The team's efficiency should be put into question. Sorry, I forgot they went belly up.

It's possible. That's why I posted it, to get feedback. I was told to get off my high horse but I'm looking around and I'm not sure where it went.

I respect your opinion.

You side-stepped my point. Let's say you consider Movie A and Movie B to be equally enjoyable and entertaining, why do you care that one cost 200millions to make and the other 2million?

Trucks, I didn't side-step it. If you look closely, you're making the same point as Nikkom. In this case, the 200m$ costing movies are under-priced because otherwise they would never sell. Like he was saying they should be sold at 50$ a ticket, that would never work. Instead, they mark it down to increase volume.

Ironically enough, that's what I was telling you regarding a markdown of these Nintendo games. Sadly your point on HW is a good one, and though it could boost HW sales, Nintendo's HW strategy does not warrant apple-like or tablet-like sales. It's too niche I'm afraid.

I have honestly never played it, but it is my understanding that it does not have the same quality value as Galaxy does. As such, Nintendo offered a much higher-caliber product at a much more reasonable cost.

I heard that Epic Mickey 2 had a lot of bugs, and its metacritic is very low.

True, but that's not what HappyD is trying to get at. He thinks the games shouldn't be priced that much ever. Even at launch.

Movie studios know full well the average price of a movie ticket, when they green light a project it's because they expect enough people will be interested in seeing the movie to make a profit. So no, the ticket price for big budget films is not underpriced. It is what it is and it's a variable movie studios have to work with.

I think the potential market is bigger than the console market of today leads us to believe. Facebook and moblie platforms would lead us to believe that there is a huge market out there. Even ignoring that important possibility, a jump from platforms is not required in the purchase of a new platform. The owning of a gaming console from one company or another is not mutually exclusive.

In relative terms, it's underpriced. The truth is that a lower-budget film may have a similar number of viewers than a higher-budget film due to the fact that appeal has in certain cases not so much to do with budget.

A movie with depth may require a lesser budget than a movie with special effects, yet they both could garner the same audience.

The problem with NSMB imho is that it doesn't even have that depth, and is in a difficult spot. Even if it did have depth, for argument sake, it certainly no longer has much novelty left. I can't say the same about 3D Mario which is in constant evolution.

You never answered though, why do you conisder it a gamble?  

Remember when I mentioned that the market was changing, and that you don't really fully know the value of a product until you unwrap it? NSMB is a new offering which has seen 4 entries in the recent past, my suspicion is that the series will not offer enough novelty to sustain the sales of its first entries, even with MiiVerse.

As such, to maintain the MSRP of 40-60$ is a gamble. The market is constantly evolving, and offerings with little to no novelty are, in and of themselves, a serious gamble.

We can't always count on potential. I doubt many of those people would want to jump ship from their Phones (as gaming devices) to Nintendo just because they dropped the price of some of their FlagShip titles. I just don't see it playing out. 

Let me ask you this, what do you think 2D Mario should be priced at now? (Sorry if you already answered this.)

So you consider the next CoD a gamble?