Topic: Why are digitally copies of games full price?

Even with a price drop in stores like GameStop, I still see that games keep their original price. Well, no big deal, its not the "official" price.
If I go to GameStop or Amazon, I can X for $40. That's the physical copy that takes money to make. It also gives you the option to sell it in the future. This isn't something devs like people doing, but it can't be helped.
You can also purchase the digital version of X for $40 from the eShop. Though, you can't sell it. The only convenience is that you don't have to carry another cartridge around. So, it has no actual value to it (at least to other people).
If you think about it, Nintendo should offer the games for less, as an incentive to buy from their store. Perhaps $5 off. I mean, they already get a bigger portion of the sale (if not whole) since the sale was not done through retail.

I agree. In a couple months, people will be able to send their retail game downloadably. Giving them more opportunities. Downloadable games should be $5 off at the least.

The downloads are priced at the same RRP as the physical version.

Nintendo and other publishers have no control over the retailers, should they decide to sell at a discount.

If Nintendo priced the downloads below the RRP, and undercut the retailers, the retailers would stop supporting Nintendo and the Wii U would go the way of the PSPGo.

Tl;dr to answer your question: economic reasons.

I'm not sure if it actually happened, but Sony was planning on selling the digital copies of the games for about $10 cheaper. I'm sure if retailers would stop supporting them, they wouldn't even had thought of it.
$5 for the loss of the case and cartridge? Seems very fair!
Also, what about when the physical copies come with a bonus, like SMT:DS:Soul Hackers? Yes its a pre-order bonus, but its an example. Say that was digital as well. You would pay the same price for much less.
EDIT: looks like it's digital as well!

The physical production cost is not really a factor that determines pricing. Publishers tend to allocate a seperate cost of distribution across all their products. They don't sit down and say 'we have to produce $1 million worth of these cases for this game so we'll bump the price up X dollars'

As it is the games industry runs on dangerously low margins. By all rights games should be more expensive than they are.

Thanks to competition, prices stay low, but the actual production of games has not become cheaper with the advent of digital distribution.

Life isn't fair.

Ugh, well this little discussion won't change Nintendo's plans.
Most likely the only games I will get digitally will be SSB, Animal Crossing, and Pokemon.
UNLESS THERES PHYSICAL BONUSES!!!

Good for you.

Dang it, you beat me to it, I was just going to say that.

Well, in the Mexican eShop, most 3rd party retail games are slightly cheaper than usual.

I understand that with brand-new games, yes, digital should cost the same. That would undercut devs and cause a lot of crap.

But what about old, OLD games? Pilotwings is $40 digitally, and that's effing atrocious when it averages less then half that at retailers, maybe $5 on Amazon. Same with other games like Ghost Recon.

Because $40 is still the MSRP. If retailers sell for less, that's their business.

Ghost Recon isn't full price, though. It's at their RRP. On a digital download service, they don't worry as much about moving units, since they don't have limited shelf space like a retailer does. There's still competition, of course, and I think Nintendo is slow to respond, but they're probably banking on people saying "the convenience is worth the price of admission."

I've heard that too many damn times now. That is single-handedly the stupidest excuse I've ever heard.

The MSRP for SNES and N64 games was mad expensive! Why don't we charge that now? Oh yes, because that would be f***in stupid.

I forgot how it wasn't MSRP. But I'm really curious as to who says the convenience is worth it?

If they wanted to move digital copies, they should at least price somewhere near what they charge at retailers. If they don't really care (which is what I assume) then that's their business. It's different for Nintendo though as they need to make online a priority.

I know what you mean. Sony and Microsoft do things way differently from Nintendo - older games that show up are much closer to what you'd see at a Non-gaming retailer at least, and they have regular sales to try and make more sales. I'm not quite sure what Nintendo's doing, though. I don't mind paying full price for a new game, digital or not, if I think it'll end up being worth it, but I'm always gonna go for the cheaper option for an older game. For the Nintendo's consoles as of late, that's always been the physical option.

Perhaps Bankai is onto something. Maybe they're not being serious about their download service, instead trying to form a better relationship with retailers so they'll display their products more prominently? Who knows...

Well I work at a shop that sells PWR and it's (like it or not) still $40 NEW which is why the games sell for $40

What store is that? Do they do price match? Does anyone buy the game?

A good comparison for pricing would be GameStop, as much as I dislike them. They don't do price match, so they can be used as a good example. And there it's less then $20 IIRC.

I don't care if you're talking about some random no-name store with one location that has a few patrons. And if you're talking about Best Buy or Toys R Us, that doesn't matter because they price match.

If I find a store in the middle of the desert that charges $60 for World at War or Bionic Commando, that means Steam should be pricing it at $60 too, no?

I really don't care if you think it's a stupid excuse or not. If you ever run a video game company you can change how it works, but with all due respect you're far too quick to call things 'stupid' to get a shot at running Nintendo.

RRP is RRP. Nintendo relies a great deal on its retail partners to sell consoles and games, if if Nintendo pisses them off you can say goodbye to Nintendo.

Valve has no reason to care about what the retailers think, so Value has no problem letting publishers undercut the retailers.

Yeah, how many people actually buy PC games from stores anyway? :3