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

Considering the rest of us have to tolerate the words "unrealistic", "appaling" and "robbery", I think you can humour me.

Not really, you're always like this. The attributes I'm using are actually relating to my points, whereas your are simply insulting my PoV.

Rolstoppable said:

So this another one of this thread's where you are trying to force your opinion on everyone.

Newsflash: Opinions differ and people can buy what they want with their money. So what you'll see in this thread will be a lot of people that tell you that they gladly paid $50 for Nintendo games and don't regret it one bit.

Also, if others are offering more interesting games at a much better price, then why aren't they outselling Nintendo games? The obvious answer is that others aren't offering more interesting games at better prices and their only option to even compete with Nintendo is to drastically undercut Nintendo's prices.

In my humble opinion, Nintendo is selling at that price on brand alone, and that can only go so far.

Had super mario been released on Steam with no prior name recognition, at 60$, you can be sure Trine 2 will destroy it in sales. Temple Run is selling much more than Nintendo games, so is Angry Birds, so if it's sales you need you have them. League of Legends probably has an immense userbase at the moment.

From Wikipedia: As of July 2012, League of Legends had over 32 million registrations and averages 12 million players worldwide per day, with the number of concurrent users online at any given time peaking over 3 million. Players also collectively log 1 billion hours per month, making League of Legends the world's most played video game[46][47]

People bought Mario for 50$, I'm thinking that with the increased competition from the marketplace, with games of IMHO competing value, the markup will no longer be in Nintendo's favor. I'm not sure how this is me imposing my opinions on anybody...