What happened to gaming mascots?

by Blake Snow { Jul 14th 2006 at 12:30PM }

Next-Generation explores the absence of gaming mascots from current- and next-generation gaming. In reflection, Slashdot writes: "Today [mascots] are no more than hangers-on, surviving either by cynically marketing to the very young or by remaining vestigial elements in games that would have been great with or without them. The next generation is coming, but mascots are nowhere to be found."

Sure we have Sonic and Mario remnants, but they are for the most part only used for specific franchise promotions rather than company-wide advertising. So do "missing in action" company mascots represent a death of 80's and 90's advertising or the maturing of a gamer generation? Or is is something else altogether?

[via Slashdot]

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Artimus @ Jul 14th 2006 12:33PM

Considering this is visible in ads across all products (cereals, television, cleaning products, etc.) I'd say it has absolutely nothing to do with the mature gamer.

Probot @ Jul 14th 2006 12:39PM

Mascots are still here.

Nintendo has Mario and Microsoft has Master Cheif.

The only reason Sony doesn't have a mascot is because their best games are 3rd party.

Chris Taran @ Jul 14th 2006 12:40PM

I don't know, seems to me like Mario is still Nintendo's mascot to me. The two will always be synonymous.

ninx @ Jul 14th 2006 12:42PM

Gaming mascots were really as a result of the golden platforming days. Platform games really ran and drove consoles like basically FPS in the last generation. But Platforming hasn't really shined as much in 3D & so the whole mascot feel has kind of layed off as their games aren't really carrying the consoles.

The games that do drive consoles today don't really have a mascot feel cause they don't fit the usual parameters of a mascot.

An equally great factor is b/c of the maturing of the gaming population.

32_Footsteps @ Jul 14th 2006 12:44PM

Actually, I have to say, I don't remember seeing Mario in ads for non-Mario Nintendo games. Nor do I remember seeing Sonic outside of ads where a Sonic game (or a system bundled with Sonic) was specifically mentioned. I do remember that ROB was in early Nintendo ads, but they stopped including him as of 1987, I believe (possibly earlier).

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that mascots are just as much associated with companies now as they were in the past, when they've been developed. Peoplejust aren't paying as much attention. I personally suspect that it's because most mascots are restricted to just video games at this point (no more Mario cereal, cartoon, movie, soundtrack, etc.). Thus, the various Pokemon properties (that's the last game I remember having its own line of snacks and breakfast cereal) is the closest we have now, what with 9 movies, an ongoing show, board games, card games, and enough plush toys to blanket Lichtenstein 10 times over.

Zertoss @ Jul 14th 2006 12:47PM

Since Sega doesn't have their own console anymore, it seems logical to me that their mascot (Sonic) wouldn't be as prominent as he was back in the Genesis/Megadrive days. I don't really know how you would sell games like Chromehounds with Sonic or why you would even try. That just doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Nintendo has so many franchises that they almost have nothing but mascots. The Wii is launching with at least one mascot to support it and sell it.

Sony used to have mascots (Crash Bandicoot, maybe even Spyro) for the Playstation, but both started showing up on other platforms, so I don't think they can really be called Playstation mascots anymore, which I guess means Sony has no mascot.

I'd say Master Chief counts as a mascot for Xbox and Xbox 360, but like the post said, MS just doesn't use him to do any advertising.

Maybe it's time for the mascots to make cameo appearances in other games like the good old days?

Akuma @ Jul 14th 2006 12:48PM

Mascots have no role now because a good game is a good game regardless, and no one needs to see mario or sonic to know it.

Mascots were supposed to be the face of a company but you dont need one anymore. Especially when most of the games featuring thse mascots have turned crap.

All the sonic 3d games have been disatrous, except for maybe sonic adventure 1.

Pacman for namco, has turned crap on 3d gaming.

That konami one with the kid and he has blue hair (dont know his name) hasnt had a game in how long.

PS1 had crash bandicoot for a time, but then sony relalised mascots are a waste of time. Instead diversity in gaming, and good advertising made more sense.

However if you ask me m$ kinda have one since half of all xbox1 owners have halo2, and halo 1 was just below half.

Finally, tho Nintendo still have one, they tarnished the imaage of mario by putting him in every half assed game they make, from tennis to party games. And now that wii sports is thier 'flagship title', they have put him to the backseat.

Mascots Exist @ Jul 14th 2006 12:48PM

MasterChief is obviously a mascot! In fact he was the most popular character of last generation and sold many an Xbox.

When Halo 3 is released for the Xbox 360 I am sure anyone who has been holding off on a 360 will get one. Master Chief is kind of the grown up version of a mascot. Mario though I like him is more family oriented.

Smellslikepie @ Jul 14th 2006 12:56PM

Sega has Sonic
Nintendo has Mario
Microsoft has Master Chief
I can't think of one for Sony other than Crash Bandicoot, but he's dead.

Theses are ALL mascots. For Eric-Jon Rössel Waugh to claim that Master Chief can't be considered a mascot because he is more iconic is ludicrous. I don't know if I read the articel correctly but that's what I got from it. Master Chief is a mascot. Obviously Gordon Freeman isn't, but Master Chief is. I'd say mascots are as alive now as they were way back then :p.

If I haven't read the article correctly can some one tell me?

DarkJosh @ Jul 14th 2006 1:03PM

Halo 3 will not change my mind about buying an XBox 360 becuase I bet you sometime in the future it will come out to PC. XBoxs library is just PC games and the ones that arent are horrible. Halo 3 looks like crap anyways and every halo is just a piece of crap...I wouldn't say that M$ has any mascots since both Halo 1 is on the PC and Halo 2 is coming to the PC...Halo 3 will probably be on the PC plus Bungie made Master Cheif not microsoft. Maybe they should make a game featuring the paperclip from Word.

martin @ Jul 14th 2006 1:03PM

Considering Sony ruined it for everyone when they got a gay Bandicoot to do their mascoting and then couldn't decide on how big to make Lara Crofts breasts. I really think Sony is the one who killed the mascot with how many times they decided to change it.

abdi @ Jul 14th 2006 1:08PM

mascots usaully result in stale franchise after the 100th game.

Enigma @ Jul 14th 2006 1:12PM

"Considering Sony ruined it for everyone when they got a gay Bandicoot to do their mascoting and then couldn't decide on how big to make Lara Crofts breasts. I really think Sony is the one who killed the mascot with how many times they decided to change it."

I just think the average gamer got older, and theneed for cute cudly mascots to sell games isnt necessary. And there is a broader more diverse audience now, compared to what there used to be in themid to late 80's.

But that cant be it, must be Sony and their evil wayz ... Cant be Joystiq commenting without the (insert Sony bash e-tarded comment here) can it.

Jon @ Jul 14th 2006 1:13PM

Bubsy killed them all

Smellslikepie @ Jul 14th 2006 1:13PM

DarkJosh: Guess who makes the Operating System that is running Halo on the PC. That's right, Microsoft. Master Chief is one of their Mascots because he's out on Microsoft's Xbox, Xbox 360 and Games For Windows.

nambit @ Jul 14th 2006 1:15PM

Mascots (well for Nintendo) are as strong as ever. Look at all the internet sites, for example. When news comes out regarding Nintendo, you see either Mario, Samus, etc. Heck, the banners on many sites propogate mascots. Nintendo seems to love to use Toad, Yoshi, Wario, Donkey Kong, and others.

The difference now is that there is not *ONE* mascot, but *MANY* mascots used for different things. Toad, for example, often is used as a guide (perhaps from Mario64) while Yoshi has been used as a "come with me and check this out" kind of character. Heck, Yoshi was really used a lot a while back. At one point, he seemed to steal the show from Mario.

Anyhow, on other platforms, I saw the fellow from Gears Of War used to represent the 360 on quite a few occasions. Also, Joanna Dark was pimped quite a bit too during the launch. Sony hasn't done too well on the mascot thing. They own Spidey and try to use him, but it doesn't work out too well.

But you know, it's the developers/publishers that really have that character association. Square goes through phases of who they wish to use as their mascots. Going from Cloud/Sephiroth/Aeris(Aerith), to Tidus/Yuna/Auron and so on. Konami's studios have Snake, Capcom has the likes of Leon and Megaman depending on the kind of marketing they want to push.

No, mascots are still alive and well. The difference is the concept of "ONE" mascot rules all is gone.

Smellslikepie @ Jul 14th 2006 1:15PM

"Bungie made Master Cheif not microsoft." - Bungie has been aquired by Microsoft. Waaaay back in 2000. Keep up with the news, eh?

JimmyHACK @ Jul 14th 2006 1:16PM

they all have potential mascots

they just don't use them as a overall mascot to sell the system and its products.

zero2dash @ Jul 14th 2006 1:17PM

Sony's never been about having a mascot, unless you count "polygon man" which was in their first batches of Playstation magazine ads. He was quickly killed off (rightly so) and most people nowadays have never heard of or seen him. (I still have some magazines with ads featuring him, but if you haven't seen him, go here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygon_Man)

The way it used to be (in the NES and beyond years), each console had a mascot; yes, Mario = Nintendo, Sonic = Sega (eventually), and Bonk = TurboGrafx-16 (NEC's). Nowadays consoles aren't really character specific. That being said - Sony technically has several mascots, or rather "characters that are associated with their console". Kratos (God of War), the Prince (Katamari Damacy), Ico, Shadow of the Colossus characters, Jak & Daxter, Ratchet & Clank, etc. are all characters that only appear on Sony's consoles. Nintendo still has characters from Mario, Zelda, and Metroid being the most recognizable, and of course Microsoft has Master Chief & Joanna Dark primarily.

ill trooper @ Jul 14th 2006 1:19PM

Really now - Nintendo's Mario is the only 'Mascot' left. Sonic is from another generation, and currently no longer symbolizes a hardware company, although as a game character, is alive and well. For me, Master Chief is a lame mascot, with little character other than faceless anonymous aggression.

Sony is a different kind of company that doesn't build a mascot image, they build hardware and let the developers go at it. I'm sure they would have liked to come up with one, but it didn't happen.

This notion of mascots is from a simpler time, and with all companies trying to make multimedia online hubs, focus is elsewhere. The market is more mature, and more complex - while a mascot could fit in, I don't see it happening right now.

And Probot, Halo2 is a third-party dev too. Microsoft can't make good original games either.

Enigma @ Jul 14th 2006 1:22PM

"And Probot, Halo2 is a third-party dev too. Microsoft can't make good original games either."

They are first party ... they are owned by MSFT! /wink

MosquitoControl @ Jul 14th 2006 1:24PM

And Probot, Halo2 is a third-party dev too. Microsoft can't make good original games either.

Nope, 2nd party.

Sonic is from another generation, and currently no longer symbolizes a hardware company, although as a game character, is alive and well.

I wouldn't say Sonic is "well."
He hasn't had a successful non-2D game outside of the DC. If even on the DC.

Probot @ Jul 14th 2006 1:26PM

"And Probot, Halo2 is a third-party dev too. Microsoft can't make good original games either."

Well, they can buy developers. Bungie is owned by MS, so it counts as 2nd party if not 1st.

eialba @ Jul 14th 2006 1:32PM

Almost everyone is saying that the argument made in the post is wrong.

But it's right.

Games these days are complex. They are about ideas, not characters. Sam Fisher, for example, could have been a mascot in older days when Splinter Cell would have been much more simple. Now, the idea is espionage and politics.

Even RPGs of old had a simplicity to them that is virtually gone from console games of today. The presence of mascots is only useful to Nintendo's portable systems because it's the only company that still wants to somewhat maintain its innocence. The PSP has no mascot of any kind because it's meant to be a complex, almost business-like, electronic device.

Mascots are, indeed, losing their grip on gaming. And the culprit is not the average gamer, who has fun with characters. The culprits are companies who want to expand their repertoire beyond the gaming world and into our entire consumer society.

DG @ Jul 14th 2006 1:35PM

Sony and Sega killed off mascots together in 1995. Sega launched without Sonic and Sony never bothered cultivating a mascot, save for using Crash Bandicoot for a little while. And it's really for the best.

Back in the early 90s, everyone was trying to have mascots. Sunsoft had Aero the Acrobat, Accolade had Bubsy, Electronic Arts had James Pond (no, seriously), Playmates had Earthworm Jim, Hudson Soft Bomberman, Ubisoft Rayman, and Capcom Mega Man (but Ryu would appear in ads for other games as well). The whole industry was overrun by cutesy characters that appeared in a couple of games, a bunch of ads, and all ended up canceling each other out.

To me, the big shame of losing mascots is that the Xbox and PS2 (and Xbox 360 and PS3) are competing on specs and the rare first party breakthrough. There is no sense of a Microsoft or Sony universe, and that's what makes Samus, Link and Mario of Nintendo so appealing. Buying an MS product for Halo or a Sony product for Gran Turismo while expecting all of the rest of the games to be shared seems kind of sad to me.

MetaHuman @ Jul 14th 2006 1:40PM

It's simply because there's no special reason behind them anymore. Mario is the way he looks today as he does 20+ years ago simply because Shigeru Miyamoto couldn't animate hair, a mouth, or use enough colors to distinguish arms from his body. What was used instead were a hat, mustache, and overalls. VERY much like Superman in the early days of print comics, whereas Superman's colors were chosen to stand out on newsprint, Mario's were chosen to stand out against a black background.

The truly 1st mascot we still know today is probably Pac-Man.

Sonic was designed by Yuji Naka under Sega's expressed interest in rivaling Mario. Save for Naka's twist on game mechanics, both were born on the same principle of being characters in easy-to-play, hard-to-master games. Sonic could be as close to Mario as Captain Marvel is to Superman. For a time, Captain Marvel WAS beating Superman, but Sonic hasn't had a true hit, critically, on a console in a looong time.

The reason new 'mascots' fail today is that they neither have A)a universal appeal or versatility, B)weren't born of limitations that characters like Mario and Sonic had to surpass, and C)they are ultimately designed solely for 'mascot appeal' when it hasn't been earned.

Crash would be a mascot if his parental company actually kept him. Instead, he's only another cartoony character that keeps people wondering, "What's a bandicoot?". Same for Spyro, but everyone knows he's a dragon. Ratchet and Clank and Jak and Daxter are riffs based off of the idea of the 2-character team popularized by Banjo-Kazooie and earlier team-ups like Sonic and Tails. Kratos is actually Spawn, and while Shadow of the Colossus and ICO are awesome, lend very little to the idea of any character being nominated for Sony mascotship. Sly Cooper's purpose is too specific for instant recognizability. Master Chief is too GENERIC to be as recognizable, what with all the dozens of other sci-fi shooters out there. Lara Croft was a mascot for Eidos and CORE before she was dropped, but never for hardware.

Hell I bet more people remember Power Rangers more than they recognize Master Chief. Link reminded me of Peter Pan when I first saw him. And I'd SERIOUSLY recommend Sony promote LOCO ROCO heavilly. Loco Roco, in my eyes, is serious contendership for Sony's game mascot for sheer uniqueness. Too bad Sony's too caught up on trends for them to care.

In the end, many of them are just characters, cartoony or not. They are designed for the games they are in. Mario is popularly regarded as a plumber, but the only time you'll see him plumbing is in the comics or cartoons. Even Nintendo didn't know it back then, but Mario was made to be more than a one-trick pony.

Mascots are supposed to be the face of your company's attitude. And even with many true mascots quality can be questioned in their latest games and even Mario and his 'excess' of sports games and spin-offs, but Mario's adventures, 2D or 3D, have always been gold. THAT is mascot versatility, and the only one to come as close is Sonic.

turtleboy @ Jul 14th 2006 2:14PM

probot what a simple perfect answer. I agree. Mascots are very much alive and well with Nintendo. Nintendo has Pokemon, Star Fox, Mario, Luigi, Yoshi, Donkey Kong, Metroid, Link,and Bowser. I see these mascots selling Nintendo product all the time. I'm not talking games ether I mean clothes to ds skins you name it. Microsoft has Master Chief indeed. Sony has relied so much on 3rd party support that what is a mascot to them. Sony I guess has crash. Nintendo by far has the most mascots. They have so many that they made a Monopoly game.

BPM? @ Jul 14th 2006 2:24PM

#6 Akuma:
"That konami one with the kid and he has blue hair (dont know his name) hasnt had a game in how long."

I think you mean Goemon (Mystical Ninja/Ganbare Goemon! series). He could be considered Konami's mascot, since he's been in about 25 games, from the Famicom to the DS!
Sadly, only four of his games were translated (and all but one were great. The last one, Mystical Ninja Starring Goemon for Game Boy, was horrible).
Working Designs got the rights from Konami to translate the PS2 Goemon game, but SCEA refused to allow them to release it, since the graphics were dated (it was an early Japanese PS2 game). And now Working Designs is closed, so it's unlikely we'd ever see it, even if SCEA changed their mind.

Andrew Yoon @ Jul 14th 2006 2:28PM

The games industry still has powerful mascots. They're Reggie (Nintendo), Kutaragi (Sony) and J. Allard (Microsoft). I personally liked the cartoon mascots more.

32_Footsteps @ Jul 14th 2006 2:41PM

Again - outside of their games, how much did mascots ever appear in advertising? Capcom didn't use Mega Man to push non-MM games. Namco doesn't use Pac-Man outside of games in which the VG Mascot Granddaddy appears in. If anything, iconic characters from the Final Fantasy series (chocobos, moogles, and the like) are the closest you'll find to video game mascots used to promote beyond their series.

Mascots exist as they always existed - to make a stable franchise to make a company lots of money. The role of mascots hasn't changed at all, nor has their importance. The only thing that's changed is how much we recognize that role.

After all, Mario is still a guaranteed seller. So is Sonic. They obviously keep making Crash Bandicoot games for someone. Sly Cooper does alright. So do Ratchet & Clank. We're about to see yet another permutation on Mega Man (on top of the original, MMX, MM Legends, MM Zero, and MMBN). Namco can't stop putting Heihachi Mishima in games (no matter how much they should).

Mascots are just as important as they always were, and just as prevalent. Either the authors of the piece overestimated mascots of yesteryear, or they underestimate those of today. The role and importance hasn't changed. Only the perception has.

nootau @ Jul 14th 2006 2:42PM

@27
i agree with Andrew. The mascots have become peoople, and not fictional. (similar to bill gates being the mascot for microsoft for so long) I remember when that guy (his name illudes me) showed his GTA tatoo at E3 2006, that was when i realzied they were being "mascot-ized" (is that a word?). They are the face of the companies now.

Also, these companies have become publishers too (publishing games that were not developed inhouse) and i think they really dont want to bring a game specific mascot out to confuse customers of those published games. Mascots are now relagated to their respective titles and series'.

Oh, And didnt Hudson use Bonk too?

jojo29 @ Jul 14th 2006 3:02PM

yes but Halo is also on PC /wink:)

but then again if you have a pc why would you waste your time on that trash(yes trash on PC, but gold console) when i can play Half Life 2, Counterstriker: Source, Battlefield 2, Doom 3, etc...

DG @ Jul 14th 2006 4:18PM

nootau:

Bonk, and later Air Zonk, were more mascots of TTi.

Zertoss @ Jul 14th 2006 4:35PM

Hudson should probably use their little bee in their logo as their mascot. ;)

That got me thinking. Sega used to have Sonic in their logo (well, up against the left side of it and shaking his finger in classic Sonic fashion) on all of their old TV spots, even in their non-Sonic games, didn't they?

I think that's how companies should use their mascots to advertise. It identifies the character with the brand and the brand with the character.

Nintendo could use almost any of their characters on their logos in a TV spot. For example, they could show a Mario bouncing across the logo's letters for an ad for a Mario game or for a game that isn't part of one of their franchises but is, like Mario, aimed at everyone.

Microsoft could, at the end of an ad, have a shot of Master Chief blasting the screen to reveal the Xbox 360 logo and/or Microsoft Games logo in the center of a bullet hole. They might want to come up with something else with games aimed at younger audiences, though.

For Sony, Kratos would be fine for more mature ads, as long as God of War remains exclusive. Sly Cooper would probably be the best mascot for games aimed at everyone. Use your imagination. ;)

To me, that's how the mascots should be used. Going beyond that, cameo appearances are almost always a treat, especially when they're hidden away as some sort of secret in the game.

Lane @ Jul 14th 2006 4:55PM

Nintendo has more mascots than members of Congress. If you can make games solely based on original characters, then I'd say you utilize mascots to the best of your ability.

Sony has never really had its own mascot. They've been like the British in the American Revolution, hiring Hessian mercenaries (yeah that's right, didn't even need wikipedia for that). But yeah, they don't have any because Spyro died, Lara deflated (no pun intended) and then defected, and Crash crashed. All they have left is Gran Turismo, and who wants their mascot to be a Ford Focus? Not I...

And as for Microsoft...without the MC, they wouldn't have made it to the 360.

Sean DL @ Jul 14th 2006 5:24PM

Nintendo is the Disney of gaming. It's pretty much that simple, that all they are missing in NintendoLand Theme Park(But they do have Pokemon Theme Parks).

Everyone else moved away fro mtht, mostly because alto of the games became more bloody, and you can't have a killer as your mascot(Unless your Sega and Shadow)..

Craig @ Jul 14th 2006 7:39PM

Isn't the Super Smash Bros. franchise just a compilation of fighting mascots?

If the rumors about non-Nintendo characters (i.e., Solid Snake) being in the Wii version are true, then I'd say that mascots are alive and kicking.

PayTheMan @ Jul 14th 2006 7:55PM

Considering the types of games currently releasing, it's hard to find a mascot that's appropriate for all ages. While Master Chief may be a badass he certainly can't be used to market the Halo series to young children.

Also, the market of gamers who played Genesis and SNES, N64 and PSX, have grown and already made their allegiances when it comes to the next console they purchase.

Here is where Nintendo maintains the lead-- they understand that the gamer market is not growing. Right now the other corporations are catering to the same generation since N64 and PSX. Nintendo, on the other hand, has programs such as Touch Generations and the Wii console.

Now we see Nintendo pushing for wider market penetration not through mascots, but through technology and innovation.

David Babylon @ Jul 14th 2006 8:36PM

I would personally love to see the mascots make a return.

Sean DL @ Jul 14th 2006 8:50PM

And Nintendo isn't forgetting that N64/PSX crowd with the Wii, which is why we still get the core Mario and Zelda franchises games, and also created new stuff at E3 to attracted the Halo/MGS fans like Project H.A.M.M.E.R and Disaster: Day of Crisis.

Tom Hayden @ Jul 14th 2006 10:35PM

I think people may be missing the point in that, while all game companies have potential characters who may fit the mascot role, they don't push them as the face of the company anymore, nor do gamers or the public at large associate a specific character with a specific company like they used to. I think Artemis hit the nail on the head in post #1 when he said that this is probably because you just don't really see mascots at all anymore. I mean when was the last time anyone saw a commercial with Tony the Tiger, Ronald McDonald, Colonel Sanders, et al? Mr. Clean pops up from time to time, and the Michelin Man has that one spot, but that is all I can think of. This is a marked contrast to the 80's and early 90's when it seemed that every had featured a character. As to why this happened, I am not sure, but it is probably because some marketing dudes did some studies and figured out that people don't buy things because a fictional character tells them to.

Ian @ Jul 14th 2006 10:43PM

Mascots in gaming have always been the same. I mean the Atari 2600 didn't have any mascot did it? Has PC gaming ever had a mascot? Nintendo markets the hell out of mario and the same with what Sega did with sonic but thats about it. MS has master cheif and Sony their 1st party games (like ratchet and jak) but nothing thats put on ever console box they have.

ipodfanboy @ Jul 14th 2006 10:56PM

Isnt John Madden EA's Mascot year after year, thats the only way EA makes a profit from selling Madden.

Conn @ Jul 15th 2006 12:13AM

I don't see why a lot of you guys seem to think that mascots can only represent hardware. Mega Man is undeniably Capcom's mascot, and they're a software developer.

Also, I think Nambit (15) hit the nail on the head.

Geist @ Jul 15th 2006 12:36AM

As far as I understood the article, a lot of you are confusing 'mascot' with 'popular ip'. A mascot is not just something that sells a system (for example,) it _is_ the system/company. Just because a company uses a character a lot does not make the character the mascot, it merely makes them a popular company. Read the article, about how Sonic was designed to 'be' Sega, down to the color blue. Mario has grown into mascot status becuase of his popularity, bevy of games, and crazy amounts of marketing and merchandise he was used in way back when (I still see plushies here and there.) Saying James Bond is EA's mascot is foolish. Who watches a James Bond movie and thinks EA is on the screen? A mascot is used to represent a company, not sell it (though they often do, anyway.) When you see Mario, you see Nintendo. And so forth. This is why Mario will never be on a non-Nintendo console, or Link, for that matter. But Master Chief, for example, can be. He's been on the PC, and I don't see my PC as a Microsoft product. When I see MC, I don't think "Microsoft" or "Bungie." I think "Master Chief," which is why he's not a mascot IMO. Anyway. That's enough from me.

will @ Jul 15th 2006 1:02AM

they use phrases now instead mascots
its simple and people can relate a phrase to a product when it come up in a casual conversation
for example
nintendo(wii):play=believe
microsoft(xbox 360):jump in
sony(ps3):its too cheap
:P

Gil Hamilton @ Jul 15th 2006 1:52AM

29: "Namco doesn't use Pac-Man outside of games in which the VG Mascot"

Actually, he's spread far beyond that.
He's even made it into the corporate logo at times(Soul Edge machines had him in the Namco splash screen, if I recall correctly), and his most recent appearance I know of is in the Namco-developed Mario Kart arcade game as a playable character.

Greg @ Jul 15th 2006 3:02AM

Two words....WHO CARES!!!!!

plagiarize @ Jul 15th 2006 9:03AM

don't forget that Mario is still selling hardware and software for Nintendo hand over fist. New Super Mario Bros sold almost half a million copies in America alone lost month, and world wide has already sold millions. Part of the DS's sales spike is down to mario, and part is down to the Nintendo DS.

Actually look how they're advertising the DS lite. You can see that Nintendo are still using their mascot's to push hardware.

As for Master Chef... he was in dead or alive 4 to get him in a game at launch. I don't think there's many mascots that haven't been in games on other companies systems if you include the PC.

MC = Xbox. it's unquestionable.