• The site will be down for scheduled maintenance this Friday the 24th at 2AM PST / 5AM EST / 9AM UTC while we perform a software update. We expect this process to take up to 5 hours. Thank you for your understanding and patience. New features will be included.
  • Community Spotlight sign-ups are open once again for both Gaming and EtcetEra Hangout threads! If you want to shine a spotlight on your community, please register now.

Super Mario Maker 2: Switch Online requirements and multiplayer limitations

Oct 27, 2017
1,639
Germany
I can't believe here is another game that forces this arbitrary joycon only multiplayer on us. Makes zero sense to me that coop creator couldn't just work with two pro controllers. Especially when you consider for how long you are most likely gonna build levels.

Apart from missing local co-op, every other thing in this game is looking on point though!
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,924
Multiplayer? No.

Level sharing? Absolutely, it's not multiplayer.
There's other PS4 and XBO games that require Plus/Gold for online features that aren't multiplayer (messages, shared world events and chalice dungeons in Dark Souls and Bloodborne) so the distinction is completely arbitrary. Even on Switch you can play some online enabled non-MP stuff in Super Mario Odyssey without a sub but you need the sub for Mario Maker 2.

Most people don't really care because at this point people consider Plus/Gold/Online as mandatory subscriptions to operate these machines.
 
Oct 25, 2017
810
You can do leaderboards and download mods/levels and such in other games on the other systems without a subscription. It's only reasonable that people would've expected a similar situation here.
Fair enough. Just seeking clarification!

Based on this reaction, let's hope Pokémon doesn't tie trading to NSO...
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,375
Even leaderboards behind a sub is a bit much... Especially since they said those kinds of features wouldn't require the online. But oh well...
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,924
Fair enough. Just seeking clarification!

Based on this reaction, let's hope Pokémon doesn't tie trading to NSO...
Pokemon trading is you directly interacting with another player online. That would be tied to the online subscription on any platform. And you do need Switch Online to trade in Let's Go, so it's expected on Sword and Shield too.
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,177
There's other PS4 and XBO games that require Plus/Gold for online features that aren't multiplayer (messages, shared world events and chalice dungeons in Dark Souls and Bloodborne) so the distinction is completely arbitrary. Even on Switch you can play some online enabled non-MP stuff in Super Mario Odyssey without a sub but you need the sub for Mario Maker 2.

Most people don't really care because at this point people consider Plus/Gold/Online as mandatory subscriptions to operate these machines.
A more apt comparison, the game LBP doesn't require PS+ to download levels IIRC.

Similarly on Xbox, when it did exist, Project Spark didn't require XBLG.

Like I said, for online multiplayer, sure, I get that 100%, keeping with the crowd... but this seems a bit much.
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,589
It's an online feature, so why shouldn't it require online?
Other examples were already given of UGC content like LBP/Dreams where downloading content to play offline doesn’t require a subscription but playing with online connectivity (multiplayer, leaderboards etc) does

MM2 should absolutely allow download of courses without NSO. Require it for leaderboards and online multiplayer
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,589
There's other PS4 and XBO games that require Plus/Gold for online features that aren't multiplayer (messages, shared world events and chalice dungeons in Dark Souls and Bloodborne) so the distinction is completely arbitrary. Even on Switch you can play some online enabled non-MP stuff in Super Mario Odyssey without a sub but you need the sub for Mario Maker 2.

Most people don't really care because at this point people consider Plus/Gold/Online as mandatory subscriptions to operate these machines.
These are effectively continuously online to pull messages etc as you’re going through the world. I don’t think it is a complicated distinction between blood borne/dark souls which are effectively online, and downloading content for solo play offline
 
OP
OP
Atheerios
Oct 27, 2017
3,582
Costa Rica
on the other systems
MM2 should absolutely allow download of courses without NSO. Require it for leaderboards and online multiplayer
That's the key part. Nintendo service is different and cheaper, they lots of times don't do what other companies are already doing. You should set your expectations for NSO moving forward because this is never going to change.

Fair enough. Just seeking clarification!

Based on this reaction, let's hope Pokémon doesn't tie trading to NSO...
Pokemon already needs NSO for trading, battliing and any online functionality.
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,177
That's the key part. Nintendo service is different and cheaper, they lots of times don't do what other companies are already doing. You should set your expectations for NSO moving forward because this is never going to change.
And to that end I'll have to keep to my original response in that it's quite lame on their part.
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,177
I don't think it's lame at all, the service is cheaper and I'm getting cool features like multiplayer online for the first time in a Mario game. It's just worth it.
I wasn't referring to the multiplayer, just specifically the level sharing aspect being tied to online. There is nothing cool about that.
 
OP
OP
Atheerios
Oct 27, 2017
3,582
Costa Rica
I wasn't referring to the multiplayer, just specifically the level sharing aspect being tied to online. There is nothing cool about that.
Well, to be fair, Online being behind a paywall at all is not cool. There's really no need for it to be, so where do you draw the line on which online features should be free and which ones should be paid? Sony did their thing, Nintendo is doing it differently. It's not an industry standard.

I'm not trying to defend them, but what I say is that I understand why they do this. There's no official guidebook on how to run an online paid service, rules are up to the company, and Nintendo doesn't have as many online games as Sony or Microsoft do, so they have to push it harder somehow, by doing thinks like requiring online for UGC.
 
Oct 27, 2017
1,989
So if I understand correctly, you need NSO for level sharing and there's no couch mp in a single Switch.

Disgusting, it was always obvious they'd try to force their shitty service but this way of crippling a game is a new low.
 
Oct 27, 2017
2,433
Netherlands
Surely Nintendo can't be so daft that they introduce a coop building mode so you can play the game with your kid but then don't allow you to play together so you can't actually play the game with your kid, right?
I know this is Nintendo, so that question is part rhetorical, but still.

If so, my motivation to buy the game just went
 
Oct 27, 2017
879
Norway
Kinda crazy how Nintendo has become one of if not THE worst when it comes to locking stuff behind a online paywall. (yes I know it's cheaper)
Basically the game is useless without a paid subscription. You basically just rent most of the game.
 
Nov 7, 2017
1,524
Surely Nintendo can't be so daft that they introduce a coop building mode so you can play the game with your kid but then don't allow you to play together so you can't actually play the game with your kid, right?
I know this is Nintendo, so that question is part rhetorical, but still.

If so, my motivation to buy the game just went
Mario Maker levels work really fast, I was surprised at first too but the more I think about it the more sense it makes not to have local co-op as people would be leaving the screen constantly and split screen would be too small for competitive. In any case, it's a bummer.
 
Oct 27, 2017
2,433
Netherlands
Mario Maker levels work really fast, I was surprised at first too but the more I think about it the more sense it makes not to have local co-op as people would be leaving the screen constantly and split screen would be too small for competitive. In any case, it's a bummer.
Sure for competitive, but it's not like NSMBWii/U and NSMB3DW, both of which are featured, didn't already have multiplayer solutions. Zooming cameras work. It should work even better with the older versions due to their cleaner look.
 
Dec 3, 2018
44
So if I understand correctly, you need NSO for level sharing and there's no couch mp in a single Switch.

Disgusting, it was always obvious they'd try to force their shitty service but this way of crippling a game is a new low.
Can't believe Nintendo would require Nintendo Switch Online for one of their premier online games for the Nintendo Switch...
 
Dec 3, 2018
44
Yes because we're not talking multiplayer playing, but level sharing and local MP. That's the new low.
No offline local multiplayer is a real shame, I'm with you there. I assume it's to keep NSMBU selling as the local coop Mario for the switch.

I understand not wanting to pay for online features, but it was a given that this game would require NSO from the day the service was announced. I can't see it as a "new low", isn't this just the new normal?
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,589
No its not the new normal IMO. For a heavily UGC based game you really shouldn't be locking UGC behind a paywall. It devalues a huge part of the game.

It also potentially damages word of mouth which UGC type games often heavily benefit from.
 
Oct 27, 2017
1,989
No offline local multiplayer is a real shame, I'm with you there. I assume it's to keep NSMBU selling as the local coop Mario for the switch.

I understand not wanting to pay for online features, but it was a given that this game would require NSO from the day the service was announced. I can't see it as a "new low", isn't this just the new normal?
It is new because until now similar functions on other platforms with paid online didn't require it.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,924
It's too late to complain about this kind of thing. Online games are already huge on consoles despite the subscription requirement so most people don't mind paying. The time to fight this was last gen when you should have not bought an Xbox 360 and gone with the PS3 instead (I did my part!) but it didn't work. Xbox 360 was a success. So now we are in this subscription hell where various arbitrarily decided online features will be behind a paywall on every console and there's nothing you can do about it. You're going to pay for Online if you want to play Super Mario Maker 2.
 
Dec 5, 2017
2,010
Kinda crazy how Nintendo has become one of if not THE worst when it comes to locking stuff behind a online paywall. (yes I know it's cheaper)
Basically the game is useless without a paid subscription. You basically just rent most of the game.
Lets not carried away now, worst, pls examples outside this one why Nintendo is worst when comes to locking stuff behind a online paywall?
You can play over 100 levels and made own levels and play them without online, so I wouldn't call that useless.

Also when we talk about this locked online features (yes, sharing levels is online features too), we need to mention online subscription price,
and we talk about $20 for hole year that not only gave all Mario Maker 2 online features, but gave accees to every other Switch online multiplayer game, NES games, I mean just with this this "Nintendo Launches Game Vouchers Programme For Switch Online Users" where you buy Mario Maker 2 and onother game can get hole year online for free.
 
Oct 25, 2017
700
Lack of local multiplayer is very disappointing....and baffling. Creating a level together and then watching while the other person plays it doesn’t sound fun at all.
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,641
Athens, Greece
No offline local multiplayer is a real shame, I'm with you there. I assume it's to keep NSMBU selling as the local coop Mario for the switch.

I understand not wanting to pay for online features, but it was a given that this game would require NSO from the day the service was announced. I can't see it as a "new low", isn't this just the new normal?
It was pretty normal and expected, and it's a cheap service anyway and people were like "still not worth it lol" and when Nintendo are trying to add value to the service people cry "new low".

It's the same with amiibo, when amiibo aren't required for any functionality people are like "lol amiibo are useless"
When amiibo lock stuff people cry "15$ dlc!!!"
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,589
I don't understand the mult-console requirement. I get maybe you can be far away from other players. But this is a game about flexibility in construction. Maybe have levels where you can't be away from others (eg like NSMB) which would be perfectly playable on one screen couch coop.

Seems such an oversight. How many levels will people really create where you can wander around separately? I'm sure it'll lead to some interesting designs but its not really Mario Bros at that point.
 
Jan 10, 2018
2,823
Tokyo
The direct was great and the game looks amazing, but no local multiplayer completely soured me from buying the game. I won't buy the game until local multiplayer is implemented. I don't care how they do it, with either a zoom out, split screens or a combination of both (with a timer to catch up for example), but without that, I will not give them 60 euros. I loved that Nintendo always insisted in the importance of couch coop so this is really disappointing coming from them.
 
Oct 27, 2017
461
If I can't play other people's levels with the money spent on the game then no deal.
That's the real meat of the game, the rest of it is not worth asking price.
 
Oct 26, 2017
12,121
Seems obvious that unless you limit yourself to strictly F2P games, pretty much all online functionality is limited to NSO. You can either accept that or not buy the games and let them know. I still haven't subscribed to NSO and probably won't do it for a while either and if I do, it'll only be for a month here and there.
 
Oct 25, 2017
10,094
I think in co-op right now, characters don't all have to be on the same screen. You can all run different directions. Local co-op doesn't really work with that.
Yes if you use split screen. I’ve played 4 player races in split screen on Switch with Sonic Mania. So it is possible.
 
Oct 31, 2017
6,550
Greece
Nintendo charges for their online services, which in turn means that any online gameplay in any given game, independent of it being 1st or 3rd party, is accessed only through paying the subscription. The uproar in an actual 1st Party game having this roadblock is where exactly? And I wonder how the reactions are gonna be for Pokemon considering this, cause I don't think people realized it yet with Let's Go that a full fledged online Pokemon Multiplayer is gonna be behind a paywall.
 
Oct 25, 2017
11,447
I'm surprised about the lack of a proper co-op, while the Switch Online part was largely expected. Even games like Super Mario Odyssey or Let's Go have a (pretty lame) local co-op mode and this game is full of competitive and co-op options, so it legit surprises me that out of all games, this is the one not offering any kind of actual co-op gaming besides the level editor - which, to be fair, sounds more gimmicky than practical. Still hyped about the game since I wouldn't be playing local much anyway.
 
Oct 27, 2017
461
Nintendo charges for their online services, which in turn means that any online gameplay in any given game, independent of it being 1st or 3rd party, is accessed only through paying the subscription. The uproar in an actual 1st Party game having this roadblock is where exactly? And I wonder how the reactions are gonna be for Pokemon considering this, cause I don't think people realized it yet with Let's Go that a full fledged online Pokemon Multiplayer is gonna be behind a paywall.
There's a difference between online multiplayer and download/upload of community content, I can't think of many games on any system that lock that behind a subscription.