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

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

Tagged games:

forest-spirit said:
happydolphin said:

But if a game releases at 5$ that is as good as a game at 50$, what does that tell us about the market prices? I understand that you'd pay 50$ for it, but how many games do you play a year, and is 50$ reasonable in today's "pick up and play" landscape, where so many games exist and are all largely comparable in competition for our entertainment time & money?


But all these games competing for my money aren't largely comparable at all. $50 for a game is perfectly reasonable if that game provides me with an experience that I really, really want.

Okay, but there are many people out there that prefer to play many different games, and that's what today's market is like. It's pick up and play, and there are many apps that fulfill that need in the market at the moment. Imho NSMB U at 60$ doesn't fit the current state of the market.



Around the Network
happydolphin said:
Vinniegambini said:

What's the point of this thread to be honest (no trolling)?

Furthermore, appalling is a strong word, one might suggest you revise or use another terminology in order to express your views and get your point across.

In addition, MSRP of 59.99$ and 39.99$ are for retail games, not downloadable or free to play games. Thus, your comparison is quite flawed. Moreover, these prices are the same across the board for all video game publishers, not Nintendo only. Hence, I believe you should change your stance and direct your focus as to why do video game publishers sell retail games at 59.99$ or 39.99$.

New Super Mario Bros. 2 is a downloadable game. I think NSMB U is as well.

No. It is a retail game that happens do be downloadable. Same for NSMBU. That's a small but important difference.



KHlover said:
happydolphin said:
Vinniegambini said:

What's the point of this thread to be honest (no trolling)?

Furthermore, appalling is a strong word, one might suggest you revise or use another terminology in order to express your views and get your point across.

In addition, MSRP of 59.99$ and 39.99$ are for retail games, not downloadable or free to play games. Thus, your comparison is quite flawed. Moreover, these prices are the same across the board for all video game publishers, not Nintendo only. Hence, I believe you should change your stance and direct your focus as to why do video game publishers sell retail games at 59.99$ or 39.99$.

New Super Mario Bros. 2 is a downloadable game. I think NSMB U is as well.

No. It is a retail game that happens do be downloadable. Same for NSMBU. That's a small but important difference.

And how does that change anything to his point? It's downloadable at 60$, and Trine 2 is downloadable at 15. So what's the point?



They can sell their games for however much they want. No one is forced to buy them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoghH53xpmQ



miz1q2w3e said:
They can sell their games for however much they want. No one is forced to buy them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoghH53xpmQ

Great, another post like this...

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.



Around the Network
happydolphin said:
Vinniegambini said:

What's the point of this thread to be honest (no trolling)?

Furthermore, appalling is a strong word, one might suggest you revise or use another terminology in order to express your views and get your point across.

In addition, MSRP of 59.99$ and 39.99$ are for retail games, not downloadable or free to play games. Thus, your comparison is quite flawed. Moreover, these prices are the same across the board for all video game publishers, not Nintendo only. Hence, I believe you should change your stance and direct your focus as to why do video game publishers sell retail games at 59.99$ or 39.99$.

New Super Mario Bros. 2 is a downloadable game. I think NSMB U is as well.

They are retail games available via a downloadable medium, quite a difference.

I also find it disapointing that you are attacking Nintendo, and Nintendo only in regards to video game pricing and not the industry as a whole. One might be inclined to say that you are shortsighted.



happydolphin said:
miz1q2w3e said:
They can sell their games for however much they want. No one is forced to buy them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoghH53xpmQ

Great, another post like this...

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.

Great minds think alike.



miz1q2w3e said:

Great minds think alike.

The thread has nothing to do with me buying the game. It has to do with the viability of the practice and what effect it has on Nintendo on the long-term. Sadly this forum (apart from a few exceptions here) blocks before we can get to that point, as your excellent post demonstrates.

Vinniegambini said:

They are retail games available via a downloadable medium, quite a difference.

I also find it disapointing that you are attacking Nintendo, and Nintendo only in regards to video game pricing and not the industry as a whole. One might be inclined to think that you are shortsighted.

@bold. And how does that change anything to your point? It's downloadable at 60$, and Trine 2 is downloadable at 15. So what's the point?

I'm saying the hard truth about Nintendo because I want them to be better, because they mean so much to me. If I haven't talked about the others, it's because I don't care as much. There could be a case to make for them but it doesn't interest me atm. If you have a case, make it. One poster already mentioned LBP.

Rolstoppable said:

Or maybe people won't realize it, because games like Angry Birds and Trine don't hold a candle to Nintendo games, so Nintendo's software prices remain reasonable in people's perception.

So far we haven't reached the point where the option is between a $10 and $50 game, let alone a $1 and $50 game. I don't expect this to happen in the future either, at least not to Nintendo. Other companies might get threatened though.

:) You could be right Rol, but seeing the potential of some of these games, and seeing the decreasing sales power of some of Nintendo's games, it's honestly my expectation for the near future, and Nintendo will be in trouble if they don't prepare in advance. You never fully see the threat before it arrives, but it's always good to prepare for it before it hits. imho.



People keep saying what is or is not value in this thread. So here, Value:

1: a fair return or equivalent in goods, services, or money for something exchanged
2: the monetary worth of something : market price
3: relative worth, utility, or importance

Notice that value is either market value, which is fair for these games according to the market, or relative value, which is subjective... so how can these games not hold "the correct value?"



Spazzy_D said:

People keep saying what is or is not value in this thread. So here, Value:

1: a fair return or equivalent in goods, services, or money for something exchanged
2: the monetary worth of something : market price
3: relative worth, utility, or importance

Notice that value is either market value, which is fair for these games according to the market, or relative value, which is subjective... so how can these games not hold "the correct value?"

How do you judge the market value of a game where one offering is sold for free or at 1$, and another is sold at 50$?

Also, how to judge whether a price is right or not? Who makes the decision of setting a price and how do they do it, if not by some heuristic or objective measure? And if they can do it, why is it so unfathomable that we as amateur business analysts can analyze that price?