By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Why NON Nintendo games prices go down so fast

omarct said:
manuelogando40 said:

I am not agree with this. In fact, most Nintendo games sell in a impressive way, and they sell with strong legs. It is safe to say they reach the most people with their games. 

Thats false, only the very popular Nintendo games have strong legs because Nintendo fans have no choice but to buy full price. But their less popular games do not have strong legs.

But this works well for Nintendo because they make a few strong games and dont have to worry about cannibalizing themselves with many games and lowering prices, which is why they dont care so much about third party games as they see them as competition. If you are an avid gamer, this is one of the reason why having only a Nintendo console its not recommended as their selection of games is very limited compared to the other consoles/pc. 

TLDR one of the many reasons for lower prices in other consoles  is the result of competition from many third party games trying to get a piece of the pie. Meanwhile Nintendo has almost 0 third party competition on their console which allows them to keep their prices up, not to mention they have a very dedicated fan-base.

Your tldr makes literally no sense.  These companies do not exist in a vaccuum.  Nitnendo is competing against Microsoft, Sony and PCs for gamers' dollars.  Smash is competing against RDR2 for gamers' dollars.  In this respect, Nintendo the developer is in the exact same situation that Activision, Square Enix, SIE, and others are: they want you buying their game and are competing against everyone else for their share of the pie.



The answer is competition, with lackluster 3rd party support/inferior ports there's little Nintendo's games have to compete with for consumer attention so they can keep the prices up. Sony & Microsoft have significantly more games competing for consumers money so obviously need to drop prices to remain competitive.



So what, if Nintendo consoles had more third party games, they'd have to drop their prices?

....Frankly that just makes it seem like the third parties are stupid for not putting less expensive games on the Switch to try and fill that niche. So basically we are all saying that the third parties are stupid and failing to fill in a clear and obvious niche.



The Democratic Nintendo fan....is that a paradox? I'm fond of one of the more conservative companies in the industry, but I vote Liberally and view myself that way 90% of the time?

KingofTrolls said:
KLAMarine said:

The difference is day-night?

Yes. Nobody invests tens of millions of dollars for a game, and will simply sit and stare at other's new games overshadow it a week after launch. 

The Nintendo consoles have a lot less multiplats and there is a reason for it.

"Yes. Nobody invests tens of millions of dollars for a game, and will simply sit and stare at other's new games overshadow it a week after launch."

>What are you referring to here?

"The Nintendo consoles have a lot less multiplats and there is a reason for it."

>The Switch is newer compared to the X1/PS4?



Nintendo thinks that by lowering their prices, they are devaluing their product. For them, people often associate low prices with low quality products and do not want people to have that perception of their games. The problem here is that Nintendo has no competition in the market, its games are unique, no other game gives you the "Nintendo experience", so they do not feel that need to lower the price quickly. In the case of others, their games have a more direct competition with those of other companies.

Personally, I like Nintendo and luckily for them, I decide for what I like and not for price.

Last edited by alejollorente10 - on 22 December 2018

Switch Friend Code = 5965 - 4586 - 6484

PSN: alejollorente10

Well, competition, first and foremost. I don't see why anyone would even attempt to downplay that factor. It's probably part of the reason Nintendo never really tried to form an equitable partnership with third-parties across the board the way others have. Nintendo's consoles are primarily intended to push their own software.

More than that, though, they've conditioned their fans to accept it. Once that happens, many of those fans will defend the practice.

As for why others drop their prices, that's pretty simple. The people who aren't trying your game at $60 might try it if it's at $40. Those that aren't trying it at $40 might try it at $20. When there is a lot of competition, this is viable way to increase exposure. Selling cheaply is better than not selling at all. Software isn't like a physical product where most of the investment is in the production materials.

More importantly, getting someone to try your game at $20 might turn them into a fan, meaning they might buy your NEXT game at $60. It's an especially smart move when you're talking about a continuing franchise.



Which strategy do people think is the better one for the longivety of a company?

R.I.P. Bullfrog, Maxis, Westwood etc



Nintendo system of doing stuff is trash tier level, overpriced games for years & barely any discounts, thank God for PSN, XBL & Steam.

I'm not saying games should be 50% off after a week but after 6 months drop the price 25/30% & everyone would be happy, plus more people would enjoy.



Yea, Breath of the Wild has barely budged.



JustThatGamer said:
The answer is competition, with lackluster 3rd party support/inferior ports there's little Nintendo's games have to compete with for consumer attention so they can keep the prices up. Sony & Microsoft have significantly more games competing for consumers money so obviously need to drop prices to remain competitive.

 

pokoko said:
Well, competition, first and foremost. I don't see why anyone would even attempt to downplay that factor. It's probably part of the reason Nintendo never really tried to form an equitable partnership with third-parties across the board the way others have. Nintendo's consoles are primarily intended to push their own software.

More than that, though, they've conditioned their fans to accept it. Once that happens, many of those fans will defend the practice.

As for why others drop their prices, that's pretty simple. The people who aren't trying your game at $60 might try it if it's at $40. Those that aren't trying it at $40 might try it at $20. When there is a lot of competition, this is viable way to increase exposure. Selling cheaply is better than not selling at all. Software isn't like a physical product where most of the investment is in the production materials.

More importantly, getting someone to try your game at $20 might turn them into a fan, meaning they might buy your NEXT game at $60. It's an especially smart move when you're talking about a continuing franchise.

Ok, competition is a fact. But, Nintendo is selling video games. Rockstar is selling video games, Activision is selling video games, EA is selling video games, everybody here are selling video games. So, competition is real, for all, Nintendo included. 



"Every day I look in the mirror and ask myself: "If today were the last day of my life, would I want to do what I am about to do today?". If the answer is no for too many days in a row, I know I need to change something"

Steve Jobs