Nintendo Hasn't Ruled Out Making Another Super Mario Galaxy, Says Miyamoto

Nintendo Hasn't Ruled Out Making Another Super Mario Galaxy, Says Miyamoto

The team chose to build on Super Mario 3D Land this time, but there may be room to make a new Super Mario Galaxy somewhere down the line.

The Super Mario Galaxy series may be gone, but it has not been forgotten, according to Shigeru Miyamoto. Super Mario 3D Land and the Super Mario Galaxy series are developed by the team, potentially indicating that the shift away from Mario's space-bound adventures may shut the book on a sequel. In a recent "Iwata Asks" interview, Miyamoto clarifies that the absence of a new Galaxy should not suggest that Nintendo won't ever return to the concept.

"Just so there is no misunderstanding, I should point out that this doesn't mean we'll never make another Super Mario Galaxy game," says Miyamoto. "The same team can't make both at the same time. And we can't bring in a second party and slap the name Super Mario Galaxy on it. I suppose we could idealistically make both in Tokyo, but we want to do something new too, so there was that dilemma."

In the same interview, producer Yoshiaki Koizumi reveals the team made a conscious decision to make a game building the ideas established in Super Mario 3D Land, but they had also considered making the game more like Galaxy. "When we first started making Super Mario 3D World," said Koizumi, "Miyamoto-san asked me if this was going to be more like Super Mario Galaxy or more like Super Mario 3D Land. When we made Super Mario 3D Land, we had our eyes on the form of this game, so we made it this way without any hesitation."

While there isn't a new Galaxy in the works, the legacy of the series has made its mark on the series in general: Nintendo announced yesterday that Rosalina, the Galaxy princess, will return as a playable character in Super Mario 3D World.

Source: Iwata Asks

Permalink

Of course not, it's Nintendo. I'd be offended if they stopped at the 58th Mario Galaxy

To which my response is; Why not? I'd rule it out. I'd rule it out HARD.

Make Super Mario invades other game franchises on a Dimensional Tour of mindfuckery or something.

Charli:
To which my response is; Why not?

They haven't finished milking it, yet.

....Err, I mean, innovation! Yeah. Innovation.

On the one hand, Super Mario Galaxy was an excellent game, and Galaxy 2 was even better in virtually every way. On the other hand, I'd love to see new and fully fleshed-out settings for Mario games. 3D Land felt too sterile, and the odd floating worlds with no real connectedness or background didn't work as well when they took it out of space; 3D World looks like it'll improve on that, but still needs a stylistic overhaul.

What I'd really like to see is for EAD Tokyo to take a break from Mario and do something totally new, like a Metal Gear-esque stealth game or a God of War-esque action game. EAD Tokyo is the only internal team at Nintendo I'd trust not to fuck it up. Then, while those guys are on a break from Mario, they can put Retro Studios on the next "main" Mario game, to give the series the revitalization it really needs.

P.S. Thanks

Zachary Amaranth:

Charli:
To which my response is; Why not?

They haven't finished milking it, yet.

....Err, I mean, innovation! Yeah. Innovation.

Because Galaxy 2 was somehow bad and not one of the best games ever made according to the huge majority of player and reviewer?

There is absolutely no reason why they would drop the Galaxy idea if they still have new stuff to add and if they can make sure that that quality of the game is still as high as Galaxy 1 and 2.

BiH-Kira:

Because Galaxy 2 was somehow bad and not one of the best games ever made according to the huge majority of player and reviewer?

Well, that was an interesting non-sequiter. I'm not sure how that ties to a joke about Nintendo's fetish for faux innovation. Unless maybe you believe that mocking the lack of innovation from a company that prudes itself on such and whose fans worship them for it automatically means the game is bad. But honestly, that doesn't make sense to me.

So they're going to call it Super Mario Universe, right? Because they kinda have to, considering the system it'd be on. Otherwise EVERYONE is going to make that joke over and over and over again.

sid:
Of course not, it's Nintendo. I'd be offended if they stopped at the 58th Mario Galaxy

lol. This is what I was saying in the other topic. Low content post is not ok, posting bullshit is ok.
There are 2 Mario Galaxy, 2! In the least 6 years! Less than Uncharted, there's 4 of those, one with zombies.

Super Mairo 3D World is looking really interesting, a mix between 3D Land and Galaxy, it looks like it's the most inovative Mario since Galaxy.
Between a new Galaxy or a new Mario game I really don't care, it will be excelent anyway. As long as they manage to keep the awesome level design it's fine by me.

Just hope the games are a bit harder than its predecessors, the end levels are a good challenge, but the beggining is usually easy, make the whole game (except first few levels) like it's the end.

Frankly, Galaxy is by its very nature one of the more exploitable Mario concepts that Nintendo has had in a while. While I'd love to see them take a chance like they did with Super Mario Sunshine, it could be perfectly feasible to just ship Mario off to some new planets.

sid:
Of course not, it's Nintendo. I'd be offended if they stopped at the 58th Mario Galaxy

Considering how there have only been two Mario Galaxy games in the last 4 years, and in that time frame there has been more milked franchises that came out- it's silly to assume that they have milked this particular Mario franchise.

I can honestly say that for their other franchises. People say Pokemon is milked to death, yet they only make a new game once every 3-4 years. You have other, much younger franchises actually start to beat Pokemon in their installments.

Same with Zelda. One game per home console. Yet that's considered a milked franchise.

Such a funny world.

Full Metal Bolshevik:

sid:
Of course not, it's Nintendo. I'd be offended if they stopped at the 58th Mario Galaxy

lol. This is what I was saying in the other topic. Low content post is not ok, posting bullshit is ok.
There are 2 Mario Galaxy, 2! In the least 6 years! Less than Uncharted, there's 4 of those, one with zombies.

Super Mairo 3D World is looking really interesting, a mix between 3D Land and Galaxy, it looks like it's the most inovative Mario since Galaxy.
Between a new Galaxy or a new Mario game I really don't care, it will be excelent anyway. As long as they manage to keep the awesome level design it's fine by me.

Just hope the games are a bit harder than its predecessors, the end levels are a good challenge, but the beggining is usually easy, make the whole game (except first few levels) like it's the end.

To be fair, my argument was directed more towards the fate of Mario franchises as a whole than Mario Galaxy specifically. It's not about how fast Nintendo beats the dead horse, it's about for how long.

Sounds good, though hopefully they will wait till the next console. As much as I love the two Galaxy games, 3D Mario games are meant to try new things. Even though I was initially disappointed with 3D World, it's grown on me and I'm really looking forward to it, despite being based on 3D Land.

sid:

Full Metal Bolshevik:

sid:
Of course not, it's Nintendo. I'd be offended if they stopped at the 58th Mario Galaxy

lol. This is what I was saying in the other topic. Low content post is not ok, posting bullshit is ok.
There are 2 Mario Galaxy, 2! In the least 6 years! Less than Uncharted, there's 4 of those, one with zombies.

Super Mairo 3D World is looking really interesting, a mix between 3D Land and Galaxy, it looks like it's the most inovative Mario since Galaxy.
Between a new Galaxy or a new Mario game I really don't care, it will be excelent anyway. As long as they manage to keep the awesome level design it's fine by me.

Just hope the games are a bit harder than its predecessors, the end levels are a good challenge, but the beggining is usually easy, make the whole game (except first few levels) like it's the end.

To be fair, my argument was directed more towards the fate of Mario franchises as a whole than Mario Galaxy specifically. It's not about how fast Nintendo beats the dead horse, it's about for how long.

How is it "beating a dead horse" when Mario is still one of the most loved and one of the most profitable franchises in the industry?

sid:

Full Metal Bolshevik:

sid:
Of course not, it's Nintendo. I'd be offended if they stopped at the 58th Mario Galaxy

lol. This is what I was saying in the other topic. Low content post is not ok, posting bullshit is ok.
There are 2 Mario Galaxy, 2! In the least 6 years! Less than Uncharted, there's 4 of those, one with zombies.

Super Mairo 3D World is looking really interesting, a mix between 3D Land and Galaxy, it looks like it's the most inovative Mario since Galaxy.
Between a new Galaxy or a new Mario game I really don't care, it will be excelent anyway. As long as they manage to keep the awesome level design it's fine by me.

Just hope the games are a bit harder than its predecessors, the end levels are a good challenge, but the beggining is usually easy, make the whole game (except first few levels) like it's the end.

To be fair, my argument was directed more towards the fate of Mario franchises as a whole than Mario Galaxy specifically. It's not about how fast Nintendo beats the dead horse, it's about for how long.

But what dead horse? There's nothing dead about Mario.

Zachary Amaranth:
Well, that was an interesting non-sequiter. I'm not sure how that ties to a joke about Nintendo's fetish for faux innovation. Unless maybe you believe that mocking the lack of innovation from a company that prudes itself on such and whose fans worship them for it automatically means the game is bad. But honestly, that doesn't make sense to me.

I think his point was that it really doesn't matter if every title "innovates" so long as it improves upon the previous iteration.

And to be fair, he's right. Galaxy 2 vastly improved over its predecessor and received pretty high acclaim. Who cares if they're milking it, if the games that are being produced are still really good? >_>

Maybe it's just me, but I feel like it's really only "milking" the franchise if they keep producing games of a certain type and the quality is clearly dropping off. If the games are getting better each time (and to date, they are, as far as Galaxy goes), then who gives a shit if it's the second, third, or tenth?

It's not like the game industry knows what the definition of "innovation" is, anyways. The word's been beaten to death so much by everyone that it's lost all significance and serves only as a ridiculous "buzzword" to throw into your comments as "zingers" in favor of something (or, as you've done here, to serve as a rant against something).

Zachary Amaranth:

Charli:
To which my response is; Why not?

They haven't finished milking it, yet.

....Err, I mean, innovation! Yeah. Innovation.

Here's a quick riddle: What's the difference between a new Mario Galaxy and a new 3D Mario game with a different title?

And given that you clearly have no interest in Mario either way, what do you care what they name the next Mario title?

Because we haven't had enough Mario games.

Have they ruled out making another Starfox 64? You know, a genre we actually lack these days.

Mahorfeus:
Frankly, Galaxy is by its very nature one of the more exploitable Mario concepts that Nintendo has had in a while. While I'd love to see them take a chance like they did with Super Mario Sunshine, it could be perfectly feasible to just ship Mario off to some new planets.

Ship him off... with F.L.U.D.D by his side!!!! It's...

SUPER MARIO GALAXY SUNSHINE U!!!!!!!

OT: It's this "new" Galaxy game doesn't exploit the notion that it's on the Wii U, then you have failed me, Nintendo... which, when I say that, I mean you succeeded at something I did not see coming again... As in, my sarcasm cannot be recreated until another hatching of a Yoshi egg and/or another Luigi-centered game comes out that's not just a platformer with Luigi in it...

(If it is going to be called Super Mario Universe, then that's being more predictable than usual...)

I am perfectly happy with this option. Galaxy was brilliant, and even if it wasn't filled to the brim with shiny new stuff, Galaxy 2 was easily the tightest gameplay in any 3D platformer. Polished to a 1200 grain mirror finish, and then some. And if all they do is polish up the gameplay like crazy, I'm in.

I'm not here for the Lands, or the Worlds, or any of the other million 2.5D Mario titles. But a new Galaxy? With microplanets and fun gravity and all kinds of wacky free floating and themed places? Yeah. I'm in.

CriticKitten:

And to be fair, he's right.

Not if you're Apple, Nintendo, or any of the other companies that pride themselves on their "innovation" and "revolutionary" ideas.

Honestly, though, I think his comment is more of this:

WhiteTigerShiro:
And given that you clearly have no interest in Mario either way

Someone didn't like that I made a snarky comment about Mario and immediately switched to the "haters gonna hate" mindset.

I mean, yeah. I have no interest in Mario either way. That's why I've owned almost every iteration of the core Mario series from inception to now. It's why, when I had a Wii, my most played games were Super Mario Galaxy and Super Mario World on the VC. It's why I've been recently ranting about the lack of Super Mario World in portable format (far as I can tell) and why just about the only reason I regret not having a WiiiiiiiU is the fact that the new Mario title for it looks pretty damn good. and pretty much the only reason, because I don't care for most of the games coming out for it whatsoever. Unlike the 3DS, where my only question is which games I'm going to get first because I can only play so many.

But I said a snarky thing about a Mario game, so it naturally follows that I clearly have no interest in Mario either way.

It's only logical.

I mean, seriously, though, this is a common and disturbing trend. Any criticism of a game, no matter how small, seems to put you in the 'haters' camp. Because you cannot simultaneously be a fan of something, or even just casually interested, and still take issue. You are with us or against us in a purity test that the moment you step out of line you are obviously against us.

Honestly, I'm betting I'm a Nintendo hater, too. I mean, I could post pictures of the four DS/3DS models I currently own, including the one I broke four years ago but still use for Pokémon rading, but would even that be enough to prove my brand loyalty? Do I clearly not have an interest in Nintendo either way, as well?

Mario games are Mario games, matters little what they are called, just matters if they are fun.

Mario Bros, land, world, 64, galaxy, sunshine, etc.

Zachary Amaranth:
-sip-

I like how you took one line out of my post that wasn't even a core part of the argument and turned it into "you're just bashing me because you think I hate Nintendo".

No, I'm "bashing" you because you're whining about "innovation" when that has nothing to do with this discussion at all. This series got better in the last iteration. So why do you care if they make another one, especially if it keeps getting better each time?

Don't straw-man. It doesn't help your case in the slightest.

CriticKitten:
I like how you took one line out of my post that wasn't even a core part of the argument and turned it into "you're just bashing me because you think I hate Nintendo".

No, I'm "bashing" you because you're whining about "innovation" when that has nothing to do with this discussion at all. This series got better in the last iteration. So why do you care if they make another one, especially if it keeps getting better each time?

Don't straw-man. It doesn't help your case in the slightest.

Funny. I never made it about you or whined.

I find the "innovation" thing funny. It was the foundation of the joke. My statement about 'hating' Nintendo addressed two people, neither of which were you. One was addressed as "his" claim and the other was addressed in a following quote. I was very specific.

Don't accuse me of a strawman for saying things to you I never said in portions of a post not about you. It's a blatant double standard.

Zachary Amaranth:
Funny. I never made it about you or whined.

So I'm guessing all of that "I've bought so many Nintendo products but obviously I hate Nintendo" crap in your last post wasn't meant to be whining about a perceived attack against you? Because that's totally how it reads to me.

I find the "innovation" thing funny. It was the foundation of the joke. My statement about 'hating' Nintendo addressed two people, neither of which were you. One was addressed as "his" claim and the other was addressed in a following quote. I was very specific.

Uh, if you're referring to your most recent post, then yes, one of those two people most certainly was me.

If you're referring to your initial two posts, it was the second post which I directly quoted in my first reply to you....a post that you then quoted out of context and used to start rolling into a rant about how people are hating on you for no reason.

Don't accuse me of a strawman for saying things to you I never said in portions of a post not about you. It's a blatant double standard.

Except that it totally is a straw-man to pull out this crap about how you're only being ranted at because of a perception that you "hate Nintendo". Because anyone who reads this thread knows better.

You're being called out because it's relatively obvious that you're too stuck up on bitching about Nintendo's lack of "innovation" (which is, by this point, a meaningless buzz word of use to no one) and not focused enough on whether or not the game/franchise in question is even any good, which is supposed to be the important thing. As I said in my first post calling you out on this (which you still haven't actually responded to, because you were too focused on quoting that one out-of-context line), if the next title is better than the last, who gives a crap if it's the second, third, or tenth?

Maybe when you can adequately answer that, you'll have earned the right to complain about other things. But so far, every time anyone has asked you that question, you've dodged it or passed it off as "meaningless" when it's not.

CriticKitten:
So I'm guessing all of that "I've bought so many Nintendo products but obviously I hate Nintendo" crap in your last post wasn't meant to be whining about a perceived attack against you? Because that's totally how it reads to me.

You also made an unnecessary confrontational post based on something not even remotely aimed at you, though. You're still lying both about my motives and what I said. Pardon me if I don't take much stock in the way you read it. You seem to be looking for reasons to lash out, and if that's what you really want, fine. You can go on my ignore list. You seem like a decent person most of the time, and I'm not sure why you need to cleave to this lie so hard, but I have bigger things to worry about than someone hell-bent on being deceptive.

EDIT:

Uh, if you're referring to your most recent post, then yes, one of those two people most certainly was me.

Except it's clear I wasn't. You again have to change what I say to have an argument. I don't know why you're doing this.

Zachary Amaranth:
-snip-

None of this is an answer to the question I've asked you since the very beginning of this conversation, so I'm forced to presume that you don't actually have a valid answer.

It's cute that you're trying to turn it into a rant about innovation or how people are hating on you, though, instead of just answering a very simple question. And when someone repeatedly points this fact out to you, rather than answer, you put them on ignore. Apparently, "why does it matter how many games they make so long as they keep getting better" is an impossible question for you to answer. I'm not sure why, but that's all I'm reading out of this discussion.

That's fine, but when people look back at this discussion, they're not going to look unfavorably on me. They're going to wonder why you turned this into a rant about "innovation" instead of just explaining what your particular beef is with Nintendo's decision to continue making future iterations in a highly-popular and critically-acclaimed series.

You're just making yourself look ridiculous by trying to make this into a rant about something it's clearly not.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here