Disney’s Biggest Weakness: Why Mickey Mouse Should Be More Like Mario
We’ve been saying for a while that video games are a blind spot for Disney. Now a former executive and potential CEO successor to Bob Iger agrees. This post discusses Disney’s big problem with gaming, how to fix it, and why Mario should be the ‘role model’ for Mickey Mouse.
While speaking at the Yahoo! Finance Invest conference last month, Candle Media CEO and former top Disney executive Kevin Mayer spent a lot of time discussing the Walt Disney Company. As you might recall, both Kevin Mayer and Tom Staggs were recently welcomed back into the Disney fold as strategic advisers to Bob Iger.
It’s been speculated that this is a precursor to one or both being brought back to succeed Iger via a talent acquisition of Candle Media. This blog has been championing this duo or Josh D’Amaro-Dana Walden as co-heads of Disney with an Eisner-Wells or Walt-Roy dynamic. (Basically, we just want someone at the top who cares about Walt Disney World and Disneyland!)
Point being, this is not just some random former executive who was scorned by Disney airing his laundry list of grievances or failures of the company. Kevin Mayer is part of Bob Iger’s inner circle, and has a legitimate shot at being Disney’s future CEO. I’m no Las Vegas odds maker, but from the outside looking in, I’d put him among the top 5 candidates. So what Mayer says carries weight, and could be a preview of what’s to come.
In any case, here’s what he had to say about video games and Disney: “Games is the one place where I think Disney has not yet made a substantial investment,” he said. “It’s also a place where people can interact with or spend a lot of time with their favorite characters in context.”
Mayer added that “gaming is the last big business platform. You plug that into those core assets, and no matter what happens to those linear networks, you have a really great growth trajectory.”
He’s right.
An existing games studio made our list of 5 Businesses Bob Iger Should Sell & Buy as an acquisition that Iger needs to make, even though he’s unlikely to actually make it anytime soon. It’s unfortunate that the company’s debt load and position is what it is, as Disney is incapable of building its own video game studio and acquisition costs are only going to increase–significantly.
The last few years have seen hundreds of billions of dollars in video game company mergers and acquisitions, as the industry consolidates and Sony and Microsoft have locked in smaller studios to their platforms. Microsoft just finished up a bitter fight with the FTC, which unsuccessfully challenged its $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard. Industry insiders have said that many more deals are likely on the horizon.
Video games are a blind spot for many people, and that’s undoubtedly true for readers here. It’s also presumably true for Bob Iger himself, who has gone out of his way to create partnerships with Apple on its future products because of his personal relationship with Steve Jobs. (Who knows what the future holds, but in the here and now, Disney dedicating time and resources to video games makes a ton more sense than being an early-mover on the Apple Vision Pro
There’s also the fact that Iger uses Apple products, whereas I’m just going to guess that he’s not playing Mario Kart or Minecraft. For both Iger and others, it’s important to remember that there’s often a difference between one’s own interests and cultural relevance. To that end, I want to provide some context as to video games are such a big deal.
In the last decade, the gaming industry has grown consistently, a trend that accelerated in 2020 when everyone was stuck at home. The global games market now has over $185 billion in annual revenue. That sum makes it bigger than Hollywood and the music industry combined!
The world’s biggest current franchises aren’t Avatar, Star Wars, Marvel, Cars, Toy Story, and Frozen. They’re Grand Theft Auto, Fortnite, Call of Duty, Pokemon, Minecraft and Mario. With each passing year, new video game franchises are born or strengthened by crossovers into legacy media.
Two of last year’s biggest movies (Super Mario Bros. Movie and Five Nights at Freddy’s) and one of the biggest television shows (The Last of Us) were video game adaptations, a trend that’s only going to accelerate given their success. Nintendo has officially announced that it’s working with Sony on a live-action The Legend of Zelda, and there are rumors of at least a half-dozen other animated adaptations of Nintendo games. That includes credible rumblings of a cinematic universe that would build up to a Super Smash Bros. film (think the MCU and Avengers).
No offense to anyone reading this, but if you’re dismissive of video games, that probably says more about your age than anything else. As more millennials and younger generations–people who grew up on gaming–become parents or have more purchasing power, the market for video games is only going to become stronger and more mature.
For all of his dealmaking prowess and success in fostering the growth of Disney’s business units, Bob Iger has unequivocally failed at establishing the Walt Disney Company as a major player in the video games space. After losing nearly $1.5 billion, Iger shut down the company’s in-house gaming division, Disney Interactive, back in 2016.
Iger also conceded during a 2019 earnings call that Disney is “not particularly good” at self-publishing games, and was satisfied with licensing its IP to third parties, like Electronic Arts. Being satisfied partnering with EA is like outsourcing restaurants to McDonald’s. Sure, it gets the job done and is efficient, but is it really what’s best for the Disney brands?!
To be fair, this is not just an Iger or a Disney problem. Hollywood as a whole overlooks the current market and future potential of video games, and is satisfied licensing out its characters. The problem with this is pretty evident to anyone who has ever played one of these games: many of them are not very good.
If you think about it, this makes perfect sense. If you’re a third party video game studio using someone else’s popular IP, what incentive do you have to devote your top talent or resources to it to make the end product any good? If you have the rights to make a game based on Gollum from Lord of the Rings, you could dump a ton of money into ensuring that it’s excellent. Or, knowing the star-power that Gollum packs, you could be satisfied spending, like twenty bucks on development, make one of the worst games ever, and hope it’ll sell anyway.
That’s a very specific example and there’s almost certainly more to the story about why Gollum is uniquely bad. But the thing is, we’ve seen this play out time and time again with Disney-branded video games. At best, they’re mediocre and utterly forgettable. These games might enjoy some popularity with hardcore Disney fans, but they’re not even close to cracking the cultural zeitgeist.
At worst, they’re filled with microtransactions, actively tarnishing and milking the brand rather than reinforcing it. There’s a certain reputation that comes with Disney-branded video games, and it certainly is not one of quality or ambitiousness. Even the reasonably well-liked Disney Dreamlight Valley is bad about this, and nothing like a first-party Nintendo title.
Third party publishers know they’ll sell to a certain degree without much regard for quality, Disney will collect its a nice little fee, and everyone goes home happy. Except do they? At the end of the day, Disney has made next to no long-term impact in the realm of video games. They have zero legacy or fanbase beyond fans of Disney who also play video games. It’d be roughly equivalent to Disney only releasing the live action remakes, without ever having made the animated movies upon which they’re based.
All of this is put into especially stark relief at you look at what Nintendo has accomplished of late. After being released in 2017, the Nintendo Switch has become the #3 all-time best-selling video game console, surpassing even the Wii and original Playstation. Like the Wii, this device is another approachable console that’s popular with mainstream audiences rather than just hardcore gamers.
Beyond the console being really good, the Nintendo Switch has sold so well because of the company’s first-party software dominance. Nintendo has always been exceptional at brand stewardship, and that really shows this generation. The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom and Breath of the Wild are all-time greats, Mario Kart 8 is the #6 best-selling game ever, Animal Crossing: New Horizons basically got the nation through 2020, there have been several popular new Pokemon games, and Super Smash Bros. is a cultural phenomenon.
While good in their own right, Mario Kart and Super Smash Bros. are also good examples of Nintendo nurturing and cultivating characters and new IP. The studio has cleverly kept characters in the spotlight, even as their core franchises have gone dormant. They’ve used these and other popular games as a springboard for spinoffs and remakes, to great success. They’ve also done a stellar job recognizing when remakes, re-releases, and sequels make sense–doing these things sparingly and strategically.
Nintendo’s recent successes have not stopped with video games. Arguably the two biggest recent accomplishments have been the company’s successful leap into theme parks and movies via its partnership with Universal.
Super Nintendo World has been a smash success in both Universal Studios Hollywood and Universal Studios Japan. It’s a commercial and creative success, with the lands being perpetually-packed and selling oodles of interactive wristbands and other merchandise. And in Spring 2024, Donkey Kong Country will open in Osaka, the first of several rumored expansions beyond the original Super Nintendo World at Universal’s theme parks.
Then there’s the Super Mario Bros. Movie, which claimed the #2 spot from the original Frozen on the list of all-time top grossing animated movies with a box office haul of nearly $1.4 billion. As mentioned above, there’s already chatter about future films; no movie makes over a billion bucks these days without at least a half-dozen sequels and spinoffs being greenlit. That’s like the first law of Hollywood.
Obviously, raking in over $1 billion at the box office and who knows how much at the theme parks is very good (mild understatement) and Nintendo should be very happy about its success. Equally important is that the company has introduced all-new audiences to its characters.
That might sound funny given that Mario is already hugely popular. In fact, Mario has been more recognizable than Mickey Mouse for three decades among American children. The operative caveat there, of course, is “among American children.” See the note above about video games being a blind spot for many people, especially older audiences. Despite this, I’m guessing some of those people went to the movies or theme parks this year and fell in love with Mario. His video games have undoubtedly found new fans as a result.
A few years ago, Nintendo didn’t even have a ‘franchise flywheel’ in the traditional sense of the term. Now they have one that would be enviable to most media companies, Disney included. Suffice to say, Mario is only going to become more popular and recognizable, as the character is introduced to non-gamer audiences. Some of those people will, in turn, become gamers.
What Nintendo has done with Mario over the last several years is what Mickey Mouse could and should be. It honestly boggles my mind that Disney didn’t see that survey in the 1990s and think, “this is our blueprint.”
To be sure, Disney has done some smart things to revitalize Mickey Mouse. The recent cartoon shorts were top notch and Mickey & Minnie’s Runaway Railway is an excellent addition. It’s also crazy that this is the first theme park ride for the classic character, and that the cartoon shorts have now come to an end.
Beyond being a mascot, Mickey Mouse doesn’t seem to have any substantive future for Disney. That’s nuts! Mickey & Minnie and their friends are not all that much different than Mario & Luigi and their friends!
It’s wild to me that Disney hasn’t made an earnest attempt at parlaying the popularity of Mickey Mouse into something else. Obviously, a platform game is what I have in mind, but there are so many possibilities–and Disney seems content on not attempting any of them.
As someone who has an interest in the business side of Disney, it fascinates me how Nintendo has been able to accomplish this. A big part of it is undoubtedly owing to the long tenure of its core creatives and leadership. Shigeru Miyamoto, known affectionately as the Walt Disney of video games, created the company’s biggest characters and franchises…and is still actively involved with production.
He’s just one of many key individuals who has been with Nintendo for decades. (Another great example is Takashi Tezuka who produced Super Mario Bros. Wonder, and has been working on the series for almost 40 years starting with Super Mario Bros. in 1985.)
Disney has executives who have been around decades, to be sure, but one of the biggest issues we see at Walt Disney World is a lack of institutional knowledge and memory. Increasingly, it seems like Parks & Resorts is a springboard to other positions, often in other companies. By contrast, Nintendo keeps its talent and is laser-focused on delivering fun, creative, and ambitious entertainment. Their level of success and quality output is truly mind-boggling.
Admittedly, part of this mini-rant might be prompted by my own media consumption. All of the following were among my favorite games, and blew me away:
- The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom
- Super Mario Bros. Wonder
- Metroid Prime Remastered
- Metroid Dread (I know it came out a couple years ago, but I played it in 2023)
Collectively, these occupied roughly 200 hours of my time. I haven’t had a chance to play it yet, but I’m guessing Super Mario RPG will join that list. (I know that’s a number of hours that should be embarrassingly high for a grown adult, but keep in mind that Sarah was pregnant for ~9 months of the year and fell asleep at like 7 pm nightly. It was playing the Switch in bed or rewatching The Office, and there are only so many times I do the latter.)
Meanwhile, I can’t think of much Disney-Pixar-Marvel-Star Wars content that I even enjoyed aside from Once Upon a Studio, and I’m not really sure that counts. Guardians 3 was pretty good, but I’m struggling to recall other movies or shows that really clicked for me. Granted, I haven’t watched a lot of it…because so much has become so formulaic and uninspired that I’ve lost interest.
We mentioned market share as measured by revenue at the start, but time spent with the media and mindshare is an even bigger deal. Again, I spent a couple hundred hours with Zelda and Mario this year. It’s not something I’m bragging about–it just is what it is. And that’s as a “responsible” adult with other obligations. The average kid is not just consuming more video game content, but actively engaging with it. It’s occupying their minds and imaginations in a way that passive entertainment like movies and streaming simply are not.
It’s surprising to me that this isn’t more important to Disney, a company that has historically recognized the significance of its theme parks as integral to brand affinity. Those immersive spaces forge fans and reinforce relationships with movies and other media. However, they also have huge barriers to entry in cost and location. They may seem dramatically different (to you), but video games offer a somewhat similar sense of immersiveness. There’s a reason why the Mushroom Kingdom was so easy for Universal Creative to translate to a theme park.
The key difference is that video games are very easily accessible. My Nintendo Switch is like a virtual Walt Disney World that can go with me anywhere and the console cost less than a flight to Florida–let alone multi-day tickets, hotels, etc. Another fifty bucks gets a game that’ll provide dozens of hours of entertainment.
I’m always surprised when I meet a Disney fan who is not also a Nintendo fan. There is so much overlap between the two when it comes to family-friendly fun, imagination, creativity, and characters. It’s a similar story with professional wrestling; I’m not at all into that, but can still understand why there are a ton of Disney+WWE fans. It’s not as weird as it might sound–to each their own!
Honestly, I think you could argue that that the Nintendo of today is more like Disney during its prime than the Disney of today. It’s hard to say Nintendo is at the top of its game now given that the company has had so many peak eras and great games, but I think you could safely say that we’re in the midst of a Nintendaissance (like the Disney Renaissance of the 1990s), especially coming out of the dark days of the Wii U era.
Ultimately, I hope Disney looks at the current Nintendo Renaissance and uses that as the blueprint for itself in the future. It obviously won’t be easy–if it were, there would be a dozen studios like it instead of just one Nintendo–but Disney has a great advantage in already having so much intellectual property and beloved characters that would lend themselves wonderfully to a variety of video game genres. The “only” thing they have to do is invest the time, money, and creative talent to make video games that are good (easier said than done–just look at Microsoft).
I doubt that’ll happen anytime soon due to Disney’s debt load and other problems that need to be addressed with a greater sense of urgency. Trying to tackle video games at the same time could be biting off more than they can chew. But the thing is, at some point, Disney will want or even need to create a legacy for itself in gaming. It would be good for the brand and its characters, especially Mickey Mouse, who Disney otherwise seemingly does not know how to handle.
Need Disney trip planning tips and comprehensive advice? Make sure to read Disney Parks Vacation Planning Guides, where you can find comprehensive guides to Walt Disney World, Disneyland, and beyond! For Disney updates, discount information, free downloads of our eBooks and wallpapers, and much more, sign up for our FREE email newsletter!
Your Thoughts
What do you think? Should Disney attempt to emulate Nintendo’s strategy with Mario via Mickey Mouse video games? Should the company invest resources into video games, or is it just another money pit or distraction? Any questions? We love hearing from readers, so please share any other thoughts or questions you have in the comments below!
Yes, I agree that pulling the plug on Disney Interactive was a huge mistake. Yes by their own admission they are awful at self publishing their own product. What they should have done was partnered with one of the game development companies and let them handle the games. As for Infinity I think that if they really believed in the product it could have evolved into something that didn’t require the figures. I could have seen it having character packs that could be purchased.
I’m a late Gen X’er raised on Atari 2600, Intellivision, NES, Super NES, and Sega Genesis. Even in the 80s, home video gaming was a huge obsession for so many. I subscribed to Nintendo Power magazine. I called toy/department stores incessantly to see if new titles had arrived. I’d outgrown most Saturday Morning Cartoons but set my alarm to wake up for shows like Captain N: The Game Master (what a weird show).
This isn’t a recent oversight by Disney, it’s been a blind spot for 40+ years (but obviously moreso in the modern state of consumer culture). This is probably a topic for another post but Disney was so overprotective of its IP in the “old days” with concepts like the “Disney Vault” and not syndicating its cartoon shorts (everyone of my generation grew up on Warner Bros., MGM, and Hanna-Barbera cartoons, but we rarely saw Mickey/Donald/Goofy). I’m sure that mentality was a big part of the reticence to dive into gaming, and now they’re kinda stuck behind the times as noted in this post.
Oh they’re doing like that.
Tom – you gotta play HP Legacy. I’m about 12 hours in and it’s incredible, and if you’re a fan of the Nintendo style, I really think you’ll dig it.
Also – completely agree about Disney’s decades-long missed opportunities in the gaming space.
I never read the Harry Potter books and didn’t even get into the movies. I love the lands, but as a theme park fan who can appreciate that there’s a deeper ‘level’ of worldbuilding for fans of the IP.
Also, aside from Nintendo games, my favorite type of game is survival horror. So my other ‘big’ games last year were the Resident Evil 4 and Dead Space remakes, Alan Wake, and Control. It’s going to be more difficult to find time to play this year, too.
Ya really you said that is true.
Meanwhile spiderman2 is a hit and Indiana Jones has got interest. Honestly, Mayer was not right when he (can’t do CEO at TicTok) was with Disney when they closed down Disney interactive (which Disney built by purchasing studios) and he did nothing to even bring it around. He helped acquire Club Penguin and had no interest in it after. Buying their way back again won’t equal the success as Nintendo and others built their studios from the ground up with experience and passion, Disney has none of that in this medium. They only see money and execs with no game knowledge. Thats why they lost money at their last attempts, and I have to say heaps of attempts starting in the 1990s. lastly, you’re complaining the success of the Mario theme parks, and that Disney should follow, yet Nintendo is doing theme parks and films as what Disney is doing in games…. LICENSING! I doubt Nintendo would get into Hollywood as it’s not what they do. Yes, they started Nintendo Pictures, but they’ll are still going to studios like Universal to distribute them.
I agree that closing down Disney Interactive was probably a mistake, as it seemed like they had built the foundation of something good–even if the releases weren’t achieving financial or critical success. If Disney were to acquire a games studio in the future, I hope it would also be a talent acquisition–they need to have people at the helm with a background in games, and not movies or (worse yet) merchandising.
Spot on. Both my 8 year old son and his Disney princess loving younger sister enjoy the Mario games and are counting down to when Epic Universe opens. They would pick going there over WDW hands down. And having grown up with Mario their 40 something year old mom can’t wait to see Nintendo land either.
As a fan of Disney, Nintendo and professional wrestling, I absolutely see your point about the creativity and storytelling capabilities and how all three have them in spades. And yet, wrestling video games are of shockingly mixed quality and rarely if ever tap into the true weirdness possible in mixing the two. (The occasional bizarre story bit in Career Mode aside) Disney is in an even better position to be able to use their characters in new and more immersive ways and yet, (Kingdom Hearts aside) has also had the same mixed quality and lack of true storytelling.
Disney finding a studio to establish a long-term development deal and rapport with would be fantastic both for them and gaming. Not them leasing the characters to EA for another pile of shovelware.
(EA needs to be kept FAR away from Disney. Microtransactions in family games are vile)
“Disney finding a studio to establish a long-term development deal and rapport with would be fantastic both for them and gaming.”
This would also be great. Anything that ensures there’s consistency and quality, rather than a bunch of one-offs.
Although I haven’t played a football game in ages, I’m still bitter about EA grabbing the exclusive NFL license. The 2K series was my absolute favorite back in the Dreamcast days.
As a professional game developer who is credited on several licensed games, I just want to say there are many, many factors that lead to the often middling quality level of licensed games, and you might be surprised to learn that many of the “bad” decisions made are often mandates from the licensor over the developers’ recommendations, not the other way around. If those creative decisions are poorly received, it is all too easy for Goliath to point the blame at David, and David stays quiet because otherwise they’ll never get another license again. One thing that is never a factor, at least for the developers on the ground, is a lack of effort or care for the license or the final quality of the shipped product. We love these licenses, and it’s a dream come true to get to play in those universes. We are always, ALWAYS trying to make the best game possible. The system just doesn’t always let us.
Love your blog and all your Disney insight, hopefully you feel my respect for you! This one just hit a little close to home.
“…you might be surprised to learn that many of the ‘bad’ decisions made are often mandates from the licensor over the developers’ recommendations, not the other way around.”
I am surprised in the sense that this was honestly something I hadn’t considered before. I should not be surprised, since this type of mandate from ‘on high’ is something that happens even within Disney, so of course it happens with licensing deals and at other big companies.
Without knowing more, I guess maybe the ‘perfect’ setup for Disney would be an inhouse team with gaming expertise that can manage brand integrity and licensing, and is cognizant of what’s realistic and in the best interests of the end product, rather than making uninformed and unreasonable demands.
Thanks for sharing your experience and insight!
“It honestly boggles my mind that Disney didn’t see that survey in the 1990s and think, “this is our blueprint.”
I think they did, because Runaway Brain came out in 1995. Even if it wasn’t popular, the lesson should have been to try other kinds of things, rather than do basically nothing for over a decade, and then just the one thing (MM Clubhouse) for 5-10 years after that.
I was really hoping for more specifics about which clearly successful smaller developer or publisher to look at purchasing, particularly given the sheer sizes of the companies who make the games that I recognize.
I think giving up is precisely the problem–both with Mickey Mouse cartoons and video games. It seems like Disney wants instant and massive success, and isn’t content playing the long game and building gradually over the course of decades.
It’s really wild to me, because if any company should see the value of being methodical and taking their time, it should be Disney. They are one of the few companies with the resources to do it, and the brands/characters that beg for precisely that type of approach.
Thanks for the thoughtful answer! I hope you don’t mind some elaboration. See, the way I’ve seen the history of the company, Disney has never *had* to build gradually over the course of decades. From my perspective, since 1923 Disney has been successful by building on the last success for the next new project, leveraging lessons learned from one area to the next. Unless you look at individual projects, the only category that Walt Disney entered and not immediately succeeded (or at least been very good, like True-Life Adv.) was the Disneyland Circus, and Disney basically avoided significant live animals in the parks for decades after that.
I also have no idea to evaluate whether potential future success in 2026 could be said to have been built gradually over the course of decades. Maybe the relationships developed with, um, developers over some partial successes could be said to have led to it, maybe it hasn’t. It’s *really* hard for me to analyze that. Also, I just like the idea of buying a successful organization (Mojang Studios?) and bringing in some bright people who we can mix and match across different fields. (It still kills me that Ward Kimball worked on *one* Disney parks attraction.)
Disney Infinity anyone?
Disney Infinity was an interesting idea, but I think it leaned too heavily on the merchandising side of the equation. Disney wanted to hit a home run on their first swing of their first at bat, and decided to retire when that didn’t work.
It would be like if Nintendo abandoned plans for a Zelda Breath of the Wild sequel because the amiibo didn’t sell well.
I wanted my kids to play Disney infinity but it came too late to the figurine/gaming party, my kids were only obsessed with Skylanders at that time
IIRC, Disney Infinity hit about the same time as Skylanders was peaking – now, I really enjoyed Skylanders (I still have several of my figures, though I haven’t played the game in years) but it seemed like there was really only room for one of those games in the world, and Nintendo’s Amiibo and the Disney Infinity games were entering the market just as the enthusiasm was starting to wane…
I’d love to see Disney have some drive to use these characters and franchises correctly, but in a world where they even treat the parks more like Fortnite (come see a limited time character available right now!) than actually any cohesive story experience, I’m not convinced the company could create a compelling gaming experience themselves today.
I don’t think Disney could pull off a Super Mario Wonder, because the company really needs to actually steward their IPs with attention and care, and even the latest park AND game efforts for major franchises feel like they lack that (with maybe the exception of Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora, which Lightstorm was heavily involved in).
A comment above mentioned Hogwarts Legacy above, and I love that there’s a little bit of the parks land in there (the backstory to the ruins from Hagride), and felt way more natural than just say – shoving Batuu into The Sims (which still somehow delivered more of the vision of Galaxy’s Edge than the physical land ever did). I think these meaningful connections from game, to movie, to theme park is really that transmedia dream – but nobody’s quite got it right yet.
“I think these meaningful connections from game, to movie, to theme park is really that transmedia dream – but nobody’s quite got it right yet.”
I’d say that Harry Potter (granted, I haven’t played Hogwarts Legacy, but it seems really well received) and all things Mario/Universal come really close. Maybe not the type of interwoven storylines and connectivity diehard fans want to see, but in a looser sense of the same worlds coming to life in different ways.
I also wouldn’t be so dismissive of Disney ‘stewarding their IPs with attention and care.’ I think things like Disney Infinity, Epic Mickey, Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge, and more were really big swings–they just didn’t quite stick the landing or connect in the way they could’ve should’ve due to various compromises, abandoning ideas too early, etc.
Because I’m not a gamer, though I had some involvement with a couple of video games, I had no idea Disney wasn’t a force in gaming.
Reading your blog had me shaking my head. Walt would never let this area of storytelling escape his purview.
It’s definitely not a money pit.
“No offense to anyone reading this, but if you’re dismissive of video games, that probably says more about your age than anything else.” OUCH!!!!
Hey we’ve been there since PONG.
My “age” might limit my knowledge of current fads but I know how big video games are and that some of the older games are expensive collectors items.
For a great many parents those games bring families together.
I’m also aware that kids your age, like one of my sons, who is an RN, not some stoner living in our basement, still loves playing those games when not helping save lives.
This Christmas, one of the items on his list was Disney Illusion Island Nintendo switch. Of course Santa delivered and our son tells us the game’s a lot of fun.
This is an area that I’m stunned Disney is not heavily involved in. They definitely belong here more than ESPN etc. You are absolutely right, Mickey should be leading the way instead of eating Mario’s Kart dust.
Maybe it’s not actually an age thing. I guess I’m not entirely sure, because my parents also had arcade and other early home systems, but they definitely “outgrew” video games and had no interest in playing them with me even when I was a kid.
I think part of it is a stigma thing–that video games were viewed derisively for a long time for anyone over a certain age (e.g. clarifying that your son is “not some stoner living in our basement”). My generation seems like the first one that has kept playing games even as we’ve gotten older. Even still, it’s not nearly as common for well-adjusted adults as watching movies, television, etc.
(Part of that could be because our reflexes dull over time–I know I’m not the gamer I once was!)
What is with the Kingdom Hearts erasure here? There are three of them and they’re like.. masterpieces. Also, I get the greater market analysis, but that Mario movie was horrible. The Last of Us show was amazing, but good movies or tv shows based on video games are incredibly rare.
To each their own, but I think Kingdom Hearts is too niche. No matter how good it is, there’s a certain ceiling on its success.
I don’t think the Mario movie was terrible given what it set out to do, but I’d agree that it was not great. I also am highly skeptical of any attempts to turn Nintendo movies into an MCU type interconnected universe. There just isn’t enough ‘there there’ to do that, IMO. Of course there will be sequels and spinoffs, but I suspect those movies will see diminishing returns fairly quickly unless they step up the character and worldbuilding.
As a huge fan of the games, I’m downright fearful of any Zelda movie. I just don’t think it’s the type of game that lends itself to a movie, but hope to be proven wrong.
I very much agree Tom. Even the hurdle of Link not talking, now imagine he’s Chris Pratt doing bits…*shudder*
I see your POV on Kingdom Hearts as well, but I think it speaks to your point about developers just putting out content willy nilly to get a short term win, since the Kingdom Hearts games take like 10 years to make and they’re very thoughtful about how the KH story ties in with the movie stories etc.
I think Tom’s comment about Kingdom Hearts being ‘niche’ is dead on – I played the first two on the Playstation, and while I appreciated the way the Disney characters were used, I had zero familiarity with the Final Fantasy characters or storylines, so that part kind of left me cold.
Regarding Mario – Shigeru Miyamoto has said that he generally aims for minimum storytelling in the Mario games – basically, just enough to set up the action and let people get to playing. The original Super Mario Galaxy on the Wii is the only Mario game that I’ve played that had a discernable storyline, and Mario’s not really even involved in it – it’s about Rosalina. (Despite being GenX I started console gaming on the Gamecube, so there may have been other Mario titles with stories that I never played.) While I get that Super Mario Brothers is a huge franchise, it’s not one really known for complex storytelling…
Mario has been known to team up with other video game franchises, most notably the “Mario and Sonic at the Olympic Games” series…
my kids LOVE Dreamlight Valley.
remember Disney Interactive? soooooo many cd-rom games
Mickey does still have a string presence on children’s TV. My daughter (now age 9) fell in love with Mickey through the Clubhouse animated show, and Doc from her show. So I wouldn’t say Mickey’s ONLY role is as a mascot!
I could not agree with you more. I have 11 and 8-year-old boys, and it is absolutely true that video games are THE form of entertainment that this generation cares about. My 11-year-old recently had his first big slumber party with 5 other boys. We offered an Avengers movie, but they turned us down. They all just wanted to play Mario Kart together. My kids do enjoy Star Wars and (some of) the Marvel movies, but this is not what they talk about with their friends, and not what they prefer, if given the option of video game time.
I think Hogwarts Legacy deserves a mention in your article as well. I understand you are creating an analogy between Mario and Mickey, but HL is another example of a game that has spun off from a book/movie/theme park empire and has had incredible success among young kids.
I think this statement gets to the core of Disney’s problem: “Nintendo keeps its talent and is laser-focused on delivering fun, creative, and ambitious entertainment.” Many of Disney’s most recent movies have had a pious, earnest tone that frankly comes off as a bit preachy and, most importantly, not fun. The Mario Bros. Movie may lack a profound message, but it absolutely succeeds at wild, irreverent fun. In addition to the talent and investment changes you mentioned, Disney needs to lighten up its products, which are increasingly taking on the shape of carrots and peas–something Mom wants you to consume, but you would prefer to avoid.
“Many of Disney’s most recent movies have had a pious, earnest tone that frankly comes off as a bit preachy and, most importantly, not fun.”
Totally agree with this.
To each their own, but I don’t mind ‘movies with a message.’ That includes messages with which I do not necessarily agree. I don’t really care one way or the other; that’s been one of the core functions of art for centuries. I only care when those movies stop being entertaining and start being tedious or chorelike.
Pixar movies have, historically, excelled in this regard. (I still have a hard time believing Wall-E got made!) But they’ve excelled because they’ve also been excellent and emotionally compelling, so most people didn’t care whether they agreed or disagreed with what the movie had to say.
I’ll put in a huge plug here for the newer crop of Mickey shorts that Disney has been making over the last few years. They confusingly put them out under a couple of different names (Mickey Mouse Shorts, Wonderful World of Mickey Mouse), but they are clearly the inspiration/driving force behind Runaway Railway. They really push the characters a long way beyond what I remembered from the old 40s-60s Mickey Mouse product.
Relatedly to the article here, they also just released Mickey Mouse Illusion Island on the Switch (and other platforms, I think) and while it looks like a pretty simple fetch quest platformer at first, it really has some real charm and tight controls for what I thought was going to be a shovelware release. We’ve been playing it with the kids and it’s a blast to get 4 characters going at the same time. Highly recommend it.
Yes! Wonderful World of Mickey Mouse is super underrated. Gorgeous art, creative stories and properly funny in a SpongeBob way.
“I’ll put in a huge plug here for the newer crop of Mickey shorts that Disney has been making over the last few years. They confusingly put them out under a couple of different names (Mickey Mouse Shorts, Wonderful World of Mickey Mouse), but they are clearly the inspiration/driving force behind Runaway Railway. They really push the characters a long way beyond what I remembered from the old 40s-60s Mickey Mouse product.”
I also love those–but they’re done. When I mentioned ‘cartoon shorts that have now come to an end’ in the article, I was referring to those. The series finale was last summer. Perhaps I’m expecting too much, but I feel like if they were going to end that, they should’ve had another Mickey Mouse concept lined up to succeed it.
interesting take, but in my opinion it won’t work with Mickey. Why? Because the mouse never, to the best of my recollection, never in his entire career, did anything exciting. If Disney wants to get into video they need to go Donald Duck. Don’t misunderstand, I grew up with Disney. I loved Snow White, Bambi, Cinderella, Pinocchio, all of them, but for fun cartoons I was strictly Warner Brothers: Bugs, Daffy, Elmer, Road Runner, Pete Puma, Foghorn. All of them were far more interesting and humorous characterizations, to me anyway, and the Looney Tunes / Merrie writing Melody writing, the dialogs, really appealed to my sense of humor. The only Disney character that came close to the WB gamut of emotion and comedic situations was Donald Duck. Even when Mickey got in trouble it would be with something like ants at a picnic and then his reactions/ solutions were, to me anyway. far from comedic, and the dialogue was terminally jeune. So what do you envision for a successful Disney Video game from those who couldn’t make Mickey’s Runaway Railroad anything I felt the need to ride three times? Essentially, Mickey doesn’t have a gorilla, an antagonist or even a real sense of humor. Those were never developed throughout his on-screen years. It’s kinda late now and would be so far out of character that I don’t think it would be workable or successful.
Fantastic observations, Tom! I literally just had a conversation about this with my 13 and 15-yr old kids. As a gen-Xer who devotedly spent the first quarter of 1988 in dead-eyed pursuit of Ganon, I feel like I have a half-understanding of how compelling modern gaming is and how socially connected my kids feel through their Switches. I told them that I’d rather seem them playing Epic Mickey than shooting people up in Fortnite and what resulted was a robust discussion of how many Disney character-based games they’d prefer to see, but just have no access to. For a company with a seemingly unquenchable thirst for IP synergies, you’d think Disney would have leveraged the gaming space long ago!! My personal game request is for an immersive hidden Mickey collection quest through 1980’s Epcot, but your idea of matching Mickey against Mario is probably more lucrative.
You had me at “through 1980s EPCOT” 🙂