Talk:Super Mario Run

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sources[edit]

czar 17:04, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Endless runner"[edit]

A thought, based on something someone noted to me in person the other day. Is endless runner the best term to use if the game has a defined end and, as such is not endless? I mean, it basically plays the same as one, it just has a defined end. Most sources don't call it "endless runner" outright, but call it variants like "auto-runner". That's not a recognized genre though, nor is it something I can illustrate through use of wiki-links. Or maybe we should have it like [[endless runner|auto-runner]] or something like that?

Thoughts? I'm open to suggestions. Sergecross73 msg me 19:52, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Change instances to "auto-runner", but still link to endless runner, maybe? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 20:23, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've gone with that for now. Sergecross73 msg me 16:05, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ideally, the endless runner article should have a subsection about "auto-runners", but this is better than it was previously. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 00:08, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Old conversation, but since Super Mario Run isn't endless, I'm going to change the "endless runner" in the lead to "auto-runner". (and remove the category) Awsomaw (talk) 13:17, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DENA as the game's developer[edit]

The game is being developed in-house by Nintendo, as stated in this Time article where Miyamoto says "The team that’s developing Super Mario Run is actually mostly comprised of the original Super Mario development team. So [Takashi] Tezuka-san is the developer and I’m the producer. We’ve brought together the developers at Nintendo who know the side-scrolling Mario games best, to work with them to develop the best side-scrolling Mario game for a mobile device."

For future reference, DENA was only announced to be an assistant for them, and from what I understand, they only provide some networking-related services, as Nintendo is unfamiliar with the practice of mobile app development and did not have the logistics for them set up at the time. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 08:33, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I think some confusion has been created because yesterday video game analyst Serkan Toto claimed that he spoke to someone who said DENA was actually developing the game, and some sources started picking up the rumor and discussing it. While he's a reliable analyst in general, he's not in the position to confirm something like this exactly. Sergecross73 msg me 12:37, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, well I'd still take Miyamoto's word (and previous announcements) regarding this. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 18:32, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I completely agree, I was just letting you know the background on it. Sergecross73 msg me 19:10, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that the analyst chooses what lexicon to use. He first said DeNA is "developing the game" and Nintendo is only doing "quality assurance". Then, he rephrases and says DeNA is "programming the game" and Nintendo is "designing it". As a journalist, his first statement was erroneous. We don't know if DeNa is doing SOME programming, ALL the programming, or completely co-developing the game (program, graphics, sound), or entirely developing the game on their own (highly unlikely). That's always one thing that we have to be sure of - accuracy and irresponsibility of loose claims. Ajcalderon13 (talk) 15:24, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
His statements conflict with previous statements regarding DENA's involvement in Nintendo's mobile lineup anyway, so until Nintendo clarifies, we shouldn't consider it as a fact. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 22:22, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
An IP added earlier that "開発協力・運営協力" (Joint development and cooperation) means that DeNA belongs as the developer, but I still don't think this is enough to place them in the infobox. First of all, we already knew that these Nintendo mobile games were being assisted on by DeNA, and this conflicts with previous statements from both companies regarding their role with the games. We need more direct statements from either company before we can say for sure that DeNA actively contributed a large part to the game's development, beyond just mobile networking services. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 20:36, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I imagine that, if its true, it'll probably make headlines, as I don't think the general public thinks DENA is developing the game for certain. An outside company being the primary developer for a Mario game doesn't strike me as the type of detail you'd have to dig for - it seems like something that'd be a top story on your typical IGN/GameSpot/Eurogamer mainstream websites. Sergecross73 msg me 20:40, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
According to US Copyrights Gov - Nintendo handled programming, audio, text, and visuals. It also credits SRD (an internal programming company that works inside Nintendo) for additional programming, and DeNa for additional graphics as well. The database is quite thorough in authorship information, and this corroborates that Nintendo handled a majority or significant portion of the game in-house. 14:17, 28 December 2016 (UTC)Ajcalderon13 (talk)

Persistent internet connection[edit]

[1]

So it was announced that the game is always online, in order to combat piracy. Two things: would this fall under Gameplay or Development; and would this warrant early protection of the article given the high amount of vandalism SimCity (2013 video game) received on similar news? --ThomasO1989 (talk) 17:02, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think either would be okay depending on how it's presented. If it's more about Nintendo announcing it, and/or explaining or changing it at all - dev section. If it's how it may affect gameplay - gameplay section. As far as protection goes, is wait for now, partially because I think the industry/user base has gotten more tolerant of the concept in the last few years, especially with mobile games, and partially because I keep a pretty close watch on the articles, along with Dissident93 and some others, so I'll be prepared to protect as soon as issues occur. Sergecross73 msg me 17:11, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't see this before I added it, but I did add this to Dev, since Miyamoto explains their reasoning (but which also ties to a number of other things I added about N's switch to mobile and protecting its first-party characters). I don't think it needs mention in gameplay. --MASEM (t) 18:05, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On that review table...[edit]

As a note because I see a revert war brewing: while the article is in this "development" mode and not at any GA/FA/PR, we are allowed to have reviews in the table that are not used in prose. The goal ultimately is to use each review in prose and that must be met by the time you go to GA, but at this point, where we're floating up to B-class, it is completely fine to data-dump the reviews and hold off writing the reception until one has a better picture of how to write it. --MASEM (t) 15:43, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that was precisely my understanding of things as well. Pinging Lordtobi to make sure he sees this. Sergecross73 msg me 15:50, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly since this isn't a GA article adding review links in the Reception section is fine. --Frmorrison (talk) 19:06, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that's a good argument, since ideally we should be creating the article from the ground up as a (potential) GA. Despite that, we shouldn't be removing valid stuff just because it's too early to have a proper section on it. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:42, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

is it okay if I add a link to "always-on drm"?[edit]

My edit was undue'd. Joeleoj123 (talk) 13:43, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like Masem was the editor who objected to your addition. I'll let him explain, as I'm no expert in DRM and I'm not entirely sure what the difference is in this case. Masem? Sergecross73 msg me 14:17, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
First, it was being added to the lede, which is not the right place for it. The always-on Internet connection is described in the body (including the reasons why and reaction to that), but the issue is that it is not clear if it is true DRM or the requirement for a server connection (like an MMO); Nintendo certainly doesn't call it DRM, so we should avoid that term if that's not what it really is. --MASEM (t) 16:11, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
From what I've read in stuff like this, it appears to be both. But looking at sources, many third party sources mention the requirement, but few actually call it DRM explicitly I suppose. (Most hits seemed to only have DRM in the user-generated comment sections rather than the articles themselves.) Sergecross73 msg me 16:22, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to fail this for now. The reception section is really what needs the most work and can't be ignored. I also have a feeling that "Commercial" section might need to be cleaned up in tone as it sounds to report-like. I'm optimistic that this will become a GA soon, just needs more time in the oven. Don't give up.Blue Pumpkin Pie Chat Contribs 18:19, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In Popular Culture or Variations[edit]

Saw this on Yahoo Sports http://sports.yahoo.com/news/pirates-bring-classic-video-game-life-new-pnc-park-videoboard-235742291.html, seems that the Pittsburgh Pirates have brought this to life! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.225.120.2 (talk) 11:12, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Super Mario Run/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk · contribs) 05:17, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]


I'll start the review.

@Blue Pumpkin Pie: Have you forgotten about this one? Harrias talk 12:08, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have not. and I'm actually writing it up as we speak.Blue Pumpkin Pie Chat Contribs 17:06, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Harrias: Sorry for the delay. here are some issues i found for the case.
LEAD

Immediately there is information on the lead that is not in the article anywhere else. The Lead is supposed to summarize the content that is in the article.

  •  Done The game is one of Nintendo's first games developed for mobile devices, and one of the few instances that a game in the Mario series was officially released on non-Nintendo hardware.
^^This is nowhere mentioned or recognized in the article.
  •  Done As a Super Mario game, it contains a common plot whereby Mario must rescue Princess Peach from Bowser and rebuild the destroyed Mushroom Kingdom.
^^Once again, not recognized in the article that it is a staple in the Super Mario series.
  •  Done Unlike many other mobile games that use a free-to-play approach, Super Mario Run is offered as a free demo with an alternating price to unlock the rest of the game's remaining content.
^^This is not reflected in the article at all and is highly subjective. The model presented does exist and it is called freemium
  •  Done The Release date for the game can be mentioned much earlier in the article. I recommend it to be introduced as part of the second sentence.
  •  Done The game became the fastest-growing app in iOS history having been downloaded more than 50 million times worldwide during its first week, increasing to around 300 million by 2018.
Nowhere in the article is the game recognized as "the fastest-growing app in iOS history". It appears to be a subjective claim with a side of marketing.
GAMEPLAY
  •  Done The image has too much information. It's not relevant what level we are seeing. The image is supposed to explain details that may not be apparent on the gameplay section. So the details of how the pause button works are already explained in the body of the article, and not necessarily in the gameplay.
"Gameplay of Super Mario Run showing Mario standing on a pause block, halting his running as well as the timer at the top of the screen."
^^This is what I would prefer as the description.
  •  Done In the game's plot, Mario is invited to Princess Peach's castle. He accepts the invitation. He witnesses Bowser kidnapping the Princess and destroying the Mushroom Kingdom. It is up to Mario to undo his actions.
^^This can be summarized better. The last sentence sounds like it's taken directly from promotional material.
  •  Done The player controls Mario Mario automatically runs from left to right, and jumping on his own to clear small gaps or obstacles. The player must can control Mario by tapping the touch screen to make Mario jump over larger obstacles;
^^Its probably better to organize the information on what Mario does automatically, and inputs the player can control. It's odd phrasing to say players control Mario if he does things outside of the player's control.
  •  Done Like other side-scrolling Super Mario games, the player must maneuver Mario over gaps, onto enemies, and into coins to collect them. The end goal is for the player to safely get Mario through the level in the fastest time possible.

^^The source does not indicate how similar it is to other side-scrolling Super Mario games. It also does not indicate that the end goal is to complete the level in the fastest time possible.

  •  Done Despite the controls, In addition to controlling when and how high Mario jumps,there are elements that alter Mario's movements besides jumping. For example, an undocumented but strategic a hidden ability exists whereby the player swipes and holds the screen in the direction opposite of Mario, stalling his jumps during his descent and moving him slightly in that direction.
  •  Done For another example, standing on pause blocks pauses the timer and allows the player to decide where Mario to go. Standing on blocks marked with directional arrows changes the direction of Mario's jump. Bubbles are limited and are used to send him backwards, letting the player repeat sections of the level. They are used automatically to rescue Mario from impending death.

^^These are obstacles, not examples of how players control Mario. Other than perhaps the bubbles, but it's not clear what bubbles are in the article. I know they are obtainable items than can be used at the player's discretion, but the article doesn't indicate that at all. So are they an object or an obstacle? The sources breakdown


  •  Done In addition to the main game, there is a the separate "Toad Rally" game mode where players can challenge "ghost" versions of other players' playthroughs of levels, similar to the time attack modes found in most Mario Kart entries.

^^Source does not compare to Mario Kart.

  • more issues pending
  •  Done Following the launch, Nintendo introduced a "Friendly Run" version of Toad Rally

^^This sentence is vague. What does it mean the following launch? THat it happened soon after the launch? and if so, how soon?

  •  Done An easy difficulty mode was added in a January 2017 update, assisting players having difficulty in beating levels in World Tour by granting them unlimited bubbles and removing the time limit. This mode has the downside of not counting any However, coins collected will not count while playing within that mode.
  •  Done In September 2017, a significant update added levels, courses, buildings, and a playable character, Princess Daisy. The update includes nine new levels that must can be unlocked by completing various goals and challenges.

^^The word "significant" is subjective and should be removed. Also, review the entire paragraph and see if you really need to point out every sentence as an update.

  • I may forgot to mention this, but the themes of each level is too trivial to point out in the Gameplay section.
DEVELOPMENT
  •  Done The last paragraph in this section has all of the basic information on how the game was developed. So why isn't it the first paragraph?
  •  Done Nintendo representative director Shigeru Miyamoto explained that the company believed that with some of their game franchises, "the longer you continue to make a series, the more complex the gameplay becomes, and the harder it becomes for new players to be able to get into the series", and that the company sees mobile games with simplified controls, such as Super Mario Run, not only allows them to "make a game that the broadest audience of people could play", but to also reintroduce these properties to newer audiences and draw them to their consoles.

^^The point trying to make in this section is too long and can be summarized further.

RELEASE
  •  Done Super Mario Run can be downloaded for free, giving players access to the first three levels, and the remainder of the game can be unlocked following a one-time payment, eschewing the traditional microtransaction approach used by smartphone games.

^^None of the sources explicitly state that the standard approaches microtransaction and that Super Mario Run is going against normal conventions.

RECEPTION
  •  Done The name of the reviewer is not necessary and should be avoided. The publication/website is more than enough and the reference already lists the name of the author.
  • Reception section has a long list of reviewers in the VG review table but the large majority of them are not reflected in the article. Not even the most recognizable sources are being used. IGN, GameSpot, Eurogamer, EGM, Game Informer. The goal should be adding all of them though. There is a significant portion of them giving a below-average review and should be reflected in the article.
  • Avoid reducing reviews to just a single sentence of commentary. Reviewers can have multiple points in their assessment of the game, and usually, they share similar points. Outliers are also important to mention. IF there are any reviewers who are saying the exact opposite of the common opinion, then it should be mentioned too. So you're going to have to review the Reception section extensively.
  • more issues pending

As you continue to review, I am making changes based on your suggestions. You will start seeing checkmarks appearing next to the suggestions, indicating that they are complete. I have already added one next to the first entry under GAMEPLAY, for example. FreeMediaKid! 23:40, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Because I was delayed on this one, I will give you an entire month as of now to fix these issues, there are still more to fix, and I will be adding more as I continue to review it.Blue Pumpkin Pie Chat Contribs 18:19, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer comparison[edit]

For my own reference, I will have to create myself a table that conveniently lists the opinions of reviewers. I would rather do that than edit the article directly while comparing the reviews, which in the latter cass could become quite ugly. FreeMediaKid! 10:00, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review chart
Publication Opinions (by order of appearance in reviews)
4Players + Good controls, challenging, acrobatic level design, leaderboards with friends
− Always-online requirement, Nintendo Club requirement, no landscape orientation, Toad Rally itself and cosmetics underwhelming
EGM + Uniquely combines Super Mario with the runner genre, providing a new difficulty; situationally replayable
- Tediously repetitive, hardware requirements, always-online requirement
Game Informer + Feeling of speedrunning skillfully, situationally replayable
- Tediously repetitive, really repetitive
GameSpot + Acrobatic Mario, good controls, situationally replayable
− Tediously repetitive (procedurally generated levels would have fixed that), expensive for a mobile game, always-online requirement
IGN + Simple to learn and difficult to master, good controls, replayability
− Adds nothing new to the series, relatively static graphics
Nintendo Life + Faithful graphics, good controls, lack of player input compensated for, replayability
− Always-online requirement, expensive for a mobile game
PC Magazine + Good controls, situationally replayable, levels have high variety
- Always-online requirement, no landscape orientation, tediously repetitive, ticket system unnecessary
Pocket Gamer + Fast, fluent and various level design; replayability
− Toad Rally mode somewhat uncompetitive
Polygon + Good controls, bubble mechanics welcome, replayability
− lack of player input, always-online requirement, tediously repetitive
Notes Google searches for meaningful reviews from other countries to broaden the perspective—in particular Australia, Korea, and especially Japan—seemed lacking. Additionally, the Gamezebo and Hardcore Gamer reviews contained information and opinions that were shared by other higher-profile reviewers such as Nintendo Life, so adding the sources into the article would have simply repeated others' opinions or observances.

I decided to move this section from the GA nomination page to the main talk page. The recent GAN failed, and I wanted the problem regarding the lack of reviewer statements to be more obvious, so I had to move this table, which now includes Pocket Gamer and Polygon reviews. FreeMediaKid! 06:56, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

From a VG project standpoint, we don't do reviews this way, that's too consumer oriented. Either we hit the major high points of each review, or, and a better approach, try to identify common reviewers' high and low points pulling in a few key quotes from various reviews to support those as one goes through that. But definitely not by the table approach above. --Masem (t) 13:42, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is not what I have been thinking. What I have been thinking is that I would create myself a table that I could later use as a very, very rough summary of the important notes to consider when editing later. Feeling that my drastic edits might render the section seemingly rushed or ungrammatical, I would rather just build the table here, translate that into prose in my sandbox, and then blend that content into the article. To be honest, I had not been thinking about using the sandbox until reading this comment, but I should understand what Reception sections ought to look like, based on my experience. It probably would have helped to clarify the meaning of the table, but as I read the reviews, it helps me to remember what I have read of them, and I feel somewhat more motivated by doing it. I had not thought of it, but my approach does seem rather unusual, as it probably would have been made perfect sense out of if I had simply moved it to my sandbox. FreeMediaKid! 10:59, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it’s a little out of the ordinary, but as long as it’s leading to constructive editing to the article, I’d say it’s fair game. Worst case scenario, you could just move it to your sandbox, though this article doesn’t have much in the way of dedicated editors, so I doubt there’d even be enough input to force that to happen. Sergecross73 msg me 12:34, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, I do not know what I was thinking when I moved the section here. Something has been telling me that I would be doing all of the editing, so if that is the case, I had no reason to move it here, except to more publicly display it. Then again, it does leave the section open for suggestions. FreeMediaKid! 02:02, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Super_Mario_Run&oldid=1218834059"