Support NeoGAF

[xaszatm]

Boo hoo, a negative thread about Nintendo. Perhaps if they, you know, went with the far superior unlock method then it wouldn't be a problem for anyone. It's clearly not a non-issue, since people have even said they don't want to play the game if they have to deal with waiting over a week for all the content. This feature only affects the game in a negative manner, it's worth discussing.



Let's just not criticize anything ever then.

See? You insult anyone and everyone who even slightly disagrees with you. Then you over-exaggerate the other side's point (that this thread has gone on way too long) by implying we want the exact opposite. No, I don't think people should just enjoy everything. But if you went back into the thread this bullcrap is based off of, you'd find out that there are other things people are curious about, some positive and some negative. Why does this negative comment need its own thread?

The only reason I bothered replying in the first place was because you and two other posters kept on bringing this thread up. Dedicating to sarcasticly insult anyone who had the slightest opinion different from you. This thread lost all purpose when you started doing that.

 

[Red Devil]

There's no news of being able to create a world map which means you can at best string a few levels together. This game totally needs a world map creator.

There's no new of being able to create a world map, because you can't, that's been confirmed long ago.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

What's stopping people from restricting themselves only certain items?

Ask the developers who cram all those effects into their games leading to them running at 30 FPS or less in 2015.

Too much cake can lead to a tummy ache.

 

[erawsd]

If everyone could just have the option to turn it off, then what's about the players who'll do exactly that and come off not truly understand the intricacies of the level creator?

It completely justifiable with the reasons I pointed out on my post. The community if online submitted content will be much better if everyone is on the a near same level of understanding of the mechanics of the level creator.

Then those people can dive back into the tutorial to learn some more?

People who are wanting to craft some good content will learn the tools, there is no need to force that. Someone turning it off without a taking to time to understand the tools likely isn't invested in creating content to share anyway, they just want to play with the tools and be done with... and that should be their option.

Even as a way to teach people how to use the tools it doesn't make any sense because "the community" isn't one single entity that will learn these things at the same pace. Maybe I only have 20 minutes to play on Tuesday and I'm not ready for more tools on day 2? Or maybe I have 4 hours to kill and I've got time to master all those and more? The decision should be made at the individual level, arbitrarily applying it to everyone benefits no one.

Super Guide in NSMB series. I remember a lot of outrage over this completely optional thing that players didn't have to use, with disagreements boiling right down to the same "lol Nintendo fanboys will defend anything" rhetoric.

There are people who can never be happy and any solution to this issue will displease a different set of people that agree with those who find novice aids to be universally repulsive. Anything designed to assist a novice will be met with some form of backlash.

And? Unless you are suggesting that I'm one of those people (I'm not), I have no idea why they matter. I'm not arguing against an entirely optional tutorial, I'm arguing against something that is the direct opposite.

 

[Moff]

I like unlocking, but I feel it could have done better than with "play 5 minutes a day". Many games I play I dont even play 9 days, I am more a player for fewer but longer sessions.

 

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

Super Guide in NSMB series. I remember a lot of outrage over this completely optional thing that players didn't have to use, with disagreements boiling right down to the same "lol Nintendo fanboys will defend anything" rhetoric.

There are people who can never be happy. Anything designed to assist a novice will be met with some form of backlash.

Propose an alternative, any alternative, that hasn't also been met with backlash from hardcore gamers. I'm thinking you won't find one that some group of people won't gripe about. It's a no-win situation.

Super Guide backlash is a completely irrelevant argument. You're right, people will complain about anything. The Super Guide backlash was an example of that. But firstly, that was a vocal super minority composed entirely of the nutty gaming elitists who hate the idea of accessibility and casual gaming, and think the idea of providing players a tool to overcome difficult levels is a cancer on gaming. That only the people who "legitimately earned" their progression to the next level have the right to play the game. People who complained about that feature are far from a significant group in any measure, and wheeling them (or the any number of groups who have complained about any number of other dumb things over the years) out is pointless at best, completely and totally disingenuous at worst. And unfortunately I see these kind of comparisons all too often. The idea that because people would complain no matter what it's suddenly a lose-lose situation is completely false, because the amount of complaints and their rationality are not consistent across all scenarios. It's a false equivalence and tremendously poor argument that's invoked far too often.

To discuss specific options, it makes immeasurably more sense to dole out content based on gameplay-related milestones, be it time-based or feature-usage based. Because that means that players are actually learning these features inside and out, and are being rewarded for their learning and progression with progressively more advanced tools in a very organic way. A gamer who has spent all afternoon mastering various features would logically be ready to use more features. Someone who turned on the game for 5 minutes one day to poke around the menu before going to bed would not logically be more knowledgeable, nor do people learn how to use game maker tools while sleeping, so forcing people to wait until tomorrow makes no sense at all. "Tomorrow" means literally nothing. If Nintendo had rolled out the features as I described, sure, there probably would have been people complaining - like you said, they always do. But again, it's completely disingenuous to say this, because it implies that it would be anywhere near the same volume. If you truly think as many people would find this method as arbitrary and pointless, I don't know what to tell you other than you're wrong. This topic likely wouldn't be a thing, and at the very least the amount of complaints would be far, far fewer. You don't need a crystal ball to know that.

And again, it makes even more sense to include optional, in-depth tutorials that actually walk you through these features progressively, starting with simpler features and working up to more complex one and more complex design ideas/objectives in general. This way, new users are guaranteed to be taught the ins and outs as they progress, unlike the calendar-based solution, which literally only guarantees the user is one day older each time something is rolled out. Meanwhile, users who are unafraid to dive right in can, without any unnecessary handholding. Perfect for virtually everyone. Sure, maybe some people will still complain - again, like you said there's always someone. But these are the kind of people that complain when a game has an easy mode and nonsense like that. They're a super minority who is literally meaningless, and to say it one more time, it is completely and totally disingenuous to compare the discussion in this thread to those kinds of people.

 

[BGBW]

There's no news of being able to create a world map which means you can at best string a few levels together. This game totally needs a world map creator.

It's a level creator, not a game creator. There should have been no expectation for a map creator, What does it add? A way to link your levels together that you'll end up sharing one by one online thus the link is broken? This is literally complaining for complaining's sake.

What's stopping people from restricting themselves only certain items?

Leave someone alone in a room with a box of chocolates and tell them to eat just one. I hope you weren't expecting one when you come back an hour later to check up on them.

 

[Shiggy]

Would be smart if Nintendo has some cheat code that unlocks all at once.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

It's a level creator, not a game creator. There should have been no expectation for a map creator, What does it add? A way to link your levels together that you'll end up sharing one by one online thus the link is broken?


.

People LOVE their overworld maps.

They can add to the presentational value but I think Galaxy 2 proved they don't necessarily make the game that much better.

 

[cheesekao]

So how complex is Mario maker compared to Little Big Planet's creation tools? If it's less complex then I really don't see the need of such an arbitrary restriction.

Leave someone alone in a room with a box of chocolates and tell them to eat just one. I hope you weren't expecting one when you come back an hour later to check up on them.

Way to make an off base blanket statement. Many people are aware of the concept of self moderation.

 

[AHindD]

This drip-feed method is ultimately for the best as it addresses the inevitable problems most players will face with such a deep level creator like in SMM. Giving everyone time to understand the toolsets as they get gradually rolled out will allow players an opportunity to understand them and see how they can interact with other objects and the physics of the different Mario themes. You wouldn't be able to do this if everything was available from the start.

Week 1 of the game's release will be an interesting look at what early adopters will create with what little they have for those early days.

Its complete bullshit. For those who purchase the game a week late / dont play with the creation tools at all during launch, they will find they have a full set of tools available and unlocked for them. If I buy the game 2 weeks after launch, I'll miraculously have a full set of creation tools available to me that launch buyers didn't. I then may or may not still get overwhelmed with the tools on offer.

This calendar-based restriction only hurts early adopters of the game.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

Its complete bullshit. For those who purchase the game a week late / dont play with the creation tools at all during launch, they will find they have a full set of tools available and unlocked for them. If I buy the game 2 weeks after launch, I'll miraculously have a full set of creation tools available to me that launch buyers didn't. I then may or may not still get overwhelmed with the tools on offer.

This calendar-based restriction only hurts early adopters of the game.

That's all incorrect.

 

[Wanderer5]

Its complete bullshit. For those who purchase the game a week late / dont play with the creation tools at all during launch, they will find they have a full set of tools available and unlocked for them. If I buy the game 2 weeks after launch, I'll miraculously have a full set of creation tools available to me that launch buyers didn't. I then may or may not still get overwhelmed with the tools on offer.

This calendar-based restriction only hurts early adopters of the game.

Actually it looks like regardless of whenever you buy it, you still have to go through the 9 days process.

 

[Zomba13]

Its complete bullshit. For those who purchase the game a week late / dont play with the creation tools at all during launch, they will find they have a full set of tools available and unlocked for them. If I buy the game 2 weeks after launch, I'll miraculously have a full set of creation tools available to me that launch buyers didn't. I then may or may not still get overwhelmed with the tools on offer.

This calendar-based restriction only hurts early adopters of the game.

It's locked behind 9 days no matter when you buy the game. It's not a DLC thing or hitting a server, It's part of the game design to say "This is the first day you have played this game on this system. You only have these things. Tomorrow, if you play for five minutes, you will unlock more things" etc.

 

[Forkball]

See? You insult anyone and everyone who even slightly disagrees with you. Then you over-exaggerate the other side's point (that this thread has gone on way too long) by implying we want the exact opposite. No, I don't think people should just enjoy everything. But if you went back into the thread this bullcrap is based off of, you'd find out that there are other things people are curious about, some positive and some negative. Why does this negative comment need its own thread?

The only reason I bothered replying in the first place was because you and two other posters kept on bringing this thread up. Dedicating to sarcasticly insult anyone who had the slightest opinion different from you. This thread lost all purpose when you started doing that.

I'm not insulting anyone. Give a rebuttal to my points if you want. I haven't seen anyone discuss why this is inherently better than a typical unlock method outside of some of the most bizarre reasoning I've ever seen on this forum. Please tell me why I shouldn't have all the items on day one.

Ask the developers who cram all those effects into their games leading to them running at 30 FPS or less in 2015.

Too much cake can lead to a tummy ache.

What in the hell are you even talking about? How does developers choosing graphical fidelity over FPS have anything to do with keeping content locked for days?

It's a level creator, not a game creator. There should have been no expectation for a map creator, What does it add? A way to link your levels together that you'll end up sharing one by one online thus the link is broken? This is literally complaining for complaining's sake.


Leave someone alone in a room with a box of chocolates and tell them to eat just one. I hope you weren't expecting one when you come back an hour later to check up on them.

You are the second person that I've quoted in this very post that made some sort of stomachache analogy. Consumers aren't little babies and don't need Papa Nintendo to hold their hands. You are basically saying, "The only problem with Super Mario Maker is that it's almost too much fun."

 

[Bulbasaur]

They did the same thing with Animal Crossing New Leaf for certain town amenities/shops etc if recall correctly.

 

[Tezzeractor]

Actually it looks like regardless of whenever you buy it, you still have to go through the 9 days process.

Do you think it will be possible to cheese it with Animal Crossing style, clock setting techniques, or is Nintendo too savvy to that now?

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

What in the hell are you even talking about? How does developers choosing graphical fidelity over FPS have anything to do with keeping content locked for days?

First, calm down.

It's very simple.

Your post seemed to have to do with self-moderation as if it is easy and I was pointing out that if professionals can't even practice it, then how will amateurs???

 

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

Do you think it will be possible to cheese it with Animal Crossing style, clock setting techniques, or is Nintendo too savvy to that now?

Even though they could prevent such a method from being used (and they actually do prevent it for some things in some games) I can't possibly imagine they would. I'd definitely be willing to bet it's cheesable.

 

[cheesekao]

First, calm down.

It's very simple.

Your post seemed to have to do with self-moderation as if it is easy and I was pointing out that if professionals can't even practice it, then how will amateurs???

Amateurs are what they are, amateurs. They are more likely to be more conservative than professionals because they lack skill. Tinkerers on the other hand...

 

[AHindD]

It's locked behind 9 days no matter when you buy the game. It's not a DLC thing or hitting a server, It's part of the game design to say "This is the first day you have played this game on this system. You only have these things. Tomorrow, if you play for five minutes, you will unlock more things" etc.

Well I'll be damned, cheers for the correction! That makes it even weirder. Sucks for those who watch a few tutorial videos / know what levels they want to create, but will have to wait days in order for them to access the tools.

 

[Forkball]

First, calm down.

It's very simple.

Your post seemed to have to do with self-moderation as if it is easy and I was pointing out that if professionals can't even practice it, then how will amateurs???

I am calm, I'm just confused about your awful analogy. Game developers sacrifice FPS for graphics because they believe graphical fidelity will lead to more sales of their games over FPS. It has nothing to do with self-moderation.

And honestly, who cares about self moderation? Let people go nuts if they want to. Seriously, I am getting a headache reading these defense posts. You are basically restricting people for imaginary reasons that you think is for their benefit. Let people who pay money for the game decide what they want to do.

 

[Wanderer5]

Do you think it will be possible to cheese it with Animal Crossing style, clock setting techniques, or is Nintendo too savvy to that now?

Don't know, unless they set it up in such a certain way that prevents it which I wouldn't really know still. At the very least if you able to do it, you would probably have to go day by day rather than just forward 9 days cause of 5 mins requirement.

 

[Terrell]

Super Guide backlash is a completely irrelevant argument. You're right, people will complain about anything. The Super Guide backlash was an example of that. But firstly, that was a vocal super minority composed entirely of the nutty gaming elitists who hate the idea of accessibility and casual gaming. People who complained about that feature are far from a significant group in any measure, and wheeling them (or the any number of groups who have complained about any number of other dumb things over the years) out is pointless at best, completely and totally disingenuous at worst. And unfortunately I see these kind of comparisons all too often. The idea that because people would complain no matter what it's suddenly a lose-lose situation is completely false, because the amount of complaints and their rationality are not consistent across all scenarios. It's a false equivalence and tremendously poor argument that's wheeled out far too often.

There's a distinct lack of self-awareness here, as you fail to identify that detractors on this particular issue are ALSO "a vocal super minority" composed of elitist hardcore gamers who hate the idea of distributed content, which are also "far from a significant group of people in any measure", as evidenced by the lack of fucks given in equally-sized hardcore gamer communities elsewhere on the internet, which has already been addressed in this very thread. Never mind that your opinion will align with these "nutty" elitists who hate accessibility by virtue of it being a method of novice accessibility.

So no, I feel the parallel is perfectly warranted and your attempts to frame your opinion as a populist one are... intriguing, to say the least.

The amount of complaints in the 2 presented scenarios are fairly consistent and equally blown far out of proportion, as they tend to be on topics regarding implementations of accessibility in general. That your opinion isn't grounded in it and that you dismiss the implementation with one that will be equally derided is wholly relevant, including the example you provided.

And incidentally, people may see your opinion on gated content as "nutty" as those who dislike the Super Guide, and those who dislike things like the Super Guide could easily take objection to being referred to that way. Much like people might see your solutions as "stupid" or "arbitrary", when you see them as a solution to a "stupid" or "arbitrary" issue you have personally. Opinions are odd that way.

 

[wanderingprostheyltite]

You are the second person that I've quoted in this very post that made some sort of stomachache analogy. Consumers aren't little babies and don't need Papa Nintendo to hold their hands. You are basically saying, "The only problem with Super Mario Maker is that it's almost too much fun."

You give the average consumer far too much credit. Gaf isn't the average consumer.

 

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

They did the same thing with Animal Crossing New Leaf for certain town amenities/shops etc if recall correctly.

They did, but it's really not comparable. Animal Crossing is a real-time life and town simulator. Literally the entire point is that the world progresses and changes in real time, as you play (and as you don't play). Rolling out content over time is central to the entire purpose of Animal Crossing.

Saying "you can't put in a Blooper spawner for another 7 days" or whatever is not central to the design of this and has no real justification.

 

[spekkeh]

Stupid idea. If they were afraid people wouldn't get it, they should have included a skippable tutorial. It's always a bad idea to take away player autonomy. Especially in a creative suite.

 

[Forkball]

You give the average consumer far too much credit. Gaf isn't the average consumer.

The average consumer that buys games that are infinitely more complicated than dragging and dropping blocks? I think they can handle it.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

I am calm, I'm just confused about your awful analogy. Game developers sacrifice FPS for graphics because they believe graphical fidelity will lead to more sales of their games over FPS. It has nothing to do with self-moderation.

And honestly, who cares about self moderation? Let people go nuts if they want to. Seriously, I am getting a headache reading these defense posts. You are basically restricting people for imaginary reasons that you think is for their benefit. Let people who pay money for the game decide what they want to do.

You're fine with people going nuts with this game but Nintendo is not.

They don't want to see 9 Bowsers on the first screen with all spikes underneath him and one millimeter of platform.

Is it babysitting???

In a way but they don't want their most famous IP going to the shitter right out the gate.

I'd have a problem with it if you had to get approval from Nintendo in some impractical way before you obtained the rest of the tools but nah, you just have to wait a LITTLE bit.

Personally, I'm not for their decision but I certainly don't think it's pointless and I see what they are thinking.

The masters of platformer level design not wanting to see their baby flushed down the toilet on day 1.

 

[correojon]

Read my edited spoiler.

Please, explain to me in what world this calendar-based rollout makes sense at all? A player could idle for five minutes a day and unlock features at the same rate a user spending five hours a day figuring out every little bit of the game's workings. Where is the logic in that at all? If they insist on staggering these features, in what would does it not make sense to base said staggering on the actual time spent using said features, or the number of features used? "Come back tomorrow!" is completely arbitrary, as "tomorrow" has literally no bearing on the user's understanding of the game's features whatsoever.

If you have ever designed a level for a game I think you´d agree that there are a lot of things you learn just by trying things out and developing a sense of what feels right and what doesn´t. That takes time. No tutorial can teach you that, so I think Nintendo is trying to somehow enforce people to spend time developing simple levels to get a feel for those basic things before diluting their focus with more options.

They are not using this 9 days just to teach people about the editor, but to give them sometime to grasp basic level design concepts.

Furthermore, how would it not make even more sense to use in-depth tutorials that actually progressively walk you through these features, to ensure you actually have a deep understanding of them, while allowing users who neither want nor need handholding to bypass it altogether? There's a reason why this has been used to frequently in other similar products, such as Project Spark: it works.

I agree on this, tutorials to learn how to use the editor may prove really helpful. At the same time, Nintendo has a story of teaching the player by "doing" instead of "showing" and it´s a method that has proven to work really well even back from the revered first screen of the original Super Mario Bros. I´ll have to wait until I can try the game to see if there´s really a need for tutorials or there´s some kind of system that walks you through it.

But anyway, this is about learning the editor usage and not about learning level design basics, which I think is the real reason behind these 9 days.

Your entire argument is "Nintendo knows better because they're Nintendo", which is an incredibly poor argument. Whether or not they've put out games in the past with well-made content progressions has no bearing here, and does not change the fact that a calendar-based system is completely arbitrary, and neither logical nor intuitive. But by all means, continue telling me I'm wrong simply because Nintendo is genius and infallible.

Oh, and nice non-sequitur on the "hate players" bit there.

I´m not saying that "Nintendo knows better because they're Nintendo", I´m saying that they know what they are doing because they have a +20 years record that proves they know how to effectively teach players how to play new things. And because their recent releases continue that trend. Examples:

• The first screen and level from SMB are revered as level design masterpieces on how to teach the player all the game´s basic concepts without him knowing.
• The invisible hand behind Super Metroid that guides all the player´s progression through the game without him knowing or the way to introduce new abilities like the walljump in the world context without it seeming a tutorial.
• The level design in Super Mario 3D Land/World following a structure of 4 steps to guide the player from learning a new mechanic to mastering it and using it in different ways.

You can´t disregard all this as a fanboy screaming "Nintendo knows better because it´s Nintendo", the same way you can´t disregard the proven experience and history when designing systems to teach players that Nintendo has.

 

[Tezzeractor]

Don't know, unless they set it up in such a certain way that prevents it which I wouldn't really know still. At the very least if you able to do it, you would probably have to go day by day rather than just forward 9 days cause of 5 mins requirement.

If that's what it takes, I'm definitely going to do it.

Even though they could prevent such a method from being used (and they actually do prevent it for some things in some games) I can't possibly imagine they would. I'd definitely be willing to bet it's cheesable.

Sounds gouda to me.

 

[CaptainGyro]

I'm not insulting anyone. Give a rebuttal to my points if you want. I haven't seen anyone discuss why this is inherently better than a typical unlock method outside of some of the most bizarre reasoning I've ever seen on this forum. Please tell me why I shouldn't have all the items on day one.
"

I know this sounds funny coming from a guy who has implied that you should just stop posting because you've made your point, and I am going to continue the conversation, but what exactly are you looking for here? You say people haven't discussed why they think it's better. But then you say that people have tried to discuss it, but it's the some of most bizarre reasoning you have ever seen.
People have given their reasons for why they think it's the way it is, most people have said it's not perfect and a little disappointing. So what else do you want? For everybody in here to agree with you and become as angry about it and keep dwellling on it and say they aren't going to buy the game? Because it's not going to happen

 

[Bsigg12]

Kind of an annoying set of content blocks. I get slowly adding access to more advanced mechanics but gating it with literal days is kind of crazy.

 

[wanderingprostheyltite]

I know this sounds funny coming from a guy who has implied that you should just stop posting because you've made your point, and I am going to continue the conversation, but what exactly are you looking for here? You say people haven't discussed why they think it's better. But then you say that people have tried to discuss it, but it's the some of most bizarre reasoning you have ever seen.
People have given their reasons for why they think it's the way it is, most people have said it's not perfect and a little disappointing. So what else do you want? For everybody in here to agree with you and become as angry about it and keep dwellling on it and say they aren't going to buy the game? Because it's not going to happen

Like I said earlier, complaining is a hobby for some on here.

 

[Wanderer5]

There's a distinct lack of self-awareness here, as you fail to identify that detractors on this particular issue are ALSO "a vocal super minority" composed of elitist hardcore gamers who hate the idea of distributed content, which are also "far from a significant group of people in any measure", as evidenced by the lack of fucks given in equally-sized hardcore gamer communities elsewhere on the internet, which has already been addressed in this very thread. Never mind that your opinion will align with these "nutty" elitists who hate accessibility by virtue of it being a method of novice accessibility.

So no, I feel the parallel is perfectly warranted and your attempts to frame your opinion as a populist one are... intriguing, to say the least.

The amount of complaints in the 2 presented scenarios are fairly consistent and equally blown far out of proportion, as they tend to be on topics regarding implementations of accessibility in general. That your opinion isn't grounded in it and that you dismiss the implementation with one that will be equally derided is wholly relevant, including the example you provided.

And incidentally, people may see your opinion on gated content as "nutty" as those who dislike the Super Guide, and those who dislike things like the Super Guide could easily take objection to being referred to that way. Much like people might see your solutions as "stupid" or "arbitrary", when you see them as a solution to a "stupid" or "arbitrary" issue you have personally. Opinions are odd that way.

Are you seriously looking at complaints of a thing that is forced upon everyone to complaints of a thing that is completely optional as equal grounds?

 

[Forkball]

You're fine with people going nuts with this game but Nintendo is not.

They don't want to see 9 Bowsers on the first screen with all spikes underneath him and one millimeter of platform.

Is it babysitting???

In a way but they don't want their most famous IP going to the shitter right out the gate.

I'd have a problem with it if you had to get approval from Nintendo in some impractical way before you obtained the rest of the tools but nah, you just have to wait a LITTLE bit.

Personally, I'm not for their decision but I certainly don't think it's pointless and I see what they are thinking.

The masters of platformer level design not wanting to see their baby flushed down the toilet on day 1.

First, calm down.

Yeah, Mario had a good run until someone made a level with a bunch of Bowsers and then it all came tumbling down. Do you honestly think this? You think that Nintendo is terrified that people are just going to ruin the integrity of Mario unless they put them through a nine day tutorial?

If Nintendo doesn't want us to go crazy with the levels, why has EVERY single piece of promo material heavily focused on the kooky and unorthodox things you can make?

Look how crazy the levels are in the video where they announced the 9 day lock.

Are those only using day one materials? No, they are using everything in the game to get people interested in it.

"The masters of platformer level design not wanting to see their baby flushed down the toilet on day 1." I don't even know how to reply to this sentence. They don't want us to ruin Mario, so they are giving us a Mario level creator with restrictions for a week? WHAT?

 

[CMojicaAce]

I don't agree with this practice at all. If content was being unlocked for months to keep the game fresh, MAYBE I could see why they did it. But 9 days? Why even bother?

Plus, it's different from having to unlock, for example, characters in a fighting game because you could play all day on day one and unlock everyone, but it is impossible to do that in this game.

I don't see how people will feel overwhelmed when they aren't being forced to learn and use every tool in a tutorial (as far as I know). The gamer should have the option to learn the tools he/she wants at the pace he/she wants to, rather than being restricted.

I just think it isn't a very good decision by Nintendo.

 

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

There's a distinct lack of self-awareness here, as you fail to identify that detractors on this particular issue are ALSO "a vocal super minority" composed of elitist hardcore gamers who hate the idea of distributed content, which are also "far from a significant group of people in any measure", as evidenced by the lack of fucks given in equally-sized hardcore gamer communities elsewhere on the internet, which has already been addressed in this very thread. Never mind that your opinion will align with these "nutty" elitists who hate accessibility by virtue of it being a method of novice accessibility.

So no, I feel the parallel is perfectly warranted and your attempts to frame your opinion as a populist one are... intriguing, to say the least.

The amount of complaints in the 2 presented scenarios are fairly consistent and equally blown far out of proportion, as they tend to be on topics regarding implementations of accessibility in general. That your opinion isn't grounded in it and that you dismiss the implementation with one that will be equally derided is wholly relevant, including the example you provided.

And incidentally, people may see your opinion on gated content as "nutty" as those who dislike the Super Guide, and those who dislike things like the Super Guide could easily take objection to being referred to that way. Opinions are odd that way.

The fact that literally no one here has a coherent justification for this feature, nor any explanation for how alternative methods aren't superior beyond "because" flies in the face of this post.

It's by all definition arbitrary. It may not be a huge issue for a significant number of people, or even be a minor issue for a notable group of people. It's not even a huge issue for me as I already explained - in fact it has basically no effect on me whatsoever and I really don't even care. But it is arbitrary, and if you truly think that that stance is irrational, that rational people would find any dissent over this nonsensical, full stop, that the number of people who would find issue in this design over the ones I propose (which are used extremely frequently in numerous other similar products without notable dissent) would be equal to the number of people complaining here, and that the volume of both groups would be equivalent, I don't know what to tell you.

Other than that's nonsense that is.

 

[erawsd]

You're fine with people going nuts with this game but Nintendo is not.

They don't want to see 9 Bowsers on the first screen with all spikes underneath him and one millimeter of platform.

Is it babysitting???

In a way but they don't want their most famous IP going to the shitter right out the gate.

I'd have a problem with it if you had to get approval from Nintendo in some impractical way before you obtained the rest of the tools but nah, you just have to wait a LITTLE bit.

Personally, I'm not for their decision but I certainly don't think it's pointless and I see what they are thinking.

The masters of platformer level design not wanting to see their baby flushed down the toilet on day 1.

If someone wants to create 9 Bowsers on the first screen with all spikes underneath him and one millimeter of platform, then they'll make that on day 4 when Bowser unlocks. Forcing people to wait 9 days to unlock all the tools isn't going to stop people from trying all manners of dumb stuff.. doing dumb stuff is likely were such a creation tool has appeal to them. Not everyone will create something great to share with the rest of us and thats perfectly fine because you can create something that is rubbish and still have fun doing it.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

"The masters of platformer level design not wanting to see their baby flushed down the toilet on day 1." I don't even know how to reply to this sentence. They don't want us to ruin Mario, so they are giving us a Mario level creator with restrictions for a week? WHAT?

You're not getting it.

Why do you think they are doing this then???

For no reason at all???

 

[wanderingprostheyltite]

You're not getting it.

Why do you think they are doing this then???

For no reason at all???

Nintendo just wants to troll people. For the lulz.

 

[Forkball]

You're not getting it.

Why do you think they are doing this then???

For no reason at all???

That's what I'm trying to figure out. The only reason is that they think we are so dumb that we can't handle it, which shows how out of touch they are with consumers. This kind of decision making is why Nintendo has been doing poorly. This decision is really just a symptom of a larger problem and it's frustrating to see Nintendo repeatedly make these mistakes.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

Nintendo just wants to troll people. For the lulz.

I WISH that was the case but there's a method behind the madness whether people like it or not.

However, maybe this is Miyamoto lurking this thread:

 

[DryvBy]

This drip-feed method is ultimately for the best as it addresses the inevitable problems most players will face with such a deep level creator like in SMM. Giving everyone time to understand the toolsets as they get gradually rolled out will allow players an opportunity to understand them and see how they can interact with other objects and the physics of the different Mario themes. You wouldn't be able to do this if everything was available from the start.

Week 1 of the game's release will be an interesting look at what early adopters will create with what little they have for those early days.

For the best for who? The customer?

This isn't for the best for anyone. What you just described is that Nintendo's customers are too stupid to fully get the entire tool set on launch day so they need to be spoon-fed the content to really understand it.

You are aware there are currently Super Mario Makers out there already, right? PC has been doing this for over a decade.

 

[xaszatm]

I'm not insulting anyone. Give a rebuttal to my points if you want. I haven't seen anyone discuss why this is inherently better than a typical unlock method outside of some of the most bizarre reasoning I've ever seen on this forum. Please tell me why I shouldn't have all the items on day one.

...except I've said that it was unnecessary? I mean, I understand the thought process (combination of easing newbies into the maker and invoking the illusion of having more content) that led to the decision, but I've already said that it could have been implemented better. But because you are so eager to attack anyone and everyone, this fact has completely left your mind.

 

[Terrell]

Are you seriously looking at complaints of a thing that is forced upon everyone to complaints of a thing that is completely optional as equal grounds?

They're different means to the same end, and both are a minor inconvenience at best in the larger picture.

I'm not "forced" to create levels with limited toolsets to get the tools. If I'd rather wait til I have the entire toolchain, I'll fire it up, fiddle in the level editor for a few minutes, and play levels that the game already comes with until I get them all.

I would agree/suggest that an option made available to players who don't feel they need the toolchain peppered out to them would be preferable. For all we know, there is such an option that has yet to be discussed by Nintendo, since all our current information on this seems to come from a single YouTube video. And it is important to keep that in mind when entering such a discussion.

I don't even think people have no reason for disappointment at waiting 9 days for a full toolchain.

But that's all it is: disappointing.

Not "stupid". Not "arbitrary". Not "pointless". Not anything aside from disappointing.

It was done for a reason. People don't like the reason. That does not make the reason invalid or unworthy of consideration, especially when alternatives aren't seen any better.

Even my suggestion of offering an option to ungate the content will undoubtedly be met with "why even fucking bother if it's not the default?"

It's why I argue against emotional dislike being framed as design failure in video games outright and will continue to do so.

The fact that literally no one here has a coherent justification for this feature, nor any explanation for how alternative methods aren't superior beyond "because" flies in the face of this post.

It's by all definition arbitrary. It may not be a huge issue for a significant number of people, or even be a minor issue for a notable group of people. It's not even a huge issue for me as I already explained - in fact it has basically no effect on me whatsoever and I really don't even care. But it is arbitrary, and if you truly think that that stance is irrational, that rational people would find any dissent over this nonsensical, full stop, that the number of people who would find issue in this design over the ones I propose (which are used extremely frequently in numerous other similar products without notable dissent) would be equal to the number of people complaining here, and that the volume of both groups would be equivalent, I don't know what to tell you.

Other than that's nonsense that is.

So because you disagree with a justification, it's "incoherent". There is no "superior" method without a near-universal acceptance of it. No alternative would meet that requirement within the hardcore gamer space, who are really the only ones who are likely to care.

That you continue to frame your argument as populist when you have no grounds for doing so is bordering on a superiority complex.
And for something you don't care about, you've certainly contributed a lot to the discussion of it.

The number of people complaining here isn't that many. They're just exceptionally loud. There is no distinction between them other than volume. You can say "well, this method met with no notable dissent", but all that tells me is that they weren't as loud about it or the people couldn't be shouted down with "lol fanboys" rhetoric. Rhetoric you have used in this very thread, I might add. Which makes your assertion of how little you care all the more confusing when you feel the need to talk opinions down using language intended to discredit opinion like a Fox News pundit.

 

[SoundPulse]

Honestly, the better way to go about it (If we truly feel the need to help players ease their way in) would be to present the player with a simple question on first boot:

"Have you ever played a Mario game before?"

Nearly nothing in the game really requires any more knowledge than you would acquire from playing a Mario game, hence this question. You're not tinkering with any sort of scripts that you'd run into on, say, RPG Maker. You're dropping things onto a grid, at least for the most part. If the player answers no, they're dropped into a tutorial where the game explains both how to play Mario, as well as helping the player create some simple example maps. Here, there would be no arbitrary time limit. Each element would be introduced, given practical exercise, and the tutorials would move on at the player's pace.

If the player answers yes, they're asked a follow-up question, something along the lines of "Do you want to see some tips and tricks about Mario Maker?", which, if answered with a yes, would drop the player into some of the more advanced tutorials about the mechanics specific to Mario Maker. Either option line would allow the player to exit at any time, at which point they're alerted that they can return to view (and play) the tutorials at any time.

I get that it's Nintendo, but it's a game about the player using their imagination to come up with and design their own Mario levels. It's not on the level of complexity of something like Photoshop. If you're not willing to let go and have the player run amok with a game about ~creativity~, then what's the bloody point?

 

[Zemm]

What happens if you lose your save, do you have to start the 9 days over again?

 

[The Dutch Slayer]

Wow you know what is more crazy then this is unlock system that Forkball is one of the few here that is the voice of reason.

Send out a few questions to Nintendo PR just now with all our comments and concerns I hope to hear from them today.

 

[Enter the Dragon Punch]

This drip-feed method is ultimately for the best as it addresses the inevitable problems most players will face with such a deep level creator like in SMM. Giving everyone time to understand the toolsets as they get gradually rolled out will allow players an opportunity to understand them and see how they can interact with other objects and the physics of the different Mario themes. You wouldn't be able to do this if everything was available from the start.

Week 1 of the game's release will be an interesting look at what early adopters will create with what little they have for those early days.

Why are you assuming the people buying this game are going to be dumb

This has literally never been an issue in games like Little Big Planet, Modnationracers, Trials, Tony Hawk, Minecraft, Halo series, Worms, etc

Are you simply doubtful the average consumer purchasing this game can handle the depth of making a Mario level, or are you just going along with it because it's the business choice that Nintendo's made?