| RolStoppable said:
Nintendo has built their brands for well over 20 years and as long as they continue to provide high quality, their brands aren't going to fizzle out. You can only call it "selling on brand alone" when the product itself is bad, but the examples you provided in the OP are the best platformers on the market. No sane company would lower the price of something that sells millions, so why should Nintendo? Price drops happen when a product has reached an insufficient level of sales. The examples you provided in the OP cost $10, because their publishers can't charge more for them. They would like to, but their games wouldn't sell at that price. NSMB2 has sold more than 5m copies by now and NSMBU has sold 1.5m copies on a console with a tiny userbase. It doesn't look like Nintendo's pricing model will change anytime soon. You are forcing your opinion on others by saying things like "games like Super Meat Boy have competing value". That's up to every person to decide for themselves. Judging from sales, most people don't think like you. Lastly, you should have realized how bad your argument is when you had to use games that are not platformers as examples for commercial success. |
@bold. Do you really need to say things like that? The argument applies to retro games in general I used platformers because it was, to me, the easiest genre to analyze, but it applies to everyting else that is retro, 2D, arcade, or that doesn't involve a hefty amount of development like say Gears of War or Halo 4, or Mario Galaxy.
If I'm imposing my opinion, then why is it that you are saying that the titles in OP couldn't sell at 40-60$? You do realize that there's much more to the sales of a game than intrinsic value? Or you don't see that?
