Look, if we wanted to be charged through the nose on a service, we'd hire a REAL plumber, not Mario. No thank you, Nintendo.
"Pay 99 Cents To Make Mario Jump Higher," Hedge Fund Urges
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
That thought is disgusting. Microtransactions on Mario and most other classic series on touchscreen-only devices would be a horrifying betrayal of what made them great.Andy Chalk said:
As for Pokemon, that wouldn't be too bad if a good lot of content was brought in from microtransactions. Something like "100 more Pokemon for 99 cents" sounds fair, and the touchscreen wouldn't sacrifice gameplay quality.
God no, this would be a terrible idea. Nintendo with microtransactions?! I think a piece of hope in me would curl up and die 
And besides, of all things to charge for, they charge for him to jump higher? It just isn't Nintendo's style at all. By all means make the games for phones but don't charge to make him jump higher. That's just bad form. If anything, but the old GBA games onto phones, I'm sure a lot of people would pay for that.
And besides, of all things to charge for, they charge for him to jump higher? It just isn't Nintendo's style at all. By all means make the games for phones but don't charge to make him jump higher. That's just bad form. If anything, but the old GBA games onto phones, I'm sure a lot of people would pay for that.
Thats a terrible idea plain and simple, Nintendo should give mobile development a go though. Not necessarily by porting existing games over though, they should dip into their arsenal of IPs and use some of them to make totally new games. Making fun and mechanically streamlined games that use alternative controls and don't cost an arm and a leg to develop are one of Nintendos strongest abilities, if they made completely new games specifically for smartphones and tablets and sold them at the right price they could make loads of money.
Not only are they good at making games like that they have an enormous advantage over most mobile developers, with the amount of software vomited up onto the App Store and Google Play it can be hard for good games to get attention (and income obviously) but Nintendo have some of the best brand recognition in gaming. Almost everyone knows who Nintendo are and what they make, any mobile game made and sold by Nintendo would benefit from it greatly and they wouldn't have the hit or miss visibility many mobile devs have with their first few games.
Porting existing games would work too but I think new games purposefully designed for touch screens and the motion controls in phones and tablets would work just as well.
Not only are they good at making games like that they have an enormous advantage over most mobile developers, with the amount of software vomited up onto the App Store and Google Play it can be hard for good games to get attention (and income obviously) but Nintendo have some of the best brand recognition in gaming. Almost everyone knows who Nintendo are and what they make, any mobile game made and sold by Nintendo would benefit from it greatly and they wouldn't have the hit or miss visibility many mobile devs have with their first few games.
Porting existing games would work too but I think new games purposefully designed for touch screens and the motion controls in phones and tablets would work just as well.
There are still plenty of good, fun games. It would be like judging what you consider to be "real" gaming by the Microtransaction ridden, day one DLC/season pass infested and buggy broken hell console and PC gaming can be at times. Games like Super Cratebox, Rymdkapsel and Nihilumbra are just three (very different to each other too) great games that don't have any of that Candy Witch or Star Trek: Trexels exploitiveness going on, you simply pay a small amount of money and you get the full game. There also mobile versions of great multiplats like Limbo and Bastion, even the mobile version of Minecraft is still good despite the controls and small world. There are loads of others, though they can be hard to find at times because simply going to the Play or App store doesn't wont help much.FieryTrainwreck said:
I think it wouldn't hurt if Nintando designed a few games with smart phones in mind. For example, Wario Ware games would be an amazing fit on a mobile platform. Advanced Wars and Fire Emblem games made with mobile in mind would also be awesome. I also think their NES Remix stuff would be perfectly suited for not only making an interesting mobile choice, but it could also be used to help push the Virtual Console. A few other fits that I think would fit nicely on a mobile. Mario Party, Dr. Mario, Pokemon (specifically the first 2 gens.), Tetris, Golden Sun, Mii Maker, and lastly a new IP made with mobile in mind.
Some may argue my points, but I think it could work out. Not to mention these games could be put on the eshop as well so people who want them on their 3ds/wiiu can still get them in those places.
Some may argue my points, but I think it could work out. Not to mention these games could be put on the eshop as well so people who want them on their 3ds/wiiu can still get them in those places.
while i get the sentiment of nintendo going mobile, it is like you're all asking for nintendo to cannibalize the one overly profitable product they've had for decades while failing to address the things they are actually having issues with
Ok, Im gonna need to get some Steve Carell up in this b.
Nintendo, do not listen to this guy. If you want to get with the times, do so by all means, just not those ones. I'd rather you stay stuck in your conservative ways, stagnating, maybe even going under because of it, than walk that road. It's fate worse than a fate worse than death. And you deserve better. Do mobile gaming the Nintendo way.
Nintendo, do not listen to this guy. If you want to get with the times, do so by all means, just not those ones. I'd rather you stay stuck in your conservative ways, stagnating, maybe even going under because of it, than walk that road. It's fate worse than a fate worse than death. And you deserve better. Do mobile gaming the Nintendo way.
God dammit, where's Jon Stewart's "Go F--k Yourself" Gospel Choir when you need it?Andy Chalk said:
This. I will gladly pay $6 for a full nintendo game on the ipod, if it's well designed/makes sense. I will downright rufuse if they went with microtransactions.lacktheknack said:
You know, it's a rare treat in the crazy world to just hear a bastard of a person come forward and just go "Yeah, I'm the evil money-grubbing that embodies everything you fear about capitalism. What about it?"
Not that Nintendo would ever do this.
Though to be honest, my extremely morbid curiosity sort of wants it to happen.
Not that Nintendo would ever do this.
Though to be honest, my extremely morbid curiosity sort of wants it to happen.
I know people think they know money because they got some and helped make some more.
But why are these people who are so out of touch with their consumer base of their target market... well, trying to get into that target market. We are a culture of die hard militants for the things that we love, and that's on the positive side. On the negative, we can be brattish hooligans that call for blood and spurn on our hacking brothers and sisters to strike at what offends us. We've made our points clear and loud with our wallets and our posts: These sort of things sickens us.
There's no room for this. You upset us, you pay. It's that simple. And given the outcry and rage we give just for on the disc DLC, you're telling us that you're going to design something that we'll need to pay extra to literally win? Be advised, this is not like getting a better gun in Call of Duty. You can still kill people with enough skill with the stock guns. There would be no logical reason to jump higher in a platformer game other than you need to reach something. If that's the case, you'd need to actually pay to complete the game after you bought it. Even if to do a hundred percent completion, that is a deplorable tactic.
Honestly, someone tell me the reason that companies and businesses feel that they can openly cheat us and belittle us and expect to get rich off of it?
But why are these people who are so out of touch with their consumer base of their target market... well, trying to get into that target market. We are a culture of die hard militants for the things that we love, and that's on the positive side. On the negative, we can be brattish hooligans that call for blood and spurn on our hacking brothers and sisters to strike at what offends us. We've made our points clear and loud with our wallets and our posts: These sort of things sickens us.
There's no room for this. You upset us, you pay. It's that simple. And given the outcry and rage we give just for on the disc DLC, you're telling us that you're going to design something that we'll need to pay extra to literally win? Be advised, this is not like getting a better gun in Call of Duty. You can still kill people with enough skill with the stock guns. There would be no logical reason to jump higher in a platformer game other than you need to reach something. If that's the case, you'd need to actually pay to complete the game after you bought it. Even if to do a hundred percent completion, that is a deplorable tactic.
Honestly, someone tell me the reason that companies and businesses feel that they can openly cheat us and belittle us and expect to get rich off of it?
Part of what worries me is that Nintendo has to do something, and I worry that this is exactly what they're going to do.
It's people like him who are making decisions in gaming in general, though.Vivi22 said:
What good will photography do?canadamus_prime said:
Looking around gaming sites, it seems most people would embrace it. OR at lerast a large enough plurality to be close enough for jazz.Sir Thomas Sean Connery said:
