• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Super Mario Run 10M+ downloads Day 1, over $4M revenue, biggest Appstore launch ever.

You act as if Nintendo is desperately trying but failing to make money off their dedicated hardware business. Yes, the Wii U was an utter failure but the 3DS wasn't.

Or let me ask it this way. Do you feel like Sony will be making mobile games only in the future? Because that's where the market is going, right?

Didn't you said that making more money is better than making less?

They might had made money, they can make several times more money on mobile. That's not even looking at the increase of costs in each new gen. Which is the real problem of this market stagning.

So yes, answering your second question, is entirely possible to sony to release only mobile games in the future. The first step on there: They are going to release several mobile games.
 

marc^o^

Nintendo's Pro Bono PR Firm
In a constantly stagnating, even decreasing, market, where traditional dedicated hardware, is slowly but surely becoming a niche, in which a dedicate audience will keep said market afloat, and that in the best case scenario.

Mobile and tablet devices fills all the needs of the people that Nintendo want back in their consoles, they aren't gonna trade those devices for gaming devices, when they just want little timewasters for when they are on the bus or in the coffe break. They want Mario on the go, but they also want clash of clones and the dozen of many other games they play. I see people playing Mario for the next second use whatapp or spotify, or look at facebook or a large selection of app that people use in their daily lives that won't be avaliable on the switch, for example.

And that just counting everyday social app, there's also a lot of app people use on their jobs. Outlook, Gmail...

The convenince and usuabilty of these devices makes the switch, or any other hardware Nintendo can create, unable to provide that funcionality. There's a reason why MP3 players are basically obsolete by now.

Is a sign of things to come, and yeah, maybe Nintendo may sell hardware to a small subset of these people, but is not enough and it won't change the trend that for many years we've been watching on NPD threads and many other data.

So yeah, what he says may be logic, but it goes against the evolution of the gaming market that we've seen for years now and that people still negates.
What you describe isn't answering my question, nor invalidates what he said about mobile gaming promoting brands. We just had a glimpse of that virtuous circle with Pokemon Go and 3DS. It's not delusional to think it can happen again, and again.
 

KingSnake

The Birthday Skeleton
Not only did they say initially that you'll pay once for the whole game

Actually that didn't happen. Not initially, at the Apple event. If you live just in the Apple bubble, the price is something you haven't heard about it. You needed to follow either Nintendo's social media or gaming/tech sites to hear about it.

The announcement, Apple communication before and at the launch said nothing about a price. The iPhone app store page doesn't have it somewhere visible at the first glance, unless you scroll. There is a big number of people who legitimately thought it was free and were hit by the paywall 3 levels and a half later.
 
That's a 4% download-to-purchase ratio. That's in line with F2P games but the cap is $10.

That's horrible.

Nintendo values their reputation more than they value money. They don't want to be known as just another company that makes garbage pay-to-win Clash of Clans clones.
 

KingSnake

The Birthday Skeleton
Its not the price, its that you HAVE TO pay

The "outrage" and flood of low reviews has nothing to do with the price. The Monument Valley devs had the same thing happen to them when they released a $2 expansion

I'm not sure about that, I didn't see any outrage for Rayman games when they were not f2p.

As I said before, Monument Valley was in the same boat from the perception point of view, a game that was free (at that point) that suddenly got a paywall.
 
What you describe isn't answering my question, nor invalidates what he said about mobile gaming promoting brands. We just had a glimpse of that virtuous circle with Pokemon Go and 3DS. It's not delusional to think it can happen again, and again.

If the grow of 3DS, which not all can be attributed on Go, is what we can expect of this masterplan. Then I think I'm quite right.
 
Nintendo doesn't end up releasing a shitty game with microtransactions and all that sort of junk and people complain it's not free LOL. No wonder they waited so long to enter the mobile market, it's so toxic and off putting that I have no words.
The Worst part is some people saying is a bad move from Nintendo.... Also is funny to see that 10 Million of downloads in a single day means nothing according to some guys... is hilarious.
 
What? Have you ready any of those reviews? I'd say the price is the only reason the scores for this game are so low.
Considering that this isn't the first game to suffer the same "I have to pay money?" outrage, for games with much cheaper unlocks and purchases, I disagree

The price doesn't matter. They'd be complaining even if it was a $5 unlock.
 

fantomena

Member
Can someone explain to me the 10$ case? I thought it was F2P.

Disclaimer: I haven't downloaded it yet as Im on Android, but will try on someone elses iOS.
 
The mobile audience doesnt deserve a mario game.
Let them pay 1000's on candy crush.

We will enjoy mario, after all we grew up with him. He is our friend.
 

heringer

Member
I'm not sure about that, I didn't see any outrage for Rayman games when they were not f2p.

As I said before, Monument Valley was in the same boat from the perception point of view, a game that was free (at that point) that suddenly got a paywall.

That's because most people don't care about Rayman.
 

Lernaean

Banned
Actually that didn't happen. Not initially, at the Apple event. If you live just in the Apple bubble, the price is something you haven't heard about it. You needed to follow either Nintendo's social media or gaming/tech sites to hear about it.

The announcement, Apple communication before and at the launch said nothing about a price. The iPhone app store page doesn't have it somewhere visible at the first glance, unless you scroll. There is a big number of people who legitimately thought it was free and were hit by the paywall 3 levels and a half later.

I'm sorry, but i knew it from announcement day. As i said earlier, anyone who cared about the game knew it from the get go. Ofc most ppl who casually game on phones weren't aware, but they aren't aware of most things in life anyway.
The point is simple. Nintendo never intended to rip anyone off, they had stated it's a paid app, and the quotes were out there for anyone interested. I'm sick and tired of everyone purchasing things without any research and then whining online because it wasn't what they thought it would be when the information was out there in the open. It's always the consumer's fault for not researching on the stuff they want to acquire, especially in cases when the facts are only 2 mins of googling away.
 
Something is intriguing for me. Nintendo said nothing about the price/paywall at the Apple event when they announced it, right? And it wasn't mentioned on the page for registering the interest either I guess?

I have the impression that in the Apple bubble this was perceived as a free game from the announcement, during the promotion and up until the launch. Did the notifications that it's launched said something about the price?

Nintendo DID announce that Super Mario Run was a pay once game during the Apple event. I believe the price was not fixed at that time, but they did mention that would be a thing.
 

KingSnake

The Birthday Skeleton
Because it was a upfront price, and you can't review the game if you don't buy it.

There was a "demo" for Rayman?

You had to pay to play, as far as I remember, so people already went in with those expectations.

Yeah, that's the point. That's the issue. Not just the price in isolation or that people want only free things. The fact that Mario seems free until it isn't for a lot of people. And it was communicated this way (or rather the lack of the price info) on a lot of channels.

It's a trade-off that Nintendo made. Getting a lot more people to try it and maybe a lot more people buying it vs. negative backlash from people who hit the paywall. Maybe they should have done a better job at communicating the price.
 
This is what Nintendo should have done, imo.
I think it would have done significantly worse if they just decided to make it $10. Not only is that already a big barrier for many on mobile (Get vs $9.99), it would be the only runner or platformer in that price range.

That's a small subsection of games. Most don't dare to charge that much for a game, and if they do, it's because it's a big expansive game like a 4X or RPG or board game or a port.
 

Tobor

Member
It's quite silly though, they are offering a free demo to let people see if they like the game and somehow that's seen as negative as opposed to having to buy it blindly

I hear you, but the free demo is counterintuitive to mobile gamers. The majority seem to be seeing it as bait and switch.
 

KingSnake

The Birthday Skeleton
I think it would have done significantly worse if they just decided to make it $10. Not only is that already a big barrier for many on mobile (Get vs $9.99), it would be the only runner or platformer in that price range.

Your argument practically justifies the "shock" for the price for a lot of people, then.
 

heringer

Member
I think it would have done significantly worse if they just decided to make it $10. Not only is that already a big barrier for many on mobile (Get vs $9.99), it would be the only runner or platformer in that price range.

Yeah. Even with the outrage I bet a lot of people ended up buying anyway because they enjoyed what they played.

Apple could communicate this a little better though. They changed "Free" to "Get" but clearly wasn't enough because people are that stupid.
 
Nintendo has the stature to completely redefine the mobile market so I'm a little disappointed to see them following trends instead of setting them. Maybe it's just my disdain for runner-type games but I thought they had the chance here to define what a mobile platformer could be and instead gave us another auto-runner game with a Mario skin. Or maybe my expectations are too high, I don't know.
 

foxuzamaki

Doesn't read OPs, especially not his own
Nintendo has the stature to completely redefine the mobile market so I'm a little disappointed to see them following trends instead of setting them. Maybe it's just my disdain for runner-type games but I thought they had the chance here to define what a mobile platformer could be and instead gave us another auto-runner game with a Mario skin. Or maybe my expectations are too high, I don't know.
They're too high, they didn't set out to redefine the mobile market, they did it to get people back in their ecosystem
 

Aleh

Member
I think it's also a problem of the way the AppStore distinguishes free apps from paid apps.
They should make it so that it only tells you that you have to pay for the game, but also provide in the same AppStore page a big "Try free demo" button instead of letting people download it for free with no mention of the price. Then throw in a section with apps that provide demos too or something.
 

Tobor

Member
I think it would have done significantly worse if they just decided to make it $10. Not only is that already a big barrier for many on mobile (Get vs $9.99), it would be the only runner or platformer in that price range. That's a small subsection of games. Most don't dare to charge that much for a game, and if they do, it's because it's a big expansive game like a 4X or RPG or board game or a port.

Right, but this is MARIO. The brand carries weight the majority of mobile can't touch.

I do see both sides here. By releasing it this way, they are still on the top of the grossing charts and millions more get to try the game. Maybe the negativity in the reviews doesn't matter. We'll have to wait and see.
 
Yeah. Even with the outrage I bet a lot of people ended up buying anyway because they enjoyed what they played.

Apple could communicate this a little better though. They changed "Free" to "Get" but clearly wasn't enough because people are that stupid.
The good part is that Nintendo even with bad reviews is going to make money from SMR and the brand exposure is insane... Also Mario is the holy grail of Nintendo, they are not going to cannibalize their most valued IP like ordinary F2P game.
 
Right, but this is MARIO. The brand carries weight the majority of mobile can't touch.

I do see both sides here. By releasing it this way, they are still on the top of the grossing charts and millions more get to try the game. Maybe the negativity in the reviews doesn't matter. We'll have to wait and see.
Yeah. Even with the outrage I bet a lot of people ended up buying anyway because they enjoyed what they played.

Apple could communicate this a little better though. They changed "Free" to "Get" but clearly wasn't enough because people are that stupid.
I never would have considered buying it at all if I hadn't been able to try it. I was very negative towards the game up till release; it looks basic and boring compared to Rayman and other runners on mobile. Playing it convinced me otherwise

...that said, I'm still not buying it yet. It's a well crafted, tightly designed game no doubt, but it's still a $10 runner. There are better games and smaller devs that $10 could go towards. It's a "wait till I have iTunes credits to spare" game

I wonder if that's the other side of the coin. The F2P audience thinks actually paying for it sucks and a part of the audience that does buy premium mobile games might find that price for a runner kind of crazy
 

Polygonal_Sprite

Gold Member
Sure, you can keep that delusion if you feel yourself any better.

You seem to have missed the massive boost in not only software but hardware sales (five year old hardware at that) resulting from Pokemon Go on mobile.

NSMB Wii (a near ten year old game) is already getting a sales boost from Mario Run.

Mario Run hype will lead nicely into the Switch reveal of the new game. Lots of kids will want a Switch to play it.
 

heringer

Member
I think it's also a problem of the way the AppStore distinguishes free apps from paid apps.
They should make it so that it only tells you that you have to pay for the game, but also provide in the same AppStore page a big "Try free demo" button instead of letting people download it for free with no mention of the price. Then throw in a section with apps that provide demos too or something.

Yeah. Instead of a completely separate app, they should just offer a demo option inside the page of the paid app, like Steam.
 

marc^o^

Nintendo's Pro Bono PR Firm
If the grow of 3DS, which not all can be attributed on Go, is what we can expect of this masterplan. Then I think I'm quite right.
Now you recognize it has a positive effect, but not that big. It still doesn't contradict what he said, and at least now your point is reasonable. You were certainly not quite right.
 
Holy shit, so much trolling in this thread. Excuses, concern trolling etc. etc. It has it all. Some people just can't cope with Nintendo having success. I'm surprised the mods aren't eagle watching Nintendo threads more, especially those that deal with something Nintendo and success.

It's pretty much par for the course. And given the reactions to the PS4 Pro/Scorpio, it's hardly limited to Nintendo. :/

At any rate, really interested in seeing how this performs long term. Anything that Nintendo can do to help drain the swamps that are the mobile app stores is a good thing in my book. Glad to see it's doing well out of the gate.
 

HeySeuss

Member
I remember one of the first threads about this game when the price was still unknown and people were convinced it would be 15-20 bucks. And now the masses are complaining that not only do they have to pay, but that it's 10 bucks which is almost seen as obscene for a mobile game. I said the sweet spot would be 5.99-7.99 and that would still probably be seen as too much.

We need to remove emotional connections from our arguments and look at the bigger picture. People are conditioned on free mobile games that have ads and paying a couple of bucks for the in game currency to advance the game when they get stuck. 10 bucks is a HUGE barrier to many people that want a quick time sink when they have a few minutes to kill.

Nintendo left a lot of money on the table IMO by pricing it as high as they did. Sure a Mario game is a premium name, but you are losing large chunks of your customer base every generation. If the main goal is to bring people back into the fold, you need to price it accordingly. They didn't do that very well.
 

oti

Banned
The mobile audience doesnt deserve a mario game.
Let them pay 1000's on candy crush.

We will enjoy mario, after all we grew up with him. He is our friend.
What is this nonsense.

This is what Nintendo should have done, imo.
No, that's a terrible idea. Sure, the Reviews wouldn't be as bad but the point here is to show people that Nintendo games are polished and fun experiences. No matter how great the reviews would've been, people just wouldn't try out Mario Run.

You're asking a market that doesn't want to spend a single penny as is to pay $10 upfront. That's commerical suicide.
 
Have you actually played it? Cause it's definitely not another auto-runner with a Mario skin.

It's definitely the most polished platformer I've played on a mobile device. It's a shame that the mobile market has basically been trained that games that charge are a bad thing. I hope Nintendo and some of the other developers entering the mobile market like Sony, can change that thought process in the future.
 

Gamezone

Gold Member
10M+ downloads, and the game isn`t even out on Android devices? Isn`t that good, or is it well below expectations?
 
Top Bottom