http://www.siliconera.com/2010/01/25/these-wii-games-are-eligible-for-an-everyones-recommendation-selection-reprint/

Unfortunately they are only in Japan at the moment, but considering how 3rd party games don't typically do as well as 1st party games on the Wii, I think it's a better idea that Player's Choice.

All i'm going to say is that I own several Wii games, but only one of them is first party. I still play the other games, but Nintendo's reluctance to drop their prices simply means they haven't got any of my money since I bought my Wii, period. I understand that I am not their target consumer anymore but I do not think this is okay behaviour. At least when Sony is on top, they reduce the prices of their games after they sell so many copies, or after a certain period of time.

Metroid Trilogy? They discontinued that while stock lasted and for some reason did not rerelease it as a $20-$30 game. Completely unacceptable to me.

Nintendo follows a Disney-like model.  Rather than trying to sell as many copies of a game as they can in its first run by cutting prices, they'd rather sell as many copies as they could at full price and then bring it back in some fashion a few years later.  Disney has had a habit of introducing enhanced versions of movies that have few differences, Nintendo does that or adds a new entry to a series that releases once per console.  By not cutting the price they are reinforcing the idea of a lasting value in their products, at a level that includes the whole range.  If they had cut MP Trilogy's price rather than its production the message would have continued to be "just wait, you can get it cheaper eventually."  Instead, they could rerelease it on the 3DS in two years if they want and charge full price again because people would realize that no matter what a full-priced 3DS game costs that is the best price they're getting it for.

On the flipside, games that rapidly decrease in price aren't worth full retail.  Why would anyone buy Ninja Gaiden 3 at $60 when they know that in a few months it'll be $40 like NG2 was?  Also, if you know the company is willing to sell the game at $40, which means they still make a sale per unit, then it makes THAT company seem greedy for trying to sell a product at $60 that isn't really worth that price to most consumers (or even in their own business model).  Early buyers of a game that gets cut in price quickly are basically being suckered in.  They want the game so they pay extra to have it, but the company is happy to take far less - that sounds a lot more greedy to me than what Nintendo does (even though I know it's reasonably not).

Overall, it's a method to protect the value of Nintendo's franchises.  Even a small-time game like Excite Trucks could have hurt the sales of SMG if people expected the same old price-cut-on-lagging-sales model.  Nintendo may not have maximized its profits on some games because of this, games they probably won't even consider for rerelease, yet it helped to maximize profits on the big games (and thus overall). Also, they aren't hurt if Excite Trucks doesn't sell an extra 250k at a reduced price, as they stood little to gain from those sales and a lot to gain from the fact that people would have to buy the big games at full price if they ever wanted it new at all.

tldr - Nintendo is trying to protect their brand name and long-term viability while most of their competitors don't believe they have either, and really don't unless they can produce far more content than Nintendo does.

How many times have you seen people post "i am interested in this game I will pick it up when its 20-30 bucks though? Thats one of the reasons. I have to admit a lot of the third party games I have I just waited a couple months and saved the cash because I knew it would happen and honestly very few of the games not made by Nintendo on the Wii are worth the $50. On the other hand I have bought most my Nintendo games day one because they are worth more than $50 to me.

For a lot of people Nintendo has a great reputation for good quality games. They know this and if the game is selling millions why bother cutting the price? It be stupid too from a buisness perspective.

They're so expensive because you don't have to unlock half of the game's content via DLC.

*hipthrust*

That's true. Nintendo always tries to keep their prices for games as high as possible which lead toward Ps1 success.

Least I don't have to throw down an extra 10 dollars per game this generation compared to 360/PS3.  PS1 was successful for a few other reason besides price (However, price definitely did help, aka PS3 not dominating because of high initial price).

no doubt the table turn some this generation yet i have little doubt a game like GT5 cost many times more than MK wii. IMO nintendo was a little cheap with Wii upgrade of MK.

it's the same with hardware , wii may be cheaper but you get a lot better hardware  for your money with the HD consoles.

@ Smidlee

MK Wii could have been more but I was pretty satisfied.  They included a good deal of tracks, characters, etc..  What would you have liked more with the MK on Wii?  

I agree MK wii wasn't bad but it felt more of the same. Modnation Racers at least add a few more features as a MK clone.
Knowing MK was going to sell like hot cakes they could have created a serious track editor , one that would blow MNR alway.