By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
happydolphin on 05 February 2013
Edit Thread
RolStoppable said:

Based on this logic, Super Mario Galaxy 2 and future 3D Mario games should be $30 because of the effort that went into Epic Mickey 2.

Do you consider them of similar effort? If so I don't know what to tell you. Clearly Mario Galaxy is a higher-production game than Epic Mickey.

Otherwise you wouldn't have made this post I presume. You're trying to prove by contradiction but it's backfiring because you're playing on a false premice, which ironically is part of your tactic.

Michael-5 said:

People still buy it at full price. You don't like it, but you buy a Nintendo console for these games.

It's also not just platformers, it's any big budget Nintendo game. Zelda and Smash Bros also sell for near full price, or full price.

So you consider all Nintendo games to be of similar budget? Sorry if I don't understand you correctly but NSMB, Wii Sports, Wii Play, Mario 3D, Zelda 3D, Smash Bros, are they all on the same playing field? Because if so I could understand but I starkly disagree on it. And I don't think the market agrees with that either. The mass-market may be a little unknowledgeable but they aren't totally oblivious.

NintendoPie said:

OK, but I don't get what it means. Like, what does "Et al" actually mean?

Why'd you ask me if that was OK? It's your thread!

I asked because I can't read tone easily off of written word and I presumed you were being inquisitive, as in suspecting I made a late change in logic, which I didn't.

But to clarify "et al" means "and the others", from latin. 

Sometimes if you don't know something like that, try google. Most things it knows.

Spazzy_D said:

That's an awfully big gamble, taking a business model that is working really well and changing it becuase it "might" make more revenue, if it doesn't it would be disasterous.  It's actually a stupid gamble depending on how many more copies you would have to unload to surpass your previous revenue.

I understand, but it is also a big gamble to price games at a traditional $ number, games that have likely lost their novelty and may have a discovered "cheap" value in the greater market after experiencing the past entries, allthewhile new games are emerging in the market at a very low price with novel concepts that people are craving (I believe, especially after the Wii era).

Gamble versus gamble, I'd go with lower price.