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:

happydolphin on 05 February 2013
NintendoPie said:

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.)

No problem. I think that 2D Mario should be priced from 15-30$ on entry into market, for all offerings (home and portable). I think that's a competitive price.

As for jumping ship, it isn't required though. It is perfectly reasonable to own an iPhone/tablet/smartphone/PC, and a gaming console. However, I would agree with you if you said that Nintendo's current HW strategy doesn't easily warrant pushing the current cap (150m for a top-selling plat) much higher.

Also if Nintendo didn't count on potential, the Wii as it were would never have existed.

TruckOSaurus said:

So you consider the next CoD a gamble?

If Tony Hawk and Rock Band are any indicator I would say yes. The flip-side to that is EA Sports games, which have maintained a yearly iteration model, and it worked out. I'm not sure if that's more the exception or the rule, I'll let you think about it and tell me what you think.



Around the Network
Spazzy_D on 05 February 2013
happydolphin said:
Spazzy_D said:

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.


But how is it a gamble if they mark the game up and can lower it if it doesn't meet expectations by a huge margin? 



NintendoPie on 05 February 2013
happydolphin said:
NintendoPie said:

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.)

No problem. I think that 2D Mario should be priced from 15-30$ on entry into market, for all offerings (home and portable). I think that's a competitive price.

As for jumping ship, it isn't required though. It is perfectly reasonable to own an iPhone/tablet/smartphone/PC, and a gaming console. However, I would agree with you if you said that Nintendo's current HW strategy doesn't easily warrant pushing the current cap (150m for a top-selling plat) much higher.

15$ is unrealistic. Wouldn't you think that would hurt Nintendo? That price is way too low for any console or handheld game, really. 30$ is pushing it, but I could see them possibly offering that in a "perfect" world.

What do you mean by their current HW strategy? To get more than 150 Million sales would take more than just competitive marketing and pricing.



bananaking21 on 05 February 2013
KHlover said:

You shouldn't forget that most of the Nintendo games you presented take around 10-12hrs+ the first time you blast through while the time needed for some of the other games you posted is...absymal (*cough*LIMBO*cough*)


if limbo was longer i would have gotten pretty much bored with it. the game is amazing and gives an amazing experience, but it shouldnt be longer. it was also priced at 15$ so its not considered high in my book. the price of what they asked for is VERY reasonable in my opinion



happydolphin on 05 February 2013
Spazzy_D said:

But how is it a gamble if they mark the game up and can lower it if it doesn't meet expectations by a huge margin? 

Okay, I see your point now. Wouldn't you say that Sony's PS3 pricepoint, following your approach, hurt Sony more than it did them favors? They were #1 in the market until that hiccup. I'm not sure fixing in the future always pays off.

NintendoPie said:

15$ is unrealistic. Wouldn't you think that would hurt Nintendo? That price is way too low for any console or handheld game, really. 30$ is pushing it, but I could see them possibly offering that in a "perfect" world.

What do you mean by their current HW strategy? To get more than 150 Million sales would take more than just competitive marketing and pricing.

@2nd para. yes it would. It would take a revolution in their HW strategy altogether. I don't think they have it in them personally but I've been proven wrong with the Wii. They are just too traditional I don't think they will, anytime soon, manage to tap into apple-like sales.

If they did do that, 30$ for Mario 2D would be a no-brainer and even on the expensive side. The attach-rate required would be much lower, and would probably yield much more revenue. As I said I don't think they have it in them. I don't think the gaming market has that "think outside the box" kind of mentality, it's pretty introverted in general. The Wii was the exception to the rule

RolStoppable said:
Yes, the top dog in the genre needs to be priced $15-30 in order to stay competitive.

 

Yep.

 



Around the Network
KHlover on 05 February 2013
bananaking21 said:
KHlover said:

You shouldn't forget that most of the Nintendo games you presented take around 10-12hrs+ the first time you blast through while the time needed for some of the other games you posted is...absymal (*cough*LIMBO*cough*)


if limbo was longer i would have gotten pretty much bored with it. the game is amazing and gives an amazing experience, but it shouldnt be longer. it was also priced at 15$ so its not considered high in my book. the price of what they asked for is VERY reasonable in my opinion

I've seen LIMBO more as art than as video game, so $15 were ok for me. If I'd seen it purely as game I'd been disappointed with the price though.



Some useful VGChartz tweaks

Member of the "An Unbiased Review" Database team

happydolphin on 05 February 2013
KHlover said:

I've seen LIMBO more as art than as video game, so $15 were ok for me. If I'd seen it purely as game I'd been disappointed with the price though.

What does that even mean though? You enjoyed it right? It was worth 15$ right? Whether movie, book or game I don't see why Limbo should have to be a "game" game to please.



TruckOSaurus on 05 February 2013

@HappyD: Apple-like sales are not possible. The iPhone is... wait for it... a phone! There's many more people who need/want a phone than people who need/want a gaming console.



Signature goes here!

bananaking21 on 05 February 2013
KHlover said:
bananaking21 said:
KHlover said:

You shouldn't forget that most of the Nintendo games you presented take around 10-12hrs+ the first time you blast through while the time needed for some of the other games you posted is...absymal (*cough*LIMBO*cough*)


if limbo was longer i would have gotten pretty much bored with it. the game is amazing and gives an amazing experience, but it shouldnt be longer. it was also priced at 15$ so its not considered high in my book. the price of what they asked for is VERY reasonable in my opinion

I've seen LIMBO more as art than as video game, so $15 were ok for me. If I'd seen it purely as game I'd been disappointed with the price though.

i see it more as an experience, something that more video games should try to be. its just different, like to the moon for example. these "games" are different from traditional games and offer something completely different. just because they are that way doesnt mean we should say they arent video games. we are seeing alot of developers make stuff like this and its a new direction for people, and something i very much like. to me limbo is very much worth the price



NintendoPie on 05 February 2013
happydolphin said:
NintendoPie said:

15$ is unrealistic. Wouldn't you think that would hurt Nintendo? That price is way too low for any console or handheld game, really. 30$ is pushing it, but I could see them possibly offering that in a "perfect" world.

What do you mean by their current HW strategy? To get more than 150 Million sales would take more than just competitive marketing and pricing.

@2nd para. yes it would. It would take a revolution in their HW strategy altogether. I don't think they have it in them personally but I've been proven wrong with the Wii. They are just too traditional I don't think they will, anytime soon, manage to tap into apple-like sales.

If they did do that, 30$ for Mario 2D would be a no-brainer and even on the expensive side. The attach-rate required would be much lower, and would probably yield much more revenue. As I said I don't think they have it in them. I don't think the gaming market has that "think outside the box" kind of mentality, it's pretty introverted in general. The Wii was the exception to the rule

RolStoppable said:
Yes, the top dog in the genre needs to be priced $15-30 in order to stay competitive.

 

Yep.

 

I don't think it's them trying to be traditional. I think it's them trying to be profitable. Anything below 30$ is crazy low and wouldn't return any profit. (I'm pretty sure about this, just developing for an HD takes quite a lot of money.) And Apple sales are impossible, no way any gaming company could do that.

Besides, being traditional is not bad. As long as it keeps the majority of their fans happy, it's a winning idea.