Super Mario Run (iOS/Android)

[Serebii]

Wow...ok. So this is frankly one of the most...flagrantly ridiculous responses on the forum that I have seen in a while.

 

Nintendo effectively wiped £958 million off its company value from releasing this game! How can you honestly argue that most people can be wrong and then go on to compare it to the Nazis?! Not sure if you're being even remotely serious in your post or if you just have no idea about how to make effective comparisons.

 

What people were referring to was quite simple - don't sell a product to the wrong audience. Nintendo did just that - and now they face the consequences.

 

 

 

Quote for mother-fucking truth!

 

Oh come the hell on. You know that investors are the most twitchy people. Share price means nothing. After the Switch reveal, it dropped. After every reveal in this industry that isn't "Look, we're mobile now and we're going to fleece people" has stocks drop.

 

Don't be an idiot. Using share prices as evidence of if something is a good or bad decision is the dumbest thing I have ever seen on this forum.

 

Anyway, on a less ridiculous note, there are special limited Kingdom Decorations live for Christmas

 

[Sheikah]

Oh come the hell on. You know that investors are the most twitchy people. Share price means nothing. After the Switch reveal, it dropped. After every reveal in this industry that isn't "Look, we're mobile now and we're going to fleece people" has stocks drop.

 

Don't be an idiot. Using share prices as evidence of if something is a good or bad decision is the dumbest thing I have ever seen on this forum.

 

Anyway, on a less ridiculous note, there are special limited Kingdom Decorations live for Christmas

 

 

Except that's not true, is it? Pokemon Go ticked every box, Nintendo didn't even make it, and we saw a massive increase in Nintendo's share price.

 

Once again, proving how little you know outside of your Pokémon bubble.

 

The reason Nintendo's value has dropped is because of the large backlash to their pricing of the game. It is a direct response to a poor pricing strategy. If the game was generally being received well then this wouldn't be happening.

[Serebii]

Except that's not true, is it? Pokemon Go ticked every box, Nintendo didn't even make it, and we saw a massive increase in Nintendo's share price.

 

Once again, proving how little you know outside of your Pokémon bubble.

 

The reason Nintendo's value has dropped is because of the large backlash to their pricing of the game. It is a direct response to a poor pricing strategy. If the game was generally being received well then this wouldn't be happening.

 

Pokémon GO is the epitome of the mobile game I was talking about. What are you on about?

 

I know a lot more than you care to admit. Just because I challenge your preconceived notions does not mean I'm wrong and you're right. Accept you're wrong once in a while.

 

Share price is not a valid indicator of anything in regards to gaming. Sony's shares dropped after the PS4 was revealed, for example. Investors know nothing and they are fickle as hell. A momentary drop is expected.

 

We've known the price for a while so equating the drop to the price is illogical. Stop using stock price as an indicator of things, that's not how it goes. Stop being Pachter.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Serebii

[markderoos]

I realy hope they stay put with their attitude towards mobile gaming. And I hope more developers will follow suit. The mobile gaming market needs to evolve quality wise and the only way up is by highering the prices. Maybe Nintendo took a little too large step up with going for €10,- but the support they've got from Apple says enough to me; Apple seems to believe this is the way to get higher quality games on mobile. Plants vs Zombies wasn't cheap on release, right? And some of those boardgames or Fifa for example? Some franchises/games just have higher production values and they deserve a higher price I think. And personally I disgust IAP/continuous micro payments, so I'm a happy gamer

Edited December 19, 2016 by markderoos

[Serebii]

Let's not forget that Nintendo's strategy for mobile is also at odds with investors etc., and apparently Sheikah

 

Investors want a quick turnaround.

Nintendo are using their mobile stuff to leverage people into their dedicated devices. As such, it's not designed to "nickel & dime" people.

[Glen-i]

I got a legit laugh out of @Sheikah's post.

I mean, really? You're using stock prices to make your point? That's so silly!

[Sheikah]

Pokémon GO is the epitome of the mobile game I was talking about. What are you on about?

 

I know a lot more than you care to admit. Just because I challenge your preconceived notions does not mean I'm wrong and you're right. Accept you're wrong once in a while.

 

Share price is not a valid indicator of anything in regards to gaming. Sony's shares dropped after the PS4 was revealed, for example. Investors know nothing and they are fickle as hell. A momentary drop is expected.

 

We've known the price for a while so equating the drop to the price is illogical. Stop using stock price as an indicator of things, that's not how it goes. Stop being Pachter.

 

Except investors do know something as the game is already out! Wake up Serebii! When are you going to take both the share hit and consumer backlash (2.5 stars on app store) together and figure out that the pricing strategy is a poor one considering the target audience? £8 is too much for these people - they are cheap as hell up front, cash cows in the long run!

 

I got a legit laugh out of @Sheikah's post.

I mean, really? You're using stock prices to make your point? That's so silly!

Hilarious isn't it! Almost as if this was a game made to make money, and that the stock price went down because the game wasn't being received well!

 

Fun times.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Sheikah

[Glen-i]

Except investors do know something as the game is already out! Wake up Serebii! When are you going to take both the share hit and consumer backlash (2.5 stars on app store) together and figure out that the pricing strategy is a poor one considering the target audience? £8 is too much for these people - they are cheap as hell up front, cash cows in the long run!

 

I find it very strange that you actually want Nintendo to exploit people.

It's that kind of strategy that makes me detest mobile gaming in the first place.

People are not entitled to free games, no matter how much they whine about it. It's an incredibly sad state of affairs and I'm glad Ninty are not stooping to that level.

[Serebii]

Except investors do know something as the game is already out! Wake up Serebii! When are you going to take both the share hit and consumer backlash (2.5 stars on app store) together and figure out that the pricing strategy is a poor one considering the target audience? £8 is too much for these people - they are cheap as hell up front, cash cows in the long run!

 

 

Hilarious isn't it! Almost as if this was a game made to make money, and that the stock price went down because the game wasn't being received well!

 

Fun times.

 

You do realise that the ones bitching are ones that wouldn't spend a single penny on it, right?

 

I think you need to learn how the mobile gaming industry works

[Sheikah]

I find it very strange that you actually want Nintendo to exploit people.

It's that kind of strategy that makes me detest mobile gaming in the first place.

People are not entitled to free games, no matter how much they whine about it. It's an incredibly sad state of affairs and I'm glad Ninty are not stooping to that level.

 

How is it exploitng? I had great fun with Pokemon Go and didn't part with a penny.

 

This isn't about exploiting people. You can argue all you want that Nintendo are noble with their but ultimately they are out to make money. Their £8 pricing for a crowd not interested in paying up front indicates more that they once again misjudged their audience. And that choice is having a knock on effect on their reviews, and so no doubt their sales. I actually consider £8 very steep for these people and ultimately not a good choice for them in the long run.

[Glen-i]

Hilarious isn't it! Almost as if this was a game made to make money, and that the stock price went down because the game wasn't being received well!

 

Fun times.

 

Of course, while they're at it, might as well never use an IP that doesn't sell big numbers, cancel the Switch, and focus on games that nickel and dime players and never make console games ever again.

Investors don't care one itty-bitty bit about Ninty's long term future, it's all about that short-term profit, y'all!

[Hero-of-Time]

The Christmas tree decoration is lovely and that's coming from someone who hates this time of year.

 

I unlocked all the pink coins and Luigi yesterday. I'm not that far off getting Toadette, as well.

 

Thanks for adding me @dazzybee and @Kaxxx. @Ronnie, you not dishing out your code for everyone, or did you just play the demo?

 

Not to get into it but I think the game has been a steal at £8. I've put a crazy amount of hours into it so far and ive probably spent more time on this than I have on any of Nintendo's console or handheld games this year.

[Glen-i]

How is it exploitng? I had great fun with Pokemon Go and didn't part with a penny.

 

This isn't about exploiting people. You can argue all you want that Nintendo are noble with their but ultimately they are out to make money. Their £8 pricing for a crowd not interested in paying up front indicates more that they once again misjudged their audience. And that choice is having a knock on effect on their reviews, and so no doubt their sales. I actually consider £8 very steep for these people and ultimately not a good choice for them in the long run.

 

Good for you, I'm sure you represent the average mobile gamer perfectly.

 

Except that that's not what they're aiming for with Run. They're looking to get people to transition to their bigger titles. Those kind of people complaining about the price were never gonna buy a 40 quid Mario game.

 

The fact that NSMB Wii has charted again on Amazon (I think it was Amazon) shows promise for Mario Switch.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Glen-i

[Sheikah]

Good for you, I'm sure you represent the average mobile gamer perfectly.

 

Except that that's not what they're aiming for with Run. They're looking to get people to transition to their bigger titles. Those kind of people complaining about the price were never gonna buy a 40 quid Mario game.

 

The fact that NSMB Wii has charted again on Amazon (I think it was Amazon) shows promise for Mario Switch.

Right, so I feel like this particular discussion is veering into heated territory, so let's just try reel this back again.

 

Certainly, there are arguments you could make for not following the trend of free to play, but is £8 really a good fit? What if, for instance, they made half a game and sold it up front at £4? They could even make the full number of levels and sell the other half later down the line as a second game for another £4. I think the problem many had was that it was free to download and then after a short time it hit you with an £8 price tag. I can see the typical mobile gamer not being pleased with that tactic.

 

Anyhow...regarding me not being a typical mobile gamer; my understanding is that most actually don't pay, and that a lot of the money comes from a smaller pool of people. You can argue it's exploiting in the case of people with what would constitute a gambling addiction but I have seen quite a lot of good come from F2P. In my opinion, Nintendo could probably have made such a method work without compromising their core values. It's just a shame that the way they've gone hasn't gone down well.

 

I also think from a more general view that Nintendo's focus for this game isn't really to sell at a high price to bring big spenders to their titles on mobile who then don't mind spending high on their next traditional console. Rather, I should think they wanted this to do well, make money and attract people to their brand. At £8 I don't believe this is the best way to achieve those things, and I do think that this is being reflected in general reception we've seen.

 

Of course, I can see myself getting this when it comes to Android but as you say, I am not your average mobile gamer.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Sheikah

[dazzybee]

Likening IAP to the Nazi party is a bit much... Just to point out too the things you list are social and political. This is business. Business does tend to follow the most popular thing because it needs to in order to survive.

 

And I'm assuming that post wasn't aimed at me, but I have tried to argue some of the points you raised.

 

The mobile industry is not hurting gaming any more than the Wii did by and large - it expanded the audience and made a lot of money. It has also opened up the industry to make it more accessible for creators and players alike. It's made a lot of money. It's embedded expectations within the subset Nintendo is now trying to compete in. It may seem wrong people prefer IAP but they are successful. They are profitable.

 

Part of the criticism I believe isn't 'Nintendo should be more like others', but rather there seems to have been a lack of market research done. It's like when they declared they'd never looked at PSN or Live when creating their online service. Even little things, such as badly designed touch areas, suggest a sense of amateurishness when it comes to mobile. You could argue either way (of course, it's their first game vs they've been in the industry long enough to know they don't know everything particularly when it comes to a new platform and approach/mentality). I think the question is did Nintendo create a mobile game, or create a Nintendo game and released it on mobile?

 

As I've mentioned previously it would be good if Nintendo helped spur a new tier of mobile gaming and if any company has enough clout it is probably them, but a change like that will be met with resistance. Like they were in 83.

 

I don't care of it's political or business, we shouldn't hide behind popularity when forming our own opinions on something. Selling dodgy mortgages was "just business" but we can still have an opinion on it; just found it so bizarre people were justifying something just because "it's the way it is".

 

And of course movie has done a lot of good, I play lots and lots of mobile games, but I think there's a huge problem when all the top grossing games are all free, and people complain when they have to pay for a game, and even people here, long time gamers, are complaining about Nintendo charging too - that is not good. It really isn't good.

[MindFreak]

I think selling each world at its own price, say £1 and then giving the players an option to buy all worlds up front for say £4 would have worked much better and not given such a backlash. I think paying for the game is fine, I just think it's too expensive given the platform, the audience and the competition on said platform.

 

Again, look at Rayman Fiesta Run. Completely free, tons to do, high quality, and Rayman, a known IP.

[dazzybee]

Pretty fucking rich coming from someone who's opening gambit into the discussion was hyperbole and Nazi references (and ALL CAPS, because why not).

 

Here, have some of your toys back whilst the rest of us discuss things like adults.

 

What's wrong with the comparison, bit extreme but was trying to give a clear example. And you say discuss things like adults, but reply like an adolescent contributing nothing to the discussion at all other than making snide attacks on a poster - wish there were more intelligent adults like you on these boards...

 

 

Nintendo effectively wiped £958 million off its company value from releasing this game! How can you honestly argue that most people can be wrong and then go on to compare it to the Nazis?! Not sure if you're being even remotely serious in your post or if you just have no idea about how to make effective comparisons.

 

What people were referring to was quite simple - don't sell a product to the wrong audience. Nintendo did just that - and now they face the consequences.

 

Oh boy, you really are something. So you're saying a the share drop (presume thats what you're referring to) is all because of this practice and justifies people negative reaction to what people are doing?!

 

It's such bullshit and you know it, but you've always been one of those types who uses any information, whether you agree with or not, to try and prove your point, and you always come across looking the same....

 

But that is not my point. That is completely not my point and I presume you know it but I think I'm over estimating you so I'll say it again. it makes no difference to what our opinion of the medium is, well it shouldn't, but are you so small minded you need to be told what to think - well other people like IAP so I like it too!!

 

Massive Hollywood blockbusters make loads of money too, should everyone do that or they're criticised? Should art house filmmakers be lambasted? You can pick any art form, I won't go on. Yet here we are, slagging Nintendo because they are doing something a different, which *may* not be as profitable, but certainly good for business and standing up against the hideous pricing structures of mobile gaming. And people slag them, people who should value combatting IAP which is completely anti-consumer and I would say forces bad game design to see people paying that money!

[Ashley]

A more apt film comparison would be Fox charging £80 for tickets while all other studios charge £10. What you're describing is different genres ('blockbuster' is essentially a mega-genre). This isn't about genre, nor really about content (SMR offers comparible content to other games that are free), it's about pricing structure. It may be right, it may be justifiable, but it has caused some concerns amd criticism and please can we all try and discuss these without name-calling and shouting?

[dazzybee]

@Sheikah, in all honesty, do you genuinely think IAP is good and Nintendo should move towards that and not be strong in their position and have value for their product; fight against it. may inspire others to do the same. Do you genuinely not applaud Nintendo for that? I can't believe anyone doesn't think Nintendo are doing a good thing, irrespective of "business" (why should we give a shit just how many millions Nintendo make anyway)

 

A more apt film comparison would be Fox charging £80 for tickets while all other studios charge £10. What you're describing is different genres ('blockbuster' is essentially a mega-genre). This isn't about genre, nor really about content (SMR offers comparible content to other games that are free), it's about pricing structure. It may be right, it may be justifiable, but it has caused some concerns amd criticism and please can we all try and discuss these without name-calling and shouting?

 

I guess I didn't mean it quite as direct as that, more the minute of not using "business" as a way to make your decisions, particularly in creative mediums.

 

And I use caps for emphasis not shouting Think it's because in screenplays you emphasise sound effects in caps....

Edited December 19, 2016 by dazzybee
Automerged Doublepost

[Ashley]

Well just as we're saying Nintendo should be more considerate of the medium, maybe you should too But seriously, caps on the internet is just shouting. You ain't in Final Draft now!

[dazzybee]

Well just as we're saying Nintendo should be more considerate of the medium, maybe you should too But seriously, caps on the internet is just shouting. You ain't in Final Draft now!

 

Haha, is this better?

[Goafer]

other than making snide attacks on a poster

 

wish there were more intelligent adults like you on these boards...

 

Beautiful. Just beautiful.

 

And you're the one that turned this discussion sour when you compared my opinion to the Nazis and waded in with your completely over the top post (ALL CAPS, hyperbole etc). Any fool can see it reads as an attack, rather than expressing opinions like a mature adult.

 

For what it's worth, I have formed my own opinion. Just because it's apparently the majority, doesn't automatically make it wrong. See my £70 games analogy earlier. If something is overpriced compared to the competition, people are going to complain. End of. Don't like it? Tough. Welcome to a consumer driven society.

 

Fuck me, it's the first time since Apple that I've seen people regarded as heroes for overcharging.

[Ashley]

Yeah italics are the best. It's why I use them.

[dazzybee]

Beautiful. Just beautiful.

 

And you're the one that turned this discussion sour when you compared my opinion to the Nazis and waded in with your completely over the top post (ALL CAPS, hyperbole etc). Any fool can see it reads as an attack, rather than expressing opinions like a mature adult.

 

For what it's worth, I have formed my own opinion. Just because it's apparently the majority, doesn't automatically make it wrong. See my £70 games analogy earlier. If something is overpriced compared to the competition, people are going to complain. End of. Don't like it? Tough. Welcome to a consumer driven society.

 

Fuck me, it's the first time since Apple that I've seen people regarded as heroes for overcharging.

 

It wasn't particularly aimed at you by the way. And that's fine if you think it's fine. And people can complain. But so can I; works both ways. And again, you call it over charging and I call it people being paid for their work, if you think £8 is too much money for it then that's fine; but I bet you also agreed with Amazon in wanting to lower the price of books so much when publishers/authors (oh, and apple) were against it and wanted to charge higher price?! (don't know if you're aware of that "war" from a few years ago). Personally, I think artists should be paid well for their work; otherwise it will hurt us in the long run.

 

Think the same about journalists too, they got screwed over and look what happened this year. But why should people pay for news when they can get it for free on most sites, twitter etc eh?

[Sheikah]

@Sheikah, in all honesty, do you genuinely think IAP is good and Nintendo should move towards that and not be strong in their position and have value for their product; fight against it. may inspire others to do the same. Do you genuinely not applaud Nintendo for that? I can't believe anyone doesn't think Nintendo are doing a good thing, irrespective of "business" (why should we give a shit just how many millions Nintendo make anyway)

 

 

 

I guess I didn't mean it quite as direct as that, more the minute of not using "business" as a way to make your decisions, particularly in creative mediums.

 

And I use caps for emphasis not shouting Think it's because in screenplays you emphasise sound effects in caps....

 

I would rather it be an IAP model than be 8 quid, because I find that price expensive (like Goafer). Jungle Run comes to mind - tons of levels, the same Rayman gameplay, and the price? £2.49. Pretty sure it was a bit more on release but not much more, and it has been 69p a number of times too. For Mario, I think the price was misjudged based on the audience and the tactic of being a free download then asking for money was never going to go down well. Rayman was a payment up front and fared much better for it.

 

To clear up the point about IAP - there are 'free' games I have played where IAP were used to do things like cheat to clear the level, while not really impacting the gameplay at all should you choose not to spend on them. Sure, there are games where the gameplay is clearly shaped around the microtransactions but it doesn't mean the game has to be made like that.

 

I think I would rather it just be cheaper, since they're selling to a much larger audience they can afford to sell it at a lower price (which again, I'm sure is what the Rayman developers realised). You seem to think I'm all about sales and not about what I want, but the way I see it is that this is a mobile game targeted at the mobile crowd, much less the traditional Nintendo fans like us. I know I can get my Mario fix from Nintendo's game consoles so I can afford to view this release more critically. And being critical, I think they have missed a chance here and overpriced it.

 

Also just a thought - you seem to be implying Nintendo are rising above the lesser companies with their noble behaviour here. I'd be very interested to see where Nintendo go with their next proper mobile game. I reckon they'll adapt their next game to the audience more, confirming most of what I'm saying.

Edited December 19, 2016 by Sheikah