Support NeoGAF

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

A calendar-based unlock system is completely pointless and arbitrary on every level. If they wanted to stagger what tools are available to users in order to ease them in, that's fine I suppose, but do it based off of playtime or other gameplay-based metrics. i.e. create and share your first level to unlock ____, use the ____ tool for 10 minutes to unlock ____. As is people legitimately playing 3 hours a day still have to wait the same amount of time as those just turning it on and idling for 5 minutes a time. Dumb.

Though it would make far more sense still to just stick to a series of optional tutorials that progressively introduce you to each feature, starting with the simpler tools first and eventually building up to more complex tools and design ideas. But Nintendo gonna Nintendo. "We're different!"

Also, gotta love Nintendo fanboys. People question dumb moves by Nintendo and it's all "QQ more". Seriously?

 

[Komo]

What an arbitrary, pointless limitation.

Nintendo's good at those

 

[BGBW]

Like said before, like this was the first game where promotional videos/screenshots/etc shows stuff that's locked on the beginning, tsk.

Nintendo showed Rosalina in 3D World before release.
All racers for Mario Kart 7 and 8 were shown before release.

This isn't a new concept.

 

[correojon]

A calendar-based unlock system is completely pointless and arbitrary on every level. If they wanted to stagger what tools are available to users in order to ease them in, that's fine I suppose, but do it based off of playtime or other gameplay-based metrics. i.e. create and share your first level to unlock ____, use the ____ tool for 10 minutes to unlock ____. As is people legitimately playing 3 hours a day still have to wait the same amount of time as those just turning it on and idling for 5 minutes a time. Dumb.

Though it would make far more sense still to just stick to a series of optional tutorials that progressively introduce you to each feature, starting with the simpler tools first and eventually building up to more complex tools and design ideas. But Nintendo gonna Nintendo. "We're different!"

Yeah, because Nintendo knows nothing about introducing players to new things, I'm sure this decission was based on them wanting to be different and not in their overwhelming experience in introducing players to new gameplay mechanics/genres/...

/s

 

[chaobreaker]

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.

 

[Nanashrew]

I think its the same people arguing at this point...

Aye. And there doesn't seem to be any discussion happening anymore. I think at this point, I am out. There's nothing left to talk about like better alternatives and stuff, just accusations of who is a defender or not.

 

[Forkball]

Like said before, like this was the first game where promotional videos/screenshots/etc shows stuff that's locked on the beginning, tsk.

Again, there is nothing wrong with unlockables, the issue is unlockables being tied to the Gregorian calendar.

If people think this idea is so great, why not just implement it into every game? Why doesn't Smash Bros give us 10 characters the first day, then a new character every day? I think that's a great idea. First of all, you won't be overwhelmed by all these characters. If there were 35 characters available from the start, people will just look at the character selection screen, grow frustrated, and quit. Plus if you limit people to only 10 fighters, it will force people to become good with them, so there will be less bad players online. Releasing a new fighter every day gets people talking, it will give someone a reason to check the game every single day!

 

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

Yeah, because Nintendo knows nothing about introducing players to new things, I'm sure this decission was based on them wanting to be different and not in their overwhelming experience in introducing players to new gameplay mechanics/genres/...

/s

bruh,

stahp

sincerely,
me

Spoiler

Seriously, that is the stupidest defense. Nintendo knows better... because! Come on man, can you seriously explain how this ISN'T completely arbitrary, and how my examples don't make significantly more sense?

 

[hurricanes]

Everyone includes those whom this could be their first like any other game really, which is likely why Nintendo won't take them into consideration and just make as simple as possible even when everything is available.

It's bad when you ignore your enthusiastic fans.

A great solution:

create a level with these initial tools and you'll get a few more to try out for your next one, etc.

 

[KingdomHeartsFan]

Just normal Nintendo, can't try to put logic behind their decisions.

 

[Lemonte]

I'm too busy playing MGSV so I don't care, but kinda lame still.

 

[correojon]

bruh,

stahp

sincerely,
me

Great comeback, the way you have dismantled my arguments has really left me speechless. You sir are a true master at the ancient art of conversation.

Just take a look at Mario 3D World and how it slowly introduces new mechanics in each level, or at any Zelda game which are based on getting new items that allow you to do more new and more complex things as the games progress.

This time Nintendo thought that it would be more beneficial to focus the learning experience in time instead of game progress. Seeing how this game (if we can call it that) is so inherently different to any other N release in the past the change of paradigm is justified IMO.

Or you can just think that they hate players and are just trying to find new ways to screw them, but that will slightly contradict their last +20 years record.

 

[Red Devil]

Again, there is nothing wrong with unlockables, the issue is unlockables being tied to the Gregorian calendar.

If people think this idea is so great, why not just implement it into every game? Why doesn't Smash Bros give us 10 characters the first day, then a new character every day? I think that's a great idea. First of all, you won't be overwhelmed by all these characters. If there were 35 characters available from the start, people will just look at the character selection screen, grow frustrated, and quit. Plus if you limit people to only 10 fighters, it will force people to become good with them, so there will be less bad players online. Releasing a new fighter every day gets people talking, it will give someone a reason to check the game every single day!

Sure, but then that's a different problem from not being able to do what they did in the logo... Also not sure why you suggest that if this is a good idea every other game should do it, nodbody is suggesting neither.

It's bad when you ignore your enthusiastic fans.

A great solution:

What? Ever since the "enthusiastic fans" were limited to those who edited/created levels with other tools? And probably even then those are a miniroty.

 

[erawsd]

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 games. You wouldn't be able to do this if everything was available from the start.

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

Or they could have just included a creation tutorial that drip feeds the people that need it and still provide a menu option to turn it off for people that don't. Everybody is happy, everybody wins. A forced 9 day tutorial period is in no way justified or logical.

 

[Rich!]

This is stupid.

I'll stick to Lunar Magic. Been editing Mario levels for over a decade now, nothing new.

 

[Boy Wander]

bruh,

stahp

sincerely,
me

Spoiler

Seriously, that is the stupidest defense. Nintendo knows better... because! Come on man, can you seriously explain how this ISN'T completely arbitrary, and how my examples don't make significantly more sense?

It isn't completely arbitrary if they did research and got feedback from play testers. Unless you think someone literally just made this idea up and nobody challenged it? How do you know that it IS completely arbitrary?

 

[Forkball]

It isn't completely arbitrary if they did research and got feedback from play testers. Unless you think someone literally just made this idea up and nobody challenged it? How do you know that it IS completely arbitrary?

So because it was focus-tested then it must be a good idea? No game has any bad ideas?

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

A calendar-based unlock system is completely pointless and arbitrary on every level. If they wanted to stagger what tools are available to users in order to ease them in, that's fine I suppose, but do it based off of playtime or other gameplay-based metrics. i.e. create and share your first level to unlock ____, use the ____ tool for 10 minutes to unlock ____. As is people legitimately playing 3 hours a day still have to wait the same amount of time as those just turning it on and idling for 5 minutes a time. Dumb.

Though it would make far more sense still to just stick to a series of optional tutorials that progressively introduce you to each feature, starting with the simpler tools first and eventually building up to more complex tools and design ideas. But Nintendo gonna Nintendo. "We're different!"

Also, gotta love Nintendo fanboys. People question dumb moves by Nintendo and it's all "QQ more". Seriously?

Perhaps file a petition.

 

[Recall]

So because it was focus-tested then it must be a good idea? No game has any bad ideas?

It's 9 days. 9 days.

Is it perfect? No. Will it really matter in the long run? No idea until the game is in people's hands.

 

[chaobreaker]

Or they could have just included a creation tutorial that drip feeds the people that need it and still provide a menu option to turn it off for people that don't. Everybody is happy, everybody wins. A forced 9 day tutorial period is in no way justified or logical.

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 library of online-submitted levels will be much better if everyone is on the a near same level of understanding of the mechanics of the level creator.

 

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

Great comeback, the way you have dismantled my arguments has really left me speechless. You sir are a true master at the ancient art of conversation.

Just take a look at Mario 3D World and how it slowly introduces new mechanics in each level, or at any Zelda game which are based on getting new items that allow you to do more new and more complex things as the games progress.

This time Nintendo thought that it would be more beneficial to focus the learning experience in time instead of game progress. Seeing how this game (if we can call it that) is so inherently different to any other N release in the past the change of paradigm is justified IMO.

Or you can just think that they hate players and are just trying to find new ways to screw them, but that will slightly contradict their last +20 years record.

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.

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.

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.

 

[Forkball]

It's 9 days. 9 days.

Is it perfect? No. Will it really matter in the long run? No idea until the game is in people's hands.

Is it a bad idea? Yes.

If 9 days is ok, what's the line? Is ten days ok or too long? Why? What about eleven days? How about EIGHT days? Is eight days too short? I need Nintendo to tell me the optimal time I should wait before I can enjoy the game to the fullest.

 

[Arcayne]

Eh, thats fine. More time for folks to figure out how to create levels with the tools we're given. 9 days is hardly a long time.

 

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

It isn't completely arbitrary if they did research and got feedback from play testers. Unless you think someone literally just made this idea up and nobody challenged it? How do you know that it IS completely arbitrary?

Please explain to me how it isn't. In your own words, form a complete explanation on how you feel this decision makes any more sense than a gameplay-based system or optional, in-depth tutorials, without saying something along the lines of "Surely Nintendo knows what they're doing".

Perhaps file a petition.

Clever.

 

[chaobreaker]

Is it a bad idea? Yes.

If 9 days is ok, what's the line? Is ten days ok or too long? Why? What about eleven days? How about EIGHT days? Is eight days too short? I need Nintendo to tell me the optimal time I should wait before I can enjoy the game to the fullest.

Occam's Razor: The staggering of content being 9 days long is because they're releasing a different toolset everyday and there just happen to be 9 of them in total?

 

[xaszatm]

What's really getting me upset is that, because the exact same three people keep posting in this thread responding to every post to make sure this thread stays up, we once again have a negative Nintendo thread overwhelmingly on the front page of Neogaf while the neutral one stays hidden. I don't even think this is the best idea for Nintendo. It's a non-issue, granted, but it could have been implemented better. But it's always the same. A solid few making sure that the negative stuff stays front and center, not even caring if it's true or not (though it is true, though not really that important, in this case and the fact I have to write this instead of it being obvious infuriates me).

This is a non-issue. Plain and simple. If it really was a non-issue to you people eagerly typing how you're right, then you'd stop posting after every reply in an increasingly insulting manner and leave this thread alone to die.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

Is it a bad idea? Yes.

If 9 days is ok, what's the line? Is ten days ok or too long? Why? What about eleven days? How about EIGHT days? Is eight days too short? I need Nintendo to tell me the optimal time I should wait before I can enjoy the game to the fullest.

In a way, we're lucky we are getting this game in the first place.

In my mind, I NEVER thought such a game would be released even though others brought up the idea.

I thought Nintendo was too protective and egomaniacal over their main IPs to make this happen.

It's fine to bitch about things but this many pages for THIS "problem"???

 

[Gwarf]

Also they could at least make it 6 days instead of 9 like God intended. Then on the 7th day the game will not allow you to create anymore.

I laughed

 

[Forkball]

Occam's Razor: The staggering of content being 9 days long is because they're releasing a different toolset everyday and there just happen to be 9 of them in total?

The tool sets are completely random. Each day gives you a different number of items. Why isn't the fire flower in day one? Why are the chain chomps on the last day in a set with only two other items? Please explain this to me because I am dying to know.

In a way, we're lucky we are getting this game in the first place.

In my mind, I NEVER thought such a game would be released even though others brought up the idea.

I thought Nintendo was too protective and egomaniacal over their main IPs to make this happen.

It's fine to bitch about things but this many pages for THIS "problem"???

We have officially reached the bottom of the barrel. "They are releasing a Mario level maker, who cares if it has problems! It's a thing that exists!"

 

[Rats Off To Ya]

This is superbly stupid in the most Nintendo way possible.

Game looks great, though.

 

[Dynamite Shikoku]

What an odd thing to build into the game

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

We have officially reached the bottom of the barrel. "They are releasing a Mario level maker, who cares if it has problems! It's a thing that exists!"

How many pages does this gamebreaking issue elicit and how many pages does the overview trailer of the game get???

Not saying this shouldn't be a thread, just saying the dwelling on it is pure insanity.

 

[chaobreaker]

The tool sets are completely random. Each day gives you a different number of items. Why isn't the fire flower in day one? Why are the chain chomps on the last day in a set with only two other items? Please explain this to me because I am dying to know.



We have officially reached the bottom of the barrel. "They are releasing a Mario level maker, who cares if it has problems! It's a thing that exists!"

Perhaps they want to see what the playerbase can create with the specific items in each toolset.

 

[Terrell]

Or they could have just included a creation tutorial that drip feeds the people that need it and still provide a menu option to turn it off for people that don't. Everybody is happy, everybody wins. A forced 9 day tutorial period is in no way justified or logical.

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.

bruh,

stahp

sincerely,
me

Seriously, that is the stupidest defense. Nintendo knows better... because! Come on man, can you seriously explain how this ISN'T completely arbitrary, and how my examples don't make significantly more sense?

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.

You don't like it, and that's fine. But it's neither stupid nor arbitrary as people have suggested, when any solution you propose will be deemed the same way by some other set of people. You suggested tutorials earlier, but there's a large enough subset of GAF that would rather see the industry burn than have to opt out of another completely optional tutorial. So.... what do you suggest that will make everyone happy, instead of just yourself? Because simply shuffling the issue of to another group of people to be upset by it isn't necessarily the answer.

 

[dickroach]

I don't use my console online. im just gonna mess with the system clock, and unlock all these cool things that no one else has, and make really cool levels... that I won't post online

 

[wanderingprostheyltite]

How many pages does this gamebreaking issue elicit and how many pages does the overview trailer of the game get???

Not saying this shouldn't be a thread, just saying the dwelling on it is pure insanity.

People really like their complaint threads on gaf. It's a hobby.

 

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

It's fine to bitch about things but this many pages for THIS "problem"???

Firstly, this isn't directly aimed at you, but I am using your post (specifically this line) as an example, because I see it much too much.

I hate this. Any time a complaint is made about something, it's "bitching". It can't just be a discussion about how a feature is arbitrary and annoying, it's unwarranted, excessive "bitching". People voicing the idea that nothing is wrong and it's all "pointless whining" come in, turn it into a stupid argument about how surely Nintendo is infallible and knows infinitely more than our puny Nintendo hating minds (not saying this is you - again, I'm just building off your comment to discuss the thread as a whole), and the post count shoots up. Then people may finally concede 10, 20 pages in that it "could be" a "minor issue" to "some people", but then they start talking about how it's not something worth bitching about "this much".

It's literally impossible to voice any sort of dissent without someone commenting about how it's not worth discussing. Why? People find this arbitrary and pointless, which it is, and they want to and should be allowed to discuss that point, regardless of how minor of an issue you or anyone else perceive it to be. And of course, those who complain always get made out to be far more extreme in their opinion than they are, because again, voicing displeasure about a certain aspect is always just irrational "bitching".

... despite the fact, that many (most?) of us here really don't even care. Seriously, this doesn't even really bother me. I think it's dumb and completely arbitrary and illogical, but at the end of the day this is something that has virtually no effect on me. I don't plan on buying Mario Maker any time soon, and if and when I do buy it my usage will be very casual, and probably lean more towards consuming content rather than creating it anyway. I don't spend a lot of time per day playing games and I'm personally not a very creative type. But why should I not be able to agree with those voicing dissent and give my two cents on the decision without it being angry, anti-Nintendo "bitching"?

 

[shauntu]

What an odd thing to complain this much about.

 

[Forkball]

What's really getting me upset is that, because the exact same three people keep posting in this thread responding to every post to make sure this thread stays up, we once again have a negative Nintendo thread overwhelmingly on the front page of Neogaf while the neutral one stays hidden. I don't even think this is the best idea for Nintendo. It's a non-issue, granted, but it could have been implemented better. But it's always the same. A solid few making sure that the negative stuff stays front and center, not even caring if it's true or not (though it is true, though not really that important, in this case and the fact I have to write this instead of it being obvious infuriates me).

This is a non-issue. Plain and simple. If it really was a non-issue to you people eagerly typing how you're right, then you'd stop posting after every reply in an increasingly insulting manner and leave this thread alone to die.

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.

How many pages does this gamebreaking issue elicit and how many pages does the overview trailer of the game get???

Not saying this shouldn't be a thread, just saying the dwelling on it is pure insanity.

Let's just not criticize anything ever then.

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

Firstly, this isn't directly aimed at you, but I am using your post as an example.

I hate this. Any time a complaint is made about something, it's "bitching". It can't just be a discussion about how a feature is arbitrary and annoying, it's unwarranted, excessive "bitching". People voicing the idea that nothing is wrong and it's all "pointless whining" come in, turn it into a stupid argument about how surely Nintendo is infallible and knows infinitely more than our puny Nintendo hating minds (not saying this is you specifically - again, I'm just building off your comment to discuss the thread as a whole), and the post count shoots up. Then people may finally concede 10, 20 posts it's that it "could be" a "minor issue" to "some people", but then they start talking about how it's not something worth bitching about "this much".

It's literally impossible to voice any sort of dissent without someone commenting about how it's not worth discussing. Why? People find this arbitrary and pointless, which it is, and they want to and should be allowed to discuss that point, regardless of how minor of an issue you or anyone else perceive it to be. And of course, those who complain always get made out to be far more extreme in their opinion than they are, because again, voicing displeasure about a certain aspect is always just irrational "bitching".

... despite the fact, that most of us here really don't even care. Seriously, this doesn't even really bother me. I think it's dumb and completely arbitrary and illogical, but at the end of the day this is something that has virtually no effect on me. I don't plan on buying Mario Maker any time soon, and if an when I do buy it my usage will be very casual, and probably lean more towards consuming content rather than creating it anyway. I don't spend a lot of time per day playing games and I'm personally not very creative type. But why should I not be able to agree with those voicing dissent and give my two cents on the decision without it being angry, anti-Nintendo "bitching"?

Well, I don't mean anyone questioning it but it's in the WAY some go about it that sounds like whining.

For the others, I don't think it warrants an in-depth discussion but that's me about this certain bit of news.

If people want to dissect it or try to rationalize or irrationalize it, that's fine.

But some really seem insulted by it and I will never get that.

 

[Interceptor]

They probably thought:
"Hmm, with everything ready from the start we will see probably just that - many levels with just everyhing crammed in just to try it out."

Unlockable tiers limit you and limitation breads creativity. Sounds like a Miyamoto approach.

 

[Gwarf]

How stupid.

This isn't a competitive game. This is a creative tool.

"Pretty cool painting, but we're just gonna hold back blue. You don't need blue, do you? Just make the sky pink. Make it a sunset."

You can say it doesn't bother you, but being in favor of this is asinine.

Um... this is exactly how I was taught to paint...

2 weeks using a pencil before a single brush hit the canvas!


(Note, my personal belief is maybe an advanced option in a menu for the "core" types that only want to play the game their way instead of how the game designer wants them too)

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

They probably thought:
"Hmm, with everything ready from the start we will see probably just that - many levels with just everyhing crammed in just to try it out."

Unlockable tiers limit you and limitation breads creativity. Sounds like a Miyamoto approach.

Basically.

Nintendo sometimes pay so much attention to details it rubs people the wrong way but they'll always stick to their guns of vision for the most part.

It's a beautiful and ugly thing.

 

[Interceptor]

Basically.

Nintendo sometimes pay so much attention to details it rubs people the wrong way but they'll always stick to their guns of vision for the most part.

It's a beautiful and ugly thing.

Yep. All this talk for, imo, a minor problem when there is a real problem to talk about: Those awful, awful editor sound effects.

 

[Bill Rizer]

May be odd, but I like this idea better than gameplay-based unlocking. It's like Tekken 2 back then, it unlocked a new character every week (I think), I always found it an interesting system.

 

[Branduil]

What they should do is leave this as the default, but put in a settings toggle where you can unlock everything at the start.

 

[Jimrpg]

What a horrible idea.

The whole game is ham strung by stupid decisions.

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.

Then there's this stupid unlock thing which really should be tied to hours played if they absolutely needed to have it. And they shouldn't, all the tools should be available from the get go. And there should be adequate optional tutorials/instructional videos included to show how to make cool stuff.

 

[Forkball]

They probably thought:
"Hmm, with everything ready from the start we will see probably just that - many levels with just everyhing crammed in just to try it out."

Unlockable tiers limit you and limitation breads creativity. Sounds like a Miyamoto approach.

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

 

[BGBW]

What they should do is leave this as the default, but put in a settings toggle where you can unlock everything at the start.

You unlock the toggle on day 10.

 

[Tezzeractor]

Nine days? I don't like that one bit, but I guess that gives me time to play the levels included on the disc.