Bad Reviews For Super Mario Run Are Sending Nintendo's Stock Tumbling (fortune.com)

People aren't loving Nintendo's newly released Super Mario Run. Nintendo's stock plunged 7.1% Monday, bringing its total drop since the game's release last week to more than 11%, Bloomberg reports. The game's mediocre reviews had a similar impact on DeNA, the Nintendo partner that helped with the game's development: Since the game's introduction, its stock has fallen 14%. From a report: Reviews in Apple's App Store (so far, the game is only available on iPhone) show an average rating of two and half stars out of five. Overall, there have been nearly 50,000 reviews. Its reviews make it among the lowest rated app among those at the top of the download rankings, according to Bloomberg.

Comments

Told ya so.

[Anonymous Coward]

And now nintendo will make a statement that without hard controls and buttons, good games can't be made and go back to making games that a small portion of people love for their own hardware and pay even less attention to what people say.

Re:Told ya so.

[dontbemad]

go back to making games that a small portion of people love for their own hardware and pay even less attention to what people say.

Fine by me. While the console lock-in may be annoying at times, the quality of their games and enjoyment I can get from them is much higher than any phone-based game I have ever played, period. It is high-time that we finally started accepting that phones have limitations, and that they aren't the magical "entertain everyone perfectly" devices that a lot of people seem to think they are.

Re:Told ya so.

[stealth_finger]

In other news nintendo's new console less powerful than 2/3 year old rivals. No doubt they are banking on mario and mario kart, a zelda game, pokemon and all their other old staples to see them through.....again.

http://gadgets.ndtv.com/games/news/nintendo-switch-is-slower-than-the-ps4-and-xbox-one-report-1639542

Re:Told ya so.

[bluefoxlucid]

Phone-based games are cocaine: low-effort, cheap rewards.

Re:Told ya so.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's the only one that's portable.

Re:Told ya so.

[arth1]

And if they keep making good games, it will. The power behind the hardware is less important than the quality of the games made for it.

Very much so.
Pac-Man ran on a 3 MHz CPU, with a 16 kB ROM and 2 kB RAM + 2 kB video RAM. And you got 60 fps and responsive controls.

Re:Told ya so.

[Calydor]

Hey man, about that cheap cocaine, can you hook me up? <.<

Re:Told ya so.

[_KiTA_]

In other news nintendo's new console less powerful than 2/3 year old rivals. No doubt they are banking on mario and mario kart, a zelda game, pokemon and all their other old staples to see them through.....again.

So? Both of THOSE are less powerful than a comparable PC. It doesn't matter. We've hit a plateau where the graphics aren't getting better by leaps and bounds anymore. The PS4, XBox, and WiiU / Switch graphics are "good enough."

Re:Told ya so.

[bickerdyke]

And now nintendo will make a statement that without hard controls and buttons, good games can't be made

IMHO, that's true enough for Mario-Style Jump'n'Runs.

And dumbing it down to a "Jump'n'Nothing" gave us exactly that. a dumb game.

You probably can't make a good text adventure with mouse input either.

Re:Told ya so.

[zerocommazero]

Their new system is a portable. That should have hit the point home that the new system would not be on par with PS4 horsepower. Also the "Switch" is more a successor to the portable DS/3DS, where they are still healthy. Nintendo may not say that as the 3DS and Pokemon are whats selling from them this holiday, but make no mistake. Nintendo is done with (traditional) home consoles. The Wii U was its worst selling console and they know they cant directly compete. The main console market (AAA, FPS, etc.) is not even their main target audience. It would be pointless and a waste of their resources to even try.

Re:Told ya so.

[Waffle Iron]

This a million times. I still get way more enjoyment from my old Gameboy than from my phone, which is a thousand times more powerful.

What Nintendo should do is create a modern smartphone in a physical package that is identical to a classic Gameboy. (Well, maybe it could be a little thinner). It would be practical, fun to play, and hipster-approved.

Re: Told ya so.

[unami]

it's not about the gameplay - the bad reviews are either about the game crashing or (mostly) about the high price (for not wnough game)

Re:Told ya so.

[petermgreen]

The playstation 2 was released in Japan in March 2000, North America in October and Europe in November
The gamecube was released in Japan in September 2001, North america is November and Europe in May 2002.
The xbox was released in North america In November 2001, Japan in Febuary 2002 and Europe in March 2002.

So the playstation 2 had a year or more of head start over the Xbox and Gamecube.

Re:Told ya so.

[stealth_finger]

In other news nintendo's new console less powerful than 2/3 year old rivals. No doubt they are banking on mario and mario kart, a zelda game, pokemon and all their other old staples to see them through.....again.

So? Both of THOSE are less powerful than a comparable PC. It doesn't matter. We've hit a plateau where the graphics aren't getting better by leaps and bounds anymore. The PS4, XBox, and WiiU / Switch graphics are "good enough."

They're not less powerful than a comparable PC, hence the comparable. Less powerful than a high end pc yeah, but are you saying graphics should be made for the lowest common denominator because it's "good enough"?

Re:Told ya so.

[stealth_finger]

Their new system is a portable. That should have hit the point home that the new system would not be on par with PS4 horsepower. Also the "Switch" is more a successor to the portable DS/3DS, where they are still healthy. Nintendo may not say that as the 3DS and Pokemon are whats selling from them this holiday, but make no mistake. Nintendo is done with (traditional) home consoles. The Wii U was its worst selling console and they know they cant directly compete. The main console market (AAA, FPS, etc.) is not even their main target audience. It would be pointless and a waste of their resources to even try.

So three years later you can't get the same or similar in a smaller system? Also this is talking about in docked mode. In hand held mode the performance is considerably worse, 60% worse in the case of the GPU clock speed.

Re:Told ya so.

[nmb3000]

And the first hit is always free.

Re:Told ya so.

[Oswald McWeany]

I wish developers concentrated more on playability than graphics these days like they used to. I don't care how realistic a game is if the gameplay is crap, yet I know where most developers spend most of their money.

I also know why, it's much easier to sell a game that has amazing graphics- even if they end result is something that offers little entertainment in the long run.

All consoles are "good enough" to play great games with good graphics.

Re:Told ya so.

[mbeckman]

It's just a game. Run along now.

Re:Told ya so.

[secretsquirel]

none of these new games can match the nokia snake game anyway

Re:Told ya so.

[Oswald McWeany]

The game doesn't have to be good or even be a massive seller.

A single button jumping game can't have been too expensive to produce- they probably have most of the sprites made from other projects, the music they do. They probably don't have to make a huge number of sales at $10 each to make a profit out of this game.

Nintendo's tanking profits are a bit of an oversight. The game may be bad and poorly reviewed, but they probably made (or will make) profit out of it.

The only real downside to Nintendo is the hit to their reputation, but they can probably take a few hits.

Re:Told ya so.

[thegarbz]

Except you don't know what you're talking about. Nearly every complaint about the game is the fact that you can play through world one but then it asks you to pay. People are bitching because they were asked to part with $9.90

Re:Told ya so.

[thegarbz]

go back to making games that a small portion of people love for their own hardware and pay even less attention to what people say.

Fine by me. While the console lock-in may be annoying at times, the quality of their games and enjoyment I can get from them is much higher than any phone-based game I have ever played, period. It is high-time that we finally started accepting that phones have limitations, and that they aren't the magical "entertain everyone perfectly" devices that a lot of people seem to think they are.

None of the console games I own can match the gameplay and enjoyment I get ... on a bus, or while waiting for a train.
Super Mario Run is actually quite solid and fun. Most of the bad reviews are bitching about having to pay money to play a game. A console doesn't fix that, it makes it worse. I guess it does weed out the entitled little shits though.

Re:Told ya so.

[bluefoxlucid]

There's no tanking profits here. Nintendo's stock price dropped because of bad news, thus the sentiment that their stock price will devalue, thus people selling off. We didn't just pick up an earnings report.

Re:Told ya so.

[Anonymous Coward]

It had a running start. Still could help explain its advantage in other areas. The real reason the PS2 outsold other consoles of its generation, if you recall, is that everyone suddenly needed a DVD player and the PS2 cost about the same as a regular DVD player, but with the added ability to run games.

Re:Told ya so.

[Merk42]

It had a running start.

How about Wii compared to PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360? Wii came out last (albeit by 2 days compared to PS3) yet outsold them both.

The real reason the PS2 outsold other consoles of its generation, if you recall, is that everyone suddenly needed a DVD player and the PS2 cost about the same as a regular DVD player, but with the added ability to run games.

So it's almost as if horsepower isn't a direct measure of a console's success, and there could be other, more novel ways, it can be successful.

Re:Told ya so.

[dyslexicbunny]

The lack of hardware power is less disappointing than the consideration that the only major releases will be only established Nintendo franchises. Last system I got was a Wii and it mostly ended up being a paperweight. I can't justify another such purchase again for a handful of games.

If Nintendo is going to be the largest contributor to games for the system by far (which isn't a horrible thing), then I think they need to seriously shake things up and make some new IP as well. Maybe they have but I don't hear about it since I'm a guy in his 30s. But the fact that I haven't isn't a promising sign.

Re:Told ya so.

[Oswald McWeany]

That was actually a typo on my part, I had intended to write "tanking stock price is an oversight". Their stock will bounce back. One bad game that they make a profit off of will not hurt their long term viability.

Re: Told ya so.

[jxander]

The failure of the WiiU was entirely in marketing.

The console itself is plenty powerful, and the tablet opens up a slew of interesting multiplayer possibilities. Just play their tech demo (Nintendoland) to see what could have been. There was genuine innovation there.

But Nintendo didn't explain anything to the consumer. Their marketing strategy was ass. Nonexistent ass. No one knew if it was an expansion to the Wii, or its own console, or is the tablet the console, or wtf is this thing. Once it got off to a shaky start, developers started to balk. Even Nintendo themselves held off Zelda, only further ensuring the demise of WiiU. That's why the first commercial for Switch went to great lengths in explaining everything. You know exactly what the switch is and what it does. Every capability was shown in detail, so there is no confusion.

I do agree though, that it feels like a bit of a retreat. It's definitely more handheld that console, but I hope it's a temporary step back. They can get comfortable, get more 3rd party developers back onboard, and try something really wild again in the next cycle.

Re:Told ya so.

[LeftCoastThinker]

What Nintendo needs to do is sell a custom bluetooth case for the iPhone that essentially uses what the phone has (display/electronics etc) and adds what it is sorely lacking (real buttons, D pad/thumb stick, maybe speakers etc.) Sell this for cost at $20 directly through the any Nintendo app delivered to your door in 2 days like Amazon and you have a very powerful platform that is equivalent or better than the DS with millions of installed users.

Phones by themselves without real buttons are just too limited for real gaming, which is why I have a ton of games on my phone, but I have stopped buying them. The only winners that I regularly use are solitaire, Mahjong and the Fallout vault game. Everything else is either too simple to play for more than 20 minutes, too small or too difficult to control with a virtual controller. I know that there are bluetooth controllers out there, but if Nintendo were to do it, the quality and performance would actually be good enough to enjoy.

Re:Told ya so.

[Skuld-Chan]

This is true, but it also means that porting games from PS4 or XBOne is going to be that much harder on the Nintendo...

Which is maybe the point? I'm not sure - if they wanted to broaden their software title base and start supporting things like CoD.

Re:Told ya so.

[zerocommazero]

You must have never played their DS/3DS systems. Those had tons of 3rd party support and this system is also the replacement for that as well.

Re:Told ya so.

[zerocommazero]

Um, yeah, considering the rumored price is $250-300 ish. That's less than the PS4 at its launch. You missed the part where I said this is a portable first system. You're looking at this like a standard console but portable is deifferent. In fact, portable is the only place Nintendo still rules uncontested, which is why this is portable focused.

Re:Told ya so.

[dyslexicbunny]

I have not. Given my age and what was available to me as a kid, I have generally seen handhelds as something to do for idle time when traveling (as historically their capabilities limited gameplay compared to consoles - I acknowledge this is far less of an issue now with today's hardware and the maturity of the industry). Regardless, the DS released when I was in college and going home meant I was driving so there wasn't any point in having one.

I suppose I could get one and play it around the house but I have a Steam list out the wazoo with stuff I want to play and diminished free time compared to having been in grad school. Perhaps that insight would be a good thing then as it will get some of those handheld games into one system and might justify me making the purchase. I'm still kicking myself about the Wii purchase feeling like a waste given how little time I spent playing it.

Re: Told ya so.

[spire3661]

>The failure of the WiiU was entirely in marketing.

Just no. Its expensive to make to the point they couldnt lower the price. The new slim Xbox One is selling for $250 right now with a brand new pack in game (BF1), Wii U is still $299 for 32 GB and a 2.5 year old pack in game. Also, you cant get Wii U first party from Amazon. Its like Nintendo went out of their way to fuck up the Wii U. It had nothing to do with marketing and everything to do with Nintendo thinking they know better than everyone else. The Wii U is a design failure, and a marketing one.

Re:Told ya so.

[AmazingRuss]

We have a winner! Phone players are the most entitled crybabies in the gaming world. The free to play model thrives because of it.

Re:Told ya so.

[LeftCoastThinker]

Since I was actually gaming back then, I feel I should remind you that Pac-Man ran at 224x288 resolution. While eye candy certainly isn't everything, it is a factor. I am not a fanboy of any particular brand, but I stopped buying new Nintendo consoles after the Gamecube. Nintendo's choice to under power it's consoles and bundle expensive controller screens is fine for un-discerning grandparents and little kids, but there are many games available that are both fun and cutting edge in the graphics department. It is also true that many fun games, like Super Mario Brothers, don't need a high end console to run well. I still buy the Nintendo consoles and the 10-20 games that are worth owning, but I wait til the end of the generation. It is good that there are people at Nintendo that realize that gaming is at it's core still about fun, and you don't need bleeding edge graphics for that, but doubling down on the expensive, ass backwards WiiU is a mistake that will bite them. At the least, they should be selling their new product with an option to ditch the expensive screen and just play on your TV for $120 less than the base price of the screen console version. If I could pick up a Nintendo console for $120 to play newer 2d cartoon versions of Zelda, SMB, Metroid etc. I would, but at $300, everyone will be buying a PS4 or Xbone for the same price.

Re:Told ya so.

[Ranbot]

What Nintendo needs to do is sell a custom bluetooth case for the iPhone that essentially uses what the phone has (display/electronics etc) and adds what it is sorely lacking (real buttons, D pad/thumb stick, maybe speakers etc.)

Exactly this. Nintendo has the hardware design and manufacturing experience to easily do this. With a standardized controller Nintendo could simply repackage and resell their library of old games, which they are masters of. They wouldn't even have to bother developing new games to make this work, because even a straight port of original Metroid, Mario Bros, Kirby, Zelda, etc. would be more fun than 99% of mobiles games out there.

Re:Told ya so.

[desdinova 216]

it seems like Nintendo hasn't cared about third party titles since the gamecube.

Re:Told ya so.

[Whorhay]

Are you sure about the 60 fps bit? I would have thought it would be more like 40 or whatever old televisions ran at.

Re:Told ya so.

[arth1]

Are you sure about the 60 fps bit? I would have thought it would be more like 40 or whatever old televisions ran at.

A tiny bit over 60 Hz, actually. Dictated by the CPU running at 3.072 MHz, so moves to display memory wouldn't have tearing.

Re:Told ya so.

[martinX]

That'd be 60 fields per second.

Re:Told ya so.

[arth1]

Non-interlaced (it was low resolution), so it's identical to frames per second.

Re: Told ya so.

[arth1]

I hope they have more than Pac-Mac as their killer app. I just don't think it's able to move many consoles anymore.

Yes, but the point is that you don't need the most advanced hardware on the market - I'd gladly take a game that was a mere 100 times better than Pac-Man...

Re:Told ya so.

[yuriklastalov]

Apple could do it, Google not so much. Which, of the several hundred (at least), Android models is this controller going to support? If it's all of them, then the controller is going to need to adapt to every size, shape, and unconscionably out of date Android version out there.

I guess they could just support Pixel phones, but that's not exactly a large market.

Re:Told ya so.

[yuriklastalov]

It would be a rare mobile game indeed that's worth $9.90. Most of them are barely worth one dollar, let alone ten. For every successful "good" (read: popular) mobile game, there are a thousand shitty Chinese clones. Mobile stores are clogged up with complete shit, and even if mobile gaming were a worthwhile platform (which it isn't) it'd be impossible to find anything worth playing amongst the endless fields of garbage.

So Generation Z can keep their god awful touch-screen-all-the-things interfaces, it's just too bad that since they're the up and coming gaming market that they're going to be who devs and publishers cater to. All hope is not yet lost though. My kids love Terraria, they use to watch me play it on PC and then played it themselves on their tablets, which anyone who's played it will know how legendarily bad the controls (and the port in general) are. Recently I got them into playing it on the PC, and after an initial period of getting used to the keyboard/mouse controls they soon realized just how awful the mobile version really is, just like I kept telling them. The love of touch-centric interface usually won't survive an encounter with any superior alternative, at least if the player has any choice in the matter.

Re: Told ya so.

[djsmiley]

> That's why the first commercial for Switch went to great lengths in explaining everything. You know exactly what the switch is and what it does. Every capability was shown in detail, so there is no confusion

So, that screen is a touch screen then? Yes? No? Maybe?

Re:Told ya so.

[djsmiley]

Which one tho?

Nintendo's replacement to the ds was the ds was the ds xl was the 3ds, 2ds, 3ds XL supermega extreme sexy time edition.

I can almost smell the number of sku's this things gonna have.

I dont know what all the hate is for

[drummerboybac]

its a continuous run game with some interesting level layouts. Were people expecting a full on Mario game?

Re:I dont know what all the hate is for

[Calydor]

Full disclosure: I haven't played the game, haven't even looked at screenshots.

My first gaming console was the original NES. I have played almost every Mario game released since the first one there up to the first Galaxy game. To me, Mario games aren't about running quickly from start to finish, it's about finding paths through the levels, secrets, warp pipes etc. It's as much exploration as it is jumping from platform to platform.

This seemed to be true for most of Nintendo's own games; Mario, Zelda, Metroid all have this sense of being rewarded for going off the beaten bath, looking around and stopping to think for a moment.

The premise of "always run really fast until you're done" is more Sonic than Mario.

Re:I dont know what all the hate is for

[mccalli]

Maybe a game called Super Mario RUN is not for you then? It's not for me either - that's not reason for me to give it a bad review. Question is whether it succeeds on its own merits.

Re:I dont know what all the hate is for

[cayenne8]

My first gaming console was the original NES. I have played almost every Mario game released since the first one there up to the first Galaxy game. To me, Mario games aren't about running quickly from start to finish, it's about finding paths through the levels, secrets, warp pipes etc. It's as much exploration as it is jumping from platform to platform.

This seemed to be true for most of Nintendo's own games; Mario, Zelda, Metroid all have this sense of being rewarded for going off the beaten bath, looking around and stopping to think for a moment.

The premise of "always run really fast until you're done" is more Sonic than Mario.

Yeah..I was reading about this new game and thinking, "Really?"...they're banking on a game that you just push one button to jump, and they're counting on this being a hit?

It just sound boring as shit from the description alone. And to base this overly simplistic version on a game set that a couple of generations have grown up with that is a bit more complex, and has more in-depth game play, to me seemed it would be clear that this would not be a popular game.

If they wanted to make a Sonic on Valium type game, that's what they should have come up with, rather than putting their Mario character in there.

I mean, if they had taken the jump button and user control completely out and let the thing run on its own, it would be only slightly more boring as a premise.

Re:I dont know what all the hate is for

[c]

Yeah..I was reading about this new game and thinking, "Really?"...they're banking on a game that you just push one button to jump, and they're counting on this being a hit?

It sounds like some pump and dump traders were banking on the game being a hit.

I'd assume that everyone else would've already be aware that most game releases aren't going to be hits, or even break even, and you gotta roll out a lot of products to get a hit like Pokemon GO.

Re:I dont know what all the hate is for

[Calydor]

The ultimate in quick-time-event gaming: The entire game is a quick-time-event.

Re:I dont know what all the hate is for

[Calydor]

Sonic is known for running really fast. I mean come on, even his Wikipedia article ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ) says so: ... has the ability to run at supersonic speeds ... Sonic most commonly has to race through levels ... his iconic personality was the epitome of speed ...

Mario, on the other hand, in Super Mario RPG identifies himself not by running, but by jumping. I'm not kidding. That may also be why his racing series contains gokarts rather the F1 racers (although the relatively recent addition of dirtbikes is a grey area, I'll admit).

So no, running really fast REALLY is more Sonic than Mario.

Re:I dont know what all the hate is for

[bickerdyke]

its a continuous run game with some interesting level layouts. Were people expecting a full on Mario game?

With a price double as high as other great games: yes.

If it's an Flappy Bird style game, the price has to compete with flappy bird. Yes, high-res sprites with a popular cartoon char can offset that, but not by several 100%. And with the gaming experience that forced always-online-games deliver in trains and subways, it's probably less fun than Flappy Bird and no brand tie-in will save it anymore.

Re:I dont know what all the hate is for

[AvitarX]

Yeah, flappy bird was a total failure.

Re:I dont know what all the hate is for

[drummerboybac]

Thing is, they give you the first 3 levels for free. So you know exactly what you are buying before you plop down your ten bucks. Did people expect it to turn into a different game once they paid?

Re:I dont know what all the hate is for

[tepples]

Flappy Bird was just a dumbed-down version of Balloon Trip from Nintendo's Balloon Fight anyway, dodging pipes instead of moving sparks.

Re: I dont know what all the hate is for

[Anonymous Coward]

That's fucking stupid. Of course you don't.

A game isn't better simply because a past game is good. Nor is it worse for the same reason.

Re:I dont know what all the hate is for

[thegarbz]

Because people only read a summary without looking into it. From what I can tell most of the negative reviews are due to the game costing $9.90 to unlock it after the first 3 levels.

People reviewing it on gameplay generally give it a quite solid score.

Re: I dont know what all the hate is for

[LocalH]

Sounds an awful lot like you're saying the whole idea of a Mario game is outdated. What, you'd rather have more CoD and similar? *retch*

Re:I dont know what all the hate is for

[jbresciani]

But it isn't a continuous run game, at least not by how the first three levels play. if it is then it makes this demo ever worse as it's not only false advertising on price but false advertising on they type of game.

The game does feel like a standard Mario game, the difference is you are always moving forward with no moving backward unless you wall jump/kick. The first three levels are short with the standard flag pole jump at the end.

The issue is it's listed as "Free" but in reality only 1-1 to 1-3 (the first castle is 1-4) are free, everything else requires $14 CDN ($10 US? to unlock). If they would have been up front with the cost it would have gotten much better reviews.

Re:I dont know what all the hate is for

[Dutch Gun]

When you call it "Super Mario ______", people will automatically have certain expectations based on the history of the franchise, especially when it looks so much like the classic game. Moreover, the premium price of the product also sets certain expectations. Many of the reviewers of No Man's Sky stated that they were more harsh than had it been more reasonably priced at a typical indy game level, rather than as a AAA game.

If people are giving it bad reviews, then maybe they feel the didn't get their money's worth of entertainment from the product. Reviews are inherently subjective, so there's no "right or wrong" there, aside from the predictable percentage of trolls, I guess.

Re:I dont know what all the hate is for

[atrex]

They were probably expecting something a lot more significant with a $10 price tag.

Re:I dont know what all the hate is for

[coolsnowmen]

The entire lineage of Mario? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Re: I dont know what all the hate is for

[yuriklastalov]

Now lets get an endless runner game using the CoD IP, that'll bring the hardcore gamers over.

I played Temple Run for about 5 minutes...

[Bartles]

...why would I play this?

Re:I played Temple Run for about 5 minutes...

[stealth_finger]

ten bucks.

Re:I played Temple Run for about 5 minutes...

[thegarbz]

I played Batman: Arkam Asylum for 7min 24sec. Why would I play Minesweeper?

But I've never played a game, I don't know what it's about, but I played a game that sounds similar based on one word in the title, so I just HAVE to post about it on Slashdot.

Price Biggest Factor For Me

[Jason Levine]

Besides the fact that the Android version is still "To Be Released At An Unannounced Date", my biggest beef is the price tag. You get the first few levels for free and then need to pay $10 to unlock everything else. I don't mind paying for apps I like, but $10 for an endless runner-type game is too much. If it were $1.99, I'd buy it the second it was released for Android. At $2.99, I might consider it. At $10, though, I won't be buying it anytime soon.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[Anonymous Coward]

Lets not forget for $10 you also don't "own" the game, you get a game that requires an always on internet connection. So you can never play offline, for that rather expensive game. Especially since there is no reason for it to be online other than DRM. Pokemon GO has a reason to need an internet connection this doesn't.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[Moridineas]

I don't mind paying for apps I like, but $10 for an endless runner-type game is too much.

It's not an endless runner.

Not my cup of tea, but it's totally from, e.g., Temple Runner.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[The-Ixian]

Frankly, I am surprised that apps cost what they do on mobile platforms. I assume this is a "race to the bottom" type of condition which I can't see lasting forever, especially as the platforms start to reach functional parity (and hence complexity) with desktop computers.

Of course, I am from a generation where I paid $70+ of hard earned lawn mowing money for games that came on 3 floppy disks.

$1 - $2 may make sense for a very small (1 - 3 people) team if there are hundreds of thousands of buyers but I just can't see how that can be a 1 size fits all price.

I feel like, now that these platforms have hit critical mass, the prices are going to start creeping up over time or, at the very least, will be graduated based on install base.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[The-Ixian]

Lets not forget for $10 you also don't "own" the game, you get a game that requires an always on internet connection

That's the biggest load of BS and is why I will never even try this game. $10 doesn't seem like that much to me. It is only a lot when compared against other games. I pay more than that for lunch some days.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[SvnLyrBrto]

The $10 isn't the problem. I'd rather pay a fair price upfront then get a game for "free" and be mired in the micro transaction swamp. And divided out by the value of my time, I've already gotten more than my money's worth in entertainment from it. But the requirement to be always online, despite it being a single-player game and having no content that should require that connection, is fairly... irksome. I missed the news about that problem somehow, so it was a fairly unpleasant surprise.

Right there, that knocks it down to a three-star app. It's so stupid and unnecessary. Piracy? Seriously? How many people actually bother to jailbreak their iPhones anymore? I haven't since my 4. Without a jailbreak, I'm not aware of any way to side-load apps without a developer's signing key. And if you abuse those, Apple stomps you down hard.

And if it ever does throw a micro transaction at me? That'll be the impetus to go back and one-star it. That's a hard rule I have for rating in the AppStore in general. Like I said, I'd rather pay a fair price once and upfront than get pestered for dollars here and there to keep the game/app playable or usable. So, if after I HAVE paid you upfront, and you come back and ask me to pay more to unlock features or levels, or for extra on-game currency, or for whatever... instant one-star without sympathy, mercy, or regret.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[Comboman]

For a purely digital product with no physical media or distribution cost (other than Apple's cut) you make the biggest profit by setting the price where you get the maximum number of downloads. You don't need big margins if you can make it up in volume (and as a pleasant side-effect, you remove a major incentive for piracy). App makers figured this out pretty fast, I just wish music/movie/ebook makers would figure it out also.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[AvitarX]

Wow, that's a huge mistake.

I guess they don't want me using it on flights or the subway. Thanks guys.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[Hulfs]

At $2.99, I might consider it. At $10, though, I won't be buying it anytime soon.

I'd agree, if it was me, but my son (6) spent his own money on the game and is loving it. He's beaten every single level already (there's 24, I think) and is now trying to get every pink coin in the game - which is considerably harder. There is more complexity to the game than just jumping and it's not an endless runner Temple Run clone by any means. There's a lot of pattern recognition, timing and some problem solving needed to figure out how to get some of the coins.

He also loves being able to "play" against other people from around the world in Toad Rally and trying to beat them - you're playing against pre-recorded runs from others, not live ones.

I'm pretty sure that this game will see a lot of use for quite a while.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[Moridineas]

I did, yes--totally different from...

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[mlts]

The introduction of IAP completely killed the quality of games in iOS and Android. Before IAP, game designers had to make something that was usable, charge a decent price, and have something worth playing. Usually there was a demo game which was free, then the paid for app.

Now, almost all games are about a relatively easy 1-2 levels or whatnot, then making the game either impossible or way too time consuming to play, forcing the player to abandon it or start putting money in. You read the reviews of a lot of games, and they state this clearly.

I'd rather pay $20-30 for a good game, like a Square-Enix Chaos Rings sequel up front than to have to be nickeled and dimed every few minutes. The app makers can keep their smurfberries.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[Oswald McWeany]

There aren't many Apple pirates

Apple isn't really a techie phone. It's strength is in it's simplicity, not its ability to customize and hack. I think most would-be pirates would look elsewhere.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[thegarbz]

At $10 it's the cheapest Mario game to come out and for an endless runner it has far more to offer than previous runners, not to mention quite a decent amount of gameplay.

You're de-sensitised to game pricing and riding on the assumptions that Flappybird was free so why shouldn't Super Mario Run be.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[0101000001001010]

It goes deeper than that for me. If it were an actual $10 app, I would be more interested. Pay once, and everyone in my family could play courtesy of Apple Family Sharing. But by making the unlock an in-app purchase, everyone in my family would have to work over $10. And then there's in-app purchases beyond that.

I almost bought it anyway because I'm about to fly internationally and would have enjoyed the diversion on the trip. But to combat privacy[sic], Nintendo requires an Internet connection to play. So that use case is out as well. That just doesn't leave me with a lot of value for $10.

If it were a regular $10 app and there were some modes I could play offline, I would have bought it at launch.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[yekkow]

I agree with this 100%. I played the game and thought "hey this is a good game to play on the crapper" Then I got 3 levels in and though there is no way I would pay 10$ to unlock the rest of the game. I was just talking to my wife about microtransactions. When AppStore was in its infancy, games were 99c with over the top great games being 1.99. I was happy with this and often times I wanted someway to pay the developer more. Now I pay 2.99 for a game, and it is pay-to-play after that. Again, I am happy to support the developers, but not at what they are wanting. Example, I am playing the game HonorBound right now; everything can be unlocked in game (if you're lucky). However, if you want to increase your chances at getting a stronger character you need to use 10 elite ruins or pay 4000 gems. You can buy 2500 gems for 19.99 and 6500 gems for 49.99. Even if I buy the gems I am still relying on RNGesus to get me a decent character. Are you kidding me? I can buy a damn near AAA game for less than that.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[Pascoea]

but $10 for an endless runner-type game is too much.

But nobody bats an eye at a $5 coffee.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[Merk42]

Then given right now it's iOS exclusive, why did Nintendo do it?

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[Oswald McWeany]

I don't think Nintendo were hoping for pirates.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[Jason Levine]

I never said that it should be free, but the vast majority of games are $4.99 or less - with $2-3 seeming to be the sweet spot. Yes. there are the "free" games that inundate you with in-app purchases of various sorts (and sometimes make it so that the game is all but impossible to complete without these purchases) but I much prefer an upfront fee to being nickel and dimed as I'm playing the game.

Had Super Mario Run been $4.99, I'd have considered it (when it was released on Android), but at $10, it just seems too expensive to me.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[Jason Levine]

Good point. My boys love playing games on their tablets (or our old smartphones that are WiFi-only now). If I could buy Super Mario Run for $10 and all of us could use it, then I *might* be able to rationalize it being "only $3.33 per person." Since it's $10 per device (not even per person), it would mean needing to pay for it for my phone, each of my son's tablets, and a pair of old smartphones. (If I wanted the full version on all of our devices.) I could wind up spending $50 on this game. I'd rather just buy a console Mario game and be done with it.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[Jason Levine]

Of the games I'm playing right now:

Disney Crossy Road: Free to play, but you can buy the "Hamm Piggy Bank" to get more coins. I tend not to need it because I just play more often to get more coins.

Marvel Avenger's Academy: Free to play, but they have a premium currency. You can get some via watching ads, but to really be able to afford premium items/characters, you need to spend real money. They've had a lot of "special events" recently which start off fine, but are clearly either "pay to win" or "you must constantly be playing this game and have no life otherwise to win." I just satisfy myself with getting an event character or two without in-app purchases and ignore the premium stuff.

Disney Magical Kingdoms: Same as Marvel Avenger's Academy, but they are more generous with handing out free premium currency for completing various actions/missions. So much so that I've been able to buy quite a few premium characters without needing to spend any actual cash.

If any of these were paid apps (perhaps with a free version to introduce you to the game) without in-app purchases, I'd gladly pay for them. However, I'm not going to pay $10 for each premium character/item.

Re:Price Biggest Factor For Me

[dgatwood]

This also ensures that instead of their games stopping working in three or four OS releases from insufficient maintenance, they'll stop working in three or four years when they turn down their DRM server.

Well just wait until they see how StarFox Zero did

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

>> People aren't loving Nintendo's newly released Super Mario Run. Nintendo's stock plunged 7.1%

Well just wait until they see how StarFox Zero did.

Seriously - I don't understand the panic. Nintendo's will keep licensing its characters (as it always has) until they find the right game and format. Even Link's been pimped out on a retread (Hyrule Warriors - a reskinned Dynasty Warriors).

It's the controller, stupid

[xtal]

If they'd make a nintendo-branded bluetooth dpad and holder we wouldn't be having this conversation, it would be a conversation about how much money they're making.

Touchscreens aren't everything. Humans have fingers. D-pad is brilliant. Stop drinking the Ive kool-aid. Poor Mario.

Oh, and make some more of those NES classics. Stupid nintendo. I'd have bought at least 5 of them if they were available. I got a knockoff chinese USB d-pad clone instead.

Re:It's the controller, stupid

[110010001000]

Right. Lots of people are going to buy a bluetooth dpad to play a throwaway game. This is why slashdotters shouldn't be put in charge of anything.

Re:It's the controller, stupid

[xtal]

They have to make the throwaway game because you can't do anything else without a D-pad.

The market is punishing them because investors aren't stupid, and realize there is no slot machine about to pay out.

Re:It's the controller, stupid

[AvitarX]

Yhey could also add a battery, that way it could be used to play without destroying batter life.

That works for the iPhone, but Android is too fractured for such a device.

Re:It's the controller, stupid

[dj245]

If they'd make a nintendo-branded bluetooth dpad and holder we wouldn't be having this conversation, it would be a conversation about how much money they're making.

Touchscreens aren't everything. Humans have fingers. D-pad is brilliant. Stop drinking the Ive kool-aid. Poor Mario.

Oh, and make some more of those NES classics. Stupid nintendo. I'd have bought at least 5 of them if they were available. I got a knockoff chinese USB d-pad clone instead.

The future of gaming in my family is looking more and more like it will be Retroarch on either Android or Windows for the older games, and Steam for the newer ones. Nintendo offers a pretty decent walled garden, but it isn't a very big garden and the per-game cost is high enough to give pause when compared to the bargains that can be had on Steam.

Re:It's the controller, stupid

[thegarbz]

If they'd make a nintendo-branded bluetooth dpad and holder we wouldn't be having this conversation

You think the answer to people complaining about the cost of a game (all the one star reviews, the others are all 5 stars), is to make people buy an accessory?
Which company did you run into bankruptcy again?

Re:Well just wait until they see how StarFox Zero

[bluefoxlucid]

Nintendo openly advertised that Hyrule Warriors was a bridge game that used Dynasty Warriors gameplay (and engine) with Zelda assets. It had its own story, its own characters, and everything to make it a Zelda game; and it had the gameplay of a Dynasty Warriors game to add some variety and appeal to those sorts.

I'd love to see another one, with a step forward into blending the gameplay. This is how we got Zelda 2 and Metroid. Imagine if you could solo dungeons with Link while taking open battlefields as in Hyrule Warriors, using the build and leveling systems to affect your character. I don't know where they could go with Adventure Mode; filling in spaces with what amounts to low-quality minigames doesn't count as "content" to me, in the same way that adding 46 minutes of stock drum solos and loop tracks to a CD wouldn't count as "content". The main game, the story mode, with an open-progression world that blended Warriors and traditional 3D Zelda gameplay would be an excellent option to explore.

Re:Well just wait until they see how StarFox Zero

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

>> Nintendo openly advertised that Hyrule Warriors was a bridge game that used Dynasty Warriors gameplay (and engine) with Zelda assets

I know. Thus my use of the word "pimped": Nintendo licensed one of its grade-A assets out to a shop that knowingly put together a half-assed "bridge" game to collect money from people who liked Zelda games without actually producing a Zelda game. They've done it before and they'll do it again, because they know people like you will bite.

Re:Well just wait until they see how StarFox Zero

[RogueyWon]

StarFox Zero was, by all accounts, a pretty bad game and was a horrible commercial flop. But it wasn't actually "news" that it flopped. Investors had already basically written off the Wii-U by the time StarFox Zero released, so all it did was continue the current narrative.

If Super Mario Run doesn't pan out properly, then that is "news". Nintendo's stocks have been buoyed a bit in recent months by their planned entry into the mobile market. Their home-console sales have been moribund since around 2011. The handheld market has been a lot healthier for them - and Pokémon remains the jewel in their crown (Mario lost that accolade years ago) - but nobody seriously thinks there's a long-term future for dedicated gaming handhelds. Investors who were hoping for a serious return from Nintendo on a par with the early days of the Wii have been putting a lot of weight on their entry into the mobile market.

If that entry turns into a belly-flop, then said investors will take fright. If it turns out that putting Nintendo franchises on a phone isn't an instant profit factory, then they will be distinctly unhappy. Don't forget that other major developers and publishers have struggled to turn established gaming franchises into successful mobile titles. Indeed, many of the biggest mobile hits to date have come from left-field from developers nobody had previously heard of.

I suspect that in the eyes of investors, mobile is seen as more important to Nintendo's future even than the Switch (which some, at least, seem to have written off before it even launches). It's too early to know for sure whether they'll pull off the mobile thing or not; early signals are mixed.

Re:Nintendo should sell bluetooth controllers

[xtal]

Emulated games work great on my phone.

Including the controller.

I wish Nintendo could profit instead of being stupid.

Surprisingly decent game

[CrazySpence]

I enjoy it and going back to try and unlock all the special games/characters gives it decent replay but I also like Nintendo games and have been paying 60-70 for new Mario games for years so perhaps that's why the 14.99 (Canadian price) didn't bother me too much.

Apple QuickTime events

[tepples]

The entire game is a quick-time-event.

More than that: It's exclusive to iOS, which is from Apple, the company that invented QuickTime.

Re:Apple QuickTime events

[yuriklastalov]

You just like, blew my mind, man.

Re:Nintendo should sell bluetooth controllers

[tepples]

How do you carry the phone and the Bluetooth controller at once?

And how many other people own and are willing to regularly use such a controller? Are there enough customers to sustain a substantial market for such games? One user does not a market make.

Was it on the Terminal first?

[tepples]

First of all, the summary links a Fortune article that quotes Bloomberg. If you're going to say Bloomberg reported something, why not link to the Bloomberg article?

From the Bloomberg article:

Before it's here, it's on the Bloomberg Terminal. LEARN MORE

Perhaps Fortune reported the story while it was still exclusive to the Terminal and then edited the links in once the story hit Bloomberg.com.

Also, why are the reviews so bad from a user perspective?

Probably a result of users' realization that they will need to pay for a data plan at hundreds of dollars per year in order to play the game outside home, because of the game's Assassin's Creed Unity/SimCity (2013)-style requirement for a continuous Internet connection during gameplay, even in the single-player World Tour mode.

Make sense

[Chewbacon]

You dump a thousand dollars into an iPhone, how the hell can they expect you to pay $10 on a game? That's like 2 days missed at Starbucks.

Meanwhile, console games went up about $10 and they're flying off the shelves. It's about price? Give me a fucking break.

Stock market is crazy

[volodymyrbiryuk]

One bad game and everyone forgets who you are! *smirking C. Ronaldo face*

Re:Absurd Expectations

[omnichad]

Mario games haven't been about simply completing levels since Super Mario World on the SNES (maybe even SMB3), and this one is no exception.

Original SMB. Invisible 1-up blocks, pipes to underground coins, warp pipes.

Xperia Play

[tepples]

Sony tried that. It was an Android phone with a slide-out PSP Go-style gamepad, called the Xperia Play. It didn't do so well.

Re: Xperia Play

[unami]

but sony's handheld conoles didn't do so well either (compared to nintendo's).

Re: Xperia Play

[Ginguin]

I agree. Nintendo is in a different place than Sony was when it comes to the handheld market. They have a fairly devoted following and some solid IP. I know several people that carry a DS (various generations and styles) everywhere they go. Their recent nostalgia targeting console (release old games today? wow!) did exceptionally well. They can bring all of those to a modern device and I think people would jump at it.

I can't say, though, whether that devoted following is deep (i.e. fans would replace their current phone with a Nintendo version). Nintendo would have to do several things right to pull off a console/phone hybrid, and even that may not get enough people to switch to make it worthwhile. They could just make a version of their DS that has the capability needed to be a phone (insert sim card, can hold up to ear as phone, send messages) and hope for a slow and steady uptake, but they won't sweep into the market and see instant adoption amongst established markets. That hurts companies frequently.

Re: Xperia Play

[SScorpio]

The PSP sold over 60 million units world wide. It looks like a failure compared the to the DS's 150 million. But it still sold very well compared to everything else that took on Nintendo (Gamegear, Lynx, Wonder Swan, etc).

huh?

[Mysticalfruit]

So Nintendo makes a stupid game... mind you, not hardware but a one off funny thing and this causes the stock to tumble? For fucks sake! Call me when their consoles catch fire, or everybody's online acconts / wiipoints get plundered.

Yeah, it's a game. Some people will love, some people will hate it. *shrugs*

What's the game about anyway?

[wardrich86]

I'm an Android user living under a rock... is Nintendo basically selling a Mario-themed version of Subway Surfer/Temple Run for $10.00 and expecting people to buy it?!

Re:What's the game about anyway?

[sl3xd]

No. It's fairly normal Mario game. The only "twist" is that you don't have much of a speed control.

There are "pause" tiles, and tiles which move you backwards. Otherwise, Mario walks to the right constantly.

It's a "one button" game -- the player can jump. It's a fun game, but you can't go backwards and get every coin, kill every enemy, destroy every block, and find every secret in one playthrough.

It's a godsend for gamers who only have one thumb free. (feeding a newborn baby can get... dull.)

It's well made -- easily up to Nintendo's normal standards of excellence. The interaction to "sign up" or "log in" to a Nintendo account is shockingly well done: It's hard to describe, but you know how many games make you switch to your mobile browser, sign up for an online account, go to your email, get the validation code, go back to the web page, validate, and finally go back to the app and log in (again). Nintendo went way above and beyond, and made the process the most smooth, fluid experience I've ever seen on any platform.

I love it, and spent the $10 in-app-purchase on it.

Re:What's the game about anyway?

[sl3xd]

For the record, I hate temple run type games. Mario on iOS isn't remotely similar.

Re:What's the game about anyway?

[wardrich86]

Oh thank god. When people kept referring to it as a running game, I thought it was going to be another one of those Temple Run kinda knockoff games.

An article based on App Store reviews?

[wicka_wicka]

App Store reviews are pointless. Some of the most popular apps have terrible review scores. Mario is probably getting poor scores because it requires an internet connection (which is admittedly dumb) and people are too cheap for $10. The actual, real reviews of the game itself have been pretty good.

Re:An article based on App Store reviews?

[wicka_wicka]

Christ, you people are like clockwork. How about having a real, intelligent conversation without devolving into baseless conspiracies?

Good!

[mbeckman]

Maybe this will put an end to the gameification of adult life.

Re:Good!

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

>> put an end to the gameification of adult life

That's not what "Mario Run" does. The live Pokemon game did that, but this is just a port of Temple Run or its clone (didn't bother to look).

Who is the game for?

[Thyamine]

I think the biggest problem is that I don't know who they are targeting. The casual gamer (generally using phones and tablets) aren't going to pay this, and me as a traditional gamer sees it as a waste of money for a 'Run' style game. I downloaded it and was hopeful since it was Mario/Nintendo, but really I don't think I need much more than the free levels. It's not engaging to me, and seems to be too expensive for people who find $1.99 a lot to pay at times.

Re:Must be online DRM for a single player phone ga

[thegarbz]

Must be online DRM for a single player phone game is killing it.

Lol, just like it killed Pokemon Go right?
No one gives a shit about the online requirements, especially on a phone which is nearly always online, and especially given the amount of content you get from other players in your "single player" game.

People complaining about the cost

[thegarbz]

The cheapest Mario game to date is also the one people complain the most about the cost.

I'm calling it. The mobile phone generation are over-entitled, spoilt and want everything for free. I hope these companies abandon the platform and go back to focusing on the good old couch experience where they at least know they will be appreciated.

The game itself is quite good, has a decent amount of content and a wide enough variety of playing styles to set it apart from every other running game. But hey Nintendo, lesson learnt. Don't make good games, just make shit and load it with ads and pay to win, you'll be rich.

Re:Well just wait until they see how StarFox Zero

[bluefoxlucid]

They actually were producing a Zelda game at the time; it was taking too long. This was faster to get out, and people liked it. A different development house did most of the work. I'm not seeing the downside.

DeNA "working" as usual.

[Aereus]

Color me surprised that a project DeNA was involved with went poorly. They've consistently proven themselves incompetent and I grimaced the day I heard Nintendo announce a partnership with them for mobile.

Not an endless runner game at all.

[SuperKendall]

First of all, you defiantly get a decent amount of content to try playing and decide if you want to buy before you make the in-app purchase.

Secondly, the game is not an endless runner at all. It's a lot more like a normal Mario game, with forward motion handled for you. It's not like you always are going forward; you have pause points so you can time entry into a tricky section, and wall bounces will enable you to go a little bit backwards at times.

But also on top of that there's a whole racing subgame, and building a small kingdom with various buildings you can place.

I think there's a lot of value in what you get for $10, I didn't mind paying for it. I think they put a lot of hard work into thinking of how they could make playing the Mario games we all know and love still work on a mobile platform, way more so than most games.

Re:Must be online DRM for a single player phone ga

[Anonymous Coward]

Must be online DRM for a single player phone game is killing it.

Lol, just like it killed Pokemon Go right?
No one gives a shit about the online requirements, especially on a phone which is nearly always online, and especially given the amount of content you get from other players in your "single player" game.

Pokemon Go has a reason to be online... This does not.

They're facing two unforeseen obstacles.

[mmell]

The first is that there are a great many excellent games already available on the Android and iPhone platforms which were written from the ground up to take advantage of the hardware while minimizing the hardware's limitations (hint - most cell phones don't have anything as tactile as a joystick/joypad/t-pad).

The second is that a lot of the people using these games remember side-scrolling eight-bit gaming from their childhood - if at all - and to them, any variation on the Mario theme is likely to seem quaint, antiquated, unfinished. Minecraft was the sole recent exception to this trend - otherwise, you need a lot of polygons and at least a sixteen-bit deep soundtrack to even get anybody's attention.

Nintendo may have been the once and future video game company once (Donkey Kong and Mario Bros. took more than a few quarters out of my pocket in the day), but I guess that doesn't mean what it used to. Someone should tell the folks at Nintendo!

It's the internet connection

[Lord Duran]

You can't play it on the subway, you can't play it on a plane. When are you supposed to play it then?

Emulators are OK if the ROM is hardcoded

[tepples]

There are smaller controllers designed for smartphones.

Yet I haven't seen the manufacturer of any such controller release sales figures. If end users don't own a controller, developers are unlikely to target it.

Apple doesn't allow emulators on the App store

I was under the impression that Apple's guidelines allowed emulators so long as the app is "self-contained" (as defined in rule 2.5.2). A game's publisher can satisfy this by distributing the ROM and emulator together in one app. SEGA has ported several of its games to iOS using an emulator in this manner.

Harldy the cheapest

[HalAtWork]

Super Mario Bros 3 and Super Mario World, 2 of the best Mario titles, are regularly $5 on the 3DS and Wii and Wii U consoles.

Re:Harldy the cheapest

[thegarbz]

Yeah and if in 2034 Super Mario Run is still selilng for $9.90 you may have a point.