| cbarroso09 said: well I did not know that the games are downloaded from the heavens, because from my perspective some kind of servers are needed. Those servers are positioned inside buildings. Those servers generate heat, a problem that needs to be addressed by a cooling system. By having a cooling system and servers, things fail. When thing fails they need to be fixed. To be fixed money is needed. So when you say games need to cost less, I prefer to think that even though games are not shipped nor have a plastic on it, there is a system that needs money to be run. And by not having any online subscription and all games still released physically, I prefer to have that option on a Nintendo console. My opinion. |
You are not far from reality. People usually don't take into consideration how much it cost to maintain a server, especially one as big as companies like Nintendo, Sony and MS use. Instead of paying for the plastic, you are paying the maintenance of these servers.
That said, the price of a digital should still be cheaper than the retail version. Mainly because the retailer takes a big chunk of that money ($15 for a $60 game), add the distribution and cost of goods ($4) and you have $19 difference between what a digital game should cost. $19 per game is huge, and maintaining a server should be less than that (talking from personal experiences), but without knowing how much Nintendo spends on their servers, this is speculation on my part.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef0120a8b7438c970b-600wi
I'm talking about 1st party games btw, because 3rd parties have to pay a fee to put games on the eshop, which will take the "retailers" part (although is probably cheaper than $15).
Nintendo and PC gamer
