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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Nintendo's unrealistic pricing for old-school platformers et al.

Tagged games:

Fireforgey on 04 February 2013

Rolstoppable said:

So this another one of this thread's where you are trying to force your opinion on everyone.

Newsflash: Opinions differ and people can buy what they want with their money. So what you'll see in this thread will be a lot of people that tell you that they gladly paid $50 for Nintendo games and don't regret it one bit.

Also, if others are offering more interesting games at a much better price, then why aren't they outselling Nintendo games? The obvious answer is that others aren't offering more interesting games at better prices and their only option to even compete with Nintendo is to drastically undercut Nintendo's prices.

In my humble opinion, Nintendo is selling at that price on brand alone, and that can only go so far.

Had super mario been released on Steam with no prior name recognition, at 60$, you can be sure Trine 2 will destroy it in sales. Temple Run is selling much more than Nintendo games, so is Angry Birds, so if it's sales you need you have them. League of Legends probably has an immense userbase at the moment.

From Wikipedia: As of July 2012, League of Legends had over 32 million registrations and averages 12 million players worldwide per day, with the number of concurrent users online at any given time peaking over 3 million. Players also collectively log 1 billion hours per month, making League of Legends the world's most played video game[46][47]

People bought Mario for 50$, I'm thinking that with the increased competition from the marketplace, with games of IMHO competing value, the markup will no longer be in Nintendo's favor. I'm not sure how this is me imposing my opinions on anybody...


About the bold and underlined.

 

I refer you to Rayman Origins.  Very little brand recognition, but it was an awesome game that was recieved magnificantly.  It is now building up (not down mind you) a brand that is a 2D platformer priced at $60.  So.....Yeah.



Around the Network
Fireforgey on 04 February 2013
KHlover said:
happydolphin said:
Immortal said:

Considering the rest of us have to tolerate the words "unrealistic", "appaling" and "robbery", I think you can humour me.

Not really, you're always like this. The attributes I'm using are actually relating to my points, whereas your are simply insulting my PoV.

Rolstoppable said:

So this another one of this thread's where you are trying to force your opinion on everyone.

Newsflash: Opinions differ and people can buy what they want with their money. So what you'll see in this thread will be a lot of people that tell you that they gladly paid $50 for Nintendo games and don't regret it one bit.

Also, if others are offering more interesting games at a much better price, then why aren't they outselling Nintendo games? The obvious answer is that others aren't offering more interesting games at better prices and their only option to even compete with Nintendo is to drastically undercut Nintendo's prices.

In my humble opinion, Nintendo is selling at that price on brand alone, and that can only go so far.

Had super mario been released on Steam with no prior name recognition, at 60$, you can be sure Trine 2 will destroy it in sales. Temple Run is selling much more than Nintendo games, so is Angry Birds, so if it's sales you need you have them. League of Legends probably has an immense userbase at the moment.

From Wikipedia: As of July 2012, League of Legends had over 32 million registrations and averages 12 million players worldwide per day, with the number of concurrent users online at any given time peaking over 3 million. Players also collectively log 1 billion hours per month, making League of Legends the world's most played video game[46][47]

People bought Mario for 50$, I'm thinking that with the increased competition from the marketplace, with games of IMHO competing value, the markup will no longer be in Nintendo's favor. I'm not sure how this is me imposing my opinions on anybody...

This single word makes me disagree with your post: Temple Run is a free game, as are Angry Birds and League of Legends. As such they are guaranteed to VASTLY exceed the Mario games sales (except LoL totally doesn't), additionally the combined userbase of Android and iOS / PC vastly exceeds the userbase of the current Nintendo consoles, providing further DOWNLOADS. 

 

Also, they can't compete in terms of revenue generated.



SuperMarioWorld on 04 February 2013

You're comparing Donkey Kong Country Returns to Super Meat Boy or Limbo? that's a joke. DKCR is at least 4-5 times bigger than those games.



Fireforgey on 04 February 2013
happydolphin said:

tbone51 said:

Dont buy them then, Nintendo sells a whole lot, it would be dumb to lower a price of something selling very well. Beside those are reasonable to me..

This thread has nothing to do with me buying them or not, it has to do with the viability of the practice and what effect it has on Nintendo on the long-term. Sadly I haven't even gotten that far yet.


You're going to talk about Nintendo's long term?   The oldest console maker and one of the oldest video game publishers  in the industry....And you're going to advise them about their long term?   Sorry, I trust the 130 year old company over random troll on the internet forums.



TheLastStarFighter on 04 February 2013

Objectively speaking, NSMB is one of the very, very most successful game series, so it is not over-priced by free market standards. The first two entries sold over 20 million, the 3DS version is well on its way and the WiiU version is close to being the top game on the system despite another one being bundled. Definitely priced right. DKCR also sold extremely well.

Subjectively speaking I am personally very comfortable paying $60 for 2D Mario. I really enjoy the games, and I pay for enjoyment.

I see no reason that a 3D game should be priced more than a 2D game. Games are all the same price no matter how long or how much it costs to make them. They are discounted when they stop selling.

Maybe you should think of games like music? An album featuring 100 orchestra musicians would require far more effort to put together than the latest Beyonce disc. But Beyonce presents a unique talent that lots of people enjoy, so it will sell much more, and at a price that is more or at least equal to whatever some orchestra could charge. When you buy a Mario game, you're paying for the unique talent and artistry that is Mario. And yes, I do think that Mario is gaming artistry. NSMBU is outstanding with fantastic levels, style and seemless MiiVerse integration.

And if you're saying that 2D games should be cheaper for the good of Nintendo, that doesn't make any sense. Their systems have sold like hotcakes and each Mario title makes them about a billion dollars. 2D Mario is their lifeblood, and selling them at a cheaper price would only give them less cash to compete in a tough industry.



Around the Network
SwansVanTerif on 04 February 2013

Yeah. just look at the sales. Nobody wants these expensive platformers. That's the reason these games hit the bargin so quicly.



Fireforgey on 04 February 2013
happydolphin said:
RolStoppable said:
happydolphin said:

I understand, but when 2D games were not selling much in generations prior, and when now they found a massive boost chiefly thanks to the family appeal of the Wii, and when mobile and DD games are showing competing value, it's something to keep an eye out for.

You do realize that 2D games were not selling much, because for the most part they did not exist? They saw a massive boost, because they were being made again.

I just checked Crystal Shards and, in comparison to Epic Yarn, it sold decently.

Donkey Kong Jungle Beat sold really badly though.

Metroid Fusion sold ok.

Super Princess Peach sold ok, less than 1m.

Yoshi's story did pretty well at 3m.

Paper Mario 64 sold 1.38m.

Dr. Mario 64 sold bad.

It's all hit and miss honestly.


You mean.......Just like regular games?  I mena, what a revelation!!!!!!!!!! 2D platformers can sometimes sell really really well, and some can sometimes sell just ok or even (gasp!) badly.

 

DOOOOOOOOOOMEEEEEED, NINTENDO IS DOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMEEEEDDDDD.



oniyide on 04 February 2013
Fireforgey said:

Rolstoppable said:

So this another one of this thread's where you are trying to force your opinion on everyone.

Newsflash: Opinions differ and people can buy what they want with their money. So what you'll see in this thread will be a lot of people that tell you that they gladly paid $50 for Nintendo games and don't regret it one bit.

Also, if others are offering more interesting games at a much better price, then why aren't they outselling Nintendo games? The obvious answer is that others aren't offering more interesting games at better prices and their only option to even compete with Nintendo is to drastically undercut Nintendo's prices.

In my humble opinion, Nintendo is selling at that price on brand alone, and that can only go so far.

Had super mario been released on Steam with no prior name recognition, at 60$, you can be sure Trine 2 will destroy it in sales. Temple Run is selling much more than Nintendo games, so is Angry Birds, so if it's sales you need you have them. League of Legends probably has an immense userbase at the moment.

From Wikipedia: As of July 2012, League of Legends had over 32 million registrations and averages 12 million players worldwide per day, with the number of concurrent users online at any given time peaking over 3 million. Players also collectively log 1 billion hours per month, making League of Legends the world's most played video game[46][47]

People bought Mario for 50$, I'm thinking that with the increased competition from the marketplace, with games of IMHO competing value, the markup will no longer be in Nintendo's favor. I'm not sure how this is me imposing my opinions on anybody...


About the bold and underlined.

 

I refer you to Rayman Origins.  Very little brand recognition, but it was an awesome game that was recieved magnificantly.  It is now building up (not down mind you) a brand that is a 2D platformer priced at $60.  So.....Yeah.


problem is nobody bought Rayman Origins at that price. It dropped about 10 after only being on shelves for 2 weeks. A year after release it was being sold for twenty bucks.



oniyide on 04 February 2013
SwansVanTerif said:
Yeah. just look at the sales. Nobody wants these expensive platformers. That's the reason these games hit the bargin so quicly.

well to be fair alot of them do, just not the Ninty ones. Rayman, Lost in Shadow, A boy and his blob, etc.



SwansVanTerif on 04 February 2013
oniyide said:
SwansVanTerif said:
Yeah. just look at the sales. Nobody wants these expensive platformers. That's the reason these games hit the bargin so quicly.

well to be fair alot of them do, just not the Ninty ones. Rayman, Lost in Shadow, A boy and his blob, etc.


Well, this whole thread is about Nintendos platformers, so I don't see how that is relavant.