Bamboo 竹
Member
Just... Why? Maybe the mushroom kingdom mechanic needs to conect to a server. Still I would prefer a removal of that in exchange of a offline experience.
It appears Super Mario Run will require an internet connection at all times
- Thread starter brochiller
- Start date
Chû Totoro
Member
Piracy? (mobile games are the most pirated things in the world)
Cheaters? (maybe but not sure there's that much incentive for people to cheat)
Yeah thank all the people doing bad things :/
I don't like it a lot but I understand the reasons behind this. Else I don't see any other reason to do this (even for leader boards it could be pushed once you're connected).
Cheaters? (maybe but not sure there's that much incentive for people to cheat)
Yeah thank all the people doing bad things :/
I don't like it a lot but I understand the reasons behind this. Else I don't see any other reason to do this (even for leader boards it could be pushed once you're connected).
What a fucking terrible comparison, splatoon has a offline mode.
Prisoner KSC2-303
Member
That would still not be ideal, but a fine compromise for me.
My problem is this: Nintendo separates itself by making games that are tailor made for the hardware in ways that other companies don't. We saw that with Pokémon Go, we see it on 3DS all the time, and we see it here with a legitimately cool looking singletouch controlled Mario game.
Forcing an always online connection for what is essentially a single player game, however, goes against this and isn't something that feels very "Nintendo". This is a game that is building upon the foundation they've established in 1985 with the first SMB. It just really should work offline as do all Mario games.
This truly makes it feel like the money I spend on Nintendo's mobile efforts is somehow less respected than the money I've spent on software for all their proprietary platforms.
Geez, between this thread and that thread about the guy who played the game and wasn't overly enthusiastic about it, Gaf has really killed my interest in this game (it wasn't that high to begin with, to be fair). Not just because the game doesn't seem that great, but mostly because people get angry here when others suggest that a mobile Mario game might not turn out to be the greatest thing in existence.
I get it, Nintendo makes fun games at times. And they make crap(py decisions) at other times. Like any other gaming company. People here get so childishly defensive when it comes to Nintendo, it's insane. It's just a game, made by a giant corporation. It's not the cure to cancer.
I'll stick to the Rayman run games. It looks prettier, seems like it plays better, and you get a lot more for your money (both games (3 euro each) have more than 70 very varied levels, which is almost a steal. It's a topclass production and it avoids the needless Nintendo tax.
It's a bummer to me that Nintendo is always a couple of years behind when it comes to their way of handling internet functions. When it comes to the autorunner genre, Nintendo seems like it's coming a bit too late, asking a bit too much for it and not adding enough (and especially ignoring some good innovations over the last couple of years).
I get it, Nintendo makes fun games at times. And they make crap(py decisions) at other times. Like any other gaming company. People here get so childishly defensive when it comes to Nintendo, it's insane. It's just a game, made by a giant corporation. It's not the cure to cancer.
I'll stick to the Rayman run games. It looks prettier, seems like it plays better, and you get a lot more for your money (both games (3 euro each) have more than 70 very varied levels, which is almost a steal. It's a topclass production and it avoids the needless Nintendo tax.
It's a bummer to me that Nintendo is always a couple of years behind when it comes to their way of handling internet functions. When it comes to the autorunner genre, Nintendo seems like it's coming a bit too late, asking a bit too much for it and not adding enough (and especially ignoring some good innovations over the last couple of years).
The only sensible answer
I think people get angry because people make up their minds before even trying it and calling it a day.
Also, first 2 Raymans were really cool but the mobile series has now gone done a horrible horrible path (with collectibles, upgrades, eggs etc...) I've completely lost interest in it.
hemo memo
You can't die before your death
If this is Ubisoft and Rayman and the same exact reason I swear you'll see a very different reaction.
Why?
BolognaSoup
Member
In the 7 years I've had an iOS device I've probably used them offline for approximately 0.000001% of that time.
Forget the Splatoon comparison then
Address the point before it. Where is the stipulation that Super Mario Run must be played on public transport?
The game is made to run only on the newest iPhones. 5S and above. Who is buying these without internet connections? Yes, there are wifi only iPads but the same solution to play SMR will be the same solution that is already being used to browse Facebook on them.
hemo memo
You can't die before your death
Becuase Nintendo.
I mean did you expect any differently? If this was anyone but Nintendo reactions would be more towards "hey that's kinda dumb for a mobile game, people play them during commutes".
Something about Nintendo doing it makes it OK for some people. Just store the data and send it up the next time the device is connected but don't make it a requirement.
The fucking stipulation is that it's a single player game that shouldn't have a online only requirement, and that people do most of their mobile gaming while commuting. Is it really that hard to get that?
This makes no sense. Ubisoft gets called out on their shit all the time.
Guys, grow up. This isn't about brand loyalty. They're companies, they're not your friends. Companies can make good decisions and bad decisions. Ubisoft makes good choices, they make crappy choices. Nintendo makes good choices, they make crappy choices.
For a lot of people, Mario Run doesn't look so appealing (me included). For others it looks fun. That's all fine. But the vitriol with which people are attacked for having the gal to criticize the business choices of a giant corporation and it not fitting with what they want out of their mobile gaming is insane. It's a silly little mobile autorunner. It's not a presidential election.
I guess I should be avoiding these threads on Gaf. People are acting like others are insulting their mothers when they criticize a Nintendo game. Most people play on their phones while on the way to work, in the train, while they're waiting for someone, etc. That's why it's so big compared to regular home vg systems. Everyone and their mother plays on mobile. Having to be online (and the high price, frankly) seems like a bad choice by Nintendo, and an unnecessary one at that. It kills the usefulness of it for me, as well as for many other people, I think. If I have to be at home with my wifi to play it on my phone, I would much rather play a big Mario game on an actual Nintendo system. The point of having it on mobile should be accessibility. I don't see why that opinion would sound crazy to anyone. If you're nuts about Mario and you just want everything with his face in it, fine, enjoy. But it's not that weird to be bummed out about some of the choices made here, especially compared to a lot of other high quality games on that market.
People who play mobile games on the subway, ie most New Yorkers, do not have access to a signal for most of their commute.
In London,
Most people that play iOS one-handed games do so on the public commute, especially if they need the other hand to hold a rail or pole to stay stable.
You can't really check Facebook or whatever on your iOS because of the lack of network underground, so people use things with offline mode (Spotify, Netflix) or play games like Candy Crush or Temple Run, short burst games just to pass the time.
It's an oversight on Nintendo's behalf, won't make it a terrible game, just terribly inaccessible for the biggest commuter casual players. These people don't go home and play games.
I might go check it out at the Apple store later, really excited to play it! For some silly reason, I thought there was a downloadable demo.
There is no stipulation. Does that mean people aren't allowed to voice their complaints?
Compelling argument.
Fachasaurus
Member
Heads up, they don't care about you guys not paying 10 bucks to play a persistent online mobile game on your cell phone.
This game is gonna sell like bananas at a monkey factory. And all you guys are gonna mess around with that free demo, don't lie.
This game is gonna sell like bananas at a monkey factory. And all you guys are gonna mess around with that free demo, don't lie.
I'm going to buy this game, likely twice because I think I'm going back to Android soon-ish.Heads up, they don't care about you guys not paying 10 bucks to play a persistent online mobile game on your cell phone.
This game is gonna sell like bananas at a monkey factory. And all you guys are gonna mess around with that free demo, don't lie.
I can still complain that this game has limited accessibility and longevity as a result of this decision.
TunaMarshmallow
Member
You don't exist. Or maybe you exist, but you're a liar. Or, at most, you're an existent non-liar, but someone who should move to a different city. Regardless, you should not show any signs of disappointment.
hemo memo
You can't die before your death
You think the same peopel defending Nintendo for this are going to defend Ubisoft for mobile Rayman game that's always online?
I've seen it multiple times already, Nintendo get a pass just because.
It's dumb, Nintendo or a small indie.
None, but if people wanted to get it just to play on public transport but now learn they can't play it on public transport, why would they buy it? The product doesn't suit their needs. Sure they could play it at home, but that's not why they wanted it. At home they may prefer baking cakes or something.
Someone not buying Mario Run has no bearing on you so why care?
People have a right to be disappointed and voicing said disappointment.
Dead zones, buildings built like Faraday cages, server interruptions, tunnels during transit, and other everyday situations I can think of have the potential to be a headache for playing what could easily be a totally self-contained game. Especially a game with levels and an extended-run component that doesn't mesh well with interruptions. Things like extending battery life by disabling network features aren't unreasonable. I'd prefer this had offline support, which most games I play on my phone do.
Obviously this isn't a deal breaker, but the line between my playing something and not is pretty narrow for mobile games if there are interruptions involved, and I can think of common scenarios where this will be a frustration for normal users.
If you have children with multiple devices and don't want redundant data plans, that's a reasonable scenario. It's not just down to public transit; If you're anywhere without wi-fi with those kids, the game can't be played. Your insistence that normal mobile usage for a game of this style is demanding too much is absolutely bizarre. This is a paid app, which I think makes the case to expect offline play much stronger.
Obviously this isn't a deal breaker, but the line between my playing something and not is pretty narrow for mobile games if there are interruptions involved, and I can think of common scenarios where this will be a frustration for normal users.
If you have children with multiple devices and don't want redundant data plans, that's a reasonable scenario. It's not just down to public transit; If you're anywhere without wi-fi with those kids, the game can't be played. Your insistence that normal mobile usage for a game of this style is demanding too much is absolutely bizarre. This is a paid app, which I think makes the case to expect offline play much stronger.
Wowfunhappy
Member
I'm much less annoyed about this in a mobile game than I would be on any other platform, but it's still annoying. It's hard to get a mobile signal on the subway.
Living the Dream
Member
The $9.99 price tag is going to scare a lot of people away.
Skittzo0413
Member
Both sides of this debate are being kind of ridiculous.
1) A lot of people don't have access to internet all the time during their commute. Subways especially have this issue. It's a pain in the ass to try to play an online game if the connection constantly drifts in and out.
and on the other side...
2) This is a game which has a heavy online multiplayer/competition/scoreboard emphasis. I honestly can't think of many mobile games which have that type of leaderboard system that don't require always online. So this whole "because Nintendo" thing truly does not apply here.
Anyway, it would certainly be nice if they offered an offline single player mode.
1) A lot of people don't have access to internet all the time during their commute. Subways especially have this issue. It's a pain in the ass to try to play an online game if the connection constantly drifts in and out.
and on the other side...
2) This is a game which has a heavy online multiplayer/competition/scoreboard emphasis. I honestly can't think of many mobile games which have that type of leaderboard system that don't require always online. So this whole "because Nintendo" thing truly does not apply here.
Anyway, it would certainly be nice if they offered an offline single player mode.
Sorry, I read your reaction wrong (although my opinion should be obvious from the rest of my post, I do agree with what you're saying here). I thought you meant that people criticizing Nintendo for this would defend Rayman. Sorry about that.
It doesn't rely "heavily" on an internet connection at all... Plenty of games on mobile have a leaderbord that syncs up when you have Internet access and that just wait for a signal when you don't. Especially single player games and premium ones at that.
I can't imagine this being too taxing on servers if it's just doing a constant license checkin.
Sim City
MisterHero
Super Member
Maybe they looked at how many people were using Pokemon GO and decided it's a safe choice.
I'm a Londoner!! Born & bred. As I said, I use the tube for an hour every day. And it hasn't stopped the online game, Clash Royale, being far and away the most amount of hours in a game I've played this year. If a game is good enough then you'll find a time and a place to play it.
There will be those mobile games that are okay enough to pass the time. Plenty of those. Nintendo aren't trying to make that. They're trying to make one of the best gaming experiences available on mobile.
Fbh
Member
That kinda sucks.
Will probably still get it once it hits android, but I mostly play mobile games on longer trips when I don't allways have internet access
It's mario and it's being made by Nintendo so I'm sure it will be good, I think that it will sell a lot.
Actually looking forward to it. Would be nice to have a bigger market on phone for more expensive games that don't follow the shitty F2P grindfest with IAP.
Hopefully this sells a lot and motivates other devs to try out ideas like this.
IMO mobile has a big potential to be a great platform. It's just a shame that even good games get burried under slow progression influenced by large amounts of repetition and grinding to try to push microtransactions.
Will probably still get it once it hits android, but I mostly play mobile games on longer trips when I don't allways have internet access
It's mario and it's being made by Nintendo so I'm sure it will be good, I think that it will sell a lot.
Actually looking forward to it. Would be nice to have a bigger market on phone for more expensive games that don't follow the shitty F2P grindfest with IAP.
Hopefully this sells a lot and motivates other devs to try out ideas like this.
IMO mobile has a big potential to be a great platform. It's just a shame that even good games get burried under slow progression influenced by large amounts of repetition and grinding to try to push microtransactions.
That was also doing server side saving/loading and rudimentary multiplayer, wasn't it?
I suppose Run could be doing the same.
privitsan02
Member
Chû Totoro;226299430 said:
So lets punish the consumers with DRM while the pirates get away with it anyway? The game doesn't even have the excuse of microtransactions or ads that some other games on mobile do.
Okami Haundo
Member
Chû Totoro;226299430 said:
They haven't confirmed it yet, but I'm sure the game will have some tie to My Nintendo as well. There's no denying that they could have made the story mode work offline if they really wanted to, but that just doesn't seem to go with their approach to mobile.
Either way, this does suck for people who wanted to play this game on their commute. Here's hoping they find a workaround.