Poll Talk

Status
Not open for further replies.
Option 4. It would been nice to have Galaxy 2, but in the end its Nintendo who makes the decisions, not the fans. I've never played it before, so I would've liked to have it alongside the rest of the collection, but not a lot of people like Galaxy 2, so I respect the decision that was made.
 
Hooded Pitohui said:
  • I disagree with the decision because I think that Super Mario Galaxy 2 is important to the series' legacy and deserved to be included.
Click to expand...
I hope someone, somewhere, with a doctorate in Nintendo of America or Europe.. or Japan with Google Translate.. is seeing this overwhelming response of Nintendo f'd up.
 
Alright, alright, that's enough talk about 3D All-Stars. Let's look ahead to the future, and talk about mobile apps.


What do you want to see in a new Mario smartphone app?
  • I would like to see a new game that improves on an existing Mario app's gameplay
  • I would like to see a game based on a main sub-series that is yet to receive an app
  • I would like to see a spin-off series' game such as Yoshi or WarioWare
  • I would like to see more new Mario apps based on any sub-series
  • I would like to see an app that makes use of the Mario world, but offers new gameplay which doesn't resemble an existing subseries
  • I'd like to see a social app, like Miitomo
  • I'd like to see a different non-game app
  • The apps we have now are fine; future games should be only on Nintendo consoles
  • I think Mario should have remained strictly on Nintendo consoles in the first place

For myself, while I really think that I want to go with option eight because I prefer console games to mobile games, I think, being realistic, I have to go with option four. While it might be watered down, I'd take a Warioware smartphone app, but I also think you could... very easily take the Minion Quest/Bowser Junior's Journey model and make those into a smartphone app...
 
I'm... not exactly sure about this one, but I think option 8 is the one that fit the most with how I feel. Like, I don't mind if there are Mario smartphone apps, but I don't care at all for them? I prefer console games.

Although, I have to agree that a WarioWare game would fit well as a smartphone app.
 
Last edited:
Option 9,

While I actually quite liked Super Mario Run, as a whole Nintendo has shown to overall be incapable of making mobile games without adding something immoral, which, in the case of most post-SMR mobile games, are lootboxes. i would rather resources be put into making console games than ones with predatory lootboxes.
 
honestly, super mario run was the only genuinely good mario app imo. like, mario kart tour can be fun, but the gacha ruins it, and while i havent played dr mario world, it has lootboxes so i can tell that its just more of mkt. while they're not inherently bad games, they're kinda fundamentally flawed, and i hope nintendo steps away from this rabbit hole. i havent played mario run in a hot minute, but I dont remember it having gacha of any kind, not even microtransactions if im not mistaken. on top of that, it did something really cool with 2d mario that I hope future mario games in general do more often. the new mechanics like the vault and stuff like that makes it quite a good autorunner. I know mkt also did something unique by making mario kart more score based, and that's cool, but I don't think it should be used for future mario kart games. it feels like a mobile exclusive thing. I dont see whats wrong with making a full fledged mario game on mobile, one that DOESNT REQUIRE AN INTERNET CONNECTION!!!!! basically, i like that nintendo is trying to expand their market by putting their games on non-nintendo consoles, but i wish we had more ACTUAL mario games on mobile, games that could work just fine on a console.
 
I want a game without predatory monetary systems. That is all.

It's a low bar to cross but that's the bar they put themselves into.
 
Option 9. I wasn't initially opposed to the idea, and I still think Super Mario Run is a fun game, but it didn't take long for Nintendo to dive into the world of microtransaction-filled gambling apps after they specifically said they wouldn't. I have no desire to see any more apps from them.
 
This option: "I would like to see an app that makes use of the Mario world, but offers new gameplay which doesn't resemble an existing subseries" (This is option 5, by the way)

I am open to Nintendo exploring new ways for existing series to play, such as Dr. Mario World which I think offers a solid alternative to the traditional gameplay even if not everybody is open to the idea (to my surprise, there are people who just wants a traditional Dr. Mario on smartphones). Super Mario Run is another game that is a twist to an existing series even if I haven't really delve into the game myself. Therefore, I think a game that does not resemble the traditional offerings are a welcome change.

Thank you for reading.
 
Option 8. While it's nice to see Nintendo experiment with putting some of their franchises on mobile, allowing a wider audience to try out their games, their methods of monetization bring down the games considerably. Even without that though, it generally feels like the games are more shallow counterparts of the console games, with not as much content.
 
Here's one that's not specifically about 3D-All Stars, but is related to it! Limited release periods are something we've seen with Nintendo and with the videogame industry at large, but what do folks really think of it?

What is your opinion on videogames being available for a limited time, such as Super Mario 3D All-Stars and Super Mario Bros. 35?
  • I am alright with this approach, and it doesn't change my opinion on said games.
  • As long as the games in question are playable after they are no longer purchasable, then I am fine with that.
  • Limited release games are okay, but only if they are related to a limited event, such as an anniversary
  • I find this concept suitable, but only if the games are available in another form afterwards.
  • I don't mind them, as long the limited release period only affects digital games.
  • I don't mind them, as long the limited release period only affects physical games.
  • As long as there isn't an excessive amount of limited-edition games, I am alright with this concept.
  • I don't like the concept of limited releases at all.
  • I don't have an opinion.

For me, I'm firmly option eight. I don't see any value to consumers in limited-time releases. Not only do they create an incentive for people to spend more and spend earlier, but they go against my support for media preservation. We have a hard enough time as it is making sure older videogames stay available in a playable form, as technology marches on and old games are no longer produced and people get rid of old consoles. Making games available for only a limited period of time sure isn't helping with that!
 
Limited editions benefit ONLY publishers, no one else. This practice is bad and it's insidious as well as manipulative.
 
Hooded Pitohui said:
I don't like the concept of limited releases at all.
Click to expand...
I don't even care for the 2 games.mentioned but I still think they should be permanently available for those who do. They don't even have the excuse of limited quantities anymore now that everything's digital!
 
Limited collector's editions are fine, because that's due to while supplies last, but the games themselves being limited doesn't make sense. Especially when they're digital. Especially when they're ports!
 
Option 8. Mario 3D All-Stars, Super Mario Bros 35, Super Mario Bros.: Game and Watch edition, and the original Fire Emblem should've been available for more time than this. Mario All Stars: Limited Edition is alright, but that's because it's a port of an SNES game for the Wii without any changes besides the price tag. This is also because limited edition games, as well as collector's editions of things like Final Fantasy and other JRPGS, tend to go for high prices on sites like Ebay or Amazon when they go out of print. So yeah, not a huge fan of this in general.
 
Option 8. This is simply ridiculous.
 
It's time for a new poll! For the next two weeks, we want your opinions on the direction Super Nintendo World, which seems right now to be mostly Super Mario World, ought to take. Is there a more obscure Nintendo franchise you hope to see added? Do you want more representation for the subseries? Or is Mario good enough?

The upcoming Super Nintendo World theme park is largely Mario-themed. Which other Nintendo franchises might you like to see in future expansions?
  • The Legend of Zelda
  • Pokémon
  • Kirby
  • Metroid
  • Splatoon
  • I would like to see a Nintendo franchise other than those listed incorporated into the park
  • I would like to see the park further emphasise the Mario subseries by expanding its content themed around subseries such as Yoshi, Donkey Kong, and Wario
  • I would prefer to see the parks stick to a Mario theme
  • I have no opinion on this subject


As for myself, while I think the best option is to leverage as many of Nintendo's IPs as possible, and while I do think Kirby and Pikmin would be fine additions to the park... I have to go with Pokémon.
 
Option 1. Out of all the franchises listed, I think Zelda would be the most interesting and fun to be able to experience in real life. Metroid and Pokemon would probably come in #2 and #3. And of course, a Splatoon paintball attraction is a no-brainer.
 
I would absolutely love to see a Kirby section of the park, since it is my favorite video games series of all time. I wouldn't mind the Mario subseries getting added as well. Pokemon technically already had its own park called the Pokepark, but that attraction was only around in 2005-2006. That series is so big, it could probably get another park in the near future, that shouldn't be connected to Super Nintendo World in any way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back