What Nintendo Franchises Need To Rely Less on Nostalgic Effect In Future Titles?

Do you guys find that Nintendo's games rely too much on nostalgic effect, or that games like zelda and metroid would do better to break away more from their traditional formulas more often? In other words, what Nintendo games do you think need to be at least slightly reinvented so that their primary method of entertaining you isnt just to remind you of the franchise's past successes?

That opinion doesnt have to apply to ALL nintendo games of course. It could be with a specific game. And if you thinkall nintendo games are fine, thats okay too, just say so

I thinkthis isa verylegitimate question in 2011 because, with the currentgame genres being squeezed for juice more and more every year, I personally think Nintendo has to ask themselves as a company how long do they think their current franchises can keep their relevance? There has to be a point when you run out of ways to use the same formula, and there has to come a time when you need to chang e more than just the setting or story. You could argue that nintendo doesnt have to worry about this because they have been around for a long time, and just slapping the name mario on a game will make it sell...but, if you really think about it, video games in the sense that they are understood today is very very young...look ahead of our time twenty thirty years and ask yourself again if throwing around the name mario gaurentees profit. It very well could, but to make sure that it could sometimes you dont just need to change your cars oil, you need to change its engine. I think that in 2011, nintendo franchises can definitely still get away with being very nostalgic as their prime method of catching attention. However, i think pokemon relies alot on just reminding you of pokemon blue and red, and i think zelda does alot to try and remind you of ocarina of time now.

There are exceptions, and i think mario galaxy is a great example of a game that perfectly balances reinvention and nostalgic effect....so i think in the end what im saying is that if nintendo franchises want to keep their reputations of being fun, great originals, we need more "mario galaxies" from characters besides just mario.

There hasn't been a traditional Metroid since Fusion was released in 2002.

what ones rely too much on nostalgia other than the ones that are MEANT to, like Donkey Kong Country Returns or New Super Mario Bros?

Other M was, by most accounts, a disaster, but it was a big break from tradition by focusing on storytelling and then changing up the combat. before that, Metroid Prime, which took the series into first person. Zelda has only Twilight Princess, which arguably belongs with the "meant to" ones, and Skyward Sword is said to be changing things. i don't see how Majora's Mask or Wind Waker were meant to remind us about Ocarina of Time and not much else. Kirby's Epic Yarn is almost not even a Kirby game.

so again, where are these games you're referring to? Pokemon is certainly true, but that's not necessarily relying on nostalgia; the series just doesn't change much

I don't think Nintendo's franchises rely on nostalgia at all. Yes, a lot of Nintendo games have it. But that's fine because nostalgia is a good thing. But just about every game is build on a foundation of solid gameplay, level design, imagination and polish; that would be there regardless of nostalgia.

_

what ones rely too much on nostalgia other than the ones that are MEANT to, like Donkey Kong Country Returns or New Super Mario Bros?

Other M was, by most accounts, a disaster, but it was a big break from tradition by focusing on storytelling and then changing up the combat. before that, Metroid Prime, which took the series into first person. Zelda has only Twilight Princess, which arguably belongs with the "meant to" ones, and Skyward Sword is said to be changing things. i don't see how Majora's Mask or Wind Waker were meant to remind us about Ocarina of Time and not much else. Kirby's Epic Yarn is almost not even a Kirby game.

so again, where are these games you're referring to?

like i said, not ALL nintendo games rely too much on notsalgea, there are exceptions...and i was really asking you guys if you though any relied too much on nostalgea as opposed to making the claim myself that they do..... if u want me to give examples, honestly pokemon is the biggest most obvious example....you could say kirby has broken tradition with epic yarn, but i honestly dont think so.... it still was based on side scrolling, collecting, changing form, etc.....where as i think mario galaxy shows the leap games like zelda and others SHOULD be making more often, where with mario the things that make us feel nostalgic are usually visual rather than gameplay. Mario galaxy gameplay very much reinvented mario gameplay, very much. I dont think any other nintendo game has made the same effort to do that.... zelda always feels extremely familiar unless ur playing toon link, and after metroid became 3D it has felt repetitive ever since, they are good games but once again very much of the same, not making the leaps mario galaxy did...u know what i mean?ms555

With Epic Yarn, you just described 90% of platformers. if it had a different lead character, no one would be thinking "Kirby"

Majora's Mask recycled character models and such from Ocarina, but it is a VASTLY different experience

and "repetitive" does not necessarily mean "relying on nostalgia". the leap into first person was huge, not to mention that Mario Galaxy 2, part of the series you've been referring to as basically brand new, was basically a glorified expansion pack. true, it was massive and if it were an expansion it would be unquestionably the greatest expansion ever created, but it barely changed from its predecessor

_

Nintendonly

Is a great game. It doesn't need nostalgia to help it.

[QUOTE="ms555"] like i said, not ALL nintendo games rely too much on notsalgea, there are exceptions...and i was really asking you guys if you though any relied too much on nostalgea as opposed to making the claim myself that they do..... if u want me to give examples, honestly pokemon is the biggest most obvious example....you could say kirby has broken tradition with epic yarn, but i honestly dont think so.... it still was based on side scrolling, collecting, changing form, etc.....where as i think mario galaxy shows the leap games like zelda and others SHOULD be making more often, where with mario the things that make us feel nostalgic are usually visual rather than gameplay. Mario galaxy gameplay very much reinvented mario gameplay, very much. I dont think any other nintendo game has made the same effort to do that.... zelda always feels extremely familiar unless ur playing toon link, and after metroid became 3D it has felt repetitive ever since, they are good games but once again very much of the same, not making the leaps mario galaxy did...u know what i mean?-The-G-Man-

With Epic Yarn, you just described 90% of platformers. if it had a different lead character, no one would be thinking "Kirby"

Majora's Mask recycled character models and such from Ocarina, but it is a VASTLY different experience

and "repetitive" does not necessarily mean "relying on nostalgia". the leap into first person was huge, not to mention that Mario Galaxy 2, part of the series you've been referring to as basically brand new, was basically a glorified expansion pack. true, it was massive and if it were an expansion it would be unquestionably the greatest expansion ever created, but it barely changed from its predecessor

If people didn't enjoy Nintendo properties as they were then maybe Nintendo would change things up. vashkey

[QUOTE="-The-G-Man-"]

[QUOTE="ms555"] like i said, not ALL nintendo games rely too much on notsalgea, there are exceptions...and i was really asking you guys if you though any relied too much on nostalgea as opposed to making the claim myself that they do..... if u want me to give examples, honestly pokemon is the biggest most obvious example....you could say kirby has broken tradition with epic yarn, but i honestly dont think so.... it still was based on side scrolling, collecting, changing form, etc.....where as i think mario galaxy shows the leap games like zelda and others SHOULD be making more often, where with mario the things that make us feel nostalgic are usually visual rather than gameplay. Mario galaxy gameplay very much reinvented mario gameplay, very much. I dont think any other nintendo game has made the same effort to do that.... zelda always feels extremely familiar unless ur playing toon link, and after metroid became 3D it has felt repetitive ever since, they are good games but once again very much of the same, not making the leaps mario galaxy did...u know what i mean?ms555

With Epic Yarn, you just described 90% of platformers. if it had a different lead character, no one would be thinking "Kirby"

Majora's Mask recycled character models and such from Ocarina, but it is a VASTLY different experience

and "repetitive" does not necessarily mean "relying on nostalgia". the leap into first person was huge, not to mention that Mario Galaxy 2, part of the series you've been referring to as basically brand new, was basically a glorified expansion pack. true, it was massive and if it were an expansion it would be unquestionably the greatest expansion ever created, but it barely changed from its predecessor

how am i thinking black and white?

a new IP would be nice, but other than the characters, most of Nintendo's games are different each time. different setting, different levels etc. so they feel different enough.

The scores and reviews speak for themselves. Most of the newer Nintendo titles from long running franchises are quality titles no matter how you look at them.

Nostalgia effect is just nonsense.

EDIT: Post 7000!

[QUOTE="ms555"][QUOTE="-The-G-Man-"]

With Epic Yarn, you just described 90% of platformers. if it had a different lead character, no one would be thinking "Kirby"

Majora's Mask recycled character models and such from Ocarina, but it is a VASTLY different experience

and "repetitive" does not necessarily mean "relying on nostalgia". the leap into first person was huge, not to mention that Mario Galaxy 2, part of the series you've been referring to as basically brand new, was basically a glorified expansion pack. true, it was massive and if it were an expansion it would be unquestionably the greatest expansion ever created, but it barely changed from its predecessor

how am i thinking black and white?

More IPs would be nice, but not at the cost of making sequels to the IPs I know and love. I could care less what others say I want Nintendo to milk all their IPs to the day I die. HarlockJC

it doesn have to be all or nothing, it doesnt have to be that either nintendo is comepletely fine and doesnt rely too much on nostalgea or that they do and that therefore they have to change everything they are doing....cus honestly i think nintendo is still doing great doing what they do and that using nostalgic effect is completley fine in any video game so long as its balanced with some sort of revolution in gameplay or design. I think nintendo does that, windwaker, mario galaxy, and the pokemon game on gamecube for example broke traditions, yes........ But i say u think black or white cus u seam to think i imply that nintendo is doing something overall wrong, and that by bringing up some exceptions u are succesfully proving the complete opposite is true, having no consideration that perhaps there is a middle ground argument. I am trying to post a grey argument, and ur giving me a black argument because you think my argument is white. You understand... like i said, u cant use facts on a minority to make claims on a majority, thats an invalid argument. Thats what ur doing, and doing that is making ur argument very one sided because ur only considering facts from one side.ms555

actually i just think you've got your terms mixed up and "their franchises need to change" would better suit what you're coming up with because the only ones that rely on nostalgia are DKCR and NSMB, which are meant to bring up feelings of nostalgia

[QUOTE="ms555"]it doesn have to be all or nothing, it doesnt have to be that either nintendo is comepletely fine and doesnt rely too much on nostalgea or that they do and that therefore they have to change everything they are doing....cus honestly i think nintendo is still doing great doing what they do and that using nostalgic effect is completley fine in any video game so long as its balanced with some sort of revolution in gameplay or design. I think nintendo does that, windwaker, mario galaxy, and the pokemon game on gamecube for example broke traditions, yes........ But i say u think black or white cus u seam to think i imply that nintendo is doing something overall wrong, and that by bringing up some exceptions u are succesfully proving the complete opposite is true, having no consideration that perhaps there is a middle ground argument. I am trying to post a grey argument, and ur giving me a black argument because you think my argument is white. You understand... like i said, u cant use facts on a minority to make claims on a majority, thats an invalid argument. Thats what ur doing, and doing that is making ur argument very one sided because ur only considering facts from one side.-The-G-Man-

actually i just think you've got your terms mixed up and "their franchises need to change" would better suit what you're coming up with because the only ones that rely on nostalgia are DKCR and NSMB, which are meant to bring up feelings of nostalgia

just letting u know, im not saying that i dont respect ur argument at all, please dont think that...u have a right to what u think and though i dont agree with u i will defend to the death ur right to say it. I personally think that sometimes nintendo changes setting, story, and maybe one tiny gameplay element to make sequels, when they should be doing more. Only sometimes, but like u said epic yarn is different, and u said that an argument saying otherwise can easily be implied on any other platformer...well i agree with you its very different, but i dont think different enough. If you think about it , more things are kept than changed in epic yarn. They changed art style and u change ur form differently, but that doesnt mean they arent keeping everything else, u know? Whereas i defend mario galaxy because the opposite is true, more things are changed than kept but mario never loses his identity. Which is why maybe i should have made the central theme of my topic to be that im asking for more mario galaxy like games, kirby or donkey kong or metroid or link games that change alot about themsleves to reinvent their formulas, but still hang on to their identities to stay true to their namesms555

well i think there are Nintendo games that do that every generation. i already mentioned Metroid Prime and Majora's Mask, and unfortunately Majora wasn't as praised as Ocarina so they did sort of revert to Ocarina-style. the only game i've ever played where i felt the lack of change was a problem was Twilight Princess.

[QUOTE="ms555"] just letting u know, im not saying that i dont respect ur argument at all, please dont think that...u have a right to what u think and though i dont agree with u i will defend to the death ur right to say it. I personally think that sometimes nintendo changes setting, story, and maybe one tiny gameplay element to make sequels, when they should be doing more. Only sometimes, but like u said epic yarn is different, and u said that an argument saying otherwise can easily be implied on any other platformer...well i agree with you its very different, but i dont think different enough. If you think about it , more things are kept than changed in epic yarn. They changed art style and u change ur form differently, but that doesnt mean they arent keeping everything else, u know? Whereas i defend mario galaxy because the opposite is true, more things are changed than kept but mario never loses his identity. Which is why maybe i should have made the central theme of my topic to be that im asking for more mario galaxy like games, kirby or donkey kong or metroid or link games that change alot about themsleves to reinvent their formulas, but still hang on to their identities to stay true to their names-The-G-Man-

well i think there are Nintendo games that do that every generation. i already mentioned Metroid Prime and Majora's Mask, and unfortunately Majora wasn't as praised as Ocarina so they did sort of revert to Ocarina-style. the only game i've ever played where i felt the lack of change was a problem was Twilight Princess.

People often crticize nintendo about Zelda for this reason, but I don't see the connection at all. Critics makes it seem like Nintendo is just taking the easy route all the time and just going with what works. Truth is that Nintendo AGONIZES over Zelda, trying to find that right mix between new and familiar to appease ALL fans, mainstream and hardcore alike. It's an incredible challenge and the Zelda series is notorious for having either Miyamoto or Aonuma simply say trash everything in the development and start over.

People say they want Zelda to go darker with a different villain with a mix to the formula, and yet somehow they don't want Majora's Mask, who's only crime is that it isn't familiar enough. Too difficult, too dark,... not Zelda. Then look at Twilight Princess, which feels A LOT like Majora's Mask but never strays too far from the Ocarina formula, walking a tightrope of moving away from Ocarina as far as possible while still playing exactly like Ocarina. In that way TP really was an amazing success. I really think that Nintendo views Majora's Mask as a failure in that the game moved too far away from Ocarina (and Link to the Past) and became too hardcore, alienating the mainstream audience.

I see nods to Majora not only in Zelda but in other series like Elder Scrolls, but it always seems like the lesson is that you don't want to go too far off the edge like Majora did.Tofans of Majora's Mask itis frustrating knowing that Nintendo has it in them to be devoted to the art of gaming but they are ultimately selling a console and have to appeal to as wide an audience as possible. So we are supposed to cling to the hardcore elements of a game like TP, even though the game was ultimately unsatisfying compared to a pieceo of art like Majora's Mask. I wish that instead of making Zelda torn between 2 audience bases they could just make 2 zelda series (one for hardcores and one for mainstream) but I know that that is not possible.

[QUOTE="-The-G-Man-"]

[QUOTE="ms555"] just letting u know, im not saying that i dont respect ur argument at all, please dont think that...u have a right to what u think and though i dont agree with u i will defend to the death ur right to say it. I personally think that sometimes nintendo changes setting, story, and maybe one tiny gameplay element to make sequels, when they should be doing more. Only sometimes, but like u said epic yarn is different, and u said that an argument saying otherwise can easily be implied on any other platformer...well i agree with you its very different, but i dont think different enough. If you think about it , more things are kept than changed in epic yarn. They changed art style and u change ur form differently, but that doesnt mean they arent keeping everything else, u know? Whereas i defend mario galaxy because the opposite is true, more things are changed than kept but mario never loses his identity. Which is why maybe i should have made the central theme of my topic to be that im asking for more mario galaxy like games, kirby or donkey kong or metroid or link games that change alot about themsleves to reinvent their formulas, but still hang on to their identities to stay true to their namesms555

well i think there are Nintendo games that do that every generation. i already mentioned Metroid Prime and Majora's Mask, and unfortunately Majora wasn't as praised as Ocarina so they did sort of revert to Ocarina-style. the only game i've ever played where i felt the lack of change was a problem was Twilight Princess.

i think you're in the minority with Majora's Mask actually. it's BASICALLY the same gameplay, but the focus on side quests is huge, Link can even change forms, and of course the time limit. not to mention Clock Town being the way it was happened to be years ahead of its time

[QUOTE="ms555"] just letting u know, im not saying that i dont respect ur argument at all, please dont think that...u have a right to what u think and though i dont agree with u i will defend to the death ur right to say it. I personally think that sometimes nintendo changes setting, story, and maybe one tiny gameplay element to make sequels, when they should be doing more. Only sometimes, but like u said epic yarn is different, and u said that an argument saying otherwise can easily be implied on any other platformer...well i agree with you its very different, but i dont think different enough. If you think about it , more things are kept than changed in epic yarn. They changed art style and u change ur form differently, but that doesnt mean they arent keeping everything else, u know? Whereas i defend mario galaxy because the opposite is true, more things are changed than kept but mario never loses his identity. Which is why maybe i should have made the central theme of my topic to be that im asking for more mario galaxy like games, kirby or donkey kong or metroid or link games that change alot about themsleves to reinvent their formulas, but still hang on to their identities to stay true to their names-The-G-Man-

well i think there are Nintendo games that do that every generation. i already mentioned Metroid Prime and Majora's Mask, and unfortunately Majora wasn't as praised as Ocarina so they did sort of revert to Ocarina-style. the only game i've ever played where i felt the lack of change was a problem was Twilight Princess.

All of them.

People often crticize nintendo about Zelda for this reason, but I don't see the connection at all. Critics makes it seem like Nintendo is just taking the easy route all the time and just going with what works. Truth is that Nintendo AGONIZES over Zelda, trying to find that right mix between new and familiar to appease ALL fans, mainstream and hardcore alike. It's an incredible challenge and the Zelda series is notorious for having either Miyamoto or Aonuma simply say trash everything in the development and start over.

People say they want Zelda to go darker with a different villain with a mix to the formula, and yet somehow they don't want Majora's Mask, who's only crime is that it isn't familiar enough. Too difficult, too dark,... not Zelda. Then look at Twilight Princess, which feels A LOT like Majora's Mask but never strays too far from the Ocarina formula, walking a tightrope of moving away from Ocarina as far as possible while still playing exactly like Ocarina. In that way TP really was an amazing success. I really think that Nintendo views Majora's Mask as a failure in that the game moved too far away from Ocarina (and Link to the Past) and became too hardcore, alienating the mainstream audience.

I see nods to Majora not only in Zelda but in other series like Elder Scrolls, but it always seems like the lesson is that you don't want to go too far off the edge like Majora did.Tofans of Majora's Mask itis frustrating knowing that Nintendo has it in them to be devoted to the art of gaming but they are ultimately selling a console and have to appeal to as wide an audience as possible. So we are supposed to cling to the hardcore elements of a game like TP, even though the game was ultimately unsatisfying compared to a pieceo of art like Majora's Mask. I wish that instead of making Zelda torn between 2 audience bases they could just make 2 zelda series (one for hardcores and one for mainstream) but I know that that is not possible.

Twilgiht Princess might have been alright if the bosses were tougher. The problem with Zelda formula has become that you have to have the freedom to do sidequests to develop your character but that makes the game too easy. Why? Because you have to be able to beat the game without doing any side quests at all. So you have Zelda hardcores who do all the side quests and so they breeze through the end portion because they are over powered, and the casuals who just do the plot who will be underpowered but who will rail on the game for sucking if they can't get through it.GunSmith1_basic

my main complaint with Twilight Princess seems to be something nobody else has, but i felt like everything about the game got bigger and more complex except for the dungeon design. to me they felt basically the same size and scope as the ones in Ocarina and Wind Waker; the bosses were certainly much bigger but not necessarily more complex

[QUOTE="ms555"][QUOTE="-The-G-Man-"]

well i think there are Nintendo games that do that every generation. i already mentioned Metroid Prime and Majora's Mask, and unfortunately Majora wasn't as praised as Ocarina so they did sort of revert to Ocarina-style. the only game i've ever played where i felt the lack of change was a problem was Twilight Princess.

i think you're in the minority with Majora's Mask actually. it's BASICALLY the same gameplay, but the focus on side quests is huge, Link can even change forms, and of course the time limit. not to mention Clock Town being the way it was happened to be years ahead of its time

Nintendo always had the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality. If Nintendo is able to use the same formula for games and still get tons of praise and sales for it, they will continue to use this formula. In fact, the last game that Nintendo tried to innovate on their franchise is Metroid: Other M. They added an in-depth story, more voice acting, and brand-new gameplay mechanics, but got panned by fans and critics alike for these changes. Because of this, nintendo does not like to take risks with their game franchises.

Nintendo always had the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality. If Nintendo is able to use the same formula for games and still get tons of praise and sales for it, they will continue to use this formula. In fact, the last game that Nintendo tried to innovate on their franchise is Metroid: Other M. They added an in-depth story, more voice acting, and brand-new gameplay mechanics, but got panned by fans and critics alike for these changes. Because of this, nintendo does not like to take risks with their game franchises.

blizzvalve

maybe i am haha, thats my opinion at least. You make some valid points there bout majora.. idk what it is, i cant put it down, but majora is just too familiar i thoughtms555

it's probably the way it looked. it had the same character models, similar graphics, the same interface when you discount the timer at the bottom, some of the same enemies. if it was a launch title for the Gamecube or something you might feel differently

They need to add firearms, online deathmatch and co-op if they want to save Mario.

They need to add firearms, online deathmatch and co-op if they want to save Zelda.

They need to add firearms (not laser crap; that's for nerds), online deatchmatch and co-op if they want to save Metroid.

They need to add firearms, online deatchmatch and co-op if they want to save Donkey Kong.

Kirby can be an RPG if they add firearms and ask Bethesda to give them a hand with the franchise. KIRBY NEEDS A DEEP POST APOCALYPTIC STORY WITH BOOBIES. PINK BALLS ARE FOR WUSSIES!

Super Smash Bros. should be an online-only FPS where people use the recently added arsenal that their Nintendo characters have now to headshot each other in the face for online ranks and achievements.

There. Innovation!

[QUOTE="ms555"] maybe i am haha, thats my opinion at least. You make some valid points there bout majora.. idk what it is, i cant put it down, but majora is just too familiar i thought-The-G-Man-

it's probably the way it looked. it had the same character models, similar graphics, the same interface when you discount the timer at the bottom, some of the same enemies. if it was a launch title for the Gamecube or something you might feel differently

of course its possible! Sorry that i keep bringing up mario galaxy,( it must be annoying haha,) but seriously MARIO GALAXY did that!! Mario galaxy found a way to appeal to everybody, it appealed to both the people that wanted classic mario elements and the people that wanted total reinvention....it did both! Hardcore and mainstream both praised it...if thats not proof that nintendo can find ways to please both hardcore and mainstream, idk what is. So heres what zelda could do that mario did, change the gameplay! Change the layout and design! Change it alot! HOWEVER, balance structural changes with proper use of nostalgicvisuals and/or presentation to keep the zelda identity! That way u get a new, very fresh zelda experience and u still know ur playing zelda! U dont have to change everything or change nothing about zelda, u can do a proper amount of both, recognize where zelda needs change and where it doesnt....when zelda does that the way it should, ALL FANS WILL BE SATISFIEDms555

They need to add firearms, online deathmatch and co-op if they want to save Mario.

They need to add firearms, online deathmatch and co-op if they want to save Zelda.

They need to add firearms (not laser crap; that's for nerds), online deatchmatch and co-op if they want to save Metroid.

They need to add firearms, online deatchmatch and co-op if they want to save Donkey Kong.

Kirby can be an RPG if they add firearms and ask Bethesda to give them a hand with the franchise. KIRBY NEEDS A DEEP POST APOCALYPTIC STORY WITH BOOBIES. PINK BALLS ARE FOR WUSSIES!

Super Smash Bros. should be an online-only FPS where people use the recently added arsenal that their Nintendo characters have now to headshot each other in the face for online ranks and achievements.

There. Innovation!

Zelda... Though I kinda of want them to go back even further because each game has been heavily based off of Alttp more than anything.. I just want them to go back to the formula of the original. Just let all of hyrule be open from the beginning. Dont lead us through the game by the nose, make us figure out which dungeons you can go to first what you need to get where instead of just giving us a certain weapon and having us use it on that single dungeon and then rarely need to use them again.

[QUOTE="blizzvalve"]

Nintendo always had the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality. If Nintendo is able to use the same formula for games and still get tons of praise and sales for it, they will continue to use this formula. In fact, the last game that Nintendo tried to innovate on their franchise is Metroid: Other M. They added an in-depth story, more voice acting, and brand-new gameplay mechanics, but got panned by fans and critics alike for these changes. Because of this, nintendo does not like to take risks with their game franchises.

ms555

True. It's lucky for nintendo that the Metroid series was never a huge seller so the backlash from fans didn't hurt them too much, but it'll probably discouraging them from trying to change their other franchises.

If you analyze all of Nintendo's franchises, it's hard to see how Nintendo could expand them. Mario is all about platforming and saving the princess and {okemon is mainly about running around and catching monsters. There's nothing more that you can expand from those concepts.

However, there are a few franchises that Nintendo could change some things. Nintendo tried to make a darker Zelda game with twilight Princess, but they kept with the main, silent protagonist mechanic and the same gameplay mechanics from other games. Nintendo could make a great Zelda game with an in-depth story, voice acting, and major changes in gameplay, but there could be a major backlash with that as well. Nintendo's too afraid to branch out into other fields.