Sorry but now You're pegging your opinion on this argument, NSMBU and other first party offerings are considered leaps ahead of other alternatives by many as well which is the point of the SFIV example some people may prefer the cheaper alternatives to SFIV but that doesn't make them equal to it. Fact is we don't care about your opinion on NSMB and the other games many still enjoy them more then the alternatives you listed, you've attempted an argument that hinges more on your opinion and views of the games then solid ground and has flaws like comparing LOL to 2d platformers, you may like LOL but me personally I have no interest in it and feel SC2 is the much better game and worth the money paid for it where as I haven't bothered with LOL even though it's free.

Okay, my objective is not to talk on opinion but on something tangible. If I have nothing then I have nothing. It was my understanding that a game like NSMB did not have a level of depth that warranted its price, but by God if you think it is then who am I to judge?

The fact that you don't like LoL doesn't change the fact that it is insanely popular, and has undeniable replayability, even if you don't like it. I'm not sure the same can be said objectively about NSMB given its price.

My prediction is that over time people in general will notice this discrepancy and will begin to lose interest in Nintendo's offerings. I'm just suggesting that, before that happens, something should be done about it before it's too late. Not sure what's so unreasonable about this. It's my analysis of the situation. In my opinion NSMB does not have the depth required to be sold at its price when other games on the market offer more depth at a better price. It is subjective, but it's also a sensible point to make I don't see how unreasonable a point this is.

Again, the problem with your SFIV argument is that the cheaper alternatives are certainly not better than it since SFIV is of the utmost quality in the fighter genre, I can't say the same about NSMB. And you may think that's subjective, but it doesn't take a rocket-scientist to realize that NSMB is a cash-in for the company and lacks the depth other platformers have in general. It isn't crafted imho. SFIV most certainly is.

Get off your high horse as you've contradicted yourself and proved my point, firstly the point with SFIV is that the same argument you're applying now can essentially be applied to it and the fact that you're defending SFIV means that I've got my point through to you with that example, I play many fighters and some of the free ones are brilliant, I know people who see the alternatives as better then SFIV like what you're trying here but I bet you won't see it the same with a game like SFIV. The games you listed are good for what they are but for most part aren't considered in the same league as the first party offering by many.

No NSMB is not a cash in I see that poor argument from the usual critics who just don't like the game, the series is a modern take of the classic 2d series in NSMBU for starters you can really see the design concepts behind each level and such again this is just you throwing your opinion in there. Predict all you want but frankly I don't care, Mario has been around since 83 when he debuted as Jumpman and is still going the's a fair chance the platform genre would be either dead or in life support if it weren't for his games both the 2d and 3d incarnations of the genre which has seen many come and gone I won't bet against the franchise especially when it's doing numbers now that only COD can touch.

Many people also play games on Facebook and Angry Birds so what's your point on people playing LOL, the game is not even a 2d platformer so the comparison for most part is broken.

People STILL do speed runs of Mario Brothers 1.  Super Mario Brothers games not having "insane" replay value IS subjective.

You know I could easily report you for that Rol, but we both know you can't help it. I love you that way, but with the number of times you've called me an idiot I've learned to develop a callus. To be totally clear and honest, this is my opinion and I believe the market is not too far from my perception of things. I believe that demand for NSMB will shrink over time, as it has for Nintendogs and Brain Age. You may disagree but I'd like not to be called a troll if that's okay with you guys, you included.

I love platformers, always have. Have been playing them since forever and I don't consider NSMBWii to be a great one. (I was playing DKC2 just the other day, and if megaman can be considered a platformer I was just playing Megaman x Street Fighter, a fan-service game offered for free to the community). I also loved all the platformers I played in my lifetime, and am very happy about that.

Your 3rd argument is spot on, and at the rate Nintendo is going, with the graphs I gave spazzy, it should be clear that they should either 1) lower their forecasts, or 2) lower their prices. The market has become too competitive to price their games that people reluctantly pay to enjoy the Nintendo experience (not considering people on internet forums).

For the last para, I've given my opinion based on my understanding of the latest trends, some opinions of people I've considered from outside the internet, and my concern for Nintendo is simple, in that before they base their projections on expired expectations, I simply suggest they take a more relevant and, if I dare say, honest approach to merchandising their retro offerings.

Exactly what I was going to say.

Super Paper Mario is by no-means an "old-school platformer". You must have never played it. It's like a 30 hour game, and there are tons of things to do outside the main story.

I haven't read the entire thread (hey, at least I'm admitting it) but don't fall into the trap that F2P is the future all games will or should take. Just want to throw that out there. Comparing the content vs value for F2P and premium games can't be done so straight forward due to the different nature of monetization. There are people who have spent thousands of dollars on League of Legends - did they receive as much enjoyment for their money as someone who spent $50 on Super Smash Bros. Brawl?

Now, it costs Nintendo and other large companies a lot of money to fund their titles, so they can't go selling them at ridiculously low prices. The market has shown that it is willing to pay the price these companies have set.  Nintendo, of all premium companies, has shown that consumers agree there is value in the price they are paying. Nintendo's software sales the last few years has been fantastic.

It's a retro offering, that's what I meant. It certainly did not require the same size team as to make Galaxy I hope you wouldn't debate that.......

"retro"?  It came out in 2007. 

I don't think it's accurate or fair to these games to overly generalize and say that because of their art style or genre that they somehow have less value and should be priced differently.  That's very elitist.