There's Something About Mario

You may have heard that the next Mario game will be the best thing since sliced bread. Actually, you've definitely heard it if you've seen any articles that quote Japanese magazine Nintendo Dream in saying that the next Mario game was not shown at E3 "for fear that other developers would copy ideas from the game," according to Gamesindustry.biz. Madgamers adds that Nintendo Dream reported the game might be shown in England by the end of August and could be released in Japan by the end of the year, which begs the question... should the media wait to see the game before reporting on any supposed innovations it may contain?



Of course, any bit of information that comes out of the generally secretive Nintendo usually qualifies as big-time news. The Mario series is one of the most highly regarded in gaming, so people want to know as much about it as possible. Those who were wondering why it wasn't shown at E3 deserve an explanation as to where Nintendo is on the project, and Nintendo Dream's reporting fills that explanation well.



On the other hand, there is no doubt that the video game media is being used to an extent here. Nintendo knows that anything they say about the new Mario game will be reported all over the internet and video game magazines. Saying that the new game is too innovative to show to the public is a "nice way to gain a bit of free publicity post-E3," as GamesIndustry.biz put it. We have no guarantee that Nintendo isn't simply covering up for a game that was too early in development to show this year.



It's not like this is the first time Nintendo has used this line either: Spong.com points out that Nintendo at one point claimed that Super Mario Sunshine and Pokemon Mini -- two products that were not that well-received -- were "too innovative" to show the public. All this "free publiciity" could backfire on Nintendo by raising expectations for what could well be an unimpressive game (of course, Miyamato always seems to get the benefit of the doubt, which is a topic for another time).



So what's the solution? In truth, it's a tough balancing act between giving the readers the information they need to know and becoming a tool for a game publisher's PR department. News organizations simply have to use their best judgement to determine whether reporting the compay line on a game, sight unseen, is worth the risk. In this case I would say it's probably not, as the game media will be able to decide for itself on any innovations soon enough. Many video game web sites have not covered the story, probably for just this reason. Regardless of whether the game turns out to be as innovative as Nintendo says, these sites deserve praise for erring on the side of caution.