Hacker News Reader

Comment by dpcan | Hacker News Reader

Nintendo comes out and offers a game with a few free levels, then pay-once, and you get the whole game. Seems like exactly what everyone ALWAYS asks for. We constantly see complaining about micro transactions, etc, and Nintendo goes with the traditional pay-once model AND gives you the ability to try for free and people freak out.

This industry is so incredibly frustrating. You can't please everyone, but it seems like you can't please anyone, ever, anymore.

If you hype it, they will hate it. This seems to be the new world we live in. You almost have to subtly release something, let crowds pass it around online and feel like they are responsible for its success, put some of the "ownership" behind those hyping it, and then they can't hate on it when it comes out.

View on HN

The old problem is that you can't please everyone. The new problem is that you can fucking hear everyone with social media..

> This industry is so incredibly frustrating. You can't please everyone, but it seems like you can't please anyone, ever, anymore.

The complainers are always louder than the praisers.

People complain about SuperCell and in-app purchases in their games, but it's funny to think about how much money they make. Employees and founders there are among the highest earning people in Finland and pay the most taxes among individuals in Finald, so certainly if people are upset they aren't voting with their wallets.

For me, the overwhelming take from that article is that investors are bothered by it.

  Super Mario Run isn’t living up to the expectations for Nintendo and investors
  Many investors in Nintendo are worried about the overall profitability of the game
  Investors point to games like Pokémon Go
  Some hoped that Nintendo was planning additional content to make the game more lucrative

There are a few mentions of players:

  mixed reviews from players

This feels more like a throw-away comment about the reaction to the game, rather than specifically commenting on the lack of in-app purchases.

  it may frustrate some players who had hoped Nintendo was finally betting big on iOS

Even this isn't about the gameplay, but whether Nintendo will make enough money to justify carrying on with iOS.

I think the bigger complaint is the (unprecedented for iOS) always-on internet DRM requirement.

I don't think it's unprecedented - I thought many F2P games have the same requirement. Though I guess F2P games have a "good reason" for needing always-on internet whereas Mario Run shouldn't need it but does.

This is essentially the tried-and-true shareware model from the 90s that died in the era of micro-transactions and downloadable content. Albeit you sometimes got more than 3 levels, FPS games like DOOM come to mind.

The monetization model is great but the game doesn't have enough content to warrant $10. It also requires an always-on internet connection for zero benefit to the player. Nintendo should address both of these issues with this game and with future ones.

I've probably put 15 very enjoyable hours into it and expect to put at least that many more into it again. IMO it does a near-perfect job of capturing the fun and challenge of a console Mario game. But the consensus seems to have quickly settled on "it's not worth $10" so... OK.

> If you hype it, they will hate it.

This. People really seem to struggle to learn that if you massively hype something in advance, a lot of people are going to be disappointed. Even if it's good, but just not as good as they were expecting, they will feel disappointment.

It's been advertised on the front page of the App Store for over a month, which is more promotion then I've ever seen Apple do for a game, but although this game is good, it doesn't feel good enough to be the most promoted game in iOS history.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com