Unrealistic expectations? That's the the industry standard. Nintendo charges around full price for alot longer for games on consoles with less features than the competition. I guess from the perspective of that fanbase, it seems unrealistic.

Why fix what's not broken? O think the thing is there are ideals in businesses right. So one is maximum profit where you take high risks to get high rewards. Then there is the stability model where it's not about more and more and more but rather long lasting. Nintendo has survived well before gaming and they devise strategies where they will survive well after. They are not greedy to do anything and everything for the top spot but rather survive longer than anyone. They made a profit off of Wii u for God's sake. Even when having their ups and downs they still make a profit somehow. And they have enough reserves to survive for decades without any profit. Do they abandon short term gains for long term stability. That is why they never sell their consoles at a loss. Nintendo wants to be here a 100 years 200 years even more from now. That is the core of their business

That's not really the case though. On the Switch, you are essentially paying for getting a portable option, which is a feature that the other two systems do not offer (the games are around the level of 7th generation systems in terms of graphics but they are portable; and Nintendo is charging the same amount as what new 7th gen games cost), hence I don't really see an argument here for paying for games on a consoles with less features.

Similarly, Wii U games cost the same as 7th gen games (though of course pricing has not really gone up from 7th to 8th gen anyway) which I think was fair considering it was about as powerful as a 7th gen system (not to mention during the cross gen period, Xbox 360 and PS3 versions of games largely cost the same as their PS4 and Xbox One counterparts). Wii games cost the same as 6th gen games, so they were cheaper than X360 and PS3 (again obviously Wii on par graphically with a 6th gen system). 3DS and their other dedicated portables (before Switch) always cost substantially less than their console counterparts ($40 for 3DS; $30 for DS, etc). 

They do keep selling though. Each past financial report shows they mostly do from their release on. People were shocked last time to discover that 1,2 Switch and Arms still sold pretty good. You would be amazed.

Blockbuster was around for 28 years and look what happened in a blink of an eye. Just because something is popular doesn't mean consumers are getting the most value per dollar. Eventually, a realization dawns on them due to competition contrasting the differences and they go elsewhere.

Majority? Based on what? It's the same ol' ninty fans buying what they like and there's virtually no competition from third party games which leads to higher 1st party sales overall.

Nintendo selects is redundant. Just charge normally and the prices will drop like regular games...

The NS is fairly new so I wasn't referring to its game pricing. Nintendo was definitely keeping the prices high on their older console games from the time they were released til years after. Nintendo will likely do the same with NS games over the next couple of years.

Blockbuster didn't die because of its pricing. There were plenty of disc/video rental services that charged less than Blockbuster and had more lenient fees. Blockbuster died because consumers transitioned from physical media to online streaming, and Blockbuster did not create its own streaming service until it was too late (most other competing physical media rental places died with it; Netflix's physical rental business, which is still in operation as a side business, has significantly decreased in terms of subscribers because many of its users are now opting to stream digital content instead). It is the same reason why stores like HMV have been going away, people are paying the same amount to buy things but they are just buying it off of places like Youtube Movies/Google Play Movies, iTunes, etc.

Also, regarding the nintendo fans only buying their games, this statement is false because we have had Nintendo consoles being unable to sustain themselves without reaching mass adoption (ie outside the fanbase). The Wii U was one of those systems, and the software sales reflected that. The people that bought systems like Switch, 3DS, Wii, DS, GBA, etc. are far more diverse than the same Nintendo fans that you allude to.

I signed up just to chime in on this; I understand the frustrations of the pricing, especially for those who jump on a console a bit later than others. But those who buy the games at release or near it, would you rather pay the amount or slightly less than the RRP, knowing that you won't feel ripped off cos their prices remain at the amount you paid for them for years? Or pay the amount and have the price drop pretty relatively quickly and sharply like those on the other consoles, and feel ripped off from that? At least the Nintendo games have high trade in values if you're tired of them.

Heck I've had Gameboy Advance games for over ten years which I had to reluctantly sell off what I could due to lack of income and they've kept most of their value since. Like Pokemon: FireRed, which I paid £30 for back in 2005 but sold to CEX for £34 last year as its box was kept in mint condition along with everything else. Even though I have not played or touched it in years, it was hard to let it go due to how much time was invested in it and having a legit shiny Pokemon on the save file. Even Pokemon Ruby in its tattered box it came in, I bought for £19 in 2006 and also sold to CEX for £14 also last year.

So there are benefits and drawbacks to the prices for the Nintendo games, and I do get both sides of it.

This is a good first post. Welcome to VGC!

Wrong. Blockbuster died because they overcharged for their services. They were too used to the profit they gained from rental fees/late fees so when a competitor came along with a better business model that was consumer, they didn't know what to do and so the investors took flight. The two main killers were Redbox (which is physical rentals even to this day) and Netflix (which at that time had a really shitty streaming service and people mainly used it for dvd rental thru mail). 

I never said only. Read more slowly or something.