javi741 said:
Nintendo games to many people are so much better and iconic that people are willing to spend 60$ on them. While the Crash Trilogy definitely had more effort put into it, I think most people could agree even the base versions of Mario 64, Mario Sunshine, and Mario Galaxy are better games. |
Which basically just agrees with my point.
And have been many times like that in VGC. Nintendo fanbase have been the most critical of several practices other companies done but praised like crazy when Nintendo done the same. Like locking DLC on Amibos, that was something worse than any other company ever done, still was defended and praised here.
rapsuperstar31 said:
Funny enough if the the Crash of Spyro games would have been $60 USA everyone would have screamed this was unacceptable. But its Nintendo and we (most) will always let Nintendo slide with it. The game the way it is, should be $39.99...but I love Nintendo and I love all 3 of these games, and would probably give it a 10 unless something is really wrong with the controls especially using the pro controller. |
And that is just what I was pointing

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."







