Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Nintendo could handle their port situation so much better

KLXVER said:
Yeah, I love what Nintendo has done with some of their franchises this gen. Being going back to the roots or reinventing them. However they have really shown their greed this gen. The WiiU didn't do well, so we the fans have to pay for it. Overpriced ports, paywall for a lackluster online, expensive peripherals etc...

I love the Switch, but Nintendo could do better imo.

 

AngryLittleAlchemist said:
Nintendo doesn't do that because it would require giving reasonable value to the consumer. This is the same company that's charging $10 more for a port of a 4 year old game.

 

alejollorente10 said:

That is true but apparently, while they make money, nothing else matters. the ports that have arrived, must have gone to 40 dollars! I would like them to have a broader view of the situation and think a little more about the consumer.

 

routsounmanman said:

I couldn't care less, it's their loss. For example, I would love to play Donkey Kong : Tropical Freeze, as I've heard is an amazing game, but at full 60E, hell no. If they want my money, they gotta work for it.

 

That's one of a thousand reasons that made me stay away from Nintendo. Everything from them is so expensive.

I'm glad that they make a lot of money from it an that the fans pay the price happily and get happy. Good for them. I just put my money somewhere else.

I can get RDR1 right now for like $20 bucks while Nintendo wants full price for that SMTxFE thing. That's nuts for me. Again, I'm happy Nintendo fans are happy though.



God bless You.

My Total Sales prediction for PS4 by the end of 2021: 110m+

When PS4 will hit 100m consoles sold: Before Christmas 2019

There were three ravens sat on a tree / They were as blacke as they might be / The one of them said to his mate, Where shall we our breakfast take?


Around the Network

I just wish they had some sort of cheaper price options for those of us who already bought the games on Wii u. I know they can see as i downloaded most my wii u games which is linked to the same nintendo account as my switch



GoOnKid said:
Chaimo said:

A lower pricepoint doesn't make a game worse. A Select-Title isn't worse than its original, Super Mario World isn't worse on VC than the original SNES-Title because of the differences in what you have to pay. And so on. I don't think a re-release of a four year old game should cost the same as then. Would you buy a PS3-game which re-released on the PS4 with minor improvements for full price? Wouldn't you think that this is a bit unfair?

The Last of Us was full price when they re-released it on the PS4 and it still sold extremely well. It all comes down to the point that the age of any game is not what drives the price up or down, but the customers' demand does. The demand is clearly high for these late ports so Nintendo is right to charge full price. Sales data supports this.

Some people will interpret this and think that I love paying full price. I don't. Some may think that I will defend Nintendo for anything, I don't. I just think that any company does this, not just Nintendo. It would rather be dumb to not charge full price, actually. You as the customer can indeed only wait for price drops or sale offers if you think that these prices are too high.

And a lower price may indeed influence how much you like a game, this was scientifically proven. Paying a higher price makes you think that the product is superior to cheaper products. We can't shake that off, that's how our brain works.

 

RolStoppable said:
Chaimo said: 

Hm, I'd rather say it's just another "I'd like Nintendo to change its behaviour" thread. Yes, many people buy Wii U-Ports but that doesn't make the situation any better, does it? Only for Nintendos finances of course. I could wait untill the price drops but that's not the point here. I wanted to point out why Nintendos practices aren't consumer-friendly and further take on a solution that doesn't just say "Stop making ports", while I know that what I've suggested has its flaws and can absolutly be seen as too avaricious, as Veknoid_Outcast said.

Actually, it does make the situation better, because it proves that the charged prices are in line with the perceived value of the games. Good entertainment remains good entertainment regardless of age, hence why you can find similar examples to what Nintendo does in other branches of entertainment. Decades old Star Wars movies retail for a higher price than movies that came out only a year ago. The music of certain artists still commands a premium price despite its age.

What is and what is not consumer-friendly in the specific case of Wii U ports depends on the individual perspective. The general observation that can be made is that people who owned a Wii U consider the prices of ports too high because they've already bought those games before (therefore not consumer-friendly) while people who didn't own a Wii U don't mind the prices because the ports allow them to play good games without having to buy the atrocity that was the Wii U (therefore consumer-friendly). As such, the objective conclusion cannot be that Nintendo's practices are not consumer-friendly.

It's for the same reason that threads that ask the question if there have been too many Wii U ports on Switch have greatly divided answers. People who owned a Wii U will say "yes" while people who didn't own a Wii U demand that there should be even more ports.

While I can't say that many subjective opinions create an objective view of things, I can't argue against you two anymore. I'll have to start from another point of view next time.

Thx for the discussion. :)



village boy learns to jump.