Nintendo Stock Plummets After Poor Super Mario Run Reviews

Nintendo's plight highlights the issues in the mobile gaming market.

36

The launch of Super Mario Run was meant to be a moment of triumph for Nintendo. Even though it's the company's first major foray into the mobile market, Super Mario Run was anticipated to be a huge success. Although there's no indicator that the game is doing badly, or that it's a bad product, Nintendo stock has steadily declined in price after the initial spike that came with Super Mario Runs debut.

From a high of around 30,000 yen per share ($255.99 USD) on December 10, Nintendo's stocks today are going for 24,540 yen ($209.40 USD). The reason for this massive decline in stock price is poor customer reviews for Super Mario Run, the majority of which are not because the title is a bad product, but because the full version of the game is $9.99.

Nintendo Co Ltd. Stock

Nintendo is suffering from an issue that many Apple App Store developers have faced. There seems to be a ubiquitous view from those who predominantly game on mobile devices that paying a one-time fee to purchase a game is undesirable. This customer outrage at having to pay a premium price for a premium is what's led to the rise of the free-to-play model in mobile gaming. Apple App Store customers main argument against Super Mario Run is that Nintendo is making a "cash grab" by charging $9.99 for the game and that it should be "free."

Nintendo has released Super Mario Run in a way that the first three levels of World 1 and the Toad Rally mode are free. This decision allows customers the chance to demo the game before they choose to purchase the full product. Nintendo has made clear that Super Mario Run is going to be sold at a one-time premium price since the Apple Keynote where it was revealed. However, customers are viewing Nintendo's decision to allow customers to demo the game then requiring a one-time payment for the full product as a "bait and switch," even though all these facts are clearly marked in the product description on the Apple App Store.

It seems that Nintendo's desire to avoid the timers and premium currency that plague mobile gaming has had the opposite effect. In a desire to make Super Mario Run appealing to everyone, it's alienated the mainstream mobile gaming crowd that would rather wait 6 hours to play another Toad Rally race or buy $100 in premium currency to build their Mushroom Kingdom.

Hopefully, this doesn't sour Nintendo's feelings on mobile gaming, or force it to start offering a much less customer friendly product filled with the things that make most mobile games frustrating and practically unplayable. For now, though, Nintendo will have to find some way to deal with the fact that public misunderstanding of Super Mario Run has lead to what looks to be an unfair devaluation of its company's stock.

Contributing Editor
From The Chatty
  • reply
    December 19, 2016 8:04 AM

    Jason Faulkner posted a new article, Nintendo Faces Stock Crisis After Poor Super Mario Run Reviews

    • reply
      December 19, 2016 8:21 AM

      it's quite tragic, because the game is actually good! people are just not willing to pay / are not used to pay $10 for a mobile game it seems. The other reason is the always online problem.

    • reply
      December 19, 2016 8:37 AM

      I don't have a problem with the price. I think that's appropriate for a quality mobile game that's more than just a simple mechanic. Although, I think $5 is the tipping point for the masses, today. I think the industry needs to keep working on the public's mindset that paying $5-10 after some free content is acceptable. The early iPhone devs wrecked it for everyone by doing the whole disposable game bit.

      I really believe the mobile gaming work would be vastly different had Nintendo started developing for iOS right off. I get why they wouldn't. But, just imagine what if Nintendo showed the world how to do DS quality titles on iOS/Android instead of the stream of disposable games we got instead?

      • reply
        December 19, 2016 10:03 AM

        I agree. I was fine to pay $10, but then they tried to play scrooge mcduck by not allowing other devices on the same account have access to the other levels. Thankfully a re-install + a linked account lets you free that up (but even still only one copy can run at a time, whatever).

        The problem for me is the game isn't fun. Sure it is pretty, and the music is wonderful, but it's not like playing NSMB for the DS years ago (which I *loved*). If they can't match the experience of a game that came out 10 years why bother in the first place?

        I don't know how to fix the early ios dev game thing. When you allow *anyone* to submit games to the store for any price, it's a race to the bottom. Maybe that was the main reason for not allowing indie developers on consoles for the longest time. I think it is interesting to see how Steam doesn't fall into this trap now that greenlight is a thing. There was a post a while back about how a huge percentage of all steam games were added to their store THIS year.

        • reply
          December 19, 2016 10:16 AM

          Wait, what? It doesn't automatically allow your other devices on the same account to have access to the IAP?

          • reply
            December 19, 2016 10:47 AM

            No, you have to jump through hoops, and even when you line it up, two people can't use the game at same time.

            • reply
              December 19, 2016 10:50 AM

              Just curious, but do you have the household account stuff setup?

              I guess I could kinda see not letting the same account run multiple copies of the same purchased app (though that's still lame, but okay). But, hopefully it allows you to use the household account to get around it.

              • reply
                December 19, 2016 10:57 AM

                1) IAPs don't work with family sharing

                2) The game additionally requires you to associate the purchase with a nintendo ID, so unless you are also using that same ID on other devices you can't 'share' it.

                • reply
                  December 19, 2016 11:08 AM

                  2) d'oh - I mean, I guess I could see how that might be tied into some future thing the Switch might do, but... grrrr

            • reply
              December 19, 2016 10:52 AM

              why are you expecting one purchase to be allowed to be shared with infinite family members?

              • reply
                December 19, 2016 10:53 AM

                It should work like every (or almost every) other Apple app: You buy it, and everyone in your 'family" (up to 5), gets access as well. It's not a loophole, it's how the store works.

                • reply
                  December 19, 2016 10:56 AM

                  it's how Apple decided everyone must run their business. It's not how anywhere else works. You wonder why mobile games suck and it's policies like this. Not only can you not even charge $10 for a game but you can't charge per person, you're just expected to have a limit on sales of one per family.

                  • reply
                    December 19, 2016 11:00 AM

                    It's not really Apple, it's the consumer. For instance, I don't want to buy the game twice, so I just don't buy it at all.

                    • reply
                      December 19, 2016 11:01 AM

                      consumers suffer when sustainable business models aren't available. Apple is seeing the consequences of these policies on the iPad too with a lack of good pro apps.

                      • reply
                        December 19, 2016 11:08 AM

                        I am not sure if that applies, here. Nintendo full well has the capability to use the business model that they want.

                        If you're saying that Apple created an environment where people expect certain business models...that's not really on them, is it? Consumers must want/like a particular businesss models, and the developers cater to it. Apple is just a store-front.

                        • reply
                          December 19, 2016 11:17 AM

                          Nintendo can only use what business models Apple allows. Saying they're just a store front is a cop out. They dictate policy. Does your business model involve a trial? Well their store front doesn't have support for that. So how do you get people to try your expensive game? You could try to work around it and manually publish a Lite version but this has a variety of additional costs. Say you do it and make a Lite and Full version. Well now your full version is subject to Apple's store policy that your app must be shareable between 5 family members at no additional cost. Maybe better to just make the game cheap with IAP then. What about a subscription model? Or paid upgrades? All not supported either. So every dev flocks to free with IAP since that's the de facto only well supported business model. Now you can't charge for games. And since pro apps don't work in this way at all you just get very few pro apps.

                          An individual consumer doesn't care about business models. They're going to choose "free" every time. That doesn't mean making everything free is the best thing for consumers long term. If only one type of product can make money that way (shitty mobile games) then consumers suffer in the long run and then Apple suffers for their platform being less attractive. Apple's job is to manage the long term health of their platform and the store policies are a huge part of that.

                  • reply
                    December 19, 2016 1:18 PM

                    We're talking the same company that lets two people play Mario Kart on the DS with only a single copy purchased.

                    Their own policies are inconsistent.

                    • reply
                      December 19, 2016 1:35 PM

                      a $30-40 game that can be shared under certain circumstances with one other person who has already contributed $150+ to the company (via their own DS) in order to incentivize them to buy their own copy vs splitting a $10 purchase 2-5 ways so that other people never have to spend anything. DS sharing is a trial to get someone to buy. This is just making an already cheap purchase even cheaper.

                      • reply
                        December 19, 2016 1:39 PM

                        *shrug*

                        That's the mobile market, like it or not. Nintendo is too late to the game to try and change it. This market backlash is a clear indicator they've done something very wrong.

                        • reply
                          December 19, 2016 1:40 PM

                          or it's an indicator the market can't support this type of game anymore

                        • reply
                          December 19, 2016 1:46 PM

                          Maybe. We'll see how much they pull in from the people that do like it and pay for it.

                          It's entirely possible to be successful while not making something for absolutely everyone.

                          • reply
                            December 19, 2016 1:58 PM

                            that's what Nintendo's own hardware is for, the whole point of a mobile entry is to make something for a wider market

            • reply
              December 19, 2016 5:29 PM

              When you jump through hoops, do red coins appear?

    • reply
      December 19, 2016 10:03 AM

      "This customer outrage at having to pay a premium price for a premium is what's led to the rise of the free-to-play model in mobile gaming."

      The customer outrage is due to the race-to-the-bottom pricing that developers & publishers engaged in a few years ago (assisted by Apple's hands-off approach to the app store and allowing way too much crap in).

      They only have themselves to blame.

      • reply
        December 19, 2016 10:07 AM

        You say that, but there's also a camp that says Apple is too restrictive on what they allow on their store. They can't win either way, so they might as well go with what makes the money.

        I am fine paying $10 for a good mobile game, but I am not used to the other restrictions Nintendo put in place, effectively making me buy multiple copies.

        • reply
          December 19, 2016 10:21 AM

          Apple is both too restrictive and yet also incentivizes unsustainable business models. For their talk about app store devs seeing success, the reality is that the overwhelming majority are complete failures economically.

          The only one that model benefits is Apple, who has a ton of free/cheap content for their platform.

        • reply
          December 19, 2016 12:41 PM

          If your app doesn't exhibit noticeable bugs and/or security holes (which admittedly covers a much greater swath than is reasonable), you're home free in most cases.

          They do not monitor content or actual quality, except for porn/hate/etc. Which is the problem.

          • reply
            December 19, 2016 12:55 PM

            Oh, no, they'll block your app for any number of ill-defined reasons. And working through their review process can be a completely opaque pain in the ass. it can also be fine. It seems to matter a great deal on which reviewers you get.

      • reply
        December 19, 2016 10:17 AM

        Yup, that was my comment too. It brought us the world of worthless disposable games. bleh

        • reply
          December 19, 2016 12:13 PM

          There is so much garbage on the App Store and now it is on Steam too :(

          • reply
            December 19, 2016 1:02 PM

            Both of those systems really need to work on discoverability. I heard about some really cool space indie game that's like minecraft, but I'll be damned if I can find it on Steam amid the sea of trash there.

            • reply
              December 19, 2016 2:26 PM

              Just look at the top of the sales charts.

            • reply
              December 19, 2016 5:27 PM

              IOS is just hopeless at this point. I do wonder what would happen if Steam would set a price floor, somewhere around $10. Just put a stake in the ground and say "get outta here shovelware"

    • reply
      December 19, 2016 10:05 AM

      Might be worth linking to this article: http://www.shacknews.com/article/98123/game-trader-should-you-buy-nintendos-stock somewhere in there?

      • reply
        December 19, 2016 2:38 PM

        Nah. No one wants to listen to that idiot.

        • reply
          December 19, 2016 8:32 PM

          If Michael Pachter can make a living with his incredible video game technology predictions, I wouldn't worry about it. haha

    • reply
      December 19, 2016 10:06 AM

      Should have made each world $2 instead or something.

      • reply
        December 19, 2016 10:52 AM

        That's not a bad idea. $2/world or $10 for everything. Give people a choice.

    • reply
      December 19, 2016 11:12 AM

      When I went to see Star Wars last week I overheard someone saying "What, you can only play a couple levels and then they make you pay? Bunch of scam artists!"

      That really annoyed me. This guy thinks the people who made a product and are selling it are scam artists because they're not giving it away.

      • reply
        December 19, 2016 11:31 AM

        Which closely mirrors the overwhelming majority of the bad reviews on the app store when I checked; people are mostly claiming that they're being ripped off by Nintendo because the game isn't free.

      • reply
        December 19, 2016 11:43 AM

        no they think it's a scam because nothing in the store indicates what it is. They have plenty of reasons to expect it to actually be free like Temple Run. If Apple just properly supported trials then consumers could've had the correct expectations here.

    • reply
      December 19, 2016 11:25 AM

      Fuck their sign in page.

      I can sign in fine via their website from my computer.

      Linking an account via the exact same login does not work.

    • reply
      December 19, 2016 12:49 PM

      I wish there were more levels. $10 is steep for a 1-2 hour single player game. Multiplayer is fun though.

      • reply
        December 20, 2016 1:04 AM

        I've spent >2 hours on the three free levels and I still don't have all the black coins :( It would be weeks for the whole thing, surely?

    • reply
      December 19, 2016 1:20 PM

      If their stock price was so heavily dependent on a single game for a platform that's not theirs, that's really kind of indicative of an issue.

      Was it artificially inflated recently with the announcement of that game? If so, just sounds like a correction to me.

      • reply
        December 19, 2016 1:36 PM

        it's not really about one game, it's about an expectation that Nintendo can turn mobile into another highly profitable pillar of the company whe their traditional ones are under siege

        • reply
          December 19, 2016 1:41 PM

          Regardless it's a pretty nasty downturn over a single game. Somewhere, someone (the market) anticipated too much, too soon.
          I have to wonder if that 13% drop is an oversell and now it's a good time to buy.

    • reply
      December 19, 2016 1:29 PM

      It's $15 here, and from the first few levels I played it's really not worth that much. I could get a better game on steam or PSN for that much.

    • reply
      December 19, 2016 1:57 PM

      I think everyone here complaining about the price would still be complaining even if it costed less

      "$10 is too much, $5 is about the max I'd pay for it"

      "$5 is too much, $3 is about the max I'd pay for it"

      No matter what the price is people would complain it costs too much.

    • reply
      December 19, 2016 2:12 PM

      I've gotten more enjoyment out of this @ $10usd than a bunch of $60 AAA games.

    • reply
      December 19, 2016 2:13 PM

      The thing is some people were dumping $10 a day into PoGo, and it has almost no gameplay. So naturally $10 for a full game seemed like an easy sell.

    • reply
      December 19, 2016 2:41 PM

      I don't care for NSMB series in general but I like this a lot. I think its because of Toad Rally, perfect pick up and play mode that scratches my competitive itch.

      If you don't like coin challenges and Toad Rally then there isn't that much for you, certainly, but that's what the demo is for.

    • reply
      December 19, 2016 3:25 PM

      I'll consider this "Today's Mario Thread".

      For those who love Animal Crossing, load up the game and go to the main screen where you can see the castle. The music is in the same style of Animal Crossing! As a huge AC music fan, this is the best part of the game!!

    • reply
      December 19, 2016 9:08 PM

      Wait till the next game they put out is free to play with a billion microtransactions and energy to stop you from playing too long for free. The reviews will be bad and the stock will plummet some more because people are dumb.

      • reply
        December 19, 2016 11:10 PM

        You were close. You mean the reviews will be horrendous and the stock will soar.

Hello, Meet Lola