DonFerrari said:
And when we have threads discussing the price of Nintendo games staying the same several years after release what most of the people there do? Defend the pricing strategy of Nintendo. When those said games keep selling at a good pace years after release, what does that say? That the fanbase accept the strategy as well. Since I didn't say every Nintendo fan defend, you are seeing generalization because you want to see it. Funny enough I didn't see you, GoOnKid or anyone else discussing the notion of Miyamotoo that the price is totally valid because it's 2 games in 1.
I don't even know you for your assumption of "ever stop". But the answer for you is above. And being unhappy with the price but still buying say a lot.
Not defending the price but say it is justified? Yes, yes, sure.... At launch PS4 Sony stated that about 40% of the userbase consisted of people that didn't own a PS3 so for your justification all the ports, collections and remasters would be justified at 60 usd right? Still several/most were sub 60 (as replied by someone earlier TLOU got cut very fast due to customers complaining) and no game got a price increase from porting from PS3 to PS4 even if they had DLCs added. Skyrim that have been put in almost all systems under the sun being ported for 60usd is basically a rip-off and customers shouldn't entice more thinks like this (or like they did with USFII).
If you buy "99 Vidas o Jogo" on any PS platform you will have access to it on PS3, PS4 and PSVita as far as I heard from the creators. The point of multiple platforms was your defense of having more value because you can play on the go or on the TV, which isn't particular to the game itself. So you accept that perfomance of the game doesn't affect the price (but for some reason you ignored if it affects value or not), but then again pretends it make Switch games more valuable... waiting for your definition on Notebooks. Keep with your perception of the world all you want, if a game is running at a lower resolution and frame than another one at the same system, it's more taxing to the system than the other one unless you can prove it runs at lower processing demands, which you can't since you don't have access to the debugging or any other form to measure how much of the system is being used. |
One game!? :D
Thats a fact its not point if I will accept that or not. Again, I didnt talk about price I was talking about value, and fact is that game that could be played in full handheld mode and full home console mode has greater value than game that could be played only in handheld or only in home console mode.
Yeah, because whats are priorites with games (for instance in this case could be battery save), how good port is, how good development team is, how much time they have for development and optimisation, fact that when you porting game that was specifically made for totally different hardware won't give best results when you porting to totally different platform, point how much they are pushing hardware...dont effect at all on how some game will look and run on some system, right!? :D You relly dont know what are you talking about.







