MarioWiki Poll Discussion

Either Option 6 or 8. Nintendo should keep on producing high-quality Mario content, but should also try to keep each new title exciting and fresh.
 
New poll! This is the first time we've done a multi-choice poll, so you can pick multiple options if you play other Nintendo IPs!

Nintendo has many IPs other than Mario. Which Nintendo IPs do you play?
The Legend of Zelda
Pokémon
Kirby
Fire Emblem
Metroid
Star Fox
Pikmin
Splatoon
Xenoblade
Other
I don't play other Nintendo IPs

I did play Zelda, Pokemon, Kirby, Xenoblade, and Animal Crossing (not listed...forgot it should be listed considering how huge it is) (i added it nvm)
 
If we're not counting Smash then the only IP I've played besides Mario is Pokemon (not into it anymore though). Other than that I've played miscellaneous Mii-based games (are Miis an IP?). Everything else I've played on Nintendo consoles is third-party.
 
Bluminescence said:
New poll! This is the first time we've done a multi-choice poll, so you can pick multiple options if you play other Nintendo IPs!

Nintendo has many IPs other than Mario. Which Nintendo IPs do you play?
The Legend of Zelda
Pokémon
Kirby
Fire Emblem
Metroid
Star Fox
Pikmin
Splatoon
Xenoblade
Other
I don't play other Nintendo IPs

I did play Zelda, Pokemon, Kirby, Xenoblade, and Animal Crossing (not listed...forgot it should be listed considering how huge it is) (i added it nvm)
Click to expand...
I've played Pokemon, Kirby, Pikmin, and Starfy. (he's not listed here sadly)
 
I was first Fire Emblem vote, and also voted for Kirby, Pokémon*, Zelda, and other. *because I played Sword and Shield recently, although I plan to not buy any other Pokémon games released 2019 or later since no National Dex. Maybe I should be stricter than that tho
 
Bluminescence said:
Nintendo has many IPs other than Mario. Which Nintendo IPs do you play?
The Legend of Zelda
Pokémon
Kirby
Fire Emblem
Metroid
Star Fox
Pikmin
Splatoon
Xenoblade
Other
I don't play other Nintendo IPs
Click to expand...
Everything in bold is something that I've played at least one game in the franchise of (which really I didn't need to do that because it's basically all of this). Other than that I've played Animal Crossing, Earthbound, F-Zero, and probably other things that aren't listed on here
 
I've played a fair bit of Animal Crossing (New Horizons and Pocket Camp specifically), dabbled into a bit of Zelda and Kirby, a Pikmin demo, and that's about it.
 
F2AFE23A-70FD-487F-B3D6-9B3058E719E4.jpeg

Numerical coincidence
 
Well, as Poll Committee Chairperson for this term, our Poll Committee election closed just a short time ago, and after a day of deliberation, I would like to congratulate the following individuals for making the cut.

Introducing... the 13th Poll Committee:


Now, you may notice that the committee is short on members, despite having received more applications than the members I have selected. This is for a variety of factors, and anyone who did not "make the cut" had legitimate reasons for the rejection of their application, which I will be happy to share in private should they wish.

I'm confident that we've got a great group of people with us, and I can't wait to get started.
 
Soon I'm planning a surprise for this page, but it all hinges on when the final 12th Committee poll is archived. (EDIT: Plus I'm in Iceland now)
 
Herlock Sholmes said:
Now, you may notice that the committee is short on members, despite having received more applications than the members I have selected. This is for a variety of factors, and anyone who did not "make the cut" had legitimate reasons for the rejection of their application, which I will be happy to share in private should they wish.
Click to expand...
Here is a question that has been pressing my mind: at any point would you allow a previously rejected member to join the 13th Committee by reapplying, assuming users on the Committee agree that sufficient growth and amends have been made from and for the rejection reasons? I know this greatly sounds related to my rejection but it's actually not at all. It just interested me that you said you would only accept new members once started if members on the Committee felt comfortable with it, and one could argue that every member in the Committee having a say in acceptance would be better than it being slightly closer to unilateral like with the beginning sign-ups, as they might know other facts about the applying user.
 
Alright, while I'm waiting for the answer to my previous question, here's a bit of a fun thing I'm going to do, although it's not quite the major project I teased since that's coming up.

I'm going to say what my favorite 12th Committee poll was that I created, and my favorite 12th Committee poll was that another user created.

E3122565-FF7B-46A3-8283-C83A462FD31F.jpeg


I am proud of having cooperated to create eight polls on the 12th Committee, but my favorite of these is the third poll that I made, the autoscrolling levels poll. Now, this poll is an interesting case as while I created a lot of nominations in November last year, this was the only one that gained any sort of traction, and even it, at first, was something I didn't find the absolute most interesting, and not quite as much as the Paper Mario battle poll. However, my interest started to go up for this poll very greatly was when it started airing and the results started to show. You see, autoscrolling levels have consistently placed extremely high in the Fail Awards, including scoring 1st place for Worst Level Concept in the 2021 Awards. So, with that in mind, you'd expect a pretty vast majority of people to be in support of lowering how many autoscrolling levels are in Mario games, right?

However, results ending up being different, with only 36% of people even being in favor of one form of decreasing autoscrolling levels in Mario games one way or another, and only 11% of people outright wanting them to be eliminated. Meanwhile 58% of people didn't want autoscrolling levels in Mario games to be decreased, and 12% wanted the amount of those to be increased. Even with that not still being super favorable towards those levels, the fact that it's not much, much lower than 12% of people who want autoscrollers to be increased I find to be interesting, and it can be extremely surprising especially before one thinks about it more deeply. After all, people still like diversity in levels, and as Hooded Pitohui pointed out well in his March analysis, there are still some autoscrolling levels with good redeeming qualities. So like an average fast-food restaurant, they're panned a lot but many people still consider them not to be a complete waste.
So this poll's interesting premise of covering an unpopular game mechanic instead of a popular one, and many twists and turns in its results make it my favorite poll I was able to get implemented on this last Committee. Though I was proud of the thought-provoking four general polls about Nintendo decisions I made, making, and helping other users edit wording in, the Mario Strikers: Battle League poll, and both the Paper Mario and Double Dash polls had great topics related to gameplay too, if with a bit more obvious results particularly in terms of their first place.

B9D706F9-C5D4-4718-9319-8110AAB339DC.jpeg


My favorite poll not created by myself was a poll airing not too far before the autoscrolling poll, only a bit over a month beforehand, this being the returning enemies poll by BBQ Turtle. The premise already resonated with me, as I always like to see a diverse range of enemies in Mario games. The overwhelming popularity of seeing older enemies return was not just refreshing but exciting as well.

Though while I already liked the premise a lot, what really made it a ton of fun to cover in the Poll Committee Discussion is that, like the previous poll mentioned, it really felt like a rollercoaster. See, the second place option of returning enemies occasionally appearing being at almost 29% was interesting, followed by a pro-original properties third place of… 2%. Followed by a no opinion fourth place of 2%. Followed by a pro-updated properties fifth place of ANOTHER TWO PERCENT. The sudden drop off in popularity from second to third place, followed by stunningly similar results from third to fifth place, made this poll fascinating to me and a lot of fun to cover.
 
Our first poll of the term is officially live, if you want to check it out. It's focused around Nintendo's recent choices with regards to game updates and content at launch, which is a rather hot-button issue these days to be sure.

Nico di Angelo said:
Here is a question that has been pressing my mind: at any point would you allow a previously rejected member to join the 13th Committee by reapplying, assuming users on the Committee agree that sufficient growth and amends have been made from and for the rejection reasons? I know this greatly sounds related to my rejection but it's actually not at all. It just interested me that you said you would only accept new members once started if members on the Committee felt comfortable with it, and one could argue that every member in the Committee having a say in acceptance would be better than it being slightly closer to unilateral like with the beginning sign-ups, as they might know other facts about the applying user.
Click to expand...
I don't really have an issue with someone wanting to re-apply, though it would definitely be up to the committee themselves. People can change over time.
 
I do enjoy free stuff but the way Nintendo does it is unappealing. It always ends up resulting in a game that feels lacking in content and then by the time the update is released I don't care because I stopped playing since I already did everything the game had to offer in such a short time because there wasn't much to begin with
 
Meta Knight said:
I do enjoy free stuff but the way Nintendo does it is unappealing. It always ends up resulting in a game that feels lacking in content and then by the time the update is released I don't care because I stopped playing since I already did everything the game had to offer in such a short time because there wasn't much to begin with
Click to expand...
This is kind of how I feel too. I'm not against free updates, and I actually liked the method back during the Splatoon 1 days when it was first introduced, but it really feels like the updates are coming at the expense of content in the base game, and I don't understand why they're still doing this when its ultimately leading to the online modes in the games just dying instead and sales dropping off a cliff after like, launch month because the games have no content.

Meanwhile, the games that launch entirely feature complete (Smash Ultimate, Mario Kart 8, a ton of old games of all sorts, etc.) remain alive and booming, even without the paid DLC after the fact factored in.
 
Better a game be possibly eventually good when released, then be guaranteed to start out bad when released.
 
Herlock Sholmes said:
Our first poll of the term is officially live, if you want to check it out. It's focused around Nintendo's recent choices with regards to game updates and content at launch, which is a rather hot-button issue these days to be sure.


I don't really have an issue with someone wanting to re-apply, though it would definitely be up to the committee themselves. People can change over time.
Click to expand...
Hmm…I think I'm going to go with option 4. I'm not a fan of it, but if the updates add characters I like or new and interesting modes, I'm going to be happy with what we get in the future.
 
This is kind of a tricky one for me, because I very rarely buy games at launch, especially these days, so having not a lot of content at launch doesn't really affect me, but I'm still going to have to go with option 5 for this one, because I don't think Nintendo handles it well at all. While I do like seeing what additional content gets added to the game, generally all that happens is you get a couple extra characters and stages, and then Nintendo just decides they're done supporting it way too early (Super Rush got what, three updates before they decided they were done with it?). But they never really add extra modes or anything like that, which is one of the complaints I often see. You get more toys to play with but nothing else to actually do with them, and even then you don't get much.

Like, if we're looking at Super Rush's base roster of 17 characters, that's exactly the same as the base roster of World Tour on the 3DS (DLC bumped it up to 21), and one less than both Toadstool Tour on the Gamecube (counting the two transferable characters) and Advance Tour on the GBA. Updates eventually brought it up to a total of 22 characters, but it's just kind of pathetic that even with adding more content in later, what should be the latest and greatest in the series barely struggles to do more than its predecessors going back nearly two decades (though that's purely in character numbers, whether it actually manages to do more as a whole is debatable).

I think that it could potentially be done right, but the way Nintendo currently handles this doesn't actually fix any issues and leaves the game feeling just as lacking as it was when it launched.
 
The free update model is complete shit, for various reasons, but the biggest reason is that players are more often than not negatively affected by it. From a business model, sure, releasing a game and fixing it later has its perks, you get to reap the benefits from an upright sales while having lower dev costs, but more often than not, the game is left unfinished even after the publisher decides to pull the plug on the project. Much of future content is actually a gamble and a pact of trust you have to make with the publishers, which in it of itself is an uncertainty, and it's something they can literally just revoke at any time due to practically any circumstance, and roadmaps are literally nothing and they don't have to mean something as publishers aren't obligated to fulfill the promise of content.

First impressions are also important as well. Plenty of games had a significant negative first impression, and Nintendo isn't even the worst of the bunch. Fallout 76 was a complete disaster at launch where the updates that give it content to be just a weaker variant of Fallout 4 are additionally paid. People who experienced the bare minimum a game has to offer would have their perceptions colored negatively by it and thus just be put off the game and start playing other games; they certainly aren't going to be playing the game when it becomes "good". Other really terrible PR disasters I can think of are The Sims 4 (that game launched without family trees, toddlers, and fucking swimming pools), Anthem, Marvel's Avengers, No Man's Sky, and Babylon's Fall and out of those I can think of on top of my head, only The Sims has been successful but it gets by by being a ludicrously expensive game.
 
Free updates =/= unfinished game

Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing is a glitchy mess with a hyperspeed reversing truck, absolutely no AI, "You're Winner", and one of the tracks crashes the game.

Mario Strikers: Battle League is a perfectly functional Mario Sports title that features most of the main Mario cast, fun gameplay, and is going to be supported with two more waves of free DLC.

Tell me which of the two is an unfinished product.
 
Last edited:
The Doctor said:
Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing is a glitchy mess with a hyperspeed reversing truck, absolutely no AI, "You're Winner", and one of the tracks crashes the game.
Click to expand...

Big Rigs was literally outsourced to some no-name Ukrainian developer and published by a company orders of magnitude smaller than Nintendo, known for publishing extremely cheap projects.

I don't know why you're using logical extremes to argue a point that there is no problem with a game. It's like saying, you can't criticize a game's content because much worse games exist. You can't criticize Mario Kart Tour's predatory monetization scheme when Dungeon Keeper Mobile exists. Did you know there are games worse than Big Rigs? You can't say it's bad because there are some games out there that require you to change some parameter in an .ini file to even function properly.
 
The thing is that it's pretty disingenuous to compare to absolute shovelware - the thing that annoys me about the update model is that yeah, the game is "finished," but we've had Wii Mario sports games with full kitted out story modes, minigames, etc etc and it feels like the bar has lowered dramatically. If you compare the current offerings to what Nintendo has actually done in the past, it's an extremely lacking package.

I understand the POV that updates keep the game relevant, but I just feel like you can have your cake and eat it by releasing a product that is complete at launch and then gradually injecting life and interest back into it. I know Nintendo has done this before with their other games, and while I have an admittedly limited knowledge of Super Mario Maker 2, that basically seems like what they did there? The original launch was feature-plentiful and the updates just added more neat stuff to come back to.
 
Door Trace said:
Big Rigs was literally outsourced to some no-name Ukrainian developer and published by a company orders of magnitude smaller than Nintendo, known for publishing extremely cheap projects.
Click to expand...
I am aware of Big Rigs' small development team and cheapness. I was using it as an example to show what an unfinished game is like.

Door Trace said:
I don't know why you're using logical extremes to argue a point that there is no problem with a game. It's like saying, you can't criticize a game's content because much worse games exist. You can't criticize Mario Kart Tour's predatory monetization scheme when Dungeon Keeper Mobile exists. Did you know there are games worse than Big Rigs? You can't say it's bad because there are some games out there that require you to change some parameter in an .ini file to even function properly.
Click to expand...
I never said that Battle League didn't have problems, I used the term "perfectly functional" which means "it works as it should".

You can play Mario Kart Tour without spending a single dime. Sure, you won't have as much as the players who spend money on it, but you can still play the game. It's free to play, spending money is optional.

And yes, there are games worse than BR. If I have to dig into the files to find and fix a parameter to just play the game, then it's bad.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back