Shigeru Miyamoto views games as products, not art

Luigis Mansion was the shortest Mario game I can think of.
 
Snowstalker said:
Zae said:
Ornithologist Mario said:
Yeah, why does Nintendo make fairly short Mario games nowadays? So they want our money so we can come back for more?

Mario games have never been real long in all honesty. Platformers in general are not anyway.

Not even the mario rpgs could be placed into the category of "long".

I don't mean long, but I beat NSMBW in only a few hours without warps, the same time it took to defeat SMB3 and less than what it took to defeat SMW or NSMB.

And the YI games are a bit longer, no?

A bit, anyway.

Longest mario games honestly feel like with sm64 and sms, being large and open 3d platformers this is to be expected, but regardless.

Although really the length of Mario games isn't really that bad, at best it's actually pretty average and it's really hard to make side scrolling platformers have great length, even with limited lives and grand difficulty, even with huge levels have several different routes and exits.

If anything I'm not really concerned with length within a Mario game. There's more important things then that, such as level design, movement engine, and exploration.

That also brings to question with the rpgs, this usually isn't that bad though due to mario rpgs usually consisting of good customization(besides spm and smrpg), interactive battle system and usually enough side content to do well for quite a few days(besides m&l:pit).

Not to mention Ive found the rpgs to be immensely better anyway usually consisting of better writing and exploration.

So with ALL THAT IN MIND I don't think length is something you should really be concerned about.
 
I don't think google is spot on but try to be.
 
Snowstalker said:
I don't mean long, but I beat NSMBW in only a few hours without warps, the same time it took to defeat SMB3 and less than what it took to defeat SMW or NSMB.

And the YI games are a bit longer, no?
The only reason that they are is that there are no warps or time limits in levels
 
Koopa Kid said:
Snowstalker said:
I don't mean long, but I beat NSMBW in only a few hours without warps, the same time it took to defeat SMB3 and less than what it took to defeat SMW or NSMB.

And the YI games are a bit longer, no?
The only reason that they are is that there are no warps or time limits in levels
The YI games are much, much longer if you try to complete them 100%. It took me at least 10 years to beat YI 100%. YIDS seems almost impossible to beat 100% because it's so hard.

Nintendo should definitely make their games a little bit longer if they really care about their customers, though.
 
Fully or just getting to the end?

And YIDS's challenge mostly comes from Artoon's poor level design. By the later levels, they sort of gave up and went Kaizo.
 
The multiplayer spinoff Mario games keep me more occupied than the single player platformers. Super Mario Advance, though it was quite old, was still quick and easy (fun too) to 100%.

Length does not keep one occupied. I guess it's how fun the game is.
 
Length can be pretty significant.

But the real point in length is in sanctification of completing it and just because it doesn't have multiplayer means not a thing.

Considering the greatest of games haven't had that either.

Also doesn't matter all that much since people still love replaying smb3, sm64, and paper mario.

Also advance games were very dull and just simple ports, if anything they were nothing more then slight expansion.

It should also be noted that making platformers actually long is quite hard to do, even more open ones such as sm64, jak 2, and sonic 3k.

Which are considered among the most legendary of games, so judging a game, especially a platformer, on length is just really silly.

You want long games? Go play open world stuff, don't go in and expect any kind of platformer to have great length, because no matter what you put into it, it's not that simple to make one long to begin with.

This also brings to question of being off topic since this doesn't really have anything to do with games being considered products or form of art.

Which is also a pretty dumb subject due to that being entirely subjective/based on perspective.
 
Well, the Advance games were the only access I had to the classic games, and I still had fun with that.

The main reason I play games is for entertainment, not for beating it.
 
Baby Luigi said:
Well, the Advance games were the only access I had to the classic games, and I still had fun with that.

The main reason I play games is for entertainment, not for beating it.

Well that's you really. A lot of people play games due to having felt satisfied with completing it.

Of course this is entirely irrelevant to multiplayer games.

Although mario doesn't exactly have the most optimized and interesting multi either.......
 
Zae said:
Baby Luigi said:
Well, the Advance games were the only access I had to the classic games, and I still had fun with that.

The main reason I play games is for entertainment, not for beatin