Nintendo Soars as Super Mario Mobile Game Comes to the iPhone

Post by vidarh » Thu, Sep 08, 2016, 4:59 PM UTC

Pxtl wrote: post #72

gkanai wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the Marvel franchise is quite fatigued atm...

I tend to think franchise fatigue is less of a concern with movies because movies are short-enough in length that you don't feel like you just finished (or haven't finished) the predecessor when the sequel comes out. I'd worry more about the Marvel TV products than the movies, or if the movies fail as stand-alones (like Ultron).

Post by vidarh » Thu, Sep 08, 2016, 5:01 PM UTC

fsloth wrote: post #15

Fraterkes wrote: post #11

I've seen a lot of people saying that Nintendo were kinda dumb for taking so long to capitalize on the incredible brand recognition of mario and pokemon, and looking at the money pokemon go is making, I don't disagree. But I think that the reason a lot of non-nerds cared so much about pokemon go is that pokemon still meant the same thing to them as it did 10 years ago. So the reason that those brands are still such a…

"But I think that the reason a lot of non-nerds cared so much about pokemon go is that pokemon still meant the same thing to them as it did 10 years ago. " My kids were aware of Pokemon before the GO from the cartoon series but were not terribly enthusiastic about them. They went like nuts for the Pokemon GO game. Anecdotally, it's not just the brand, but the game itself which people feel enticing.

Post by duaneb » Thu, Sep 08, 2016, 5:04 PM UTC

vidarh wrote: post #109

wmeredith wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, that's sort of disingenuous to say, though. They made playing cards for more than half of that. Ditching your business model of 70 years to going into an emerging technology market (video games in the 80's) isn't really conservative.

They're still making playing cards. And it took them 18 years (1956-1974) of experiments with new ventures (including a cab company, and love hotels, and assorted toy ranges) before they started selling video games. Another 5 or so before they got successful. Donkey Kong came out in 1981 and finally made them lots of money from it. So ~25 years from they realised the playing card business didn't have room for further…

Post by vidarh » Thu, Sep 08, 2016, 5:15 PM UTC

eanzenberg wrote: post #111

mcphage wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Call me cynical, but I still don't believe that you can clone a endless runner game, slap Mario on it, and expect it to be successful on mobile. Nintendo has a history of taking existing genres they don't have much experience in, making it their own, and releasing really compelling games. Pikmin for RTSes, Splatoon for FPSes, etc. I don't think they're going to half-ass it.

Those 2 aren't really successful franchises.

Post by vidarh » Thu, Sep 08, 2016, 5:27 PM UTC

duaneb wrote: post #116

vidarh wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're still making playing cards. And it took them 18 years (1956-1974) of experiments with new ventures (including a cab company, and love hotels, and assorted toy ranges) before they started selling video games. Another 5 or so before they got successful. Donkey Kong came out in 1981 and finally made them lots of money from it. So ~25 years from they realised the playing card business didn't have room for further…

Are people buying the cards, though? How much of the business is dedicated to the cards? I'd reckon it could fall into an ocean and much of the world wouldn't notice. I don't call that success.