By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - Wii U: The price is right or is $299 the new $599?

Soma on 13 September 2012
NightDragon83 said:
Soma said:
Just read games could cost $60, if that's true all my hype is gone. I won't be buying new games on first day and will wait for the price to drop.

That's the price you have to pay for stepping up to the HD gen.  Did you really thing Nintendo WASN'T going to charge the same as every other developer has been for the past 6-7 years now?  Only reason they didn't before was they knew they could never get away with charging $60 for SD games that looked a generation old already.


This HD gen is already 5 years old, once the new Xbox and PS4 are out it will have outdated graphics. So will they reduce the price after that? Or the new next gen games are gonna cost $70?  I don't care, Nintendo defended their cheap prices saying they care for their consumers and mass market and stuff like that. Now they're doing the same thing they critiziced. Not good in my eyes.



Castlevania Judgment FC:     1161 - 3389 - 1512

3DS Friend Code:   3480-2746-6289


Wii Friend Code: 4268-9719-1932-3069

Around the Network
crissindahouse on 13 September 2012
Soma said:
NightDragon83 said:
Soma said:
Just read games could cost $60, if that's true all my hype is gone. I won't be buying new games on first day and will wait for the price to drop.

That's the price you have to pay for stepping up to the HD gen.  Did you really thing Nintendo WASN'T going to charge the same as every other developer has been for the past 6-7 years now?  Only reason they didn't before was they knew they could never get away with charging $60 for SD games that looked a generation old already.


This HD gen is already 5 years old, once the new Xbox and PS4 are out it will have outdated graphics. So will they reduce the price after that? Or the new next gen games are gonna cost $70?  I don't care, Nintendo defended their cheap prices saying they care for their consumers and mass market and stuff like that. Now they're doing the same thing they critiziced. Not good in my eyes.

you can't take the same money for the next thousand years.



darkknightkryta on 13 September 2012
NightDragon83 said:
Gnac said:

Nintendo is obviously charging too much for this cardboard box.

They should fill it with 800 bux worth of parts and sell it for a 200 dolla loss to show how much they love us.

And you know gamers would gladly get second jobs to pay for that cardboard box too.  Just ask Sony's Ken Kutaragi lol.

I had 5 jobs when I bought my PS3 =D



Soundwave on 13 September 2012
pezus said:
Soundwave said:

If you're not prepared to pay even $299.99 for any new console, you have no business being in the market for a new console, stop your complaining.

Obviously buying a brand new console is not for you. This is like a person who wants to go see a movie at the theater but isn't willing to spend $8+ on a ticket. Well tough luck, you can sit and wait for it to come on Netflix then.

I think Nintendo even learned that Wii at $250 was a mistake, they left a lot of money on the table seeing people pay $400-$500+ on eBay for a system.


Who are you responding to?

I'm just addressing the attitude in general that this is too much.

This is a business. Not a charity for people's amusement, if you can't pony up even $299.99, then accept the fact that you're not the type of consumer who's in the demographic/budget range for a launch video game console.

Not saying this is everyone of course, but just for the handful of people fuming, maybe they need to accept the fact that console launches and "budget pricing" do not go hand in hand.



foxtail on 13 September 2012
morenoingrato said:
Honestly, Europe is kinda getting ripped off...
And is it true they don't even have a sensor bar?

I think you can use the sensor bar in the Wii U gamepad as a replacement (for games that don't also use gamepad itself.)



Around the Network
richardhutnik on 13 September 2012

To me, it feels $50 too expensive for both models. But, given the exchange rate and early adopter madness, who am I to say here?



HulkWasRight on 13 September 2012

That's a bit too high for me right now. Have to balance the ol' Christmas list and a Wii U would make things too top heavy.



HappySqurriel on 13 September 2012
richardhutnik said:
To me, it feels $50 too expensive for both models. But, given the exchange rate and early adopter madness, who am I to say here?


I couldn't disagree more ...

If given the choice, I would rather have Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft invest in game development than subsidize hardware. For the billions of dollars lost up front on getting people cutting edge hardware, a company like Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft could develop dozens of games and/or "money-hat" dozens (to potentially hundreds) of exclusive games.



gergroy on 13 September 2012
blackstarr said:

It's difficult to compare Nintendo and Sony/Microsoft directly because Nintendo is solely a gaming company and doesn't have profits from other divisions to fall back on. So if what TheShape31 is saying about the costs is true, we can still somewhat excuse Nintendo for being so darn needy for profits.

On the other hand, I've heard people bring up this point for years and as true as it is, I can't imagine how much money Nintendo must make from their exorbitant first-party software sales (which m/s can only dream of mirroring) and of course... their merchandising (which m/s can't even begin to do, since they haven't invested into franchises like Nintendo has). 

I think it would be "nice" for Nintendo to drop the price of Wii U on a sheer "I am a consumer who wants cheap things" impulse. But we all know why Nintendo had to cut the price of 3DS, and I hope that Nintendo doesn't have to reach that point with Wii U. Because if Wii U doesn't do well from the onset, Nintendo may be one step closer to becoming just another software company...


Maybe Nintendo needs to branch back into the "love hotel" business?  



gergroy on 13 September 2012
HappySqurriel said:
richardhutnik said:
To me, it feels $50 too expensive for both models. But, given the exchange rate and early adopter madness, who am I to say here?


I couldn't disagree more ...

If given the choice, I would rather have Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft invest in game development than subsidize hardware. For the billions of dollars lost up front on getting people cutting edge hardware, a company like Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft could develop dozens of games and/or "money-hat" dozens (to potentially hundreds) of exclusive games.


I kind of agree, as a system needs some good games in order to get me to buy it.  Right now the Wii U doesn't actually have anything that interests me so I'm not actually interested in buying it, no matter how cheap it is.

However, hardware can pretty tempting as well.  I bought the ps3 and didn't get any games for almost a year because I wanted the blu ray player.  In the end, Sony has gotten me to buy almost thirty games because they had the cheapest blu ray player on the market... seemed to work for them...