Outrage Over Mario Run's Asking Price Exposes Ignorance

Mario Run is out, and everyone’s talking about one thing….the fact you need to pay for it? In a shocking turn of events, a video released on the mobile platform costs money. There is, of course, a free trial that lets people have a taste of the game, but people want more. That’s pretty much … Continue reading Outrage Over Mario Run’s Asking Price Exposes Ignorance

[PixelGateUk]

The price point is fair given how fun the game is, least I think it is ^^

[Duoma]

@kreisen ummmm shouldnt the correct term be "whales"

[MRMagoo123]

it's def not mules that's all I know, mules are people that carry things like drugs

[XanderZane]

I actually thought the game would be FREE as well. Then you would have to pay $5 to unlock more levels and content as you progress. I figured there would be about 100+ levels and after 25 levels you would need to pay $3-$5 for another 25. So to unlock all the levels it would be $10-$15 in the end, but you would pay as you go.

I definitely won't pay $15 for this game upfront. I'll try the demo and after completing that, I'll delete the game.

[Lukejrl]

Really?

[XanderZane]

@Lukejrl
Yeah really. I've never paid more then $10 for a IoS game up front. I need to play a game for awhile and be impressed before I shell out more money. The demo will have to blow me away for me to play $15 for the full game.

[princejb134]

I would pay for the game but not for $9.99. I've bought many games before but those games are .99 to 2.99 which I find fair for a mobile game. After all Mario run is just another running game you play with one finger

[boomtube1987]

nope

[Huguinho]

A few days ago, nobody gave a sh+t for mobile games, they were criticized because they are not for "hardcore" gamers, hell, even some ppl here in n4g said they shouldnt be called "gamers"... my god... Now a Mario game appears and suddenly mobile gaming must be near perfection? And the 'hardcores' complaining because you have to pay for it? Really? how f+++ing toxic you ppl are, seriously. (Not meaning you pixel i wanted to clarify)

[WiiU-Dude]

I agree. I was a little surprised it wasn't $4.99, but $9.99 is fair. Besides, who is to say more content won't come later.

[Garethvk]

It does make you wonder if Nintendo gets it. When you are a distant third to your competition, you do not gouge your loyal fans.

[rjason12]

So you gouge them by nickel and diming with micro transactions?

Haha, damn autocorrect.

[Sm3000]

*nickel........and I agree, one time fee>micro transactions 24/7/365

[1Victor]

Did any of you noticed the lawyering wall before you accept to play the game soon they're going to send you "email promo"and they can track you 24/7 if you don't disable the always on gps witch I don't understand why it needs gps for also you can't suit them in a class action suit that was a NO WAY for me.who here can tell me that later on I won't have adds in the game plus a always online mobile game of this type is ridiculous ,something like Pokémon go I understand but this NO WAAAAAY
Edit
I forgot to add I would had pay up to $10 for this game but for the reasons I said before I deleted it it's a fun game but NO WAY

[Moonman]

How is Nintendo a distant third when they have had the overall most social popularity in 2016 from E3, to Pokémon Go, NES Mini, Pokemon Sun And Moon and now this. They may be "third" but "distant" is a stretch of the imagination. They are clearly not forgotten...lol.

[DashArrivals]

Who is this Nintendo you speak of?

[ObviousGoldfish]

You hi breh?

[totallysane]

Oh yeah, look at all those franchises. Pokemon, pokemon, pokemon, pokemon, and pokemon. Can't exactly take E3 with that.

[princejb134]

Distant third party? In my opinion Nintendo introduced gaming to society. Video games didn't get really popular until the Nintendo classic followed by Super Nintendo.

[EverydayJoe]

Wrong, the Atari 2600 was very popular long before the NES. Pacman introduced gaming to pop culture (Pacman fever) and I had the cartridge for it on the 2600 after spending many of my parents quarters.
https://youtu.be/XY_ESTnBlS...

[MRMagoo123]

Nintendo 😂 ? you kids ...

[princejb134]

@everydayjoe

Sorry but the Atari 2600 wasn't very popular
Yes it this release before the nes but gaming became popular with the nes

[EverydayJoe]

@prince,
Come on, do a little research before statements like that.

"In 2007, the Atari 2600 was inducted into the Toy Hall of Fame, with 40 million units sold in its lifetime, and the youngest toy to be inducted."

Also Pac-Man sold 7 million copies on the 2600. Impressive even by today's standards with modern video game popularity.

[TheGamingArt]

gouge, $10, are you joking?

[blawren4]

It's a fair price. Charging for a game isn't the problem. Out Mai be the solution to begin to undo the damage the free to play. Model has done too gaming.

[Momo118]

pretty much what you expect from nintendo

[SegaGamer]

What, to charge money for their game ? i expect that from any company.

[Hoffmann]

- to charge more than their competition does.

Nintendo still thinks they are better than the rest and ride on a high horse..or better said, they life in a bubble.

[SegaGamer]

@Hoffmann. It's a mobile game, an area of gaming dominated by microtransactions. It's good to see a game where you can pay for everything up front. It's not THAT much money really.

[rjason12]

Obviously they are "better than the rest" when they're breaking records.

[Cmv38]

I guess sony and ms suck too.

[XanderZane]

True. They are still charging $49.99 and $59.99 for their 1st party Wii U games, even though the console is pretty much dead.

[Aloy-Boyfriend]

$10 is too expensive for a mobile game. It is still pretty much nothing I get it, but still... Better games than this are cheaper. It makes you think... It is just Nintendo being smart knowing people will throw money at them because it is Mario. Expect every other Nintendo IP to cost the same too, and the stupid/conformist consumer will yet again eat it up and throw them money

[BEASELY]

Yes, I did buy this game for $10, because it is Mario.

Is there something wrong with that?

[Utalkin2me]

Well you're the exact person that Nintendo is targeting. A game that is overpriced that requires a connection to even function.

[rjason12]

I expect it to cost more, cause it definitely has quality control, you won't see me buying it though.

[Ark_]

It's quite usual. You sell your product for a steep price first. Then, when all "first adopters" bought it and sales decline, you reduce the price and have a new market of people, who are interested, but didn't want to invest that kind of money. Imo it would be stupid, if they wouldn't put a high price tag on it. It's "Mario" after all - a major brand. It's a licence to print money - same as "Star Wars" and so on ...

And after all - better a high, but fixed price, than (psychologically) tricking kids into microtransactions.

[TheGamingArt]

What are you talking about? Are you joking....

[CocoaBrother]

In my opinion, $10 is a bit much; however, I'm glad there are no microtransactions. A phone game I play a good amount is Digimon: Heroes and, at least with its PVP section, those who spend money on Digimoney have a better chance of getting better Digimon. The game offers a $100 microtransaction which is also insane.

What I'm saying is I'd rather pay a set price and own the whole game then a free to play full of microtransactions and play-time 'cooldowns'

[quent]

No star trek trexels was an outrage, this is a $10 mobile MT free game that you can "choose" to support or not to support, can we please stop with the needles hate baiting because its Nintendo thing, there are far worse examples of greed in the gaming industry to such a degree that it makes this article look laughable and completely pointless.

[WheatBread]

For me, its not the price, it's the fact that I can't play it offline.

[_LarZen_]

It's a good mobile game and the asking price is pocket change. The complainers has to be kids or even worse adults with zero economical sense.

[stokedAF]

I loved the book "introduction to pocket change economics".

[TheUndertaker85]

...There's now "economical sense" in buying a mobile game for $10. Cause you just have to have it to live right?

Even better there's "economical sense" in buying a $10 mobile game that requires you to be always online where, a tad bit of sense would tell you, access can be completely lost at any time.

I really think you fail to grasp ecenomics or sense.

[stokedAF]

10 dollars is too much. Your pretentious article doesn't change that. Don't assume everyone is a part of the "I demand free everything" crowd because they won't pay 10 dollars for a runner.

[Gh05t]

Exactly I own the Rayman run game and it is well done and a lot of fun... Not even close to $10! Im not paying premium because "Mario"

[Cmv38]

The game cost 10 bucks (pretty cheap), and no micro transactions. That sounds like an awesome thing.

[Kaneki-Ken]

But you must be connected to the Internet in order to play so $10 is not worth it, if I can't play it offline.

[Gh05t]

Cheap compared to what? Its a runner game, Rayman run is $2.99, so thats 3x another run game that has great sound and visuals and mechanics.

[Pooker100]

They let us download a free demo, and the rest of the game is only 10$. I think it's fair.

[NotoriousWhiz]

Somewhere between 3 and 5$ would have been the sweet spot.

[TheGamez100]

Hmmm a smarter move for nintendo would definately be to make the whole game free but with microtransactions like most other successful microtrans games since there are tons of ppl that pay for microtrans anyways. It is the phone market so most people constantly spend tons of money on virtual items/money instead of wanting to just buy the whole game nowadays lol (I know cuz my friends do that). I stick with console/pc games because of this practice by mobile game companies, have never spent even a single penny on a phone game.

[Fist4achin]

Maybe because of Mario's fame they feel they can get away with it. Mario games in general bring in the fans and sales.

What I don't understand is the lack of price drops for Nintendo games for the damn 3ds...

[stokedAF]

Yeah I get the feeling that the "it's cheap" point of view is coming from the Mario angle. Technically it is cheap for a Mario game but technically it's not a "Mario game" either. 10 dollars is expensive as far as runners go. There are full games that are 20 dollars on PSN that go for 5 dollars on IOS.

[2cents]

Wow

Talk about self entitled new age idiots wanting everything free. Shameless.

[Kaneki-Ken]

Yeah paying $10 for a game that you can't play offline. I bet they used Mario Maker to make this game without doing anything hard work. They only spend money putting this on the app store. $10 doesn't justify it price for a runner.

[2cents]

They hired staff, pay salaries, rent, insurance.
Spend Dev time, back end and front end software, test, package and release. AND this is a first for a proper Mario release on mobile. I think that they have every right to charge for it.

This does not however condone the price point. You see, we vote with our wallets and if people don't buy it, they will either have to lower the price or change the pricing structure with fee to play rubbish.

You are making the mistake of comparing this title with the completely rubbish basic free runner games out there. This is a Nintendo Mario Runner, just the first run shows more effort than most complete runners out there.

You get what you pay for, however I do think $10 is a little high for a mobile game.

Edit: Fixed typo

[mezati99]

this is not console gaming nintendo this is the mobile market, if it ain't free, you can shove it up your arse

at least that's how 99% of the people play on phones think

[il-JumperMT]

Overpriced micro-transactions pay to win is fine right?

[RedTfox]

Yes it exposed the ignorance... from Nintendo. Now will they learn that mobile market is not like they think.

[yomfweeee]

Everyone complaining about the always online, blame the pirates.

[Sm3000]

Could they have charged 5 instead of 10? Maybe. But I still prefer this than micro trans, I hate those with a fiery passion

[marioJP87]

People don't realize this is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay cheaper than buying lives multiple times on candy crush or buying extra chances or whatever on angry birds.

[NecoTehSergal]

Mobile consumers are cancer, what did anyone expect? They're so used to microtransactions, being scammed and cookie-cutter China-like ripoff-games littering everything and content creators stealing from eachother that they don't know quality if it slapped them across the face. They want everything to be 'free' - even if it means ads everywhere. Even if those ads technically give more money to the creator and waste a persons' time more.

[akaFullMetal]

Who knows if this will be good or not the market will decide. But then again the market decided that dlc was good too back in 2005/ 2006. Remember horse armor, anyone?

[WickedLester]

It exposes the sense of entitlement that many mobile gamers have developed.

[NeoGamer232]

I would rather pay $14 and not have to spend another cent then be trickle charged for a game over days, months, years, to pay $100's of dollars.

The price is up front, and it is clear.

[Apex13]

We want Nintendo games but we don't want to pay for your hard work. 😂😂😆 gamers! I give up

[lizard81288]

Better than what Square is charging for some of their games. IIRC, they are normally asking $15-$20

[gbsrnctaln]

Welp, it's the iphone crowd...they are used to overpaying on shit.

[Dirtnapstor]

People are ignorant. Demo access. If you want the full version, buy it. What is all the controversy about? (if any really)
Smh, people expect everything for nothing.

[jholden3249]

It's $10 and then NO MICROTRANSACTIONS, it's $10 and NO COOLDOWN TIMERS.

$10 and you're done. DONE.

How is that a bad thing? Especially given it's an actual Mario game, which I'm sorry, but IS actually the best runner on mobile (by leaps and bounds). Don't even try to say there's better cause there's not. Even Rayman, with all its cooldown and micro transactions, isn't as good.

[ccgr]

I'd rather pay for a game once than deal with microtransactions

[OtakuDJK1NG-Rory]

So what this comment section been telling me. You can't find internet so ti's possible to pay $10.

Uh if you have data plan or acess to wifi hotspot or in place with it download you're done

Quit being a bunch of haters. Even in mobile you hate.

[Iras_]

It's simple, repetitive and lack of content (just 24 short levels). It's worse than Rayman Jungle Run in every way and Rayman Jungle Run is only $3.

[Mithan]

Then don't buy it? Nintendo doesn't owe us a "free game".

I think $14 is a lot, but I don't have to buy it...

[ChronoJoe]

I guess it doesn't help that it offers very little in terms of content, relative to that price. Other free to play games, doing similar, offer more. If free games are offering more, then obviously consumers are going to be wondering why they should pay.

I agree that a one time fee is a better option for many gamers than microtransactions but I think for mobile, and relative to the content on offer, the price is quite hefty. Take other mobile games like Lumines for instance, Lumines Puzzle and Music released on Android / iOS relatively recently, and it's $2.99. The game offers more content than most free to play puzzlers, with lots of music and many stages.

Mario Run costs quite a bit, and offers far less in terms of content, than most of the free to plays.

[Stwert]

Oh my god, paying for a product, what the hell, thats not right it should be free it's only a bloody mobile game!!!!

Yeeeaaahhh, over in the real world that's how things work. I bought it and I don't regret it. I've played it more than any other mobile game in a while.

The fact that it's a "mobile game" is completely and utterly irrelevant. It's a game! Dozens of people worked on it for months and are continuing to work on it. They all need to have their wages paid and the company has to make profit from it to survive.

I'd sooner pay upfront for it than have it riddled with micro transactions. Those buggers are a blight on the gaming world.

People want everything for nothing these days, get a grip, why should it be free? I'm curious if all those people who want everything for free apply the same logic to their own lives.

Would you go to work 18 hours a day, 5, 6 or 7 days a week, month in month out and do it all for free? Or would you expect some sort of remuneration for the time and effort you have put in? I'm going to take a stab in the dark and guess that the vast majority of you want paid for the work you do. So why shouldn't everyone else then?

Ffs. Bloody entitlement these days is a joke and I don't give a rats arse how much you downvote me for saying it, it's the sodding truth.

[FreeSpeech69]

Always Online DRM = No Buy. Besides you can get better versions of the game on the 3DS, Wii U, Wii or hell DS version is even better.

[PurpHerbison]

Cause the game sucks.

[CrimsonWing69]

Man gamers just can't stop whining.

[Kosic]

Mobile games are meant to be cheap and bite sized versions of console games.

When I heard about the price tag of around £8. I was put off from the price tag, it'll be a game I play here and there.

But I tend to spend £3 max for mobile games and usually free to 59p for the rest (10p on the Google app of the week).

Anyways, the main games you see that are priced high for mobile tend to be Square Enix games, more ports of their classic Final Fantasy series and Chrono Trigger to name a few.

People were well aware this game was coming out, and we'll aware it wasn't free to play.

The only thing you can complain about is the cost, if it's justifying the quality. I can't comment as I've not tried it, but as above for 8 bucks, I'll probably skip.

[Dan_scruggs]

The modern gamer... I don't want micro transactions AND I don't want to pay for the game! YOU ARE ANTI CONSUMER!!!

[Gr8saiyaman88]

I'm the biggest Mario fan in the world and I think the asking price is too much. Besides the fact that I don't think the game is special at all (just not a fan of auto-runners), being able to beat all the stages in no time is disappointing. I'm also not much of a "replaying old stages" kind of person, which is where the draw of the game is, so there's that too.

But I'm glad that so many people are loving it, although I imagine it's mostly people who haven't touched a traditional Mario game in years :p

[link2Dpast]

I thought it was free as well. All the news and hype of it I haven't seen anywhere mentioning you needed to pay so I feel that's th messed up part. It not being free on the other hand is understandable, it is worth the purchase if your kid or you wanted it

[OhMyGandhi]

outrage? I'm offline for two days, and the world is blowing up about 10 dollars? Way to choose your battles guys. I bet most of the people complaining about the price would have no problem paying hand over fist for some random AAA game's Season Pass or 30-min DLC add-on...

[zb1ftw777]

The damage has been done.

Just like millenial SJW's think their behaviour is moral instead of damaging, millenial gamers dont know anything other than the f2p, but not really f2p model.

Wish things could go back to the 16bit days. It was the golden era of gaming. Todays hardware under the 16bit days design mentality could have produced the kind of games legends would have been proud of.

[smazzei80]

If you don't like that is costs $10 don't buy it and shut up. I think $10 is fair for a quality game that doesn't nickel and dime you.

[rocketpanda]

Here is a paid game with actual fun content = bunch of money grabbers.

Ok, here is a free game that you need to endlessly grind with some steep paywalls and timers = bunch of moment grabbers.

It's a no win situation. Entitled gamers want every for free and all content for nothing.

[zaherdab]

There's outrage ? i didn't notice outrage anywhere nearby!!! some people just disagree with the price point i doubt they are either outraged or ignorant

[susanto1228]

I left Mario a long time ago.

[rainslacker]

best way to show that one isn't happy with the price. It's not complaining on the internet with some outrage. best way to make a point is to simply not buy it.

Some things are worth getting outraged over, this isn't one of them. It's a runner game on mobile.

[Onenyte]

When I was playing Pokemon go I never paid a penny and I felt like I got a full experience of the game, I don't know why this can't be the same.

i.e, Put your lives on a Cooldown if you run out, if you are good at the game you won't die as often.

But the option is there to pay to reduce the cooldown.

Just an idea i guess..

[iofhua]

If it's free of micro-transactions I will definitely get this. I hate P2W games with a passion.

[iofhua]

It's not for android!?? Why???

I would drop $15 for this in a second. Except I can't, because I get my mobile games from Google Play.

And here I was going to buy something on principle to reward Nintendo for fairly pricing their game, and also in protest of all the F2P whiners. I can't win for losing.

[Nes_Daze]

$10 is a weak price to attract customers, just as the Wii brand was weak, as it led to the failure of WiiU, much like their stock is a failure. Not even a widely popular fad of a Pokemon Game and this Mario game for the mobile masses can get them into a first place position. Nintendo just doesn't know how to do consistent business above the other big two.

[jlove4life]

@mike lemonade trump banning games that are of mobile faith huh i see what u did there

[blawren4]

To quote the Joker, "if you're good at something, never do it for free."

[Gaz_KnightofNylrac]

It's quite amazing how accurate Iwata was about the mobile market having devalued gaming.

A few years ago, Iwata hadn't considered Nintendo getting into the smartphone game for fear that the free-to-play model would be detrimental to their brands. Simple ports of existing content wouldn't make sense for a primarily touch screen-driven experience, since no touch screen would ever be as accurate as dedicated buttons. New games would have to be made fit for the mobile experience to help give a wider audience more exposure to Nintendo's franchises and would hopefully convince them to buy their dedicated hardware and raise interest in their series.

Now that their first "real" mobile game has hit with Super Mario Run, they seem to have kept their word: it was a free-to-start game where you can sample three full levels and a trial of the fourth, with a one-time in-app purchase that would unlock the rest. It's the value of said $10 that seems to be the big kicker here, even from a few of my fellow gamer friends.

I admire how Run has translated part of the core Mario experience into a one-handed tapping mechanic in its main World Tour mode, almost like a rhythm-based platformer with puzzle and arcade influences. I also respect the $10-for-everything payment rather than microtransactions, for it prevents people from spending more than intended, and mainly preventing unsupervised children from accidentally running up a large bill. It also doubles as showing bold confidence in the game's worth to Nintendo and as an interesting gauge of "is the quality worth the price?" to the players.

At the same time, Iwata was right; the nature of mobile gaming is operating on microtransations in the free-to-play model has trained many to see mobile gaming as "not-real" gaming. Thus, when a product that only charges a set price comes along, some people flip and suddenly want nothing to do with the game! It's really quite astounding.

If you don't enjoy the game, then fair enough; don't pay for something you don't find worth the price if those three levels didn't do it for you. But the game isn't a simple cash-in, as the essence of a Mario game is in there, complete with actual level design, colored coins to collect to maximize said-level design, and a focus on high scores for a sense of competition. Add to that the Toad Rally mode that adds a laid-back customization aspect in Kingdom Mode in addition to its main competitive focus that the $10 was justified for me at least.

Then again, I'm also a completionist who enjoys the other mainline Mario games, so the value of three sets of coins in its main campaign and the addictive nature of its endless competitive mode means I don't regret my purchase. If you only go in to only complete the main 24 levels, then I can see how the value seems steep comparatively to other mobile offerings. Again, that's fair! The value of a product is a case-by-case, so cheers. But I enjoy Run's a simplified "real" Mario game for mobile/tablet gaming, and it made me want to play the meatier games with direct control, and I hope that feeling extends to newer players who try the game and really enjoy it.

If this works, Nintendo could open up the world of gaming to other "casual" and previously-uninterested in a similar way to their DS and Wii "blue ocean" experiment, so only time will tell if I'm being overly optimistic for actually liking Run and thinking it may be on to something. Fingers crossed!

[ABBAJESUS]

It will drop to between $5 -$8 in a couple of months after mario fans have spend their $15 fanmoney.