most DK games take place in jungle areas. And they don't even try to put a twist on those environments like you'd see in say, Sonic the Hedgehog (say what you want about Windy Hill being another Green Hill, but at least it set itself apart with the tubelike level design and by being a part sky level), which I think is what Nintendo needs to start doing.

And then there's also that they seem to reuse certain gimmicks. Look at 3D Land, for instance. There's a lot of level concepts in this game that are reused from other Mario games, notably Galaxy 2. Copy/pasting those kinds of gimmicks from one game to the next really detracts from a game's uniqueness.
 

GravityStorm

Got it memorized?
3D World I don't really know, but it doesn't really look that different.
I think you've brought this up a couple times in another thread too. You should really play a game before you comment on its originality (or lack thereof). I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.

2D Mario and Pokemon are the only Nintendo games I'd say are the same game every year/couple of years. Of course, I'll still buy every Pokemon game that comes out, but the gameplay in every game is identical. 3D Mario and Zelda, on the other hand, are completely different games every time around (except Galaxy 2) because they introduce new gameplay elements in each new title. I would argue that it is not setting and story which makes games unique (though they can help), but new experiences in gameplay that aren't present in other titles. I don't really have enough experience to comment on DK or Kirby, but I feel like they're still doing pretty well as far as originality is concerned.
 

Chaos Emperor

No hope.....
When it comes to releasing the same thing over and over, pretty much ANY franchise is guilty of it. The difference with Nintendo is a lot if their franchises have been around much longer (Mario's been around since 1981, whereas most playstation and Xbox franchises are barely 10 years old), which I think is why they get this reputation, meanwhile we've had how many call of duties now? And we've has how many versions of angry birds? The thing I wonder is when gta, halo, god of war, and other more recent franchises hit the 30-year mark, will they be labeled as nothing but rehashes, or will they get a pass?
 

Bolt the Cat

Bringing the Thunder
When it comes to releasing the same thing over and over, pretty much ANY franchise is guilty of it. The difference with Nintendo is a lot if their franchises have been around much longer (Mario's been around since 1981, whereas most playstation and Xbox franchises are barely 10 years old), which I think is why they get this reputation, meanwhile we've had how many call of duties now? And we've has how many versions of angry birds? The thing I wonder is when gta, halo, god of war, and other more recent franchises hit the 30-year mark, will they be labeled as nothing but rehashes, or will they get a pass?

I don't think age is a factor, because if you would've asked this same question in say, 2008, most people would've laughed at you. But I think in recent years when we got 3 similar playing NSMB games (and within 3 years, no less), 2 Donkey Kong games which play similarly (plus a port of the first one), and 2 new consoles that don't do much different from their predecessors, you can't help but feel Nintendo is playing it too safe.
 

Chaos Emperor

No hope.....
I don't think age is a factor, because if you would've asked this same question in say, 2008, most people would've laughed at you. But I think in recent years when we got 3 similar playing NSMB games (and within 3 years, no less), 2 Donkey Kong games which play similarly (plus a port of the first one), and 2 new consoles that don't do much different from their predecessors, you can't help but feel Nintendo is playing it too safe.

i think age IS a factor, because again, people say that nintendo is the ONLY one who recycles their games (plus remember nintendo is one of the oldest companies in the gaming indusrty), while Halo, call of duty, gears of war, medal of honor, and resistance which in addition to all having a similar gameplay style, are all only about 10-12 years old and arent considered rehashes, while some of nintendos franchises are 25+ years old, which is why I asked, when halo hits its 30th anniversary, will it be in the same boat as mario and zelda (being called a recycled franchise), or will it get a pass?
 

Monek_OP

bernie2016
You can say the same about call of duty with there being different weapons and maps and a completely different story.

HAHAHAHAHAHA

You're kidding yourself if you don't think that Zelda and Pokemon are pretty much the same things over. Now that being said, that doesn't mean it's a bad thing.

From a gameplay standpoint, no, but from a standpoint of the fan base, its pretty obnoxious.

Mario has a different problem, the character himself is too out there. He's in too many games. People are tired of it.

He was originally intended to be used ... in everything.
 

Bolt the Cat

Bringing the Thunder
i think age IS a factor, because again, people say that nintendo is the ONLY one who recycles their games (plus remember nintendo is one of the oldest companies in the gaming indusrty), while Halo, call of duty, gears of war, medal of honor, and resistance which in addition to all having a similar gameplay style, are all only about 10-12 years old and arent considered rehashes, while some of nintendos franchises are 25+ years old, which is why I asked, when halo hits its 30th anniversary, will it be in the same boat as mario and zelda (being called a recycled franchise), or will it get a pass?

No they don't. There's plenty of people who are unimpressed with the amount of samey shooters out there.
 
Top