[Let's Talk] Will you be buying Super Mario Run? - Nintendo Everything

Submit a news tip

[Let’s Talk] Will you be buying Super Mario Run?

Posted on November 19, 2016 by (@NE_Brian) in Let's Talk, Mobile

Nintendo’s first actual mobile game (Miitomo doesn’t count!) is due out in about a month from now. Earlier this week, the company revealed that Super Mario Run is coming to iOS on December 15. We also have a final price of $10. Super Mario Run is free to download, but paying that amount provides full access to each of the three modes.

Many people will probably download the title just to see what it’s about. Of course, Nintendo is hoping to convert as many of those users into buyers as possible. With that in mind, we have one question for you: will you be buying Super Mario Run? Do you feel $10 is too expensive for a mobile game? Are you even interested in Super Mario Run? Tell us how you feel about it below!

Highlights from last week’s topic: The end of Wii U


Personally i enjoyed the Wii U quite a lot, in fact it have been years since i enjoyed a console so much, I don’t think it was a failure, despite the fewer games available, the ones it had were worth gold, Smash 4, Bayonetta 2, Xenoblade X, Splatoon, ect.
I never regretted having a Wii U, on the contrary, i am very happy and very proud of owing this console, which i keep enjoying and will continue to do so even after production is over. Long live Wii U!


Great system, wrong generation of young people. Too focused on specs and stuff. It’s had some great games, though. I don’t have too much to say.


I remember my Wii U very fondly, it kept me great and comfy during parts of undergrad. On it I played NSMBU and Nintendo with joy. I also truly enjoyed Assassin’s Creed 3 and Ninja Gaiden.

After that launch wave I played the great hits like MK8, Super Mario 3D World, SSB4, and Xenoblade Chronicles X.


It’s telling that though the marketing for Wii U was at first about asymmetrical
multiplayer, that aspect actually never caught on. We all had great memories about Nintendo Land I’m sure, but after the first year, the focus shifted to
creative uses of the GamePad for a single user. Wii U’s best games tend to be ones that make the most of the second screen, but there’s no denying that such games make up only a small fraction of the library: Pikmin 3, Game & Wario, Super Mario Maker, Splatoon, etc. I still think the Gamer part of Game & Wario is one of the best gaming formats ever conceived, if only for one of the most effective jumpscares this decade when the mother gets the drop on you big time after 10 minutes in Endless. The rest of the top games are just really good core games that don’t need the GamePad: Super Smash Bros., Super Mario 3D World, Mario Kart 8, Bayonetta 2, etc., and the multiplayer in those games was splitscreen or cooperative with one player having a screen of their own that was no different from the others’.

The Wii U represents to me Nintendo’s willingness to try new things at huge expense. They took the gamble and lost, and I’ll always be happy they did. They tried with the concept of the GamePad and there were hits and misses, but the hits will probably never be seen on another platform again. With Switch, Nintendo is sending the message that sacrificing the GamePad is worth the loss in gaming possibilities if it means regaining the audience that wants to just focus on portability over all else. It’s not as big a risk as the GamePad since there is precedent for traditionally grounded experiences being made to travel with the players with products like Nvidia Shield and various emulator boxes finding market success. I mean, I used the off-TV function sometimes and I know some people swear by it, and though I never really considered it a feature, it’s clearly the focus of Switch. Only time will tell if it’s a wise tradeoff for Nintendo.


Games. Games. Games!
There should’ve been more games. The great ones were so great. But alas! The dry spells were destitute and nigh unto endless! That is an unbearable tribulation for the average consumer.

Just look at the gaping chasms between the release dates of the Wii U million sellers:

November (launch) – New Super Mario Bros U

October – Zelda: Wind Waker HD
November – Mario 3D World

May – Mario Kart 8
September – Hyrule Warriors
November – Smash Bros

May – Splatoon
September – Mario Maker
October – Yoshi’s Wooly World

Leave a Reply

  • TheDonRob

    Yep, of course!

  • キロ

    Probably not.

  • Jay Bern

    I’m thinking about it. I got Miitomo and Pokemon Go and enjoyed them both, but Miitomo lost its luster pretty quickly for me and even Pokemon Go’s starting to do the same. There needs to be enough features to hold my interest for as long as possible.

  • SortableShelf19

    Probably not. It does look fun, but I’m not sure if it’s something I’d be willing to spend money on. Plus, I wouldn’t even be able to play it until next year since I’m not an iOS user at all.

  • It’s more than what I thought it’d be initially, so I’ll buy it out of curiosity. The two previous Nintendo mobile games have been at least entertaining, so I’m at least hopeful for this one.

  • Addy

    I’m not an iOS user, so no. Until the Android version gets a release, I’ll reserve judgment.

  • Exy

    Finally I get featured on one of these things!

    I’ll give it a go once it’s on Android and not before.

    • JasonBall

      Your comment deserved featuring big time. Congrats.

  • Mando44646


    1. I dont use or own Apple products
    2. Even on Android, 99% phone games suck hard
    3. I dont like Mario games. I’ll consider AC and FE when those release

  • Vigilante_blade

    No, I see no point in playing shallow games when I have access to a plethora of deeper games in my ridiculously large backlog.

    • Radish

      Except your argument is flawed because it assumes that people play phone games when they are sitting at home. Most people play phone games when they are out and need to kill time and have their phone with them. It’s not as either/or as you are making it out to be.

      • Vigilante_blade

        Many people do play them at home, what are you talking about?

        • Radish

          Phone games are designed to be played in short bursts when you have time to kill and are away from home. That’s why you don’t see very deep games on phones, or at least successful ones. You are missing the entire point of the mobile gaming experience.

          • Vigilante_blade

            And yet I see people spend entire days on their phones playing these bad games. Another reason why games on smart device sare of low quality is the touch only interface. You can’t make a deep game with such controls.

          • Radish

            Good luck playing your deep game with amazing controls while you are out and about when it’s much easier to pull out your phone (which you will always have anyway) and play.

          • Vigilante_blade

            It’s not really hard to carry a portable system when you got a bag, lol.

          • Radish

            What portable system? The Vita? Dead. The 3DS? Nearly dead. Switch? You think Switch will take over mobile gaming from Apple and Google?

          • Vigilante_blade

            The Vita is an amazing system if you like Japanese games. Games are still coming out for it daily.

            The 3DS has many games that can be played for hundreds of hours. I also have a backlog.

            I don,t think the Switch will take over mobile because it is not a mobile system. It’s a portable.

          • But it’s being promoted as a home console don’t forget that.

          • JasonBall

            It’s called a portable system, man, literally any of them. Try one some time.

          • Radish

            I like portable systems and I like portable games, that’s why I am getting a Switch. I don’t see your point.

          • Vigilante_blade

            THen why do you get your panties in a bunch when I say I’d prefer to play game son a real console?

          • Radish

            Because you entirely miss the point of mobile games. They aren’t meant for long in depth gameplay sessions. They are for when you have 5 minutes to kill.

          • Vigilante_blade

            I’m not really missing the point. Mobile games are for playing on a toilet. I have books and dedicated systems that give me a better experiences though, even on a toilet. I have so many games to play. I can’t spend it playing lesser games.

            I’d rather get engrossed in a solid, polished game, than something made to kill time. I want to enjoy my time, not just make it pass faster.

            Quality time over slightly less boredom.

          • Radish

            I don’t see how you are gonna be playing final fantasy or skyrim on the toilet unless you are seriously constipated.

          • Vigilante_blade

            Get one or two battles in, pretty much. Some gold and EXP.

          • Radish

            That’s you. I’d rather get my poop over with as quickly as possible and not risk dropping expensive hardware in the toilet.

          • Vigilante_blade

            I don’t think I’ve ever dropped expensive hardware on a toilet… and aren’t phones waaaaay more expensive than game systems?

          • Radish

            Phones are expensive too but I don’t play games on the toilet at all. The only reason I’m playing a phone game is if I am in transit.

          • Vigilante_blade

            Where you could be using a 3DS. That’s what I do perosnally.

          • JasonBall

            I’m saying that deep games are possible on the go.

          • Radish

            Yeah but are usually best suited for home. Just like you wouldn’t play your mobile games on a big screen tv

          • JasonBall

            Uh… yeah, I guess deep games are typically more in line with the concept of home console gaming. But some people’s lifestyles happen to accommodate playing deep games on the go. I remember playing many games at school when I’d have a free period, and it was easy to get into it for an hour with headphones in a corner. Maybe Vigilante is also able to enjoy deep games on the go because of his lifestyle, and therefore does not require Mario Run to keep him occupied.

      • According to studies, the overwhelming majority of mobile gaming is played at home:

        • Radish

          Interesting study, but the most popular game (Pokemon Go) cannot be played sitting at home.

          • Vigilante_blade

            It actually isn’t the most popular anymore. It was overtaken months ago. Poplar, sure, most popular, not anymore. It’s a casual game, of course there would be a huge drop rate.

          • Radish

            What non-casual game is more popular than Pokemon Go on mobile? It is still in the top 5 most popular mobile games and has a huge market share. The fact that you need to be on the Go to get the most out of the game refutes that study.

          • Vigilante_blade

            Top five, but not number one. And “casual” is not a positive label, lol.

          • Radish

            It is if you care about money, which businesses tend to do.

          • Vigilante_blade

            You mean like Sony? They are doing fairly well.

          • Radish

            Not in the growing mobile market. Their Playstation brand is really the only thing keeping the company afloat these days. Nintendo’s appeal to casual gamers will ultimately win out against a shrinking hardcore gamer market. Even hardcore gamers like you and I buy Nintendo products.

          • Vigilante_blade

            Mobile and handhelds are two different things. The hardcore gamer fanbase is still very alive. The success of the PS4 and Steam demonstrates it. Heck, even the relative success of the XBONE shows it. On the other hand, the failure of the Wii U also demonstrates my point. Only smart devices have the casual market locked down. Core gamers are the majority of console and PC gamers.

            I am a hardcore gamer, but you seem more like a core than a hardcore gamer to be honest…

          • Radish

            Yeah but my point was if any company has a hope in bringing back casual gamers it won’t be Sony or Microsoft, it’ll be Nintendo. Switch is an attempt to do just that. Hardcore gamers will like the games library and casuals will like the functionality and capability of its portable nature compared to tablets. They will also like the price (assuming it is $250). PS4 Pro and Scorpio is an attempt to double down on the hardcore market rather than expand it. And while PSVR has casual appeal, its price is astronomical for mass market success.

            I don’t care whether you label me a “core” or “hardcore” gamer, I play all kinds of games on dedicated gaming devices.

          • Vigilante_blade

            There’s no point in bringing them back. Nintendo got burned the last time they tried. Plus, as consumers, I’m perfectly happy with Nintendo not focusing on casuals at all. I want high quality games, non-casual games. It would be in my interest if Nintendo did not focus on them in any capacity. I will not encourage casual focus.

            Furthermore, casuals are on smart devices. The reality has changed since the Wii era. They are not coming back to consoles.

          • Radish

            Again you missed my point. When I say Nintendo is going after casuals I mean they are through their mobile games division. I think one of the things Switch is going to try and do is entice some portion of its mobile customers into purchasing a Switch where they can find a deeper gaming experience. The two will run parallel. If Nintendo was truly not going after casuals they wouldn’t have entered the mobile market and instead double down like Sony and Microsoft (which I think will be a mistake for those companies). I won’t be surprised if other companies attempt to copy the “Switch model”.

            If you are against this, you are basically against Nintendo’s survival in the gaming marketplace.

          • Vigilante_blade

            Seeing that commercial, it seems like they are going after core gamers this time around. Mobile consummers for the most part are not going to get a Switch. They are not going to get any console. The only “mobile” consummers that will get a Switch will be those that happen to be gamers “as well”.

            I honestly would rather see Nintendo go third party than see them going exclusively mobile. To me, it seems more that they are targeting mobile consummers who also own a PS4, PC or XBONE. The mobile only consumer base is pretty much out of reach.

            Mobile is also a spot where they can throw their low effort minigame collections and gimmick games for a quick buck. I hope they take them there and focus on better console experiences. Things like Kirby and the Rainbow Curse should not be on a home console in 2017.

          • Radish

            It’s like you don’t bother reading what I write. I specifically said Nintendo was NOT going exclusively mobile, hence the Switch. But to ignore that market is just stupid from a business standpoint. They can have multiple revenue streams just fine, and they’d be stupid not to use their presence on iPhones and Androids to advertise their deeper gaming experiences available on Switch.

            It shows a lack of maturity on your part that you would refuse to see Nintendo do business with casual consumers just because it makes you feel bad. You’d rather see Nintendo go third party than attempt to grow a shrinking market of gamers.

          • Vigilante_blade

            Oh, Nintendo is diversifying their portfolio, that’s not something I argue against. I however will not bother playing inferior game son inferior hardware. I have so many great games to play.

          • Radish

            Well that’s wonderful for you, but Nintendo is trying to win over multiple crowds with Switch, and if that’s too “icky” for some people they have to get over themselves.

          • Vigilante_blade

            Again, casual gamers are never coming back. Only core gamers play on dedicated systems. Casuals are a tiny, insignificant niche.

          • Radish

            Your “filthy casual” attitude is what really needs to leave gaming. For someone who claims to be a super mega hardcore gamer you sure talk about casuals a lot.

          • MagcargoMan

            It’s an obsession.

          • Vigilante_blade

            You attribute an attitude to me that I do not exhibit. I don’t care about the wants of casual gamers, true. That doesn’t mean I wake up at night hating them. I merely look out for my own needs.

            The only casuals I actually dislike are the elitist kind.

          • Annie

            Casuals aren’t a ”tiny, insignificant niche”, Minecraft, CoD, GTA, Lego Star Wars, Lego Marvel Avengers, NBA, WWE, UFC, MLB, NHL, Madden NFL, and FIFA are among the best selling games of this year, I get it that you’re not interested in ”casual” games but you could voice your opinion without exhibiting your denialism and elitism

          • Vigilante_blade

            Except maybe for the Lego games, the entierety of the games you have named are deep enough to be called core games…

            Please don,t call people elitists because they disagree with you.

          • Radish

            The games Annie listed are the best selling games every year BECAUSE they appeal to casuals as well. Games that only appeal to hardcore gamers won’t sell as well as Minecraft, CoD, GTA, and Fifa.

            The reason we attribute an attitude to you is because you display it all the time. I’ve never seen a hardcore gamer so obsessed with casual games that you have to talk about it every chance you get. Casual gamers on the other hand are by definition not going to care enough to voice their opinion on hardcore games, because if they did that would mean they’d have time to play them. When you make statements like “Casual gamers are never coming back” that not only flies in the face of the facts, but it also is entirely opposed to what Nintendo is trying to do with its mobile games division and the Switch. If Nintendo can’t reach a mass market appeal with their new product, and it only appeals to Nintendo fans or the hardcore gamers that care about Nintendo, we get another 13 million sales over 4 years.

          • Annie

            So you’re saying FIFA isn’t a casual game?… even if you said Minecraft was a core game the undeniable reality is that most people who play these games are casuals

            “Regardless of platform – people’s gaming habits aren’t going to change just because there’s a new platform, we have an enormous amount of players who are more in the casual game space, but they play a lot. It’s kind of a weird, ironic thing to say; They aren’t hardcore gamers, or even gamers, but they play Call of Duty every night. And those guys are going to continue to play regardless of platform. So I think not only will we continue to engage with that existing player base, but we’ll take next gen and see how far we can go with it.” ~Mark Rubin (Infinity Ward)

            And if I called you an elitist is because of the comments you make, like that time you said you hoped that Nintendo’s mobile games would fail just because you don’t like mobile gaming

          • Vigilante_blade

            FIFA is a competitive 1V1 games that doesn’t quality as remotely close to a party game. Minecraft is extremely deep when you dig deep enough, and most Minecraft users play for long, extended periods of time… as core gamers.

            You called me an elitist because I disagreed with you, nothing more, nothing less. I wanted Nintendo mobile games to fail because I dislike mobile games and would rather have them focus on their consoles. That is not an untenable position.

          • Annie

            Like I said, you can tell everyone that FIFA is super hardcore, competitive or whatever but the people that play them are mostly casuals, even Infinity Ward themselves admitted that CoD is mostly played by casuals despite having a competitive scene

            And no, I’ve disagreed with lots of people before on this site but you’re the only one I’ve called an elitist and it’s because you’ve exhibited elitism in your comments multiple times before, like when you made up your own definition of what a casual gamer is, you said casuals are crybabies who demanded games to be made easier instead of trying to get better at them, this is clearly not the definition of a casual gamer and I corrected you that time as well

          • ForeVision

            I think the definition of casual depends on who you ask. Since there are also people who “casually” play hardcore games, would those be casuals? Or the people that play core games on a lower level? What about the people that play Candy Crush on their phone/tablet, and never do anything more? I really don’t know anymore.

          • Annie

            Casual gamers are the ones that play casually and aren’t interested enough in the industry to frequent gamings news sites and comment in them like we do, Smash Bros and CoD have competitive scenes but most of their players aren’t invested in gaming, they just play for fun and don’t really care about learning all the techs or ranking up in CoD

          • Vigilante_blade

            I’ve not claimed that casual gamers as a whole are crybabies, albeit some are… And there is a lot of truth in the assertion that some individuals wish to have equality of outcome in their games, believing that it is unfair that they do more poorly than others. When it comes to gaming, I believe in equality of opportunity. I believe that games should reward self-mastery, a.k.a. the act of getting better for the sake of getting better. I played a lot of competitive smash, not to be better than others, but to be the best player I can be. If anything, a casual gamer who gets upset that I beat them at the game through my deserved victory (which I achieve through more practice and hard work) is much more concerned with how other compare to them than I ever did.

            In other words: A competitive gamer (a subset of the core gamer) believes that hard work and effort should be rewarded, and the act of self-improvement is their brand of “fun”. Those who shun competition, a subset of the casual crowd are believers in equality of outcome, e.g. those who believe that playing fields should be leveled to accommodate weaker players. The later can be interpreted as extremely unfair to core gamers, since they did the hard work, they put in much more effort. Naturally, if you work hard towards something, you’d want to win over someone who did not put in similar amounts of effort. That is in a sense, fairness. Both groups have a different definition of what is fair in a game, but core gamers tend to have one that is more merit-driven, whereas the casual definition to me appears to be somewhat lazy.

            A core gamer is simply someone who gets heavily invested in games. Naturally, those who play games on a deeper level often happen to be more skilled as a result of this habit. Furthermore, this also means that core gamers tend to have more informed opinions on games and more critical tastes. A hardcore game is the equivalent of a tea connoisseur. I for example used to drink cheap tea packets (a casual tea drinker). One day however, I tasted actual premium leaves, and became more enthusiastic toward this beverage. I became much more selective and stopped consuming cheap tea altogether (albeit I would drink it if offered to me). I am a hardcore tea drinker, but will at times engage in cheaper (casual) tea on rare occasions.

          • Radish

            You consider yourself a “hardcore tea drinker”? Holy **** man, you really went off the deep end.

          • Radish

            You’ve got it entirely backwards. If they focus solely on their consoles they will remain at a very low market-share. The reason Nintendo is going into mobile gaming is because they have FAILED with their most recent console and see a huge revenue opportunity. You really think Nintendo’s leading development teams are working on mobile games? No, they are working on console games regardless of their entry into the mobile gaming world. They have small teams working with DeNA to create mobile gaming experiences that will expand their market-share and steer people to their dedicated gaming platforms like Pokemon Go did with 3DS, XY, and Alpha Sapphire and Omega Ruby, and now with Sun and Moon.

            I am so glad you don’t make business decisions for Nintendo. Lol

          • BUT if Nintendo someday goes the 3rd party route,they better NOT follow Konami’s footsteeps and/or SEGA’s constant exploitation of their bigger franchises and leaving the other ones biting the dust.

          • KnickKnackMyWack

            You act like casual games are all inherently low quality. Dude, Wii Sports and Nintendo Land may not have a great deal of depth but they are fantastic party games that even non-gamers can play and play well at. I don’t see why Nintendo cannot have one or two of those types of games now and again. And it is not just “casual” non-gamers. We are also talking about families with children. Many of these casual titles are their entry point into games in the first place.

          • Vigilante_blade

            Most casual games are low quality. Quality games can have casual elements in it to be more accessible, but they must have depth, or they wlll have not retention value.

            Fire Emblem has the casual mode, but the game remains a deep tactical RPG. The casual mode is not forced on consumers, and one can play the more engrossing way. Mario games are simple to understand, but the mechanics can be used at a high skill level.

            You can make a core game that welcomes entry level players well. The original Super Mario Bros. is one of them.

          • KnickKnackMyWack

            I think that is an unfair judgment. Is Mario Party 2 a bad game for the sole case of being a simple party game? No, it functions well, it’s charming and it has basic gameplay that is fun, unlike many of the more modern Mario Party games that threw out traditional board gameplay.

            I agree core games can be made accessible, but not at the expense of losing entire genres and franchises just to force people to play only core games. The industry is bigger than that and can sustain its diversity.

          • Vigilante_blade

            Mario Party 2 actually has a lot of tactical depth. You must wisely choose your trajectory, and many of its games are not luck-based (albeit the luck-based ones are horrible). The series got a lot worse when they introduced the car mechanic and removed a lot of the decision-making. All in all, a more skilled Mario Party played is more likely to win than in later games in the series. It is a party game, but it has some depth to it.

            Really, no game cannot be made core. A core game is just a deep game. Make a game deep enough, and any genre can work.

          • KnickKnackMyWack

            Mario Party 2 is not tactical at all. Unless pressing A to jump a fiery jump rope is now somehow considered strategic in nature. And plenty of those types of mini games are in the newer ones too.

          • Vigilante_blade

            Sure it is tactical. You must choose your routes wisely, you get to use items in a smart way. You get to choose to go on happening spaces to get the end star. You get to use the map’s layout to your advantage. This is far better than any of the later games past the Gamecube.

            Pretty much everyone agrees that the car made this game brain-dead (and motion controls)

          • MagcargoMan

            Shoosh now, any casual game that he likes isn’t actually casual. Obviously.

          • I hate to disagree but in Mario Party 2-8 the only strategy part comes into play in the items usage and choosing your route. Everything is randomized on the boards.

        • Vigilante_blade

          That was a great rebuttal. Amazing, lol.

  • theFooFighter

    I have a 3ds and a Vita along with like 4 other handhelds. If I want to play something on the go I’ll play one of them and if i only have my phone I’ll read the news or something

  • JasonBall

    Absolutely, as soon as it comes to Android. And at the same time, I plan to get poster slots in Miitomo while I’m at it.

    Reason? Well, Mario games are too hard for me. I can’t explain it, but I have a mental block. I am incapable of controlling Mario to stomp on a Koopa. I am sure you will all balk at me, and I’m embarrassed too. I only beat Mario Land 2’s easy mode after weeks of anger and sweat and restore points. Never beat another Mario game.

    I hope that, just as Phantom Hourglass helped me transition from 3D Zelda to 2D Zelda, that Mario Run will help me with other Mario games. My problem was always the timing of moving. Jumping was the easy part. It was the timing of the D-pad inputs that got me in the past. Now, though, that is out of the equation. All I have to worry about it tapping at the right spots, not how to get there.

    I am really looking forward to it. When it’s out on Android, I’m in. I will buy anything Miyamoto makes, especially when it’s a game that might help me enjoy a wider library in the long run.

  • ronin4life

    Nope. Android user.
    Maybe once it launches on my platform of choice. Interested in the Mushroom kingdom builder majigger

  • Wendigo

    10 dollars is pricey for a silly mobile game.

  • ShadowDragoon

    No, i am not touching any smartphone game.

    • Karenahobbs

      Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj229d:
      On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
      ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash229HomeFindGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!mj229d:….,……

      • ShadowDragoon


  • Annie

    I’ll definitely try it once it releases on Android and then I’ll judge if it’s worth buying, $10/C$13.99 for 24 levels seems pricey so the game better be really good, if it was $5 or less then it’d be a guaranteed purchase

  • Locky Mavo

    Sure I will, it’ll be a good time waster when I don’t have access to my 3DS, and then from March onward, my Switch.

  • Supporter

    I will be missing out on Super Mario Run because I don’t have a mobile phone! Well… I kind of do. It’s really for emergencies though so it’s not an Apple or Android device. It’s too bad because this game definitely looks like fun. Just a quick little break from life.

    I find myself struggling to play my games because I’m usually playing for hours and I don’t have that kind of time. So this would be perfect and I say this as someone who doesn’t really care for mobile games! I hope everyone who gets to play Super Mario Run enjoy themselves. I mean Toadette has a role in the game! How cool!

  • ForeVision

    My phone gets filled up with memory just updating What’sApp, that and I’d rather play the Mario 3D kind of experience on Switch. I’ve thoroughly enjoyed Super Mario 3D Land on the Wii-U, and that’s the kind of Mario experiences that I’ll be looking for.

    So in short, No.

  • Justin McQuillen

    No, mobile gaming is worse than cancer

  • MagcargoMan

    Even if I had a smartphone, no, not unless it was free. Why would I play a watered-down 2D Mario with less stuff. I stopped buying real 2D Marios because of how bland they got. Sure as hell not gonna but this one.

  • Lic. Ferrett

    I wouldnt download it even if it was free.. I have plenty of mario games on my nintendo consoles, thank you!

  • Saxo2712

    O yeah, buying it day 1!