Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock

What?! 10 dollars?! No casual gamer would buy that! Nintendo clearly doesn't understand how the smart device market works.

@G-Boy

They will still get ad revenue from the free version I am sure. If they can sucker people into paying $10 for the full game, that's just extra wasabi on top.

If that $10 provides a really robust and worthwhile experience, then I have no issue with it. Better to do it now than to offer the features in the beginning, only to put it behind a paywall later (which has happened with a number of popular mobile games).

Can't wait to see some gameplay on YouTube.

And nintendo overprices their stuff again. $10 for a phone game? Seriously? You CAN get an N64 game overpriced on the wii instead!

It makes me sad that people will encourage this practice by buying a $10 phone game. People, send big N a message and at least wait for the inevitable my nintendo 15% off with platinum points!

I personally wouldn't even consider it for more than $5, and $2 is an insta-buy. Would prolly sell better at that price and advertise the brand better, making mario extremely relevant among mobile users.

This isn't the wiiU nor even the 3ds! There is a much larger userbase for mobile gaming!

10 dollars.... Wow, that's actually a lot.

I have an Android phone but wouldn't buy it anyway. It just doesn't look appealing nor does its price.

I presume this means it'll be £9.99 in the U.K. I'm ok with that if it's good. I'll try the demo first and see how it plays, what's been shown so far looked like fun.

Priced too high probably. But we'll see what the full package brings. It'll get plenty of attention to get the sales rolling in anyway.

Ridiculous. It's not an eShop, Nintendo.

It's not as ludicrous high priced as some Square Enix games on mobile, but it is on the high side of things.

Whilst I am reminded of, how a few years ago Angry Birds and other titles launched at just under a dollar/euro, Nintendo clearly haven't pulled a price out of the air and clearly don't wish to undermine its intellectual property by pricing it low.
I think they need to play on the fact that consumers are getting the full experience here.

"10 dollars is too much money!"
Spends 8 dollars to have coins in Pokemon Shuffle that go away in 2 minutes
"Nobody would pay 1/4th a 3DS game for something just because it's on a cell phone!"
Whales spend thousands in Mobile Strike
"10 Dollars? What are they thinking!? That's so much money!!"
Spends 25 dollars on a sparkle pony in World of Warcraft that does nothing your other flying mounts don't already do

@G-Boy
Are you still complaining for $10 ?
And even only cost $5 maybe, are you keep complaing as always ?
Well...mindset of being extreme cheapskater should be removed. It looks like from Bad Romance - Lady Gaga. "I want everything as long it's free"...
gosh...

I'm fine with $10 I think there should be a market on mobile for old fashioned pay and get all content.

I think there are positives to trying to develop premium content in the mobile space.

Certainly, mobile gaming isn't the same experience as console or PC gaming, but I think more use of mobile could be made by intelligent developers.

Mobile gaming is in its infancy. Talent isn't necessarily there as that is focused on AAA studios or indies. There's also no curation of app stores so they are full of poor-quality shovelware.

Most tellingly, free-to-play is a business model that capitilises on shallow gameplay experiences in order to maximise revenue without a focus on quality.

I'm not interested in Mario Run (because my phone has terrible battery life), but I welcome its inclusion in the mobile space as a premium title. $10 is markedly cheaper than titles that are based on microstransaction hell.

Sighs Fine, Nintendo. Here's my $10......

For what it looks to be, I wouldn't even spend half that on a game like this.

Skip in your daily coffee (tea for the British?) for a couple of days and you'll have the change for the game.
I understand wanting to get most out of your money, but this is too much.

-"The wait is almost over", says Bowser-

No, the wait has only just begun for Android users like myself. Assuming this model doesn't change by the time the Android version is released, I'll try out the free version and decide from there- probably won't pay for full unlock as the second mode doesn't interest me.

It's supposed to be F2P so this seems optional to remove ads/IAPs.

Also, I can't believe I'm actually excited for this game. Hurry up and release the Android version, Nintendo!

@DrRandle
$10 is a lot for me, I don't do these other micro-transactions that are in other games, etc.

I'm realk excited about this release. I can't bring my 3DS to work, as its way too obvious it's for gaming....but my phone is used for business as well as pleasure, so now I can game on the sly with Mario.

I don't think the people saying "$10 for this game is too much" are doing so because that is a lot of money.

I think they are saying that because charging $10 for a game that only uses a 'jump' button is obscene.

Isn't that what Americans pay daily for a cup of Starbucks? It'll do very well, I imagine. :]

And those who complain it's $10? Can you get any cheaper? It's $10!! That's one hour worth of work at minimum wage. You work one day and it's easily paid.

Good. I was expecting this price point. Excited!

@Luna_110 What gets me is that the people who complain the loudest about premium pricing in the app store are the same people who pay hundreds of dollars each year to get the newest and best iPhone. I guess they believe the cost includes entitlement to free software.

@CB85 Maybe a venti Gingerbread Latte, lol. It's really only the fancy drinks that are a wallet buster at Starbucks. A standard cup of coffee is pretty comparable in price to other coffee shops. At least where I live

Seems very reasonably priced. If the game is actually good fun, that is.

And the strategy is solid, proven time and again, and least for content-based quality games.

Distribute a meaty demo as widely as you can, and have people pay for the rest of the game if they enjoy themselves. Essentially the shareware model of yore.

@WilliamCalley
I don't think it's really fair to let the complexity of the controls be defining for the price of a game.

What if Super Mario Run is a launch title for the Switch?

Wow. That's more... expensive than I thought.

@GravyThief £7.99 in the UK.
This is brilliant! Finally! A game I am happy to buy on ios!

I bet it's utterly polished and has loads of content!
Yay!

I also hope it makes Nintendo lots and lots of money AND brings in new Nintendo game to help make the Nintendo Switch a huge success!

@G-Boy You clearly are out of touch with the vast majority of people that are frustrated with being nickle and dimed to death.

If this were a freemium game we'd probably be dumping money to get coins to spend on a gatcha machine just for a chance to get a new level.
And we'd probably have a teeny tiny stamina bar.

@DarthNocturnal
Me too. My smartphone is Android.

@khaosklub Rule of successful business number 1: Never undersell your products.

It's the indie argument all over again. People believe because indies aren't made with $$$$ budget that they should cost cents on the dollar, it's all about how one values the experience.

Sure $9.99 is "high" for mobile games, but mobile game companies are racing towards the bottom of the barrel, & for what?

People spend waaaay more on FTP games, and Nintendo isn't the only one to price their games what they believe to be fair price, regardless of the platform. Square has some pricey mobile titles, but they haven't stopped.

Would people really want a 99c Mario game, wait let me rephrase that, "would people want to PLAY a 99c Mario game? Do you even know what that would look like?

I get it, 9.99 might be a hard sell to the candy crush crowd (even tho they are gambling their $ away and don't even know it), but I still see this doing quite well regardless of what people think of the price...

Now if Nintendo would only give an android release date.

@HappyMaskedGuy

Sure worked well for Nintendo by never lowering the price of the Wii-U!

I'm honestly amazed that people are complaining about this here. Nintendo has a new hit on its hands- why on Earth would any right minded Nintendo fan not want the company to maximise their profits from this?? Do people honestly think that any iOS games that are cheaper than this will be anywhere near the same quality?

I mean seriously guys- let's be grown ups here. Stop whining.

"They're only going to make four downloads available per area to frustrate everyone."

@WilliamCalley Price was not the reason Wii U failed, and you know it

@cfgk24 I somehow missed the UK pricing, thanks!

Whilst it's at the top end of smartphone game prices, I'm certainly not against paying it for a good game that's suitable for touch input.

Ghost trick is excellent on iOS, as are the Broken Sword games, and they're worth the £5-£10 prices in my opinion - proper games not crippled by touch controls.

Let's hope Mario Run is similar!

I'll give this a buy when it comes out on Android, assuming the full version is ad-free.

@HappyMaskedGuy
"I'm honestly amazed that people are complaining about this here. Nintendo has a new hit on its hands- why on Earth would any right minded Nintendo fan not want the company to maximise their profits from this?? Do people honestly think that any iOS games that are cheaper than this will be anywhere near the same quality?
I mean seriously guys- let's be grown ups here. Stop whining."

I couldn't agree more. This just proves yet again that gamers can be some of the most entitled human beings in existence. $10 is not much. I can literally go to the bottle depot now, exchange my bottles and receive around $10 for them. One hour at a minimum wage job can produce that much. Start saving up for it right now. It really is not hard for most 1st world countries to produce $10 for a game and still be able to pay the bills, rent, for food, ect.

It's really sad to see that most people here think $10 for a game is pricy when freaking Square Enix sells their games for $15-20, they sell like hot cakes and they get away with that with very few blinking an eye, but if Nintendo releases a full game experience for $10 that you know will be a quality game, that's just stupid and clearly Nintendo doesn't know anything about the mobile market. rolls eyes I seriously hate how so many gamers think these days. It makes my head hurt just thinking about how entitled most gamers are these days and how much double standards occur between Nintendo and the rest of the industry.

Actually, it depends on how Ninty makes the game, maybe you could get a majority of the game free or play a few games at a time, paying will unlock everytime. $10 could be worth it, if it's a great game, in fact, it beats paying $0.99 each time you need a jewel or coins as they had done with Pokemon Shuffle. In fact, I think they would make more money that way (sort of nickel-and-dimes), sure the majority will not pay for anything, but those tiny paying ones are worth $$$ (look at Pokemon Go's big earning during it's initial month, or Candy Crush recurring income).

@G-Boy "What?! 10 dollars?! No casual gamer would buy that! Nintendo clearly doesn't understand how the smart device market works."

It works like a parasite. Nintendo is doing it right, whether it hurts them or not.

@HappyMaskedGuy

Lowering the price a couple years ago when sales tanked wouldn't have hurt and you know it

@Lucina

A 'full game experience' is not an endless runner where the only interaction the player has with the game is by pushing a 'jump' button.

That sounds to be about as limited a game experience as one could have.

Most I've ever paid for a mobile game is about £3! Never in my life would I spend £8 for a poxy mobile game

Pay to make Mario jump higher

That's a risky price. It will go either one of two ways:

1. The game breaks the pricing ceiling for mobile games, paving the way for other developers and completely changing the landscape of the market.
2. The mass market rejects it, causing it to tank.

If the latter happens, then it's safe to say that the mobile market will never grow in quality beyond crappy F2P games.

I absolutely applaud Nintendo for taking that risk and bucking the trend.

The price point will never work for drawing casuals in. £7.99 in the UK is dead on arrival.

Edit: Just to clarify, I'm not saying it won't be worth that money, who can say until we know exactly what it offers, but I firmly believe it has no chance of drawing the millions of casual players they're after.

Hopefully the three modes are available separately. Only the first mode is interesting to me. I'll try all of the modes for free, but I expect that I'd rather pay $5 for that as opposed to $10 for everything.

I'm impressed they have a December date that isn't Dec 29th or 30th. Nintendo said December and they are releasing it mid-December. If they did that w/ Zelda BotW we would have all finished playing it about 9 months ago.

As for the price - $9.99 is the right price. Not the only price, they could have gone w/ $4.99 or $14.99, those would have worked as well, but it's the goldilocks price for what this is "Mario on mobile".

Also, it's on Apple, and Apple people spend more money than Android people, that's a fact. Almost every single person on here complaining about the price doesn't own an Apple device, but an Android device. Apple owners won't hesitate to spend $9.99 to get a Mario game. That's chump change for them. Nothing. Less than nothing. 1 $10 iTunes card. The perfect price.

http://fortune.com/2014/06/27/apples-users-spend-4x-as-much-as-googles/

@Anti-Matter But that's exactly how the smart device market works! The most popular games on the App Store are free. Nobody can "remove" mobile gamers' "mindset of being extreme cheapskater"! And what do you mean by "complaining as always"? I have never complained about the price before! And why would it only cost $5?

...That... doesn't even look remotely fun.

I'm not even talking about the price. This just looks like the most boring Mario game possible.

Just to top it all off, they can't even give it the dignity of its own visual style. They're just recycling the same NSMB assets we've been seeing since 2006.

I can't even begin to count how many freemium games I would have loved to drop $10+ on just so I can get what I want instead of paying money to have a chance to get what I want.

That's like going to a car dealership and having an option to pay a flat fee to get a decent car or pay half that for a chance to get a sports car but with odds that you will likely get a lemon.

I think that they are many games in the App store (been an iPhone user for the last 8-9 years) that really deserve a 10-dollar price tag, but a speedrunner? It should have been set at 5, and that is on the higher side of the spectrum, IMHO.

@WilliamCalley You are one of those "hurr durr mobile games are garbage" people?

There are a lot of great mobile experiences, and from trailer it looks like this will be one of them. 10$ is nothing.

I'll give it a try when it eventually reaches Android. The price seems reasonable, but I dunno whether I'll want to pay for the full version.

@IceClimbers Bet on #1. Though not all devs, just devs w/ Ninteod's street cred and IP. That's like, um, nobody. OK EA, Sqeunix, maybe 1 or 2 more.

Do you game on Sony consoles? Back in the early PS3 days almost all digital only download games were $4.99. Some $9.99. (Sony even started a "Minis" section for games under $4.99.) Then they started to be mostly $9.99 and sometimes $14.99. Then $14.99 and occasionally $19.99.

3 or 4 eyars ago I'd say $4.99 would have been the way to go, but now, might as well shoot high. $9.99 will sell, and sell well, on iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch. Worse comes to worse it doesnt do well on Android, but Nintendo will have already earned well more than this cost by then. And if by some miracle it doesn't sell well at $9.99 - as every iDevice owning kid in America gets $10 iTunes GC from their aunts and uncles - then they can always lower it to $7.99. Or put it on sale. But they won't have to, it will sell. It's freakin Mario. How you seen how fast NES Mini has sold out, and that was $60, and required people getting up and going to the store. $9.99 on iPhone, press a button, done.

I'll definitely not be buying this. I'll download the application as it's free, but 10 bucks for a watered down version of the New Super Mario Bros. games? I'll pass.

Fortunately for Nintendo, I'm not the target audience for this anyway.

@G-Boy Maybe we will get a generous 10% discount from My Nintendo down the road sometime

@wiggleronacid I respect your decision, but the instant anyone purchases anything from the game they invalidate your point.

@DrRandle @HappyMaskedGuy @Lucina @WilliamCalley

The issue with the price isn't about the quality of the game nor the content.

Just look at these comments. These are the voices of nintendo fans! People who pay $20 for old wii games that are like $5 on ebay, and these same people are divided on getting this game at that price.

If the hardcore fans aren't sold, why would the casual market jump on board?

If you sell 5 million copies at $10 or 25 million copies at $2 each, which is better? They are trying to break into the mobile market, and when you try to break into a new market, you want to draw in a customer base even at a loss.

They want their product on more phones first. Even if it is free to play at first, it's going into the super short attention span market. They risk losing too much potential money and losing a market's attention.

And with squares overpriced games, how well do those actually sell? Since they are known for jrpg games, I'd guess their mobile games are comparable to the actual console experience, so their customerbase from consoles probably don't mind the cost. They are targeting a small customerbase who will pay a premium price, but nintendo doesn't want to appeal to a niche market, which is obvious because mario + runner style game. They are going for mass appeal!

Expected $14.99 from Nintendo. The $9.99 price doesn't bother me but it probably will limit the marketshare for the game to an extent. The vast majority will just move on to the next free game or $0.99 darling they can find.

@Kalmaro
But freemium games dominate the market, why?
They reach a broader audience by being initially free, which mario run also accomplishes, but preys on people's lack of impulse control. They make more money overall.

Impulse buyers won't usually bite for $10

I'll definitely download it and see if I like mobile-configured Mario. $10 is pricey for the App Store, but if Nintendo can do a good job convincing me of the value I'm getting for that $10, I'll think nothing of paying it.

@khaosklub I'm a Nintendo Fan too? So does my opinion not matter? It's 1/4th the price of a 3DS game and will likely have 1/4th the content. Where's the disconnect? The problem is that mobile gamers have zero concept on how pricing should look in a game. They spend way more money on way less quality garbage.

@Shard1 Do you also not buy 3DS games or WiiU games? What games do you buy if $10 dollars for a $10 dollar game is too much?

@khaosklub 5M at $10 vs 25M at $2. You could argue that 25M is better, however, this also has a free component. So in this particular case since the revenue is the same, I don't think it matters how many people actually paid. In fact, I think 5M at $10 is better. It is better to have the perception of a quality product at a premium price. It prevents dilution of the brand, which is one of the prime reasons Nintendo has waited so long to get into the mobile market.

@khaosklub Tell that to square eenix, their games are Uber expensive and sell fine.

Not to mention that iPhone users spend that kind of money on games and don't care. Nintendo has done their research.

Considering I've seen people pay over $50 in games like Temple Run, Angry Birds, and Pokemon GO, I don't see how this is a big deal. Yeah, $10 is not usually an app price, but it's better than having a paywall like most mobile games.

It's a good price and will get more replay value than the 55 amiibo i have that did next to nothing in games.

Just gotta wait for android version.
Will this kill off the 2d mario switch title?

Just for reference:
New Super Mario Bros. - 30.8M - $40
New Super Mario Bros. Wii - 29.9M - $60
New Super Mario Bros. 2 - 10.6M - $40
New Super Mario Bros. U - 5.45M - $60
https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/sales/software/wiiu.html

Sure some of these are due to bundles, but I am just trying to point out how much nostalgia lies in 2D Mario games. Also keep in mind that all of these sales were limited to the install base of the hardware.

Additionally, looking at the numbers above, any Nintendo "fans" that do not want to pay $10 for a Miyamoto-produced, Tezuka-designed Mario game can not seriously continue to call themselves Nintendo fans...

$10 for a mobile game certainly sounds pricey, but...people have spent far more than that on free-to-play games.

I won't be buying it as I carry my 3DS practically everywhere and I have New Super Mario Bros. 2 digitally, but I'll probably get the free version for a minute.

I don't own a smart phone because I think they are way too expensive.

However, most of you own smart phones. Most (not all) of you paid anywhere from $200-$700 for your smart phone.

So if you are going to complain about a $10 game when you are probably planning on replacing your 3-month old expensive phone with another one in about a year, just stop. And remember you can go buy cheese pretty cheaply to go with your whine.

This will be the top selling game worldwide of the holiday, far surpassing anything that comes out on console.

And no, it's not aimed at any of us, it's aimed at the casuals and the sheep with money. Again, not any of you. If you buy it, that's bonus money for NIntendo.

I doubt that price will work in the uk.
Paying 10 pounds for a watered down 10 year old game with less mechanics reduced to one touch.
I guess I'm not the targeted audience.
I have all the new super Mario bros series including super luigi but to buy that digitally for a small screen to play.
I did buy super Mario Galaxy 2 from the eshop even tho I have the physical copy but that cost me 8.99 but I love that game so price was justified as like most here we are Nintendo fans. However for the casual iOS market I have my doubts. Would love to see the numbers

At that price one assumes there is plenty of meat to go with the potatoes. People baulk at £15 for FFVII but there's plenty of gameplay therein.

If Nintendo have an intern whose job is to pump out a constant stream of updates then it will be worth the money. For example an 8-bit mode with SMB graphics and IAP Mario Maker sprites of Link, Shulk, Sonic etc would take it in.

Runners aren't a bad genre: I still play Canabalt a few times a week and that cost £2 when I first bought it.

@XCWarrior I do agree it's not for any of us.
But I still believe that possibly half that price maybe 5 pounds will do better for the casual market.

The casual market has been spoilt with the quick and cheap games like 99p

I've even bought them like
Angry birds
Cut the rope.
Doodle jump.
Plants vs zombies etc

A new demographic will be able to experience Mario. Ker-ching!

Wow 10 dollars is a lot? I'm pretty sure people spent more in Pokemon Go.

Let's be honest with ourselves here, I think plenty of people will buy this game for Mario. And the assumption of quality that a Nintendo game should be able to carry into a pudgy apathetic market place.

Can't spend ten bucks on a game but will pay a ridiculous amount for a phone bill a month

Is Apple TV a supported iOS platform for the game?

LOL

As long as for $10 it fully unlocks the entire game and has no annoying IAP this is a day-one buy once it comes to Android...

@khaosklub
Those prices are under selling the crap out of Mario. Mario is nintendo for most of the people that aren't big into games. Casual players drop way more than ten bucks in micro transactions in games. We as gamers know the value of a Mario game, that's why can't find a used version on almost any system for under 30 or 40, unless it's on a best seller line of games.

Honestly though answer me this if this game was actually a good Mario game and only sold for two bucks wouldn't you feel ripped off when purchasing any Mario game on consoles?

It has Super Mario's name on it. It'll sell alright.

Oh, and Starbucks is utterly terrible.

Mario is well known, so I expect a lot of people are going to try the free version. A portion of them that aren't hardcore fans WILL buy it, especially considering you get a full experience for $10. It's kind of strange that soooooo many mobile games aimed at 'all ages' support some kind of gambling mechanism to let them rob their parents. Even SEGA did it harshly with Sonic Runners before it was shut down!!

One thing that worries me though: did I see a game ticket in the trailer? Does this mean we can also spend $$$ (and My Nintendo Points) on tickets to play this Toad race thingy and possibly items for that kingdom builder?

Super Mario 3D world 17.99
Super Mario run 9.99

Super Mario 3D world loads of worlds with levels
Super Mario run 7 levels

I'd much rather pay ten bucks up front than slowly drain my wallet with micro-transactions over time. I can't tell you how much I've spent on Pokémon Go. It's insidious.

@Shadowkiller97
But nintendo is not known for premium mobile games. The point now is to get people onboard. We have miitomo and pokemon go as examples of nintendo mobile games, and neither are anything special or new.

Going in with the first game on mobile at a premium price makes them seem greedy and arrogant. Just look how divided people are in the comments about getting it. They want their first game accepted in as many hands as possible.

Also, the 5m at $10 and 25m at $2 is assuming equal amount, the fact is, as price goes down, demand will increase. Think about how many iphones people have (or ipads too right?) There are in the places where this game will be available. I'd wager it's at least 5 times all consoles+handhelds in those same regions. I'd argue that selling at $10, maybe 50m will sell, while at $2, 800m would likely sell, with many people double dipping on multiple phones and tablets.

Console games are already priced very low compared to the cost with a much smaller userbase. Charging $10 for a mobile game is like charging $100 for a console game (and that's being generous). That's a premium price for console games, and people would buy it, but profits would be smaller as would the customer base.

I have an Android phone so I can't get it (yet, apparently we'll get eventually). Considering there are more people running Android than iOS you'd think they wouldn't treat us like second class citizens. If they keep the exclusive thing with Apple going I might just say forget it to all of their mobile games out of spite. Maybe. Let's face it, no I won't if the game is actually worth playing. Stupid Nintendo.

As for the price, $10 sounds fine for a complete game with no ads and no additional microtransactions. I have a number of paid games on my phone, like pretty much everything not free to play from Kairosoft and there are a number of games where I would love the option to just pay a set amount. But those are the fee to play, not free to play games. If they did charge a set amount, they couldn't take advantage of their game's "whales" anymore.

For a pretty good example, look at DragonVale. Their dragon designs are really good and taking care of a park full of dragons is something I've wanted in a game for a long time, but they have two types of currency; coins and gems. Gems are the premium currency. You can get some for free (there are gem dragons you can get through breeding that will net you 1 gem per week or 2 per month when you've upgraded them fully) but if you want a substantial amount, you need to pay. It ranges from $1.99 for 50 gems to $99.99 for 3,750 gems! For that amount you would think you could buy at least one of anything in the game but no, the most expensive dragon is 3,800 gems! I can't imagine who would pay that amount but I'd bet anything they have at least a few people that do.

Yeah, anyways, tl;dr: I hate that it's a timed exclusive to iOS but I think the price is fine.

@Kalmaro
Which one sells fine?
On the android store, FF7 is listed under 10k to 50k installs. At $16, it's capped at $800k on android, likely lower. I don't know where to find iphone data, but it can't be more than 10x higher, which are still paltry numbers for a big name game.

Also, where do you get the idea apple users pay that? Look at the top selling games. Mincraft is at the top of their chart at $7, the only ones on the top 100 higher is an nba2k game for $8 and actual non game apps at $10 and $15. Where do you get this idea? Most of the games are $1 or $3. Mario run outprices EA mobile games! E FRICKIN' A!

Hopefully Nintendo will pave the way for premium phone/tablet games that require a one off payment. Only mugs pay for more lives/gems/coins to keep playing.

@WilliamCalley It would if Nintendo were already selling at a loss.

@khaosklub that's WAY better then some of the free to play games where you end up paying$50+ to fully enjoy the game. I'd much rather pay $10 and be done

@DrRandle
yes, as a nintendo fan, your opinion matters, but means nothing in terms of the argument. My claim is that among nintendo fans, there are those who are willing at that price point. Naturally it means that there are those who are. The fact that the hardcore who buy overpriced vc games is divided is telling in and of itself. The difference between mobile and 3ds is the userbase. The amount of mobile device users greatly dwarfs the number of 3ds users. Number of mobile devices per household is likely more than double that of 3ds' s too. When you sell in greater bulk, the cost goes down, holds true in pretty much every market, and the lower the cost, the more sales!

The amount of content doesn't matter, because it's not a comparable market. It's like saying that motorcycles should cost 1/4 that of a car since it is 1/4 of the mass, but things aren't that simple.

News story incoming, Nintendo share price goes up.

@DrRandle
I meant in comparison to other mobile games. The only mobile games I have ever gotten were free.

@dew12333 ***Red hair tingling***

@khaosklub Well first we need to establish what amount of money earned is 'good'. Technically speaking, anything that gets them a profit can theoretically be called a success

Not only that, but yes, iPhone users do spend more than $10 on a game, they do it all the time. Clash of clans proves that every day. Do you know how many people would love if clash of clans or puzzles and dragons just came out and said "From now on, we will just be selling the game for $10 and you get all content?"

It would be amazing. No one likes having to spend money just to be drip fed content. Obviously, there are those who would prefer to just play the free game as is but most of those people cave in and buy something and before you know it, they're over $10.

Nintsndo on iously took this into consideration and is allowing people to stick to the free game or just drop $10 and never have to toss money at them again. Considering how most games operate, that's a steal.

@G-Boy Do they even understand how console gamers market works?

The Switch is their last chance with me. Better be good.

@GravyThief oh! Is Ghost Trick on Ios? I loved that on DS!

Also, this is not a pure endless runner game. We are still getting hand crafted levels, so this isn't just temple run with Mario, it's something else. It's basically a faster Mario.

@rjejr

Wrong. I'm an Apple user and I would never consider to spend $10. It's simply far too much to spend on a simple mobile phone game. $5 is more like it.

There is no $10 iTunes card, by the way. The lowest they go is $15.

@Kalmaro
No, we don't need to establish what is 'good' amount of money. nor really can we, but in terms of building a consumerbase, we can all agree that numbers matter. In the example of final fantasy 7, there aren't many people buying it, nor is it listed within the top 200 of the istore top selling games. They may be making profit, but they are definitely not making themselves a major player in the mobile market. They're like the RADIX of mobile gaming.

You claim that people spend lots of money on clash of clans, then claim it is an inferior system. It's not about what you like better, it's about what the market likes better.

On android:
Clash of clans(free) - 100m+ downloads
Mobius final fantasy(free) -1m+ downloads
Final fantasy 7 ($15) - 10k+ downloads

The market certainly likes pay as you go gaming, doesn't it?

Final fantasy 7 is #48 on google play store for paid games. Minecraft is #1 at $7 with 10m downloads. 1/10th of clash of clans.

Downl the line, if nintendo can establish themselves as a major player, then overcharge for games, but this isn't their platform, and they have yet to prove themselves. If mario run were $2, I'm sure it would quickly break both grossing and download records across the board on android and apple!

@leo13
I rather pay more and get a full game on my dedicated gaming device. Where is that $10 better spent? On a 3ds game? On a wiiU game? On steam sales?

@Shard1 I guess to me there's an unfairness of comparing something to other games on the same platform. To me, a game is a game regardless of what platform it's own. But that may just be my addiction speaking, heh. The only comparison that I think should be made on games in regard to their platform is how well they utilize that platform to it's fullest. Most mobile games don't come anywhere near that, for me. So now comes one that I think will, and I'm perfectly satisfied with the price. It's better than shelling out another 40 dollars for Mario Maker, a game I already own with a better version on another console.

@whanvee
First off, why do games go to $20 when they're best sellers?

Second, regardless of quality, it's the market. You don't invest $500m into a wiiU game (gtaV's dev cost) because you will never recoup that cost unless everyone buys the game at $100 each. Would that ever work? No!

You design for mobile, you follow the market's rules. You may not like that the game is much cheaper on a phone, but considering a phone is like $700+ and a 2ds is under $100, well... I don't feel all that ripped off.

@rjejr @iGen http://bfy.tw/8mXx

@khaosklub My point was that people have no room to complain about spending $10 upfront for a game when those same people will likely drop $10 for gems/daimonds/etc in another incomplete game.

Nintendo is making a unique game that has not been done before with one of the most recognizable characters on the planet, feathering handcrafted levels, plenty of attention to detail, multi-player and an infinite runner section, and people are caring because the option to pay $10 was included.

@DrRandle
Okay, so, you have mario maker on wiiU. Spending $10 on mario run is better than $40 on mario maker 3ds. Why not spend $0 and just keep playing mario maker on wiiU? Why even consider mario run when you have a better game.

Minecraft is $10, F1 racing is $15 and NBA 2K17 is $13 here in Australia so not really that expensive in comparison to other recent or bigger releases.

@khaosklub Better by who's standard?
They are completely different games. One lets you design levels and test other people levels

One allows you to rush through levels made specifically for running and go for high scores and compete against friends.

@Kalmaro
It's not aboit an individual caring to pay $10 or not, whether it's too much for them. It's about nintendo being successful in the mobile market.
I, like others, would love to see nintendo succeed. We are sayong that the $10 price point won't give them a good foothold in the market.

A low price point is necessary to get that foothold and become a major player. It's just that nintendo is once again being nintendo and trying to ignore economics and do whatever they want, which will lead to failure in the mobile market which would fund endeavers on major consoles, like a new legit metroid game

@Kalmaro
"One allows you to rush through levels made specifically for running and go for high scores and compete against friends."

Okay, so you can't do any of this in mario maker then?

The set of features in mario run is a subset of features in mario maker, but vice versa is not true, so logically, mario maker is better.

@khaosklub You're entitled 2your opinion but I think the facts show that people are willing to pay $10 for a game upfront and people have paid even more than that for a free game.

Not only that but you don't even have to pay to play this game, unless I'm mistaken. So they are banking on you enjoying their game and then paying for it, which sounds fine to me. From what I've read this game has no micro transactions to speak of. I think their price point is right at a good mark. Not too high but enough for them to set themselves apart and not make the game feel cheap.

This is supposedly a quality product you're getting.

Also no, you can't just run through Mario maker levels for the most part.have you seen them?

Some you can't move, some you can run through, some you have to figure out what to to, some are ghost houses, some you have to run around collecting keys, etc.

Super Mario run is just pure running on levels made for it, designed by the people that know Mario best. Very very few people actually focus on making a running Mario level or levels made for speed runs.

Not to mention Mario run will have more focus on competitive people. Mario maker did this a little with clear times but this game has that and scores. I kinda like that better personally.

@Aussiephoenix83
Ha!
In the US, minecraft is $7, and 2k17 is $8. Looks like mario run will be $20 over there!

@G-Boy
Okay, think again. Mostly mobile games are Free, but most of them created by a company that not as big as Nintendo. If Nintendo keep their games Free for Full Games, they will have NO profit at all. Even bonafide developer like SquareEnix still put a price for their port games such as FF 3, FF Tactics, FF 9, etc. For me, I have no interest at all with Apps store games either Freebies or Paid. Even I still have some interest with Paid games but still can't make me to engage with the game. And luckily i'm not a smartphone gamer despite having only 2 games (I almost never played them). I would rather choose Nintendo machines with paid games that offers me something rather than Freebies Apps games that offers me "almost" nothing.

@Kalmaro
What facts? You think the facts show, but what facts?

Why would someone put down $10 for a free game? If everyone downloads it and just plays for free, then mario run is a failure, and nintendo takes a hit.

The point is, we want nintendo to succeed, but they're like turkeys drowning in the rain.

I speculate, sure, but most economic concepts. Are not opinions, but statistical trends. YOU like it better than microtransactions. YOU think it's a better idea. It's convenient for YOU!

People don't like games with microtransactions, but they are sure darn popular for something everyone hates! This isn't opinion, this is fact. So many top grossing games are f2p with microtransactions. The market has spoken.

What's better for you, isn't necessarily better for Nintendo. Good vibes don't pay employees nor cover dev costs.

@Kalmaro

That web search is rigged. You and rjejr took it to Africa and broke it.

There is still no US, current, stand alone iTunes $10 card.

I want a lawyer.

@iGen I can do this all day.

My 2 nieces and nephew ( 2 sisters and their brother) each got a iPod Touch 6th gen over the summer, my mom will probably buy 1 of these 3 packs and stick 1 in each of their stockings, my kids usually get $10 eShop cards that way.

@khaosklub I recognize that not everybody is like me. I much prefer playing games on 3DS and Wii U, but I like the idea of having a couple of good games on my phone for when I don't have either device handy and just as soon as it comes to Android, I'll be happy to pay$10 for it.

@iGen You say I took the search to Africa but you're the one swimming in 'De Nile'.

@khaosklub My statement was: people are willing to pay $10 for a game upfront and people have paid even more than that for a free game. I'm not sure what your problem with that is, people have paid $10 for mobile games and people have paid more than that in free games, are you really saying that this is false?

Also for the who micro transaction thing, it is obvious Nintendo does not want to go that route, and for good reason. They can still make a profit this way while setting themselves apart. This isn't Pokémon shuffle or go, this is Mario, and is on a totally different level. I don't see it being wise to put him on the same level as games that font have anywhere near the polish of this one. You are given the opportunity to play the game for free and buy it basically, you're essentially getting a demo.

Game companies have been doing that for years, it's just now we have another medium for it, mobile phones. I'm certain they could have made more money just by going freemium and bleeding customers dry but who says you can't be successful without making the most money? It's all about first impressions right now and it's clear they are trying to make this game stand out.

@khaosklub Well for one, I don't know whether Mario Run will be better or not. For all I know it's a pile of trash, so assigning it value based on a price point is immediately kind of dumb. I think paying any amount of money for a shiny rock is dumb, but people pay exorbitant amounts for a diamond all the time. It might also be the best Mario game that could ever be on a mobile, buttonless platform. But I suppose that's neither here nor there. By your logic, there's a difference between player bases, therefore the price should be different. So if this game were on 3DS, would you have any problem paying 10 bucks for it? If so, why is that any different than the 10 dollars on Mobile? The user base? That's not fact, that's kind of slanderous opinion. You're basically arguing with a lot of people in these comments that people on mobile basically don't want to pay for a game. The reason free to play games gross more is because of whales. The fact that more people downloaded it implies that more people immediately forgot it was a game after trying it because they saw the pay-to-win schemes hiding beneath it. Then there's people that will just never pay for a game. Those people are /terrible people/. These things are not free to make and distribute, and to not repay them for your time well enjoyed is just a jerk move up and down.

The minority make up the majority of sales for F2P games with microtransactions. Catering to the 1% of people and ignoring 99% of the people is pretty much wrong if you're trying to be a company that actually cares about quality products as Nintendo (usually) is.

I've been doing a lot of thinking about it and I gues it's totally okay if the price tag means I can access absolutely everything in the game without paying for silly microtransactions and stuff. Because a lot of money has been spent on mivrotransactions... so why not just offer a bill that covers everything?
It'll be interesting to see how this game performs.

@Kalmaro
"people are willing to pay $10 for a game upfront and people have paid even more than that for a free game."

while true, I offered EVIDENCE that "people" is about 10k for paying upfront games.

People pay more in Free games, yes, but you use that to argue that people would be more likely to buy a game that is paid upfront rather than a game with microtransactions. in the google play store, the first pay upfront game in the "top grossing" list is number 200+, and is NBA 2k17 for $8, the rest are all free.

"It's all about first impressions right now and it's clear they are trying to make this game stand out."

yes, the game stands out as being more expensive than EA games. Being cheaper than only Squenix games. They are giving a bad impression right off the bat, and limiting their audience. impressions ARE important, so they should try to impress the most people right now.

I am NOT claiming they should go microtransaction. I simply mention their success to defeat your argument that they will win people over simply by virtue of being flat priced.

My claim is, for $2, they would put the full game in more hands and also end up making more money. More people would impulse buy the game, and as we can see with clash of clans, there are at least 100m+ mobile gamers to cater to, who are impulse spenders.

I'll be curious to see how well this sells at that price point. I was expecting a standard free to play model myself, but I know Nintendo disliked that model to an extent.

@DrRandle
"By your logic, there's a difference between player bases, therefore the price should be different."

no, my logic is, look at the market. There are many more consumers on the mobile platform. It's simple supply and demand, basic lesson taught in all economic courses. There is something called the equilibrium price. At this price, you will sell the most units that will meet demand and end up with an overall profit. Raise the price too high, and demand falls, especially when there are market alternatives.

The point is, because there are more users, and Nintendo WANTS to sell to ALL users, the equilibrium price is lower.

"So if this game were on 3DS, would you have any problem paying 10 bucks for it?"

yes, because there are plenty of alternatives for $20 that would provide me with more than double the value. I would be tempted to buy it on 3DS for $5, thus such a venture would likely not be worthwhile on 3DS due to the smaller userbase.

Mario maker will be available for 3DS soon, and it offers everything Mario Run does and more. I would only settle for Mario Run for $10 on 3DS if I absolutely couldn't afford a $40 game, which being an adult, well, I can, so the point is mute.

" You're basically arguing with a lot of people in these comments that people on mobile basically don't want to pay for a game."

no, I'm arguing that people wouldn't be willing to pay $10 for a mobile game. looking at paid games, the top 100 games are $8 and under. NBA2k17 has licensing fees, which explains the $8 fee. Minecraft with a huge download count of 10mil (this is a flat price game, so the download count means people bought the game) is just $6. Final Fantasy 3 has 100k downloads at $15. FF7, the most famous of final fantasy games has 10k downloads at the same price. Mincraft with about half the price has 100-1000x more sales on android.

The point isn't that people don't want to pay to play a game, but that more people will play it at a lower price.

essentially, the perfect counter argument to every defense of the $10 price point is "look at the market".

@khaosklub You are comparing games that are, for the most part, lesser known when compared to Mario. You can't honestly speculate how much money this game will make, that's why I did not bother arguing with numbers, I merely stated that people have paid for more than $10 and spend more in free games because it's true. It remains unknown if this game will be so good that it convinces other people to hop into the bandwagon but from what I've seen, Mario is a huge name, people love Nintendo games and we are getting a legit one that is unlike the others for $10... with the added bonus that we can have it anywhere.

For the record, when I searched for the top paid games on android alone I'm pulling up minecraft, which is only a few dollars cheaper with over a million installs. The games following that fluctuate but it's all besides the point. Price is important but what is more important is content. If Nintendo is going to charge $10 then it stands to reason that their game will just have to be worth it... and it looks decent to me so far from what I've seen. I'd like to see a little more before I spend money on it though.

I'm not arguing that they would not get the game out more if they made the game cheaper, I'm just saying that they are making a statement by making it more expensive and I agree with it. This isn't just another mobile game, it's Nintendo's baby.

@khaosklub Alright dude. You clearly have some sort of vendetta against Nintendo's price point. We get it. Your tone has been nothing short of condescending this entire time, to everybody on this article. Go ahead and give it up. We get it: you think it's a bad value. Then don't buy it and move on with your life.

Well we get gift cards at work...so I will likely get this.

@Kalmaro
"You are comparing games that are, for the most part, lesser known when compared to Mario."

final fantasy, minecraft and clash of clans?!?

"For the record, when I searched for the top paid games on android alone I'm pulling up minecraft, which is only a few dollars cheaper with over a million installs."

for the record, I already stated it, and it has over 10m installs.
it's 30% cheaper than mario run. most of the top games are lesser known games at $1-3 price points. if minecraft were lower, it'd likely reach the 100m installs of clash of clans. that is the point of what I'm saying. below 10m installs? is that what nintendo should aim for? Minecraft on mobile is pretty much minecraft as people know it.

Mario run =/= a mario bros game.

"I'm just saying that they are making a statement by making it more expensive and I agree with it. This isn't just another mobile game, it's Nintendo's baby."

that's fine you agree with the statement they're making. the statement most of us get is "we're nintendo and we do business our own way. we charge more to third party developers, we never lower the price of mario kart games, even from previous gens, and we charge more for digital than physical.", because that's what they've been saying to us for a long time. but that's subjective and not the point.

whether you agree with the statement or not, my claim is that the statement they're trying to make is self destructive.

@DrRandle
you're obviously missing the point. it's not about individuals complaining about price points. it's nintendo making poor business decisions that will effect our future gaming.

We are all Nintendo fans. we want nintendo to succeed and finally make sequels to games we like, like F zero and metroid. if they fail in the mobile market, they will take a loss and it will mean less risky games on consoles.

I want nintendo to stop being so self destructive and make smarter business moves. They've been messing up with the WiiU, messing up with MyNintendo, Messing up with the Eshop and digital marketplace, and now it looks like they're messing up with the mobile market. We just want them to get their heads out of their rectums and pay attention to the world around them!

@khaosklub Yes, more people know Mario than those paid games. Clash of clans I may be a bit iffy on but I'm talking about paid games, not just freemium ones.

At this point we're just arguing over opinions and that will get us nowhere. I see no evidence of Nintendo being self destructive with this decision though.

@Kalmaro
"Yes, more people know Mario than those paid games. "
Final fantasy yes, but not by a lot. I mean, there have been movies of final fantasy, a lot of people know about it.

and Minecraft? I'd say Minecraft is far more popular than mario, especially with younger people.

"I see no evidence of Nintendo being self destructive with this decision though."

I mean, all the data I presented. Final fantasy free games dwarf the paid games. lower price games own the top paid games. if you don't see the evidence suggesting that this price is self destructive, then you're just not looking.

a point to keep in mind is that this is evidence to support speculation, not definitive proof, but there isn't much evidence to the contrary.

Ten bucks...I don't know. I buy Final Fantasy games on Android for about that.

@rjejr

Those are photoshopped.

@Kalmaro

Egypt is in Alaska. The Nile River is not on Mars.

December 15?!, My birthday!!, XD; but, well, I don't have any smart device of Apple, to wait for Android.
""Bowser"" says?!, Well, He is ready for Mario, XD

Where are the Koopalings?

@3MonthBeef My point is I don't see myself paying $10 for an endless runner on mobile devices.

@khaosklub
You have a point on the price difference. Yet when people are spending that money on a phone I doubt the games available are their priorities. Unlike us when we purchase a game system.

Besides we can't agree as you think all games are overpriced already. So no further questions your honor.

@khaosklub You're going to have hard time showing Mario is less popular than minecraft.

Also, Mario and the final fantasy games are on different levels. Mario is much more well known than final fantasy, so something how final fantasy is doing to how Mario might do is going to be difficult. You can't really prove one way or the other, you can only speculate because we don't have a case where a publisher like Nintendo is letting gamers play with someone as huge as Mario on a mobile device.

@chiefeagle02 I'm with you, I don't see myself paying $10 for an endless runner either.

Luckily, this I not just an endless runner, that's only a part of the game so no problem there.

when Nintendo will make more money on that games vs what they earn from 3D world homme console will be dead

@whanvee
I don't think all games are overpriced. I don't think minecraft on phones are overpriced, nor is nba2k17.

I wouldn't necessarily say that mario run is overpriced, though I believe it likely is. It really depends on what one means by overpriced.

I would say my point is that mario run will be much more successful as price decreases, and would be more beneficial to Nintendo's mobile endeaver.

Will it profit at $10? Probably, but there is more to this than pure profit.
And if their fanbase regrets spending the money? That will also hurt their business.

They really need to build consumer confidence in the mobile market first.

@Kalmaro wut

@Kalmaro
I'm sure data could be gathered to show which is more popular. Nintendo's youtube policies definitely aren't helping them here (another greedy self destructive business practice).
I'm sure google has data regarding searches on google and youtube.

But popular is different from how known a franchise is. Which are we talking about?

Final fantasy 7 is very well known. It's had spin off games, a movie, cloud was in smash, a big ps4 release is the final fantasy 7 remake. I will not assert that it is close to mario, but it is fairly well known among gamers, and closer to mario than most other franchises. Amiibo sales will help illustrate popularity, but that is likely a ways away.

Minecraft is insanely popular. Popular on many platforms, is one of the wiiU's better selling games, very popular on youtube, has it's own toy sections in many stores, plushies and apparel in pop culture sections in normal stores and heavily featured in stores like hot topic. I would say minecraft is just as popular and well known as mario. Fnaf is pretty close too, and is pretty successful on the mobile market.

@khaosklub

"The point is, because there are more users, and Nintendo WANTS to sell to ALL users, the equilibrium price is lower."

That's not true. Nintendo is setting this at a price they believe will maximize income.

Nintendo's President Kimishima, "In the mid-to-long term, of course we want to make the smart device business a pillar of profit, so hypothetically, if sales of around 500 billion yen continue in the future, the sales would not grow to the scale of hundreds of billions of yen as you just mentioned, but we believe that it will become a big volume in the future. It is still a little early to get into specific numbers at this point in time, so that is all I can say for now." https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/library/events/160428qa/04.html

"I mean, all the data I presented. Final fantasy free games dwarf the paid games. lower price games own the top paid games. if you don't see the evidence suggesting that this price is self destructive, then you're just not looking."

There doesn't seem to be a lot of data on lower price and higher price performance. Mainly because most of the market has been doing the low/free-ad methods. However Iwata disagrees with you.

"A key term should be "wide and small" rather than "narrow and large." The basis of our strategy will be how we can receive a small amount of money from a wide range of consumers. However, as people in general recognize that the narrow-and-large method has been outperforming the others, we are investigating where to change in order to surpass existing hurdles. We have had various discussions internally, I have challenged the developers with this issue and they have had many active discussions on the topic." https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/en/library/events/150508qa/index.html

The only issue I have is the graphical style. New Super Mario Bros looked like New Super Mario Bros 2 which looked like new Super Mario Bros Wii which looked like New Super Mario Bros Wii U which looks like Super Mario Maker's modern skin which looks like Super Mario Run.

Growing up, all Mario titles had their own 'look'. SMB 1, 2 and 3 all looked like different games because they were. Even the Gameboy offerings mixed up the sprite appearance. I have a strange feeling this 'New' look may be here to stay, offering nothing more than updated detail.

@khaosklub

It's a just test. Compared to the crap and shovelware you can buy on a mobile phone, Nintendo's pricing the debut of one of its prized premium IPs for a premium price. They're also relatively new with mobile so... better to aim for the sky before slowly making your way to the ground (there's wiggle room to lower the price). Cuz if they shoot too low, they can't go higher.

@sleepinglion

Eh, it's tough because graphical leaps between console generations nowadays are marginal compared to back in the days of sprites.

The New Mario look is a cool look though. They only thing I think they could do at this point is maybe cellshade?

@UK-Nintendo It's coming out when people will be getting iTunes gift cards for Christmas. Then they will think they aren't really paying anything for it. Nintendo will make bank even at $9.99.

@cleveland124
First off, I love souced info! Gg!

Anyway, yes, nintendo believes that they are setting the price at the equilibrium price, I disagree. I argue that the price that will maximize profit is lower.

The first quote suggests that they are going with a narrow and large approach, expection 45 billion yen (about $450mil) from mobile gaming, for 5 games for the year.

In the second quote, iwata in 2015 describes how narrow and large (cater to small audience at a larger price/scope) works well in the japanese mobile market, but states that the worldwide market prefers wide and small (appeal to a larger audience, but with smaller price/scope). He expresses interest in appealing to a larger market.

They expect a $450 million profit and are catering to the japanese market with the price point. If they sold it for $2, they could make 100m sales (like minecraft) on android alone. That's a gross of $200mil right there, in one country I believe.

Iwata had the right idea, but it seems things changed, likely due to miitomo's poor profits.

They DO want to sell to everyone and maximize profit, but based on those answers you cited, it seems they don't expect a large audience. Which explains the higher price point... and when it sells modestly, it becomes self fulfilling.

@Turbo857
You can always go up, especially after establishing youself. Look at angry birds moving to console for $60!

But they can appeal to a wide market. This looks like the best runner out there, and those games are a staple. Many casual mobile gamers would buy it on impulse.

I'm not surprised by the price,Nintendo likes to overprice their games. I need to see all the content if its worth $10...

Not interested in this at all but it does remind me that I'd like to get the super Mario maker for 3ds...

@rjejr A chart to show that Apple users are loose with their money? Well, I could've told you that. :b

Anyway, this looks surprisingly fun. Sure, they could've charged $0.99 for it, but would a $0.99 Mario game be worth playing? Judging by what's already available for that price, no.

I'm okay paying $10 for this I just don't think most people would. $0.99 would be better but maybe there is a lot of content. If it's not just procedural generation that could make it worth it to me.

10$ for a mobile runner ???

I may be a fanboy, but sometimes, I don't get Nintendo...

• this is bad for their 'casual' image just before the Switch release... Not a smart move IMHO

For god sake its not just an endless run and jump game £7.99 is the price of two disgustingly crap pints of lager in the UK
Get a life everyone

@G-Boy I think it's you wo don't get it.

These Casuals you talk of would never pay a dime anyway and just play the free version.

There are plenty of games on the Appstore ( Square Enix's Final Fantasy games for example ) that are priced 10 dollars or even 20 dollars.
I think I paid around 18-20 dollars for Final Fantasy 9 on iOS and it was worth every penny!

Now 10 dollars for Super Mario Run isn't too bad, depending how much content the game has. How much fun it is and if there is enough to do to get my 10 bucks worth.

I would love to spend my money on that... IF IT WAS AVAILABLE FOR ANDROID!

10$?????

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahshagaagagshdjdidhejerofhrdjsja.....

@Anti-Matter But mobile gamers don't think like that.

@Jeronan Can I have my own opinion, thank you very much? Even 7 dollars can be too much for mobile gamers. Nintendo needs to know how to make people buy the game.

Nintendo tries to educate the mobile masses that games are actually worth something. I fully support that.

@Janus1986
Yup. Let's help Nintendo by our ability. I will wait for Android version because my smartphone is using Android.

@G-Boy
That's the problem if they still have extreme cheapskater mindset. They want Freebies, refuse to pay something. Gosh... so selfish...
Oh, btw. I will help Nintendo with my ability while you still keep complaining with whatever Nintendo efforts.

The game looks good, and I suppose a flat fee is better than paying a bunch for microtransactions. Super Mario Run probably won't reach Pokemon Go levels of popularity, but I think it'll sell pretty well.

@Anti-Matter if you wanna help Nintendo maybe you should buy some shares. Also can donate to them. Buy this game on mobile.
Why don't you throw your android phone and buy a apple smartphone so you can buy this game. Come on help Nintendo. They need your help

@Anti-Matter I live in a country where you can have your own opinion, so why don't I have the right to complain? I think the price of this game will scare off casual mobile gamers. I don't know anyone who would pay more for a mobile game than The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past on the VC!

BTW, you can't even play this game, because you have an Android phone.

I think they've got the price all wrong to be honest. The casual smartphone gamer won't be willing to part with that sort of cash unless it's an amazing game. The reason Pokémon Go took off was because it was free, and money was optional and never forced upon you to enjoy the game. I can imagine many people downloading this to play the free features but giving it up once they get bored, rather than splash out for the full unlock. Needs to be around £2.99 to entice most people.

There seems to be two opposing points on what people are willing to spend and how much at a time. Both are great points. Some will balk at the idea of dropping $10 at one time on a game. However, the great point is also made in that people are spending that much and more in any giving week in microtransactions. So what exactly is the difference? It reminds me of the subsidization of smartphones here in the states vs outright buying the phone. Its hard to see the benefits of just buying your phone outright and saving money through the measly $20+ a month for x amount of years.

Also to @khaosklub point about the level of recognition Mario has in comparison to other franchisees, there is absolutely no doubt (at least here in the states) that Mario has more brand recognition culturally than Minecraft (and especially FF) . That's not to dismiss the popularity and recognition Minecraft has developed. But if I were to put a picture of Mario and Minecraft in front of older family and acquaintances (who.probably haven't picked up a gaming controller since NES days), I'd bet my left foot they would instantly recognize Mario first. Probably would be able to hum the theme and possibly tell you who Luigi is. Now, that's not suggesting that as far as.console game sales go, that Mario is outselling Minecraft. But the brand recognition (culture wise) doesn't even come close. And like Pokemon (with Pokemon Go to an extent) that's what Super Mario Run has going for it

@khaosklub Good luck proving me wrong about which is more popular. I am 99.9% sure I'm correct on this. Popular could be said to be different from how well known a franchise is but I still hold that I'd be right on that one too.

I'm talking worldwide here, not just in America.

@wiggleronacid Huh?

@ArmoredGoomba Lucky for you, it's not just procedural levels. I think a lot of people are thinking this is just a mario flavored temple run

@UmbreonsPapa
I buy my phones outright, a few gens behind too, for under $300. I got the galaxy note 4 now.

I think older people will recognize mario more, and young people may be more familiar with minecraft. The paradigm is shifting. I think mario is still overall well known, but minecraft may be more popular at the moment.

At the very least, I'd say it's a debatable issue.

As for the microtransaction thing, more than $10 a week, not everyone contributes that much weekly, and I doubt people go in planning to spend that much. It's impulse spending. Small amounts that all add up. Same reason stores put $1 candy and and other cheap things at the checkout line. Impulse buys. The higher the price, the less impulsive people will be. You can't compare spending over $10 on several microtransactions to spending $10 on 1 thing. People are just lesa likely to bite/buy as price goes up.

@Kalmaro
Well, I won't, but I still say an argument can be made.

And by worldwide, I'm assuming we're considering the parts that matter.

@khaosklub Anyone who knows either mario or minecraft would matter I'd assume. I don't think location matters in this case.