Super Mario 2020 - Rumors & Discussion

[spiderfan2000]

At 18:32, you see the Mario figure with the eye lights turned off.  Creepy!  Making some new eyes out of paper and sticking them on the figure would probably make it more suitable for display.

[GeneralNumberOne]

So, they have sticker applying machines. I wonder if that means anything for the future of stickers as a whole.

[Falconfan1414]

Designer also confirms all instructions are digital for Mario as a way of getting people on to the app so kids can see how they are supposed to play with the sets

[GoldenNinja3000]

24 minutes ago, Falconfan1414 said:

Designer also confirms all instructions are digital for Mario as a way of getting people on to the app so kids can see how they are supposed to play with the sets

I figured that would be the case, but it’s still disappointing. I for one only use digital instructions if I absolutely have to but I far prefer actual manuals. Going digital is probably better for the environment but still, not every child is guaranteed to have a way to access digital instructions so I hope it doesn’t become the norm across all themes. 

[Ninjaguy99]

Hopefully this leads to LEGO Splatoon sets.

[MatthewRC]

52 minutes ago, Ninjaguy99 said:

Hopefully this leads to LEGO Splatoon sets.

Or hopefully LEGO Pokémon after Mega Construx loses the license! Oh, and yes, I am aware that Pokémon isn’t a first-party Nintendo franchise. It’s a second-party franchise shared between Nintendo, Game Freak and Creatures, Inc.

[BrickG]

Pokemon is a first party Nintendo franchise. They own Pokemon. They don't own the Pokemon Company. But the Pokemon Company manages the license and stuff. Nintendo is the only ones that own all the Pokemon trademarks. I mean if Creatures and the Pokemon company wanted to break off of Nintendo they could but they also couldn't use a lot of what makes Pokemon Pokemon. For example, Nintendo OWNS the name "Pikachu", the Pokemon Company or GameFreak or Creatures have their own influences. It's a complex mess. But at the end of the day it really means that while there's multiple fingers in this bowl it would basically be impossible for Pokemon to ever go anywhere else Nintendo isn't fine with. Nintendo could have stopped Pokemon Go if they wanted (but they're open to mobile stuff, and benefit from the success of Pokemon even when because of complex contracts they don't see direct $$$ from something like Pokemon Go).

GameFreak, Creatures, and the Pokemon company could be called second or third party even. But Pokemon is first party. Nintendo owns enough of it. And it doesn't matter if a third party makes a 1st party game because that game will still be 1st party (look at Mario RPG and stuff).

Oh no I went on a tangent...

 

I think a Smash Bros style wave of stuff would be the best move. Not literally Smash Bros. But like, a Mario set, Pokemon, Zelda, Donkey Kong, etc, all in the same wave. Well, the best move for me because I'm love that.

[BlueberryWaffles]

Pokemon usually has its merchandise licensing handled separately from the rest of Nintendo's IPs though. I know that was a reason that the World of Nintendo toy line from Jakks Pacific a few years ago couldn't use anything from Pokemon. It's more hoops to jump through because of the Pokemon Company.

Speaking of, that toy line actually gives a pretty good benchmark of what Nintendo has full control of for merchandise, and therefore what could show up in Lego form. The franchises featured there included Mario, Zelda, Splatoon, Animal Crossing, Star Fox, Pikmin, and Metroid. Notable absences were Pokemon and Kirby. Fire Emblem wasn't included either but that might have just been a choice on which figures to make.

[MatthewRC]

3 hours ago, BrickG said:

Pokemon is a first party Nintendo franchise. They own Pokemon. They don't own the Pokemon Company. But the Pokemon Company manages the license and stuff. Nintendo is the only ones that own all the Pokemon trademarks. I mean if Creatures and the Pokemon company wanted to break off of Nintendo they could but they also couldn't use a lot of what makes Pokemon Pokemon. For example, Nintendo OWNS the name "Pikachu", the Pokemon Company or GameFreak or Creatures have their own influences. It's a complex mess. But at the end of the day it really means that while there's multiple fingers in this bowl it would basically be impossible for Pokemon to ever go anywhere else Nintendo isn't fine with. Nintendo could have stopped Pokemon Go if they wanted (but they're open to mobile stuff, and benefit from the success of Pokemon even when because of complex contracts they don't see direct $$$ from something like Pokemon Go).

GameFreak, Creatures, and the Pokemon company could be called second or third party even. But Pokemon is first party. Nintendo owns enough of it. And it doesn't matter if a third party makes a 1st party game because that game will still be 1st party (look at Mario RPG and stuff).

Oh no I went on a tangent...

 

I think a Smash Bros style wave of stuff would be the best move. Not literally Smash Bros. But like, a Mario set, Pokemon, Zelda, Donkey Kong, etc, all in the same wave. Well, the best move for me because I'm love that.

 

12 minutes ago, BlueberryWaffles said:

Pokemon usually has its merchandise licensing handled separately from the rest of Nintendo's IPs though. I know that was a reason that the World of Nintendo toy line from Jakks Pacific a few years ago couldn't use anything from Pokemon. It's more hoops to jump through because of the Pokemon Company.

Speaking of, that toy line actually gives a pretty good benchmark of what Nintendo has full control of for merchandise, and therefore what could show up in Lego form. The franchises featured there included Mario, Zelda, Splatoon, Animal Crossing, Star Fox, Pikmin, and Metroid. Notable absences were Pokemon and Kirby. Fire Emblem wasn't included either but that might have just been a choice on which figures to make.

Oh, okay. Thanks for the clarification! Whenever Mega Construx finally loses the Pokémon license one day, I wouldn’t mind seeing LEGO taking over!

Let’s just wait and see if Nintendo and LEGO expand their licensing partnership. Hopefully that’ll influence The Pokémon Company to license Pokémon to LEGO in the future.

Edited April 26, 2020 by MatthewRC

[BigGuy4U]

3 hours ago, BrickG said:

Pokemon is a first party Nintendo franchise. They own Pokemon. They don't own the Pokemon Company. But the Pokemon Company manages the license and stuff. Nintendo is the only ones that own all the Pokemon trademarks. I mean if Creatures and the Pokemon company wanted to break off of Nintendo they could but they also couldn't use a lot of what makes Pokemon Pokemon. For example, Nintendo OWNS the name "Pikachu", the Pokemon Company or GameFreak or Creatures have their own influences. It's a complex mess. But at the end of the day it really means that while there's multiple fingers in this bowl it would basically be impossible for Pokemon to ever go anywhere else Nintendo isn't fine with. Nintendo could have stopped Pokemon Go if they wanted (but they're open to mobile stuff, and benefit from the success of Pokemon even when because of complex contracts they don't see direct $$$ from something like Pokemon Go).

GameFreak, Creatures, and the Pokemon company could be called second or third party even. But Pokemon is first party. Nintendo owns enough of it. And it doesn't matter if a third party makes a 1st party game because that game will still be 1st party (look at Mario RPG and stuff).

Oh no I went on a tangent...

 

I think a Smash Bros style wave of stuff would be the best move. Not literally Smash Bros. But like, a Mario set, Pokemon, Zelda, Donkey Kong, etc, all in the same wave. Well, the best move for me because I'm love that.

Or maybe a few waves of Smash Bros CMF

[gedren_y]

Does Nintendo still hold licensing rights to Sonic the Hedgehog? I remember it being a big deal when Nintendo acquired the rights to make Sonic Advance for the GBA. Did LEGO's licensing deal for Sonic for Dimensions go through Nintendo or Sega?

[BigGuy4U]

Just now, gedren_y said:

Does Nintendo still hold licensing rights to Sonic the Hedgehog? I remember it being a big deal when Nintendo acquired the rights to make Sonic Advance for the GBA. Did LEGO's licensing deal for Sonic for Dimensions go through Nintendo or Sega?

I don't think Nintendo ever owned the rights to Sonic, it's always been Sega.

[Fenghuang0296]

Hey, wild speculation here, but remember we saw a purple Toad house in the reveal videos? Everyone knows those tiny ‘castles’ that are always shown on the open-world maps of Mario games and represent mini bosses and bosses, right? Does anyone else think we could see one of those in a set, as like a smaller counterpart to Bowser’s Castle and an ‘inversion’ of the Toad house? After all, Toad houses aren’t part of levels typically, but they’re still doing one. 

[ReversibleSedgewick]

(Since this thread is where we sneak off for Nintendo general chat when no one's looking, the Harry Potter sets are doing the Lord's work in providing potential Zelda set parts. I know they're not completely accurate, but would I be happy with the transparent blue Potter stag and rabbits as The Lord of the Mountain and group of Blupees in a Breath of the Wild Satori Mountain set? Yes, yes I would.)

I mean, yay, Mario, I hope they have a Pianta figure in the blind bags.   

 

[Mandalorianknight]

On 4/27/2020 at 9:05 PM, Fenghuang0296 said:

Hey, wild speculation here, but remember we saw a purple Toad house in the reveal videos? Everyone knows those tiny ‘castles’ that are always shown on the open-world maps of Mario games and represent mini bosses and bosses, right? Does anyone else think we could see one of those in a set, as like a smaller counterpart to Bowser’s Castle and an ‘inversion’ of the Toad house? After all, Toad houses aren’t part of levels typically, but they’re still doing one. 

I think the bowser junior tower in the starter set could work somewhat well for that, though it's hopefully not meant to represent it.

On 4/28/2020 at 8:23 AM, ReversibleSedgewick said:

(Since this thread is where we sneak off for Nintendo general chat when no one's looking, the Harry Potter sets are doing the Lord's work in providing potential Zelda set parts. I know they're not completely accurate, but would I be happy with the transparent blue Potter stag and rabbits as The Lord of the Mountain and group of Blupees in a Breath of the Wild Satori Mountain set? Yes, yes I would.)

I mean, yay, Mario, I hope they have a Pianta figure in the blind bags.   

 

Yeah, that would be great, honestly I'm not the biggest zelda fan but breath of the wild was a great game from what I've played and I'd totally get a set of it.

Uh, Yay, Mario, i hope we get actual minifigures eventually.

[ReversibleSedgewick]

On 5/3/2020 at 10:15 PM, Mandalorianknight said:

Yeah, that would be great, honestly I'm not the biggest zelda fan but breath of the wild was a great game from what I've played and I'd totally get a set of it.

Uh, Yay, Mario, i hope we get actual minifigures eventually.

(Although I'm gung-ho for the transparent blue Breath of the Wild animals, the actual scientific and objectively correct approach for Lego is to do Wind Waker, with the same head-sizes as the Dimensions Powerpuff Girls. And once they've done all the lovely boats from that game they can give us the https://zelda.gamepedia.com/Spirit_Train, which as far as I know wouldn't be like anything Lego have ever done?)

Yay Mario, yes minifigures would be great except that Wario should be a little bit buildable like those Minions figures.

 

[BigHobbit]

Mario Set Names can be found on Instagram...

[fantasticfootno]

The names for all of the sets were revealed, I for one am excited to see what toad's treasure hunt is.

[BigGuy4U]

I'm actually kind of curious to see some of these. Mario's House is particularly intriguing, it's never been in the main series so I wonder if it might be based off of Paper Mario or Mario & Luigi, or if it'll just be something basic Lego made up. I'm assuming Whomp's Fortress will be based on the Mario 64 level, but it seems way too cheap for that.

[MatthewRC]

1 hour ago, fantasticfootno said:

The names for all of the sets were revealed, I for one am excited to see what toad's treasure hunt is.

Maybe it’s based on Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker, perhaps?

[Fenghuang0296]

6 hours ago, BigGuy4U said:

I'm actually kind of curious to see some of these. Mario's House is particularly intriguing, it's never been in the main series so I wonder if it might be based off of Paper Mario or Mario & Luigi, or if it'll just be something basic Lego made up. I'm assuming Whomp's Fortress will be based on the Mario 64 level, but it seems way too cheap for that.

I think ‘Mario’s House’ will just be the purple a Toad house we saw in the trailer. That’s fine by me because I wanted the house and Yoshi, so if they both come in the same set it’ll be a must-buy for me. 

Some of these are curious - I can see (and skip) a Desert Pokey set with a big brick-built Pokey, but Whomp’s Fortress sounds interesting. We’ve obviously already seen the Piranha Plant Power Slide, but the Piranha Plant Attack is probably going to be that other build we saw in the trailer with the mechanism that launches a Piranha Plant out of a pipe when Mario approaches. Kind of sucks that that’s one of the most expensive sets, it looks awesome and I really want it. I’m also curious about what Toad’s Treasure Hunt entails, and how they’re going to represent Toad. Probably brick-built with a head that’s a recoloured version of the Super Mushroom we saw already, but I’m still curious.

Based on the names alone though, the only ones I see as must-buys are Mario’s House and the Piranha Plant attack. That, the Starter Course, the Monty Mole GWP and Bowser’s Castle will probably make quite the nice little display. 

[GoldenNinja3000]

In just2good’s latest video, he mentions a rumored D2C. Is there actually any credible D2C rumored to exist? I thought they were just wishes from fans and not real rumors, but I’d be happy to be proven wrong since I’d love to see a D2C for this line. 

[The_Fiery_Rooster]

17 minutes ago, GoldenNinja3000 said:

In just2good’s latest video, he mentions a rumored D2C. Is there actually any credible D2C rumored to exist? I thought they were just wishes from fans and not real rumors, but I’d be happy to be proven wrong since I’d love to see a D2C for this line. 

Yeah, I have no idea where he got that from. I haven't heard anything.

If it's true, I'd love it, but I don't want to be let down by this theme yet another time...

[BlueberryWaffles]

I would imagine a D2C would buck the trend of electronic toy/game and do something more traditional. Bowser's Castle sized for minifigs would be the first thing I can imagine, though an airship would be great as well.

[Fenghuang0296]

3 hours ago, BlueberryWaffles said:

I would imagine a D2C would buck the trend of electronic toy/game and do something more traditional. Bowser's Castle sized for minifigs would be the first thing I can imagine, though an airship would be great as well.

I can’t picture them doing two Bowser Castles simultaneously. If there is a D2C I expect a Mushroom Kingdom Castle, similar (but probably smaller than) the Disney Castle.