# Super Mario 3D World Excludes Online Multiplayer



## masterchan777 (Jun 15, 2013)

Koichi Hayashida and Yoshiaki Koizumi, director and producer of the new mario game, conducted an interview with time. In it they said that the upcoming Wii U exclusive Super Mario 3D World will only support local multiplayer.

Core platform Mario games have a mixed history with multiplayer. The first NES game is well noted for the alternating characters multiplayer for two people. Other games have featured multiplayer modes and more recently later entries in the 2d throwback "New Super Mario Brothers" have featured four player on the same screen at the same time multiplayer. Nintendo's efforts in the online arena have long been criticised as lacklustre and many might take this as a sign that such a position has not changed despite claims to the contrary. Futhermore the Wii U's tablet controller had several "alternative screen" demos featuring the tablet as an auxiliary controller with Mario being an example in them.
Is this a dealbreaker for you or does it not matter as much? It should also be noted the Rayman series, now often positioned as the main rival or even superior to the NSMB series, also does not feature online play in the upcoming Rayman Legends or its predecessor "Rayman Origins" but does have an online "challenge mode". Fellow Nintendo title Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon does feature it as does one time franchise rival Sonic the Hedgehog.

 Source


----------



## skarthebloodchild (Jun 15, 2013)

fail if there is no real online multiplayer.


----------



## Nathan Drake (Jun 15, 2013)

Nintendo should really work towards getting a better online service in general so that decisions like this no longer exist. Nintendo is the only company who still pulls "local play only" on most of their titles that offer some form of multiplayer. It's a shame that in an internet connected world, Nintendo can't seem to take advantage of one service that people love.


----------



## emigre (Jun 15, 2013)

And it's times like these where you just have to laugh at Nintendo.


----------



## SSVAV (Jun 15, 2013)

Shame.

Come on next gen Mario should have online MP. Dark Moon has it, SSB has it, Sonic has it, WHY NOT MARIO


----------



## Gabbynaruto (Jun 15, 2013)

Personally, I don't mind that. Local multiplayer is always much much better than anything online multiplayer related. Plus, we're talking Mario here. Why would you want to play online? I can understand Mario Kart, but Super Mario 3D World? The only purpose of an online multiplayer mode would be to annoy each and every person when the one(s) you're playing with will steal all your items and coins. I'm happy with this, really. Online multiplayers should be a focus in games like X or Mario Kart, but no way in a platformer like Mario.


----------



## Heran Bago (Jun 15, 2013)

A lot of my friends have moved. It's increasingly less common for me to have enough people over that want to play Mario together and more common that I'll jump in a 4 player Left 4 Dead 2 match with friends online.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Jun 15, 2013)

Look at the dummies in this thread 

Seriously, Mario games like this are built for playing on the same couch. You simply wouldn't get the same experience playing online with a bunch of randoms. You'd always have that one dick hole screwing everything up or taking everything.

Games like Mario Kart yeah, online is great, and they're adding it to MK8. But for games like New Super Mario Bros or Mario World? No, fuck that.


----------



## gamefan5 (Jun 15, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Look at the dummies in this thread
> 
> Seriously, Mario games like this are built for playing on the same couch. You simply wouldn't get the same experience playing online with a bunch of randoms. You'd always have that one dick hole screwing everything up or taking everything.
> 
> Games like Mario Kart yeah, online is great, and they're adding it to MK8. But for games like New Super Mario Bros or Mario World? No, fuck that.


Considering if there was a certain voice chat option AND online with friends, it isn't as stupid as you think and online WOULD work in this case.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Jun 15, 2013)

gamefan5 said:


> Considering if there was a certain voice chat option AND online with friends, it isn't as stupid as you think and online WOULD work in this case.


 
Yeah with friends, that's it. But still, these games are designed to be most enjoyable with a couch. Like NSMB U, do you think it would be as fun screwing the players up with the gamepad if it was someone over the internet? No.

This game is no different. The better experience is the couch.


----------



## 431unknown (Jun 15, 2013)

Kinda disappointing but, not a deal breaker. Part of the fun is being in the same room next to each other.


----------



## gamefan5 (Jun 15, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Yeah with friends, that's it. But still, these games are designed to be most enjoyable with a couch. Like NSMB U, do you think it would be as fun screwing the players up with the gamepad if it was someone over the internet? No.
> 
> This game is no different. The better experience is the couch.


There are times that some people just cannot do that, so it's better not to alienate all the players and make the 2 options available.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Jun 15, 2013)

Disappointing but not exactly a dealbreaker.



Nathan Drake said:


> Nintendo should really work towards getting a better online service in general so that decisions like this no longer exist. Nintendo is the only company who still pulls "local play only" on most of their titles that offer some form of multiplayer. It's a shame that in an internet connected world, Nintendo can't seem to take advantage of one service that people love.


There's nothing in their online infrastructure preventing them from implementing multiplayer here, this isn't the Wii. The reason it's not a feature is simply because Nintendo doesn't feel it worth spending resources to implement it.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 15, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Look at the dummies in this thread
> 
> Seriously, Mario games like this are built for playing on the same couch. You simply wouldn't get the same experience playing online with a bunch of randoms. You'd always have that one dick hole screwing everything up or taking everything.
> 
> Games like Mario Kart yeah, online is great, and they're adding it to MK8. But for games like New Super Mario Bros or Mario World? No, fuck that.



They said similar things about FPS games
They said similar things about fighting games, hell they said similar things about arcades and home consoles.
They said similar things about RTS games
Some especially cretinous types said similar things about turn based strategy (though I think 3DO would still be around if they had done heroes of might and magic play by email).
They said similar things about role playing games and well look how that turned out.


----------



## Deleted User (Jun 15, 2013)

gamefan5 said:


> Considering if there was a certain voice chat option AND online with friends, it isn't as stupid as you think and online WOULD work in this case.


It definitely isn't the same experience. 
That's like saying watching an online concert is the equivalent of actually going to said concert.
I think it was wise for them to not include online multiplayer.
No lag, good laughs/fun, and the competitive aspect is better.
I'm pretty sure they considered online multiplayer but ruled it out because it didn't fit their vision of what they wanted this game to be.


----------



## gamefan5 (Jun 15, 2013)

andy249901 said:


> It definitely isn't the same experience.
> That's like saying watching an online concert is the equivalent of actually going to said concert.
> I think it was wise for them to not include online multiplayer.
> No lag, good laughs/fun, and the competitive aspect is better.
> I'm pretty sure they considered online multiplayer but ruled it out because it didn't fit their vision of what they wanted this game to be.


I never said it was the same experience but again, it's not A worse experience if you include voice chat option and online with only friends you know. It's been done with plenty of games and it had no problems. And imo, I don't think there would be any probs in this case.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Jun 15, 2013)

FAST6191 said:


> They said similar things about FPS games
> They said similar things about fighting games, hell they said similar things about arcades and home consoles.
> They said similar things about RTS games
> Some especially cretinous types said similar things about turn based strategy (though I think 3DO would still be around if they had done heroes of might and magic play by email).
> They said similar things about role playing games and well look how that turned out.


 
Not all of those types of games would have been that fun on the multiplayer though. Sure some of them have benefited from it, but not all would have. For example, look at Goldeneye on the 64. That's one of those games that is just much better having the opponent a few feet from you, hence why it's still being played in tournaments, over the other Goldeneye/Bond games.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 15, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> Not all of those types of games would have been that fun on the multiplayer though. Sure some of them have benefited from it, but not all would have. For example, look at Goldeneye on the 64. That's one of those games that is just much better having the opponent a few feet from you, hence why it's still being played in tournaments, over the other Goldeneye/Bond games.



I try never to underestimate rose tinted goggles, however that is not what I want to argue -- Perfect dark, probably the very definition of spiritual sequel, got an XBLA remake with online multiplayer.


----------



## shadow1w2 (Jun 15, 2013)

A mario platforming game with online co-op would sell Wii U console units.
Seriously people love that.
It's not needed per se I suppose but it'll only help them.
They should at least considering making an online multiplayer update later and set the ground work for it for later.
Would seem smart.


----------



## FireEmblemGuy (Jun 15, 2013)

Can someone please explain why online multiplayer would even be a feature in the first place? The multiplayer in the NSMB games barely coordinated well with everyone within ten feet of each other; I can't imagine it'd work well over the internet at all.


----------



## Walker D (Jun 16, 2013)

You Fools!! this is what this kind of Mario games really are =


----------



## Ergo (Jun 16, 2013)

emigre said:


> And it's times like these where you just have to laugh at Nintendo.


 
I'm a Nintendo die-hard, and this makes me half-angry, half-confused, and all ******* ****ED OFF!


----------



## WiiUBricker (Jun 16, 2013)

What the fuck is wrong with you? Mario jump'n runs don't need online multiplayer. I beat those game alone and not with people standing in my way.


----------



## Gahars (Jun 16, 2013)

That's a real shame. Nintendo goes through all the trouble of creating an online infrastructure for the Wii U and they're not even taking advantage of it. Come on, Nintendo, lead by example here.


----------



## The Catboy (Jun 16, 2013)

I honestly think online multiplayer ruined gaming. So this great news to me.
Plus online would suck horribly with this game.


----------



## Lushay (Jun 16, 2013)

Are you serious? How are they purposely excluding multiplayer in these games and listening to people whine about it not being there? Wake up, Nintendo. Why do I have to enjoy playing with my friends while playing in the same room on the same screen with them?


----------



## SickPuppy (Jun 16, 2013)

I can see mario now, dual wielding FMG9's, or camping in a dark corner somewhere waiting snipe toad from across the map. Or perhaps a Mario dungeon crawler. What exactly would an open world Mario game look like, and what would you do in it, with an online community?


----------



## The Catboy (Jun 16, 2013)

Lushay said:


> Are you serious? How are they purposely excluding multiplayer in these games and listening to people whine about it not being there? Wake up, Nintendo. Why do I have to enjoy playing with my friends while playing in the same room on the same screen with them?


Actually you can enjoy the game in the same room on two screens thanks to the Wii U gamepad.


----------



## Cortador (Jun 16, 2013)

"Let's take away the option of having online multiplayer in this game, after all, we can not have both Online and Offline multiplayer on the same game, that would be preposterous!"


----------



## BlackWizzard17 (Jun 16, 2013)

Some people may be right, kinda a bummer but this actually gets you to

Step 1. Get up

Step 2. go to a friends /play with family member.

Its seems like nowadays people want multiplayer for everything. Plus a Mario game like this could at least have new power ups or levels for dlc if anything.


----------



## ForteGospel (Jun 16, 2013)

ITT nintendo haters "Deal breaker! no online no support! nintendo doesn't understand online! they need to lead! no infrastructure! QQ!"

everyone else: "as expected"


----------



## Qtis (Jun 16, 2013)

BlackWizzard17 said:


> Some people may be right, kinda a bummer but this actually gets you to
> 
> Step 1. Get up
> 
> ...


Well that's one way of interpreting it, but you could just as well play with someone over the internet. I've got quite a few friends that live in other countries, but are good friends. While I rarely play online multiplayer due to not having time for gaming at times, I would love to play online in a game like mario. Just like NintendoLand-type games would be fantastic with online, but just as well as offline multiplayer. Giving the option of online multiplayer isn't making local gaming any worse. Quite the opposite.



ForteGospel said:


> ITT nintendo haters "Deal breaker! no online no support! nintendo doesn't understand online! they need to lead! no infrastructure! QQ!"
> 
> everyone else: "as expected"


I've got quite a few Nintendo consoles and games (legit, flashcarts and such are just for the simplicity compared to carrying multiple carts), and I would like to have the option of using online. Some games really do benefit from online gaming, both on Nintendo platforms and on others too. Imagine if you still had to trade Pokémons over a link cable.. Online gaming is here and it can be done in many ways. It's not hating for wanting to get more features for a game. It's telling an opinion (though some may tell it sarcastically), which is very good in open forums like this. At least I've changed quite a few of my opinions thanks to discussions here and elsewhere.


----------



## Fyrus (Jun 16, 2013)

I'd say online would have been a plus, but it's not a deal breaker for me.


----------



## ForteGospel (Jun 16, 2013)

Qtis said:


> I've got quite a few Nintendo consoles and games (legit, flashcarts and such are just for the simplicity compared to carrying multiple carts), and I would like to have the option of using online. *Some games really do benefit from online gaming*, both on Nintendo platforms and on others too. Imagine if you still had to trade Pokémons over a link cable.. Online gaming is here and it can be done in many ways. It's not hating for wanting to get more features for a game. It's telling an opinion (though some may tell it sarcastically), which is very good in open forums like this. At least I've changed quite a few of my opinions thanks to discussions here and elsewhere.


you said so yourself, some games do benefit, some games don't, it's up to the devs to decide which games gets online multiplayer (mario kart 8) and which games gets local multiplayer (mario platformers) and in this case I completely agree with them.


----------



## Elrinth (Jun 16, 2013)

The two friends who own a Wii U lives in a town nearby, so I think online multiplayer would definatly be something we'd want to try out.
As long as the game is good singleplayer, I probably won't care.
But seeing as this is coming from a big company as Nintendo, it really surprises me they don't care much about their online strategy.


----------



## The Catboy (Jun 16, 2013)

Qtis said:


> Some games really do benefit from online gaming.


Some games, right there sums up everything.
Mario games would not benefit from it though. I've played NSMW and NSMWU multiplayer, they were extremely fun, but also something that would quickly become impossible if you weren't sitting next to the people you are playing with. 
This is one of those games where I can see more people complaining about online that praising if it had it.


----------



## emigre (Jun 16, 2013)

The Catboy said:


> Some games, right there sums up everything.
> *Mario games would not benefit from it though. I've played NSMW and NSMWU multiplayer, they were extremely fun, but also something that would quickly become impossible if you weren't sitting next to the people you are playing with. *
> This is one of those games where I can see more people complaining about online that praising if it had it.


 

Why's that?


----------



## The Catboy (Jun 16, 2013)

emigre said:


> Why's that?


Have you ever actually played them in multiplayer?
The games quickly turn into a mess with everyone attempting to do their own thing.


----------



## ForteGospel (Jun 16, 2013)

emigre said:


> Why's that?


because you would not be able to punch your friend in the face after they killed you on purpose for the 5th time

or yell at them to pop up the bubble when you are waiting to come back while they are running the whole level alone


----------



## KingVamp (Jun 16, 2013)

Elrinth said:


> But seeing as this is coming from a big company as Nintendo, it really surprises me they don't care much about their online strategy.





ForteGospel said:


> you said so yourself, some games do benefit, some games don't, it's up to the devs to decide which games gets online multiplayer (mario kart 8) and which games gets local multiplayer (mario platformers) and in this case i completely agree with them



I rather they focus their resources on their games that benefits from online the most than tack it on anything that has multiplayer.

/thread


----------



## emigre (Jun 16, 2013)

The Catboy said:


> Have you ever actually played them in multiplayer?
> The games quickly turn into a mess with everyone attempting to do their own thing.


 

Because that can't be replicated in online multiplayer? You're not really giving any reasons why it wouldn't work in online but in local multiplayer.



ForteGospel said:


> because you would not be able to punch your friend in the face after they killed you on purpose for the 5th time
> 
> or yell at them to pop up the bubble when you are waiting to come back while they are running the whole level alone


 

Dude, voice chat.


----------



## ForteGospel (Jun 16, 2013)

emigre said:


> Because that can't be replicated in online multiplayer? You're not really giving any reasons why it wouldn't work in online but in local multiplayer.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


because you can punch face someone through voice chat


----------



## MarioFanatic64 (Jun 16, 2013)

emigre said:


> Why's that?


If I may speak on Catboy's behalf, it's due to communication and co-operation. It's hard enough to work together with a friend as you're knocking about with each other accidentally just trying to get through the level.

With online, it would be much harder. Unless you're playing with friends, you have no idea who you're playing with. Which means you won't be able to work together because you don't understand what each person is trying to do. The only way to try and avoid that would be to include a kind of chat function but it's a family game, so it wouldn't be wise in the event that a 5 year old comes across some foul-mouthed teenager with sexual frustration in an online Mario game.

Yes, other Nintendo games have worked well, but that is because of the type of game. Mario Kart is competitive, so you don't need communication with the other players. The same goes for Smash Bros. Kid Icarus still works despite need of co-operation because they're also in competition with another team. There is a direct task at hand, and only one way to do it; same goes for Luigi's Mansion's online.

But with Mario, you've got a Time Limit to complete the level; and the rest is just chaos.


----------



## The Catboy (Jun 16, 2013)

emigre said:


> Because that can't be replicated in online multiplayer? You're not really giving any reasons why it wouldn't work in online but in local multiplayer.


mariofanatic64 pretty much summed it up for me
The games require proper communication and co-operation, something you can't do properly online with a complete stranger.



mariofanatic64 said:


> If I may speak on Catboy's behalf, it's due to communication and co-operation. It's hard enough to work together with a friend as you're knocking about with each other accidentally just trying to get through the level.
> 
> With online, it would be much harder. Unless you're playing with friends, you have no idea who you're playing with. Which means you won't be able to work together because you don't understand what each person is trying to do. The only way to try and avoid that would be to include a kind of chat function but it's a family game, so it wouldn't be wise in the event that a 5 year old comes across some foul-mouthed teenager with sexual frustration in an online Mario game.
> 
> ...


 
Thanks btw!


----------



## FireGrey (Jun 16, 2013)

online multiplayer wasn't so great with ratchet and clank all 4 one.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 16, 2013)

I forgot that it's stupid of us to criticize Nintendo for having a basic feature that in no way impedes the rest of the game and can only add to it.

Obviously the game is better locally but that's no reason why you can't have local and online for more well rounded options.


----------



## EZ-Megaman (Jun 16, 2013)

Why waste development time and funds on a likely bad online multiplayer when it could be used for an even better single player? Mario games are known for strong single player rather than the multiplayer aspects, so I'm not sure why people are surprised about this.


----------



## EzekielRage (Jun 16, 2013)

I would never play a Mario game online. So I don't care. And I also see the reasoning behind this, since most poeple are assholes and would just hinder you insted of help you so sitting next to the fucker that just killed you is much better than sitting somewhere alone. Also developing an online structure is expensive as shit.

THAT being said, I believe it is a mistake to not provide an online experience since a lot of people would like that. But I guess it doesn't matter anyway since it's a Mario game, it will sell anyway...


----------



## tropireno (Jun 16, 2013)

The game has multiplayer.  Online allows you to actually play that multiplayer with other people.  I don't get what's so hard to understand about that.


----------



## Satangel (Jun 16, 2013)

Gabbynaruto said:


> Personally, I don't mind that. Local multiplayer is always much much better than anything online multiplayer related. Plus, we're talking Mario here. Why would you want to play online? I can understand Mario Kart, but Super Mario 3D World? The only purpose of an online multiplayer mode would be to annoy each and every person when the one(s) you're playing with will steal all your items and coins. I'm happy with this, really. Online multiplayers should be a focus in games like X or Mario Kart, but no way in a platformer like Mario.


This! Online platformers don't work like this, not like this. Only with a friend you're voice chatting with, then it has a chance of success. Else, no, don't do it.


----------



## mightymuffy (Jun 16, 2013)

Would've been nice to include the option, especially a private match for friends only - as has been mentioned online with strangers will most likely become a trolling mess.. but hey, multiplayer NSMBWii is chaotic enough local anyway!
Still, definitely no deal breaker! I've got a gf and 2 lads, and all of us will play at some point or another, but a sequel to SM3DLand? I'm all over the single player mode anyway, anything else is just fluff for me!


----------



## Psionic Roshambo (Jun 16, 2013)

I would much rather a game have great single player than try and have the designers try to work out some tacked on multi player. 

That being said this is a multi player game from the looks of it, but with one problem. It's one of those games that requires split second timing, split second timing split up 5 ways over the internet isn't an easy thing to pull off, one person lags for even a second and 5 people are having a bad time. 

Either way it's all theoretical, the game is single player or local multi player, if you have no friends the game is still going to be fun. At the end of the day that's how I measure if a game was good or not "Did I have fun playing it? If it was not fun, was the story at least engaging enough to convince me to finish it?"


----------



## Eerpow (Jun 16, 2013)

EZ-Megaman said:


> Why waste development time and funds on a likely bad online multiplayer when it could be used for an even better single player? Mario games are known for strong single player rather than the multiplayer aspects, so I'm not sure why people are surprised about this.


Not only this but the problem with online platforming games is lag, in Mario Kart players living far away or players with bad connections resulted in the karts glitching a bit and not getting hit at times. Sometimes players fall off ledges and instantly gets back on the track due to having lost connection for a millisecond or something.
However with a platformer lag plays a much bigger role due to the precision involved when interacting with the world and player 2 while both systems are trying to calculate player positions and other outcome.
The syncing would have to be seamless for the two games to decide and agree what to do in some situations as there are so many possible glitches that can happen if data packets are delayed.

I would like someone to point out a game that accomplishes this, has there been any online 3d platforming games that actually worked in the past? Most online games out there work with a little bit of lag because there's stuff that makes up for it and disturb the game outcome that much. To my knowledge the only practical way of doing online is to have the other players show up as a ghosts, like time trial ghosts, there being no way of interacting with those players and them interacting with stuff in your own stage, meaning that both games doesn't really have to sync flawlessly for it to work.

A way of making a multiplayer Mario online platformer work the way people expect is to have it within a single country and invest in insanely huuuge amounts of money on dedicated servers capable of doing the most important calculations from there instead of having the two systems synced. I don't see a reason to invest in that kind of research for a title like Mario 3D World where it isn't needed, this is a case where it would actually detract from the single player experience due to how much time and money it would cost. People expecting an online feature in their 3D platformers are like people expecting their Wii U to come with a toaster functionality. It's dumb.


----------



## nasune (Jun 16, 2013)

I am actually glad they did this, I mean I can't be the only one who's getting tired of all this online multiplayer and social crap they're forcing upon us these days. When I start a game I just want to play and not have situations like
"Looking for internet access.""..."
"Some random stranger wants to be your friend, do you accept?" "No.."
"These poor bastards are also online." "Whatever."
"Idiot no. 5 is also playing this game."  "I don't care."
"Idiot no. 5 invites you for this game." "What? No, fuck off."
Then, when you're finally playing the game:
"Random dude 29 is now online."  "That's it, I'm done"

Now of course this is a gross exaggeration, but there have been times that there were so many notifications of people coming online or sending messages that I just quit. It might just be that I'm getting too old for this shit, but it seems to me that the only thing that matters these days is the online multiplayer when it really shouldn't.


----------



## Osha (Jun 16, 2013)

Meh, I don't particularly care. Chances are I'll play with my sister from times to times then solo the game anyway, like I did with New Super Mario Bros Wii.


----------



## Walker D (Jun 16, 2013)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Obviously the game is better locally but* that's no reason* why you can't have local and online for more well rounded options.


 
here are some from mariofan:


Spoiler






mariofanatic64 said:


> If I may speak on Catboy's behalf, it's due to communication and co-operation. It's hard enough to work together with a friend as you're knocking about with each other accidentally just trying to get through the level.
> 
> With online, it would be much harder. Unless you're playing with friends, you have no idea who you're playing with. Which means you won't be able to work together because you don't understand what each person is trying to do. The only way to try and avoid that would be to include a kind of chat function but it's a family game, so it wouldn't be wise in the event that a 5 year old comes across some foul-mouthed teenager with sexual frustration in an online Mario game.
> 
> ...


----------



## Chocolina (Jun 16, 2013)

Puttting in Online Multiplayer doesn't hurt Mario in the slightest, but satisfies all the people that demand playing with random people online. You still have your precious single player and local player. Its downright mean as a gamer for you to want Nintendo exclude such a critical feature in today's pace of gaming from other gamers, just because it doesn't conform to your tastes. I didn't want Nintendo to put in "instructional videos" to teach n00bs how to play their games and solve puzzles, but Nintendo did it anyways, and because I don't use them, they never effect me. I didn't want Nintendo to put in Easy modes for Fire Emblem and Donkey Kong, but they did it anyways, and it didn't effect me when played the game on normal.

I mean its twenty-fucking-thirteen. Rest of the consoles graduated to Internet nearly an entire decade ago, and just imagine if the Nintendo games that were online now, had their Internet taken away, just because you thought "oh well its meant to be played with friends only" If that were true, then we wouldn't see so many damn threads of strangers trading friend codes. I've traded 10 or so Animal Crossing Friendcodes with complete strangers and dabbled around in their villages for awhile. It was more fun than the game could possibly offer by itself, but do you think I'm going to care about these strangers or play with them again 10 days from now? Like fucking hell... All I wanted was someone to experience multiplayer with, something I would NEVER EVER EVER experience as local play in the real world. I'm not in highschool anymore. the only time I see someone with a 3DS, or a NDS in their hands, are atleast 15-20 years younger than me, and my 3DS is at home anyways. And the entire life of Wii since 2006, if I didn't have Internet Multiplayer, then I didn't get to enjoy multiplayer's fun, period.

And finally, just imagine Mario Kart, Animal Crossing, Smash Bros without Internet... why would you wish that sort of injustice on Mario? I really could go on and on about this issue, but I gotta be at work in 20 minutes :\

You think playing with strangers makes the game harder due to a lack of communication? Fuck... I welcome that, with as easy as Mario games are. People can enjoy playing cooperatively, competitively, or both.


----------



## LoggerMan (Jun 16, 2013)

Meh, it's more of a party game with real people. Online would be great,  but having an excuse to invite friends over is good too.


----------



## sentinel5000 (Jun 16, 2013)

This is why Nintendo keeps failing with new super mario world style games. If they can have amazing online multiplayer with mario kart then why not with NSMB style games. Gaming has changed and now online is one of the most important things on a game. That and always adding the stupid toad to the squad... its time to add Wario, now that would be great... Meh whatever, its not like they are going to do anything about it...


----------



## TyBlood13 (Jun 16, 2013)

I'm still trying to figure out how this is news, especially _front page _news. 

The Catboy & mariofanactic64 pretty much got my exact thoughts.


----------



## Clydefrosch (Jun 16, 2013)

Personally I didn't like the multiplayer in any of these games so far; other players just get in your way all the time, so I don't really care, they could as well have no multiplayer at all.

But unless there are any technical reasons, I don't really see why there isn't online multiplayer.


----------



## Sonic4Ever (Jun 16, 2013)

Rayman Legends doesn't have online multiplayer? The first trailer shown last year clearly demonstrated the contrary. Did I miss something?


----------



## Carnivean (Jun 16, 2013)

Anyone claiming online multiplayer cannot be cooperative is completely retarded and clearly hasn't played anything online with any semblance of seriousness. People manage to organise huge raids regularly on MMOs which require vastly more organisation than a Mario game could and things like mumble and teamspeak have long since killed the local only barriers for communication. If multiplayer is enjoyable only when you can_ physically strike the other people playing_ you are a pretty shitty person.

There seems to be a huge misconception that online play is equal to playing with randoms when that is simply false. I have played through multiple games through netplay or online functions with friends in other countries or counties and it has worked well because they were _friends_. This is literally something that would have been impossible years ago, I could not exactly get a friend over to hotseat a game when they live at the other end of the country or there is literally an ocean in the way of it but online play makes it possible and that is a _good thing_.

Just because you have personally had bad experiences or do not see the appeal does not in fact strip something of its value and the idea of something like online play actually _ruining_ a game is completely fucking ludicrous.

~

But really why the hell is this shit on the frontpage? Nintendo are completely retarded when it comes to online, they claimed it would be too hard to code online for pikmin when RTS games have had online for nearly twenty years for christ sake.


----------



## ForteGospel (Jun 16, 2013)

TyBlood13 said:


> I'm still trying to figure out how this is news, especially _front page _news.
> 
> The Catboy & mariofanactic64 pretty much got my exact thoughts.


well right now the front page is like this: Nintendo sucks, Nintendo doesn't know online, Nintendo sucks, xbox one sucks, ps4 rules gets all gaems, Nintendo sucks, new xbox slim sucks, xbox one runs on win 7 sucks, Nintendo sucks

also to the one that said I am a shitty person for punching my friend, seems like you don't know the concept of a _real_ friend.


----------



## jalaneme (Jun 16, 2013)

online mp stinks so who gives a flying fk, get some real life friends and play mario like it should be played.


----------



## EthanObi (Jun 16, 2013)

BlackWizzard17 said:


> Some people may be right, kinda a bummer but this actually gets you to
> 
> Step 1. *Get up*
> 
> ...


OH GOD, I HAVE TO GET MY FAT ASS OUT OF MY CHAIR TO PLAY *MULTIPLAYER* ON A *MARIO GAME*?!?!??!?!?!?* FUCK NO, DEAL BREAKER.*


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 16, 2013)

Walker D said:


> here are some from mariofan:


 
But having it as an option wouldn't hurt. You'd still have local multiplayer, and online as well if you wanted to.

Hell I'd still have plenty of fun knocking about my buddies online as we all laugh and giggle together. There's no logical reason to exclude such a basic feature when it doesn't hurt the game at all. It only adds to it.


----------



## Walker D (Jun 16, 2013)

Guild McCommunist said:


> But having it as an option wouldn't hurt. You'd still have local multiplayer, and online as well if you wanted to.
> 
> Hell I'd still have plenty of fun knocking about my buddies online as we all laugh and giggle together. There's no logical reason to exclude such a basic feature when it doesn't hurt the game at all. It only adds to it.


 
I still think that something that feels bad/poorly implemented should not be implemented at all..   ..and on this case, I can't see much of good implementation that would be worth for Nintendo to worry about


----------



## Lushay (Jun 16, 2013)

I don't have friends here who would come over to play mario with me. Why did I a move to this lonely place -_-


----------



## RodrigoDavy (Jun 16, 2013)

Not trying to defend Nintendo or anything.

"Super Mario 3D World Excludes Online Multiplayer" is not news. No one ever said Super Mario 3D World would include online multiplayer, if they announced they were going to and later changed their mind then it would be news. Also, previous 3D Mario titles didn't have online multiplayer so it's not like it was a consense that this specific title would. Also the title of the news is wrong, it would be "Super Mario 3D World doesn't include Online Multiplayer", because you can only exclude something that was already included in the first place.

So this "news" basically say "a video game will not have a feature that no one announced it would have in the first place". Can you imagine if everytime an AAA game didn't have a Time Trial mode someone posted something like "New CoD won't have trial mode"? For me this kind of thing only serves to feed fanboyish discussions...


----------



## yokomoko (Jun 16, 2013)

I've always wanted a 3D Mario game to have local multiplayer.  REAL multiplayer, not that crap in Mario Galaxy 2.   I wish Nintendo had done this on Wii cuz there's no way I'm buying a system that'll be dead in a year.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 16, 2013)

Walker D said:


> I still think that something that feels bad/poorly implemented should not be implemented at all.. ..and on this case, I can't see much of good implementation that would be worth for Nintendo to worry about


 

I don't see it really being that bad with voice chat, just like any other online game.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Jun 16, 2013)

yokomoko said:


> I've always wanted a 3D Mario game to have local multiplayer. REAL multiplayer, not that crap in Mario Galaxy 2. I wish Nintendo had done this on Wii cuz there's no way I'm buying a system that'll be dead in a year.


 
That's so funny. Everybody said the same thing about the 3DS "I want the Mario game, but I'm not buying a handheld that'll be dead in a year when the Vita is released."


----------



## bastalle (Jun 16, 2013)

Online modes would be nice but not if they sacrifice split screen play. I hate it on the 360 when I find I can only play multiplayer through live.


----------



## EnigmaXtreme (Jun 16, 2013)

I seem to recall people saying that NSMBWii didn't have Online Multiplayer because "Lag would disrupt the flow" and would probably have the same effect here


----------



## Parasite X (Jun 16, 2013)

This news doesn't bother me at all I hardly ever use multiplayer any way except in certain games. I just want to know the release date because I've got 70$ in eshop cards waiting in the wings for its release.


----------



## ForteGospel (Jun 16, 2013)

RodrigoDavy said:


> For me this kind of thing only serves to feed fanboyish discussions...


this x9000...

people complain about the decay of gbatemp, that in every thread there are just fanboyism discussions about who has the bigger e-penis, well we certainly have level up! now the publishers/moderators/reporters are doing this on purpose

also no one seems to talk about the need of *2* consoles and *2* games to play online multiplayer while for local multiplayer you just need *1* and *1*, economically it doesn't makes sense to complain about this, you are just arguing for the sake of arguing...

inb4 I need to pay gas to drive to my friends


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 16, 2013)

EnigmaXtreme said:


> I seem to recall people saying that NSMBWii didn't have Online Multiplayer because "Lag would disrupt the flow" and would probably have the same effect here


 

So we can play fighters and twitch precision first person shooters online but I guess platformers are just too much to handle?


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Jun 16, 2013)

Guild McCommunist said:


> So we can play fighters and twitch precision first person shooters online but I guess platformers are just too much to handle?


 
I don't know what kind of FPS you play online, but all of them suffer from lag.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 16, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> I don't know what kind of FPS you play online, but all of them suffer from lag.


 

I've played a few and it's really not bad, my point is that all these other games are perfectly playable online but for some reason we're saying platformers aren't.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 16, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> I don't know what kind of FPS you play online, but all of them suffer from lag.



At points no doubt but enough people can do it enough of the time for it to be worthwhile. Similarly ping mitigation techniques are probably about a thousand times easier than with mario platformer style games (most games do not have random enemies and have fairly predictable player movement to say nothing of the ability to easily toss in an AI player when the need arises).


----------



## tronic307 (Jun 16, 2013)

Another great game ruined by Nintendo's online phobia. Who's played the demo? Did it seem like it would be anywhere near as fun with one player? I'd play this online even with lag. Let's at least have leaderboards, and Metroid Blast *needs* to be online, too.


The Catboy said:


> Have you ever actually played them in multiplayer?
> The games quickly turn into a mess with everyone attempting to do their own thing.


Going by the demo, this game will be far less chaotic. If you steal someone's powerup you can release it by pressing (-), plus there's way more breathing room than in the 2D games.


----------



## ShadowSoldier (Jun 16, 2013)

tronic307 said:


> Another great game ruined by Nintendo's online phobia. Who's played the demo? Did it seem like it would be anywhere near as fun with one player? I'd play this online even with lag. Let's at least have leaderboards, and Metroid Blast *needs* to be online, too.
> 
> Going by the demo, this game will be far less chaotic. If you steal someone's powerup you can release it by pressing (-), plus there's way more breathing room than in the 2D games.


 
....It doesn't have online, so the game is ruined. Yeah, you're not a crybaby at all.


----------



## tronic307 (Jun 16, 2013)

ShadowSoldier said:


> ....It doesn't have online, so the game is ruined. Yeah, you're not a crybaby at all.


Lol, it's still an insta-buy.
Perhaps 'ruined' was too strong a word, but If you played the demo, you know how fun multiplayer is. Plus the way the player's scores are compared at the end of a level is perfect for online leaderboards. You may disagree, but I feel NintendoLand would have been another Wii Sports-like hit for Nintendo if it had online multiplayer.
NintendoLand score:
NintendoLand score if it had online multiplayer:


----------



## Rizsparky (Jun 16, 2013)

431unknown said:


> Kinda disappointing but, not a deal breaker. Part of the fun is being in the same room next to each other.


This is true, NSMBU has an extremely fun multiplayer.


----------



## Walker D (Jun 16, 2013)

One thing that doesn't makes me too worry about this game not having online multiplayer is that Nintendo seems to have really looked intro that matter, and then, decided not to go with it.

Some of the last Mario Games had a glance on the multiplayer possibilities already (with the NSMB2 and Luigi's Mansion for example), and from the Developer's Direct Video for Super Mario 3D World, you can see that their main focus was enabling a good multiplayer experience (what indicates that they thought about the multiplayer possibilities well enough).
After all that, I find it difficult to believe that online multiplayer would be scrapped only cause of laziness


----------



## Plstic (Jun 16, 2013)

I prefer having offline coop over online any day but, I come from a family of gamers so finding people to play with is pretty easy.


----------



## The Milkman (Jun 17, 2013)

The only thing that bums me out about this game is that its Wii U only. Other than that it looks great.


----------



## abdelmajidtolba (Jun 17, 2013)

If it's a platformer, no online. If it's anything else we welcome online playing.


----------



## DiscostewSM (Jun 17, 2013)

With everyone complaining about the lack of online multiplayer, how many games have been made this last decade that have online multiplayer, but lack local multiplayer?

Sometimes I just want to hang with my friends in the same room, rather than having to do that online. That's not to say I don't want "both" options. I just think with everyone focus on the lack of online multiplayer, they're ignoring how many games lack local multiplayer.


----------



## The Catboy (Jun 17, 2013)

The Milkman said:


> The only thing that bums me out about this game is that its Wii U only. Other than that it looks great.


 
Why's that a bad thing? The Wii U is their newest system and it's in dire need of games. It's about time it got games.


----------



## The Milkman (Jun 17, 2013)

The Catboy said:


> Why's that a bad thing? The Wii U is their newest system and it's in dire need of games. It's about time it got games.


 
Yeah, I know. But I always wanted a sequel to the one on the 3DS. It was so much fun.


----------



## EzekielRage (Jun 17, 2013)

Not a huge fan of 3D Land, really. it was a good game, very much fun but kinda by the numbers. Similar to this here but this one adds offline multiplayer so that's gona be great! Still wish we would go more SM64 and less SMB3


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 17, 2013)

DiscostewSM said:


> With everyone complaining about the lack of online multiplayer, how many games have been made this last decade that have online multiplayer, but lack local multiplayer?
> 
> Sometimes I just want to hang with my friends in the same room, rather than having to do that online. That's not to say I don't want "both" options. I just think with everyone focus on the lack of online multiplayer, they're ignoring how many games lack local multiplayer.


 

Just because a lot of games do the flipside doesn't make this decision any better, if anything it makes it just as shitty since it's the same principle: excluding a feature of a game for no real reason that doesn't hamper the rest of the game.


----------



## BORTZ (Jun 17, 2013)

The Milkman said:


> Yeah, I know. But I always wanted a sequel to the one on the 3DS. It was so much fun.


 
That's true and, after hearing that, I support your point.


----------



## fluffykiwi (Jun 17, 2013)

I honestly cannot see why people are making a fuss about this, apart from the usual Nintendo bashing. The inclusion of a local multiplayer option in a 3D platforming Mario is a major step forward in my opinion.

I believe this game's multiplayer mode is all about the social aspect and I have some REAL friends and family, not some voices in headsets. Its NOT the same thing at all. 

I think it is quite sad some people cannot tell the difference between getting together with friends and playing a game online.


----------



## pwsincd (Jun 17, 2013)

ForteGospel said:


> because you would not be able to punch your friend in the face after they killed you on purpose for the 5th time
> 
> or yell at them to pop up the bubble when you are waiting to come back while they are running the whole level alone


 

Voice Chat ? ahh already ninja'd .

I don't care whether it has or hasn't , however the trine2 online MP was kinda fun, not exactly the same kinda game, but you had dicks stealing all the glory and also people willing to work as a team, that's the same shit across most online games.


----------



## Gahars (Jun 17, 2013)

fluffykiwi said:


> I think it is quite sad some people cannot tell the difference between getting together with friends and playing a game online.


 

Because God knows that they're completely mutually exclusive, right?

I don't get this line of thinking. The whole point of online interaction is that it can bring people together no matter how far apart they are. One of my best friends is currently living in the hotbox of a state known as Arizona. Online gaming means that we can still experience games together despite the huge distance between us. How is that any less legitimate? How is that not real? How is that bad?

I swear, for internet users, there seems to be a shit ton of luddites here.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 17, 2013)

fluffykiwi said:


> I honestly cannot see why people are making a fuss about this, apart from the usual Nintendo bashing. The inclusion of a local multiplayer option in a 3D platforming Mario is a major step forward in my opinion.
> 
> I believe this game's multiplayer mode is all about the social aspect and I have some REAL friends and family, not some voices in headsets. Its NOT the same thing at all.
> 
> I think it is quite sad some people cannot tell the difference between getting together with friends and playing a game online.


 

But it's not the inclusion of local multiplayer or the fact that it's multiplayer platforming that's annoying people, that's always welcome, it's not having local AND online multiplayer.

I have plenty of friends but like... I'm an adult. We're busy people. Between work and college, we don't always have the time to get together in the same room and have fun. That being said we can still have fun online, and while the experience isn't as good as local, it's an option and it still works.

It's also just horrendously shitty to say "Well it's your fault for not being able to get people in the same room" because any fucking adult would know that the issue isn't them, the issue is being a busy person.

EDIT: I'm in general getting really sick of the "blame everyone else" attitude around Nintendo's issues. Nintendo doesn't include a basic feature that would enhance the game, well you shouldn't complain because it's YOUR fault that you can't get people to play with in the same room. Third parties aren't supporting the Wii U, well THEY suck for not supporting a low performing system that'll only give terrible returns at its current state. Like seriously you can fucking blame Nintendo for their missteps, if anything it'll help improve them as a company.


----------



## Eerpow (Jun 17, 2013)

Eerpow said:


> Not only this but the problem with online platforming games is lag, in Mario Kart players living far away or players with bad connections resulted in the karts glitching a bit and not getting hit at times. Sometimes players fall off ledges and instantly gets back on the track due to having lost connection for a millisecond or something.
> However with a platformer lag plays a much bigger role due to the precision involved when interacting with the world and player 2 while both systems are trying to calculate player positions and other outcome.
> The syncing would have to be seamless for the two games to decide and agree what to do in some situations as there are so many possible glitches that can happen if data packets are delayed.
> 
> ...


No one has showed me an example of a good online multiplayer 3D platformer yet, anyone?


----------



## tronic307 (Jun 17, 2013)

fluffykiwi said:


> I honestly cannot see why people are making a fuss about this, apart from the usual Nintendo bashing. The inclusion of a local multiplayer option in a 3D platforming Mario is a major step forward in my opinion.
> 
> I believe this game's multiplayer mode is all about the social aspect and I have some REAL friends and family, not some voices in headsets. Its NOT the same thing at all.
> 
> I think it is quite sad some people cannot tell the difference between getting together with friends and playing a game online.


 
If the demo was super fun, playing locally with people I've never seen before and barely talked to, that's not very far removed from how fun online multiplayer would be. There are downsides to online multiplayer such as lag and cheating, but those are gamer's concerns; it's almost certainly a time and money issue for Nintendo.


----------



## ForteGospel (Jun 17, 2013)

Eerpow said:


> No one has showed me an example of a good online multiplayer 3D platformer yet, anyone?


trine 2 i believe, but it uses steam service so the online is with friends and supports voice chat


----------



## TheCasketMan (Jun 17, 2013)

Why is Mario's cat costume yellow instead of red?
Back on topic, no online play doesn't surprise me.  Nintendo is always forcing people to buy 3 more gamepad or wii motes if they wanna play coop.


----------



## EzekielRage (Jun 17, 2013)

Which is their right. But truth be told, I imagine MOST Wii U owners bought a Wii and thus already have multiple Wiimotes.
I have two Wiir emotes with WM+, I have two Wm+ Wiimotes and the gamepad so my sessions are complete. But I have justone Classic Contoler.

Truth be told though, I'll probably play the game alone, maybe with my fiancee but thats that^^

Edit: The yellow costume is probably to distinguish it from the pink peach^^


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 17, 2013)

Eerpow said:


> with a platformer lag plays a much bigger role due to the precision involved when interacting with the world
> 
> ....
> No one has showed me an example of a good online multiplayer 3D platformer yet, anyone?



I would argue it actually matters less than a lot of other games-- enemies are fairly predictable if they are not already utterly predictable, character movement is perhaps not so inclined towards truly fine control as a gun game and it carries on like that for a while. Probably not enough to skip lag negation methods entirely but not an insurmountable issue.

Platforming.... it has yet to be called it but I would argue platformering elements are as common or more common than RPG elements (or, sadly, roguelike elements). Indeed I am fairly hard pressed to make a list of more than about 10 3d games where that is not the case.

To that end the question pick a good multiplayer game where you move in the 3d space as something more than an action focused camera.... do I even have to start making the list?


----------



## chnkpk (Jun 17, 2013)

It isn't a deal breaker but I'd like the opportunity to play this game online plenty of my friends live in different parts of the country and we use Teamspeak to communicate while playing; it's disappointing certainly


----------



## Pong20302000 (Jun 17, 2013)

TheCasketMan said:


> Why is Mario's cat costume yellow instead of red?
> Back on topic, no online play doesn't surprise me. Nintendo is always forcing people to buy 3 more gamepad or wii motes if they wanna play coop.


 
because of Lucky Golden Cats I'd assume

what if they made this 5 player


----------



## ForteGospel (Jun 17, 2013)

TheCasketMan said:


> Why is Mario's cat costume yellow instead of red?
> Back on topic, no online play doesn't surprise me. Nintendo is always forcing people to buy 3 more gamepad or wii motes if they wanna play coop.


you do understand that to play online co op you need to buy at least 2 games and 2 consoles right? and if 4 man co op that would be 4 games and 4 consoles?


----------



## fluffykiwi (Jun 17, 2013)

Gahars said:
			
		

> Because God knows that they're completely mutually exclusive, right?
> 
> I don't get this line of thinking. The whole point of online interaction is that it can bring people together no matter how far apart they are. One of my best friends is currently living in the hotbox of a state known as Arizona. Online gaming means that we can still experience games together despite the huge distance between us. How is that any less legitimate? How is that not real? How is that bad?
> 
> I swear, for internet users, there seems to be a shit ton of luddites here.


 
My apology if my use of REAL has upset anyone. I simply use that to distinguish between friends I physically interact with compared to friends I interact with purely online. Not intended as any sort of judgement. 

I agree that local multiplayer and online multiplayer are not mutually exclusive, but they are entirely different experiences. Some people are simply suggesting adding voice chat makes online the same as local multiplayer. As soon as a game includes local multiplayer, there is an outcry if it doesn't support online multiplayer, seems it may mean you are a luddite 

I do want online multiplayer Wii U games, but not this particular one.

In my opinion the Mario Platformers are games that would not benefit from online multiplayer, in fact in my opinion platformers in general do not seem suited to an online multiplayer mode. I think this opinion is evidenced by the lack of quality multiplayer online platform games already out on any of the consoles. Feel free to provide examples of great online multiplayer platform games out there for any console. I do not doubt the technical ability to produce them, just the need for them.

I think online multiplayer gaming with online friends is entirely legitimate, an entirely real experience and isn't a bad thing. I personally have online only friends and do play online multiplayer games, mostly on PC, but not every game with local multiplayer either needs, or benefits from the inclusion of an on-line multiplayer mode. Some games really benefit from making the effort to gather your friends and family together in a single room to play, and this sounds like it may be one of those. The sharing of alcohol also helps. 

Some posters seem to be suggesting adding this feature should be automatic for any modern game, or any game without it is outdated.

I would rather Nintendo release their major AAA games as quickly as possible and not spend time adding features that are unlikely to add much to the experience for most people, or add more development expense to the company, or result in additional running costs such as running dedicated servers, etc.

The majority of people who will buy this game, will still purchase it whether it has online multiplayer or not. The inclusion of online chat may discourage some parents from opening up their kids to voice chat, even if just with "friends"... I mean no-one ever befriends kids online for the wrong reasons...right?



			
				Guild McCommunist said:
			
		

> It's also just horrendously shitty to say "Well it's your fault for not being able to get people in the same room" because any fucking adult would know that the issue isn't them, the issue is being a busy person.
> 
> EDIT: I'm in general getting really sick of the "blame everyone else" attitude around Nintendo's issues. Nintendo doesn't include a basic feature that would enhance the game, well you shouldn't complain because it's YOUR fault that you can't get people to play with in the same room....


 
I never said anything about blaming anyone for not being able to get people in the same room, as I fully understand being a busy adult, having distant friends, and having constraints on your time, but it still doesn't mean the developers should include online multiplayer in every multiplayer game, especially this one.

I simply do not think inclusion of on-line multiplayer would enhance this game in any way. I actually think the addition of online multiplayer may actually make this game worse, especially without a whole lot of time and money being spent on it, and I do not want Nintendo to delay this game further.

I do not think that the people who do not agree this game needs online multiplayer are some sort of Nintendo apologists or luddites.

I am entirely able to call Nintendo on their errors, especially releasing a modern console with so few games available at launch or any credible release schedule afterwards, BUT I do not agree this decision for this game is an error. 

Please note this is simply my opinion and I could of course be wrong, maybe there will be a online multiplayer platformer released that will change my mind, but until then I think I'm entitled to my opinion.


----------



## Pleng (Jun 18, 2013)

Guild McCommunist said:


> I forgot that it's stupid of us to criticize Nintendo for having a basic feature that in no way impedes the rest of the game and can only add to it.


 
Of course it impedes the rest of the game. Not directly when you're sitting in front of it, but unless you have a development team with unlimited time, money, and manpower, then by implementing an online multiplayer mode you be default _have_ to take resources away from another area of the game.


----------



## The Milkman (Jun 18, 2013)

You know what I find funny about this. If they never made a statement, nobody would care. They would have expected this game not to have online. Think about that.


----------



## Gahars (Jun 18, 2013)

Pleng said:


> Of course it impedes the rest of the game. Not directly when you're sitting in front of it, but unless you have a development team with unlimited time, money, and manpower, then by implementing an online multiplayer mode you be default _have_ to take resources away from another area of the game.


 

Or you decide to invest more resources into the project to begin with to compensate for the added feature?

Sure, it costs more at the start, but you're also ensuring the game has lasting longevity, which is an extremely enticing prospect for developers.



The Milkman said:


> You know what I find funny about this. If they never made a statement, nobody would care. They would have expected this game not to have online. Think about that.


 

"If Nintendo didn't rule out the possibility of a feature being added then people would not be disappointed that there was no possibility of the feature being added."

Um, duh?


----------



## Pleng (Jun 18, 2013)

Gahars said:


> Or you decide to invest more resources into the project to begin with to compensate for the added feature?


 
There are a finite amount of resources. If you decide to add additional resources, they are still resources that _could_ be being spent on the main game



> Sure, it costs more at the start, but you're also ensuring the game has lasting longevity, which is an extremely enticing prospect for developers.


 
It may be an enticing prospect for developers but not necessarily for publishers, unless they are monetizing the online side of things. Having a million people buy a game and play it four times means no more profit (in fact less, if you could the cost of running the servers) than having a million people buy a game and play it for 5 years.


----------



## Gahars (Jun 18, 2013)

Pleng said:


> There are a finite amount of resources. If you decide to add additional resources, they are still resources that _could_ be being spent on the main game


 
Could be but wouldn't have been. Plus, there's a peak amount of money that you can throw at a game - you can only hire so many designers, animators, etc. before the impact becomes negligible.

(Not to mention that the online mode wouldn't have to be built from the ground up, just integrated with the multiplayer that the game was already designed around.)



Pleng said:


> It may be an enticing prospect for developers but not necessarily for publishers, unless they are monetizing the online side of things. Having a million people buy a game and play it four times means no more profit (in fact less, if you could the cost of running the servers) than having a million people buy a game and play it for 5 years.


 

Of course it's an enticing prospect for publishers, too. Longevity is (according to many in the industry, at least - here's just a recent example) a good protection against used game sales, which helps maximize profit. Players kept on board by online multiplayer might also be more willing to purchase additional content for the game. Promoting the fact that people can now take the Mario experience online with their friends could also be a great marketing draw.

Beyond profits, it makes the game an overall better product for the players. For a company that strives to produce quality titles, that alone should be pretty important.


----------



## The Milkman (Jun 18, 2013)

Gahars said:


> "If Nintendo didn't rule out the possibility of a feature being added then people would not be disappointed that there was no possibility of the feature being added."
> 
> Um, duh?


 

You don't seem to have quite understood me Gahars old boy, let me re-literate it.

If Nintendo had not said "We didnt put online in this game" then all the little ones who feel the need to make a big shit out of this would not have expected nor complained about this game having not online multiplayer.

The reason? Simple. When was the last time anyone played a Mario platformer that actually had Online multiplayer? How can you expect an experience from something that never offered it, or attempted to make you think it would need it in the first place.

But of course, your earlier post which twisted my statement and misinterpreted it and then you giving a response to said statement as if it were obvious when it wasn't what I said was quite close. I mean, practically the same thing and surely contributed to the discussion.

And before you point it out. I am indeed, srs.


----------



## Gahars (Jun 18, 2013)

The Milkman said:


> You don't seem to have quite understood me Gahars old boy, let me re-literate it.


 
Not to pull a ComeTurism0 or anything, but do you mean "reiterate"?



The Milkman said:


> If Nintendo had not said "We didnt put online in this game" then all the little ones who feel the need to make a big shit out of this would not have expected nor complained about this game having not online multiplayer.
> 
> The reason? Simple. When was the last time anyone played a Mario platformer that actually had Online multiplayer? How can you expect an experience from something that never offered it, or attempted to make you think it would need it in the first place.


 
Because franchises and genres are expected to evolve over time and adapt to the gaming landscape in order to provide players with the best experiences possible. Giving players exactly what came before and nothing else is a bad thing - that's stagnation.

Now, demanding online play in a Mario title clearly designed as a standalone affair (64, Sunshine, Galaxy 1/2 besides the periphery 2nd player function, etc.) would be puzzling, don't get me wrong. However, hoping for it in a title like this, one that is clearly designed from the ground up with multiplayer in mind? One where the online play would be a natural extension of the local experience? I don't know about you, but that seems pretty far from unreasonable to me.



The Milkman said:


> But of course, your earlier post which twisted my statement and misinterpreted it and then you giving a response to said statement as if it were obvious when it wasn't what I said was quite close. I mean, practically the same thing and surely contributed to the discussion.


 

Because there was really all that much to twist around in the first place? Are we talking about the same post here?

The obvious deflection of the issue was, to be frank, pretty obvious.


----------



## Pleng (Jun 18, 2013)

Gahars said:


> Could be but wouldn't have been. Plus, there's a peak amount of money that you can throw at a game - you can only hire so many designers, animators, etc. before the impact becomes negligible.


 
Given the complaints about the size of the recent Mario games, I'd say that the resources being given to to them are far from that peak point



> (Not to mention that the online mode wouldn't have to be built from the ground up, just integrated with the multiplayer that the game was already designed around.)


 
Yes and no. There's a lot more to think about when you have network latency and player sync, connection dropouts etc to worry about. It's not simply a case of "here's multiplayer now lets add in a connection"




> Of course it's an enticing prospect for publishers, too. Longevity is (according to many in the industry, at least - here's just a recent example) a good protection against used game sales, which helps maximize profit.


 
Yes a fair point. Although Nintendo recently claimed they have the lowest sell-on rates of the big three



> Players kept on board by online multiplayer might also be more willing to purchase additional content for the game. Promoting the fact that people can now take the Mario experience online with their friends could also be a great marketing draw.


 
Yes I already eluded to the fact that if you can monetize it then it's clearly a positive. But Mario games have a pretty quick turn around. You don't necessarily want people to still be playing your game when the next in the series comes around.



> Beyond profits, it makes the game an overall better product for the players.


 
That's subjective, and what we're debating in the first place, so you can't use it as an argument 

Personally I'd rather have additional content in a Mario game than an online multiplay mode. Even if the amount of resources spared only allowed for one extra level, I'd take that.


----------



## Eerpow (Jun 18, 2013)

FAST6191 said:


> I would argue it actually matters less than a lot of other games-- enemies are fairly predictable if they are not already utterly predictable, character movement is perhaps not so inclined towards truly fine control as a gun game and it carries on like that for a while. Probably not enough to skip lag negation methods entirely but not an insurmountable issue.
> 
> Platforming.... it has yet to be called it but I would argue platformering elements are as common or more common than RPG elements (or, sadly, roguelike elements). Indeed I am fairly hard pressed to make a list of more than about 10 3d games where that is not the case.
> 
> To that end the question pick a good multiplayer game where you move in the 3d space as something more than an action focused camera.... do I even have to start making the list?


 
If you've played the previous 3D Land game you'll see that there's a variety of unpredictable platforms, switches and enemies that depends on player actions and position, like platforms that the player balances on for example. You can't simply lag compensate and make the CPU make assumptions as all players are interacting with the same 3D world to a higher degree than in an FPS.
There are so many more options for lag compensation in FPS. In FPS's or racing games the CPU makes a prediction based on current speed and location.

In Mario we can rule out extrapolation since a computer can't predict some of the world changing actions a player can make like for example activating a switch or kicking a shell making it bounce off walls hitting enemies or other players on its way. All this has to be synced so the same thing happens on all systems. This isn't 2D, enemy and fireball trajectories can't be predicted. In an FPS all the computer has to do is calculate player 1's positions and aim in reference to player 2 in a single point in time. It doesn't matter if the killing gets registered with a delay since the death animation starts playing for the shooter first, no one notices a difference.
A grenade for example has a large margin for errors as the blast radius is big enough for delays to go unnoticed.

"Another way to address the issue is to store past game states for a certain length of time, then rewind player locations when processing a command."
You can't do that because again, actions are _world changing_, it would result in glitches and stuff which is simply not acceptable in this kind of game. Minecraft has a high degree of world interaction and suffers from a few of them.

The cover up techniques for lag are most of the time _only_ applicable in FPS's or Racing games. Wikipedia has a nice article on the lag subject.
There's a reason why we don't have interactive 3D world multiplayer games. They do not work well. For it to somewhat work everyone would need good connection speeds, be within a single country and not only that but Nintendo would have to spend tons of money on research to get rid of all the bugs involved, invest in expensive servers capable of doing calculations from there instead of having game consoles syncing with each other etc etc. And all for a game that doesn't need it, there are other titles for that sort of thing.

It's ridiculous to expect online multiplayer in a title of this genre.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 18, 2013)

Eerpow said:


> If you've played the previous 3D Land game you'll see that there's a variety of unpredictable platforms, switches and enemies that depends on player actions and position, like platforms that the player balances on for example. You can't simply lag compensate and make the CPU make assumptions as all players are interacting with the same 3D world to a higher degree than in an FPS.
> There are so many more options for lag compensation in FPS. In FPS's or racing games the CPU makes a prediction based on current speed and location.
> 
> In Mario we can rule out extrapolation since a computer can't predict some of the world changing actions a player can make like for example activating a switch or kicking a shell making it bounce off walls hitting enemies or other players on its way. All this has to be synced so the same thing happens on all systems. This isn't 2D, enemy and fireball trajectories can't be predicted. In an FPS all the computer has to do is calculate player 1's positions and aim in reference to player 2 in a single point in time. It doesn't matter if the killing gets registered with a delay since the death animation starts playing for the shooter first, no one notices a difference.
> ...



Interesting logic. I would argue all that 1) some of your examples are "what ifs" for seconds in the future which is near impossible and not what this is about.
2) Your examples exist within FPS games -- doors, turrets, vehicles which block fire, vehicles in general (especially ones you can bail out of), destructible environments/objects, "fortress levels". I will give that many of these are omitted from certain games and doubly so in multiplayer but they are present in enough (especially co-op games) that it can not be easily dismissed. Numbers wise I would reckon it is about parity or if restricted to a given area (players need to be within so much distance) possibly even less.

"be within a single country/[area]"
You mean like things are already?


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 18, 2013)

Pleng said:


> Of course it impedes the rest of the game. Not directly when you're sitting in front of it, but unless you have a development team with unlimited time, money, and manpower, then by implementing an online multiplayer mode you be default _have_ to take resources away from another area of the game.


 

I'm sure for a struggling, money-strapped team like Nintendo it's a real hard task.

Like if it was a small dev with little funding yeah, I could see it not making the cut. But for a company as big as Nintendo it's called just being goddamn lazy.


----------



## Carnivean (Jun 18, 2013)

Eerpow said:


> -snip-
> 
> It's ridiculous to expect online multiplayer in a title of this genre.


 
No, it's not. Games have been managing to sync literally thousands of invididual units in games for years now on much slower connections and weaker systems than the average we have today. You are completely delusional if you honestly think there's a significant technological barrier to implementing multiplayer on what is honestly just a basic platformer.


----------



## Pleng (Jun 18, 2013)

Guild McCommunist said:


> I'm sure for a struggling, money-strapped team like Nintendo it's a real hard task.
> 
> Like if it was a small dev with little funding yeah, I could see it not making the cut. But for a company as big as Nintendo it's called just being goddamn lazy.


 
Regardless of how successful your company is, every project has a budget. The leaders of this project have clearly decided that their budget is better spent on other things.


----------



## Gahars (Jun 18, 2013)

Pleng said:


> Given the complaints about the size of the recent Mario games, I'd say that the resources being given to to them are far from that peak point


 
Have people really complained about the length of these games? I haven't seen that criticism about that before.

Anyway, that's entirely speculation. A tighter, constrained pace may have been the intention from the get-go, so no matter how much money was thrown at the developers it wouldn't have changed the length. More money won't necessarily mean longer.



Pleng said:


> Yes and no. There's a lot more to think about when you have network latency and player sync, connection dropouts etc to worry about. It's not simply a case of "here's multiplayer now lets add in a connection"


 
I'm not saying it would take no effort whatsoever, but that the amount required would be relatively manageable and reasonable.



Pleng said:


> Yes a fair point. Although Nintendo recently claimed they have the lowest sell-on rates of the big three


 
Of course, but I'm still sure Nintendo wouldn't mind bringing that number down even more.



Pleng said:


> Yes I already eluded to the fact that if you can monetize it then it's clearly a positive. But Mario games have a pretty quick turn around. You don't necessarily want people to still be playing your game when the next in the series comes around.


 
Just because people are hooked to the multiplayer doesn't mean that they won't eagerly hop on board to the next entry - just take a look at the Call of Duty series.



Pleng said:


> That's subjective, and what we're debating in the first place, so you can't use it as an argument


 
Extra features that enhance the longevity of a product = more value for the customer. That's pretty hard to argue against.



Pleng said:


> Personally I'd rather have additional content in a Mario game than an online multiplay mode. Even if the amount of resources spared only allowed for one extra level, I'd take that.


 

And I'd rather have the option to experience the wealth of levels with all of my friends no matter how far apart we are. That's a huge value, and I would gladly sacrifice a level or two for such an option. 

Naturally, your mileage is going to vary.


----------



## Pleng (Jun 18, 2013)

Gahars said:


> > Personally I'd rather have additional content in a Mario game than an online multiplay mode. Even if the amount of resources spared only allowed for one extra level, I'd take that.
> 
> 
> And I'd rather have the option to experience the wealth of levels with all of my friends no matter how far apart we are. That's a huge value, and I would gladly sacrifice a level or two for such an option.


 
And Nintendo the project team have obviously decided that they are willing to sacrifice online for extra levels or graphics or whatever else it is they're using the resources for. They have decided that is what will make the game sell.

Are they right or not? Who knows. But Mario games have generally historically sold ok-ish without online multiplayer so one might guess this one will too.


----------



## EZ-Megaman (Jun 18, 2013)

Guild McCommunist said:


> But it's not the inclusion of local multiplayer or the fact that it's multiplayer platforming that's annoying people, that's always welcome, it's not having local AND online multiplayer.
> 
> I have plenty of friends but like... I'm an adult. We're busy people. Between work and college, we don't always have the time to get together in the same room and have fun. That being said we can still have fun online, and while the experience isn't as good as local, it's an option and it still works.
> 
> It's also just horrendously shitty to say "Well it's your fault for not being able to get people in the same room" because any fucking adult would know that the issue isn't them, the issue is being a busy person.


 
Are you Nintendo's target audience?  I mean, sure, it would be nice for *you* to have online multiplayer here, but people like you aren't Nintendo's main audience with this game.  Why should they change their products for adults that lack time when the game is aimed towards children who don't experience the same problem?


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 18, 2013)

EZ-Megaman said:


> Are you Nintendo's target audience? I mean, sure, it would be nice for *you* to have online multiplayer here, but people like you aren't Nintendo's main audience with this game. Why should they change their products for adults that lack time when the game is aimed towards children who don't experience the same problem?


 

Their target audience is supposed to be fucking everyone. Mario is known for its broad appeal. That's absolutely no excuse to cut a feature for no good reason other than "We didn't want to include it."


----------



## EzekielRage (Jun 18, 2013)

I am pretty sure they had a good reason. In fact I am certain that reason is TIME CONSTRAINTS!
With the Wii U suffering games need to be released NOW! Not in a year when they had the time to implement and test those additional features, but now.
It happened with the GameCube, when Mario Sunshine and Wind Waker had a shortened development cycle to push sales of the GameCube. And look what games arrive this year, ten years later on a system that is struggeling! What a crazy random happenstance.

Let's hope the Wii U will turn out better than the GameCube though. I guess they are trying to go the 3DS route with the system. I believe it can work but there is no point in crying over spilt milk. Perhaps at a later date there will be an online Mario game...


----------



## EZ-Megaman (Jun 18, 2013)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Their target audience is supposed to be fucking everyone. Mario is known for its broad appeal. That's absolutely no excuse to cut a feature for no good reason other than "We didn't want to include it."


 

So they're going to add guns to appeal to the FPS crowd, add a long, captivating story to appeal to the RPG crowd and add 16-bit sprites to appeal to retro gamers? Oh wait, I missed out fans of the puzzle genre too. I get that you don't mean people that like specific genres are meant to be appealed to as well, but it's a more extreme option.

Games targeted at "everyone" are typically played by children, though. Nintendo judges that most of the people that will play their game won't experience this problem, so they decided to omit online. Besides, if as an adult, you "don't have enough time", then why are you playing a game in the first place?


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 18, 2013)

EZ-Megaman said:


> So they're going to add guns to appeal to the FPS crowd, add a long, captivating story to appeal to the RPG crowd and add 16-bit sprites to appeal to retro gamers? Oh wait, I missed out fans of the puzzle genre too. I get that you don't mean people that like specific genres are meant to be appealed to as well, but it's a more extreme option.
> 
> Games targeted at "everyone" are typically played by children, though. Nintendo judges that most of the people that will play their game won't experience this problem, so they decided to omit online. Besides, if as an adult, you "don't have enough time", then why are you playing a game in the first place?


 

But like online gaming is something children can do too. Online gaming doesn't just mean joining random games, it means if your friend is at his house and you're at your house you can play together without getting together.

Online gaming isn't a demographical thing, even if it was it would only expand the demographic to add it.

Literally there is no excuse to not have such a basic, positive feature in this game other than "We're lazy."


----------



## EZ-Megaman (Jun 18, 2013)

Guild McCommunist said:


> But like online gaming is something children can do too. Online gaming doesn't just mean joining random games, it means if your friend is at his house and you're at your house you can play together without getting together.
> 
> Online gaming isn't a demographical thing, even if it was it would only expand the demographic to add it.
> 
> Literally there is no excuse to not have such a basic, positive feature in this game other than "We're lazy."


 
Really? As far as I know, parents are wary of their children playing games online as they could be exposed to bad language through voice chat, though that may not apply to all places. Most children probably wouldn't see the harm that playing with random people could do and they would stumble onto obscene language. 

Besides, would it be a completed deal breaker if you weren't able to play a 3D platformer, a genre with very little games that support online, didn't have online? I'm not arguing that online would be entirely bad (though there are a few negatives) but that a significant portion of the people who would play the game would prefer to have resources allocated to a better single player, as evidenced by the people in this topic arguing about how they don't particularly want online.


----------



## Gahars (Jun 18, 2013)

EZ-Megaman said:


> Really? As far as I know, parents are wary of their children playing games online as they could be exposed to bad language through voice chat, though that may not apply to all places. Most children probably wouldn't see the harm that playing with random people could do and they would stumble onto obscene language.


 

Considering how many children I've encountered online, I'd say that's a definite no.


----------



## FAST6191 (Jun 18, 2013)

EZ-Megaman said:


> Really? As far as I know, parents are wary of their children playing games online as they could be exposed to bad language through voice chat, though that may not apply to all places. Most children probably wouldn't see the harm that playing with random people could do and they would stumble onto obscene language.



Are these the same parents that have not got the first clue about the content of various games: "If Timmy wants to play Grant Theft Auto, Timmy can play Grant Theft Auto"?


----------



## Walker D (Jun 18, 2013)

Guild McCommunist said:


> But like online gaming is something children can do too. Online gaming doesn't just mean joining random games, it means if your friend is at his house and you're at your house you can play together without getting together.
> 
> Online gaming isn't a demographical thing, even if it was it would only expand the demographic to add it.
> 
> Literally there is no excuse to not have such a basic, positive feature in this game other than "We're lazy."





Walker D said:


> One thing that doesn't makes me too worry about this game not having online multiplayer is that Nintendo seems to have really looked intro that matter, and then, decided not to go with it.
> 
> Some of the last Mario Games had a glance on the multiplayer possibilities already (with the NSMB2 and Luigi's Mansion for example), and from the Developer's Direct Video for Super Mario 3D World, you can see that their main focus was enabling a good multiplayer experience (what indicates that they thought about the multiplayer possibilities well enough).
> After all that, I find it difficult to believe that online multiplayer would be scrapped only cause of laziness


 
I mean ..we can imply that their decision was based in laziness, based on what ?   ...The little that we know that the developers said about the game tell us that multiplayer was the point where they were more focused on.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 18, 2013)

Walker D said:


> I mean ..we can imply that their decision was based in laziness, based on what ? ...The little that we know that the developers said about the game tell us that multiplayer was the point where they were more focused on.


 

Because there's absolutely no other reason a developer with as much money and skill as Nintendo would exclude such a thing. It's kinda bullshit.

Also if it was "more focused on" multiplayer, why not include yet another multiplayer option?

Like I don't see anyone going "Hey, let's exclude a feature from our game that would only help it and not hinder it at all because we want to 'encourage playing a game in the same room.'"

I'm just flat out astonished that people can say this was a good decision or even be okay with this decision. Like it's okay to criticize a company, even Nintendo, they all deserve some criticism.


----------



## EzekielRage (Jun 18, 2013)

Repost:
I am pretty sure they had a good reason. In fact I am certain that reason is *TIME CONSTRAINTS!*
With the Wii U suffering games need to be released NOW! Not in a year when they had the time to implement and test those additional features, but now.
It happened with the GameCube, when Mario Sunshine and Wind Waker had a shortened development cycle to push sales of the GameCube. And look what games arrive this year, ten years later on a system that is struggeling! What a crazy random happenstance.

Let's hope the Wii U will turn out better than the GameCube though. I guess they are trying to go the 3DS route with the system. I believe it can work but there is no point in crying over spilt milk. Perhaps at a later date there will be an online Mario game...


----------



## DSGamer64 (Jun 19, 2013)

FAST6191 said:


> I try never to underestimate rose tinted goggles, however that is not what I want to argue -- Perfect dark, probably the very definition of spiritual sequel, got an XBLA remake with online multiplayer.


 

And it was a complete hunk of crap to boot. You realize how dated those games are when you play them or when they get remakes. 

SM3DW not being online is an irrelevant feature for a game that is generally focused on single player anyway.


----------



## DiscostewSM (Jun 19, 2013)

What if they decided to release an update that included online multiplayer later on down the road?


----------



## Bobbybangin (Jun 19, 2013)

I read the heading to the article and thought to myself, "who cares about online Mario?". Then I read the comments and realized I'm a minority in not caring. Then again, I don't really care for online gaming in general. I've owned every Mario title since the first, not crazy about Paper Marios or RPG, but playing online is the last thing I really think or care about when playing a Mario game. The two things I've always thought would ruin a Mario game is DLC and online. Guess I'm getting old.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Jun 19, 2013)

DiscostewSM said:


> What if they decided to release an update that included online multiplayer later on down the road?


Knowing Nintendo, how likely do you think that is?


----------



## Psionic Roshambo (Jun 19, 2013)

Guild McCommunist said:


> Because there's absolutely no other reason a developer with as much money and skill as Nintendo would exclude such a thing. It's kinda bullshit.
> 
> Also if it was "more focused on" multiplayer, why not include yet another multiplayer option?
> 
> ...


 
The reason that people are OK with Mario not having online is like, literally 20+ years of not having Mario online. The games have been pretty good so far, and many people are quite happy to play Mario games offline.  


I am still waiting for that MMO Pokemon game.... 

Nintendo could monetize the hell out of that, combined with the card packs. Scan the code with the camera to add some rare pokemon to your MMO online game. Buy the game, buy the cards, buy the toys and the movies... lol


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jun 19, 2013)

Psionic Roshambo said:


> The reason that people are OK with Mario not having online is like, literally 20+ years of not having Mario online. The games have been pretty good so far, and many people are quite happy to play Mario games offline.


 

Technology advances, games should advance with technology. Saying "Well Mario didn't have online 20+ years ago!" is not an excuse.

Also only recent Mario entries have been co-op focused, and this is the first real co-op 3D Mario game. So yeah, it's a completely new ball game.


----------



## EzekielRage (Jun 19, 2013)

How often do I have to repeat myself?

THEY LEFT IT OUT DUE TO TIME CONSTRAINTS BECAUSE THE WII U NEEDS GAMES NOW AND IMPLEMENTING THAT FEATURE WOULD TAKE TONS OF TIME FOR TESTING.

This is the third time I have said this, how come NOBODY reads that?


----------

