[–] SkepticalMartian 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
They should have just not bothered with the smartphone market. Smartphones do not lend themselves well to gaming because touchscreen controls suck.
The problem with a genuine SMB game on phones would be the on-screen controls. Lots of people hate them, myself included. Not to mention your own thumbs getting in the way of the on-screen action. (A bluetooth controller would defeat the mobile gaming purpose.)
Second, Nintendo is terrified of piracy, so they'd probably try to make the game call home like SMR, rendering the game unplayable in areas with no cell coverage or wifi available.
[–] TheTrigger ago (edited ago)
I also recommend the "Sentinel 3" (I think there's a "4" now?) tower defense game. Wasted lots of time on that one. Final Fantasy translated (as) well (as it could be) to mobile, imo, with Brave Exvius. There are more examples.
[–] aaronC 0 points 6 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago
Nintendo's smartphone plan is to give mobile users a watered down, inferior experience to what they could get on a Nintendo console in the hopes that they'll buy a Nintendo console after getting a taste of Nintendo games. Pokemon Sun and Moon sold extremely well, and I am fairly certain it had a lot to do with Pokemon Go.
[–] [deleted] 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
[–] TheTrigger ago
ahem
[–] 7286809? 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
It's a good strategy too. You give smartphones simpler games to play that better suit the device (no complex input devices but it has built in GPS and gyro and shit for stuff like Pokemon and Mario) and give people a taste and increase brand recognition for your dedicated gaming devices and bigger budget games. Mario Run isn't supposed to be a proper Mario games, it's an endless runner with a Mario theme. "Real" Mario will require real Nintendo hardware. It's clever, if a little jewish.
[–] Codewow [S] ago
pokemon games usually sell well, the main issue with Pokemon for nintendo is that they make very slim money from it.