By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Opinion: Is Nintendo being greedy with Super Mario Maker?

Tagged games:

biglittlesps said:
PenguinZ said:
fluky-nintendy said:

Do you also think Nintendo is being greedy/lazy with Super Mario Maker too? That they should have put more effort in making it a more well looking game and with Story mode as well?

 

It comes with 100 levels out of the box and you can essentially create 4 different styles of 2D Mario games (Both in looks and physics)... I wouldn't call that greedy. 


Anyone can make 100 levels using that level creator if 30 days are given easily.

Then why is LBP so expensive? It should be free.



Proud to be the first cool Nintendo fan ever

Number ONE Zelda fan in the Universe

DKCTF didn't move consoles

Prediction: No Zelda HD for Wii U, quietly moved to the succesor

Predictions for Nintendo NX and Mobile


Around the Network
alternine said:
They should charge 30 maybe 40 at the most but definitely not 60.

Did you say the same about LBP?



Samus Aran said:
alternine said:
They should charge 30 maybe 40 at the most but definitely not 60.

Did you say the same about LBP?


LBP doesn't count, its not made by Nintendo



i'm fine with $60 for a mario maker game. no story mode - because we all know 99.99% Mario 2D games is about saving the princess from Bowser. So we don't need a story mode in this game.

other games are $60 but some gamers feel it should be less than $60 too. and nowadays big budget AAA games are more than $60 if you add those season pass and DLCs.



DonFerrari said:
noname2200 said:
DonFerrari said:
noname2200 said:

No to both statements. I simply pointed out that a statement is incorrect. Whether you think they should modify the four styles to play completely identically (and thus eliminate uniqueness, changing them from homages to their source materials to mere "skins" in truth) is an entirely different story.


some are justifying it having the gameplay of 4 marios as it being a reason to be worth 60

I'll confess to being a bit confused. Are you advocating that Nintendo consolidate the four gameplays into one, or...?


nope... I like the idea of different gameplays (could be independent of the skin, but that isn't a problem)... just that saying that it having 4 different sets of blocks and gameplays justify 60 for me is bullocks... altough someone saying they would pay 60 or more because it's the game they always wanted, ok.

And you also get basically UNLIMITED stages. 



Pocky Lover Boy! 

Around the Network

You do know that this is a business right? You can't quantify the similarities between apples and oranges because they're simply not the same. Nintendo likes to put emphasis on their product, that's the reason why you have to wait years before they come out with discount prices for their games. For Nintendo to act as if SMM is a lesser game and slap a fee that's not according to their normal charge rate, that would lessen the value they put for their IPs.

And really, why isn't this game worth $60 dollars? It's a 2D mario game that spans 4 different incarnations of Mario platforming. To me that sounds like there's never going to be a need for a solo mario 2D platformer again. Because honestly, there is no need for another Mario 2d platformer after this game.



Nah. I'll buy it. I've been waiting for a Mario level editor for years. Nintendo should have made it earlier instead of the 8 billion New Super Mario Bros games they releases in like a year. But oh well, at least it's here now.



Sigs are dumb. And so are you!

I'd only buy a 2D Zelda maker tbh, but that's "too hard" for Nintendo.

And it needs an overworld with pre-determined spots to add dungeons/temples. And good graphics.



Jranation said:
DonFerrari said:


nope... I like the idea of different gameplays (could be independent of the skin, but that isn't a problem)... just that saying that it having 4 different sets of blocks and gameplays justify 60 for me is bullocks... altough someone saying they would pay 60 or more because it's the game they always wanted, ok.

And you also get basically UNLIMITED stages. 


Have I negated that?

If someone justifies 60, because he likes to create or likes mario or ever dreamed about creating mario stages there is no arguing... saying it's worth because of 4 different gameplays not so much (even more when they are looked to match the skins)... anyway, the price of a product depends on your willingness to pay. So if 60 is fine by you, no one have any right to complain, they can at most say for them how much the game is worth (in a fashion that when it hit that price they will buy).



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Samus Aran said:
I'd only buy a 2D Zelda maker tbh, but that's "too hard" for Nintendo.

And it needs an overworld with pre-determined spots to add dungeons/temples. And good graphics.


like RPG Maker but totally updated... I don't think Nintendo would have an unsurmountable task making it.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."