3 ms·

That’s what they did with the Super Mario Run. Don’t ever change HN /s

• asdff 4y ago
  The game had a lot of downloads, no? Plus what I'm proposing is not exactly what they did with super mario run. That game was just basically like a lite+paid mobile game release that was typical before in app subscriptions iirc. Drop the lite version, and force people to pay in if they want to play at all just like with a physical video game.
• musicale 4y ago
  I was fine with Super Mario Run. The "paid" category on iOS seems pretty OK. For example, I was just looking at card games and it includes games I actually enjoy playing such as Slay the Spire and Monster Train, which don't seem to be burdened by intrusive monetization schemes. (MT is $8 + $4 DLC - not free but cheaper than Steam's $25+.) Square Enix has a bunch of gacha games but they also have regular pay-once RPGs like Final Fantasy. (Though some of them lack controller support, and several older games have become unplayable.) (iOS should really add more game categories - there currently isn't one for platformers or endless runners, for example.) Unfortunately f2p and slot machine style monetization schemes usually makes much more money than pay once.
• crazygringo 4y ago
  Exactly. Super Mario Run did not make the expected return because people just didn't buy it. Not enough for it to be the success Nintendo needed. Only 3% of people who downloaded it bought the full version, when they'd been expecting 10% conversion. Only $60 million in a year and a half. In contrast, Mario Kart Tour made $200 million in its first year and a half with microtransactions. So Nintendo tried. But it's not the way consumers wanted to pay for it.