@CharlieSmile
And I'm a kid who runs a youtube channel in middle school. Income doesn't make all that much of a difference when it comes to expressing your opinoin.
Nice >:]
I do stupid stuff on youtube.com/mysticbros, so check it out if your bored or whatever.
Or don't, it's your time after all.
At least the ports give you a decent sized game for $60. In that case, it's only really not worth it if you haven't played the game before. What's really not worth $60 is LGPE. A barren, casualized, mobile esque game like that is in no way worth $60.
LGP/E is, indeed, terrible and should have never been anywhere near $60. Even $30 would be asking too much for LGP/E.
...However, if we're talking about NSMBU Deluxe here, I'm pretty confident in saying that even LGP/E justifies a higher price. NSMBU Deluxe is a port of a game that already feels like a port of a game before it which felt like a port of the game before it and so on and so on. Imagine a port of Pokemon LGP/E costing $60 and we'd be nearing a comparison here, but at the very least LGP/E is an originally developed game. A very cheaply done one from thought to execution, but still a level above NSMBU Deluxe.
The original NSMBU was already so port-like. The game came bundled with my Wii U and I couldn't even play through it, it was so boring. To see a rerelease of it going for $60 is just so... It's horrible. But I find it strange that I just can't muster the frustration for it that I thought would be inevitable. It's like how I felt with Nintendo's numerous unnecessary handheld redesigns. It was frustrating, but then when the New 2DS XL was announced, all I could do was laugh. It was so absurd. To watch a company go to such a level that it is at the level of parody, it becomes amusing.
Perhaps it's also because I know that Nintendo has Animal Crossing and the real Pokemon game up their sleeves this year and they got let off the hook with me... For now. But their overpriced ports that never reduce in price will never not be a bad thing and I'm sticking with that.
There's some issues here.
1) The games on PS4 (and Xbox) that typically drop in price quickly are not first-party games. The first party titles that do reduce in price typically don't retain such strong full-price product movement as Nintendo's first party at full price.
2) PS4 came out November 2013. Switch came out March 2017. That's almost 3 1/2 years to have a larger library of titles to reduce in price over time.
3) Attachment rates DO matter from a business perspective, as you actually said ("games are supposed to sell consoles"). An attachment rate of 80% means that 8 out of 10 people owning a console bought a specific title, where 40% means only 4 out of 10 bought it.
Just...don't buy it if you think it's not worth it. That's not a weird way to look at it, that's the common sense way.
1. I'm not saying Nintendo games don't sell at full price, I'm saying the Switch gets a reputation as an expensive console to play on because you have to pay full price very often. The PS4 on the other hand has a reputation of being a console where you can find bargains.
2. This is completely irrelevant. The market forces don't care about excuses. This is just a narrowing down of the reason why the console market has so few companies competing, because it takes time build up a brand and a console. The Switch is a console from the same generation that the PS4 and Xbox One, just like how the PS3 lost a year to the Xbox 360, the Switch has lost 4 years.
3. Selling 3 million copies of a game is the same amount of profit regardless if the console it's on has sold 6 million or 12 million units. Attachment rates can be a good indicated on how successful a game is, but it doesn't affect the profits. The amazing attachment rate of Breath of the Wild didn't make more profitable than competing multiplattform games with higher sales.
Nintendo don't owe you a thing.
Nintendo ain't your friend who's gonna cut you a deal on a game you want.
you don't have the right to lower-priced games just because you want them.
We don't owe Nintendo anything either. Difference is that our financial future isn't reliant on Nintendo. If they want our money they have to sell us on a product.
if video games is too expensive a hobby for you, then you should reconsider your hobby. lo siento mijo, but it be like that sometimes.
I have a PS3, PS4 and a Switch. Initially I was going to phase out my Playstation consoles by always buying the games on Switch, and even re-buying some games like Final Fantasy X, which I have on PS3. I've been drifting more and more towards the two Playstation consoles, since they have much better prices. I would be okay with paying a little bit extra to get a game on Switch, but not full price for ports of 2D plattformers.
Plattforms like Steam shows that low prices is a recipe for success, and the Wii U shows Nintendos strategy isn't very good. One of the core reasons to build up a library of games to a console is so that older and cheaper games exist for consumers to buy. If you pick up an Xbox One S today, you can get a fairly good selection of games with it for not that much money. If you pick up a Switch today you have to pay a significant amount of money to get a good selection of games with it.
You also seem to think the market is a constant thing, and that Nintendo can just keep this up forever. They are already losing momentum with Switch sales and need to re-think their policy of releasing ports for full price. When all of these ports were announced, I wanted to buy them, but now that everything is full price, and games like Mario Tennis and Kirby Star Allies gets criticized for having too little content for full price games, I have become much more skeptical towards the Switch.
The straw that could break the camels back would be if Nintendo finally released downloadable N64 games and they were more than 10 dollars (which is already twice of what Playstation chargers for their classic games!!!).
Buy what you want, skip what doesn’t appeal to you as a value. Vote with your wallet. That’s the story.
I’m sure that a corporation that has been selling video games for decades can handle it if folks wanna wait till a game is on sale to purchase it. It’s kinda what they do for a living.
#MudStrongs
Switch Friend Code: SW-7842-2075-5515 | My Nintendo: HobbitGamr | Nintendo Network ID: HobbitGamr
I googled "switch games too expensive" and there's tons of people expressing such ideas. It's starting to become a problem if you want the Switch to be your main console. Thankfully, at least 3rd party games like Crash N Sane Trilogy costs a reasonable $40.
While I do agree that the price of these ports should be closer to $40, I also have to agree with the other party. For example, while I think that NSMBU: Deluxe is too expensive, I’ll still probably buy it because I didn’t have it before and haven’t played a NSMB game since DS.
Reading: Too much Watching: Not enough Playing: SMTV
LGP/E is, indeed, terrible and should have never been anywhere near $60. Even $30 would be asking too much for LGP/E.
...However, if we're talking about NSMBU Deluxe here, I'm pretty confident in saying that even LGP/E justifies a higher price. NSMBU Deluxe is a port of a game that already feels like a port of a game before it which felt like a port of the game before it and so on and so on. Imagine a port of Pokemon LGP/E costing $60 and we'd be nearing a comparison here, but at the very least LGP/E is an originally developed game. A very cheaply done one from thought to execution, but still a level above NSMBU Deluxe.
The original NSMBU was already so port-like. The game came bundled with my Wii U and I couldn't even play through it, it was so boring. To see a rerelease of it going for $60 is just so... It's horrible.
Maybe if you played the original NSMBU, but to people that haven't, you're getting a full game you've never played before. But regardless of whether you've played LGPE, the game just doesn't have much period. So LGPE is worth even less.
Nintendo has largely gone for the squeeze blood from a stone strategy, which is working for now but how much longer? Sure they can get people to repeatedly buy the same game but will that keep working?
Considering both Minecraft and GTA 5 are still selling, plus the entire COD series, plus annual roster update sports franchises, plus much of Nintendo's games in general...yes. Not automatically but a lot of the times if they market it right, yeah. It will.
For the record though this entire concept is inherently flawed since consumers have decided that "combining a couple of last gen games for current console/s" is a trend worth supporting this entire generation, so obviously Nintendo can pull it off because so many others have. The fact that it's 60 dollars means maybe it will be somewhat less successful, but it is not actually unusual. Nintendo does sometimes refuse to sell games for cheaper to maybe their detriment but NSMBU is not actually a good example of that when it actually is following a current trend of game re-releases. On the same console where you can buy Skyrim or Minecraft for the 8th time.
this would be like complaining about street fighter ports being too expensive on switch and you blamed it only on the collection instead of when they released Ultra Street Fighter 2 on its own for 40 bucks
Nintendo keep their prices high deliberately. They aren’t entering the race to be bottom that’s taking place on other formats and there’s merit in that.
When people buy a Nintendo game they know that, most of the time, it isn’t going to drop in price hugely. There’s no point waiting for a price drop , just buy it without worrying you’re going to be kicking yourself when 50% falls off its price in 2 months.
They also maintain their resale/trade in value for a long time which is a plus.
They keep the perceived value-the image-of their products high too.
Different strategies work for different companies. Activision/EA/Ubi Soft drop their prices quickly because they’re looking to make money from MTX. Nintendo aren’t. Their own software is their main profit stream.
I’m not even saying that Nintendo are right to do it this way but maybe be careful what you wish for.
@electrolite77 Tbh as someone who games on PC regularly, the race to the bottom pricing and "your games aren't worth anything" mentality gamers were conditioned to have after Steam really hurts the value of games imo. Now people expect to not buy games at launch because you save so much money and frustration (if the game is buggy), then pick them up for cheap way later. And if they ever pick up a game for $60, they always want it to last some huge amount of time. Like seriously, God of War 2018 went on sale for like $20-30 during Black Friday and that was around six months old. There's being consumer friendly, but at times I feel like sometimes it's a bit too consumer friendly and feeds into unrealistic expectations.
Metroid, Xenoblade, EarthBound shill
I run a YouTube/Twitch channel for fun. Check me out if you want to!
Please let me know before you send me a FC request, thanks.
Lets be honest. Nintendo was never a cheap system to begin with. All the games that were released were around 60 euro. Full price. Even after a year or 2 still most A++ games were still high priced. The other systems that sells are doing a better job by cutting the price by half. Nintendo has great Mario and Zelda game but that's it. And they milk it as much they can and their system expensive as well. You get the basic of the basic when you buy a Nintendo hardware. You are still forced to get other stuff. When you compare hardwares Switch and PS4 they are basicly the same. Except Sony gives at least 500gb and 2x stronger hardware. Nintendo porting games from their own brand is the same. You still have to pay the full price. I said it before... if you keep supporting a brand like this they will keep doing this. Don't buy it to show that they can't get away with it. Well it's what it is. It's a brand and it's mostly for kids of course and they are selling. So we can't moan a lot, but it won't change anything. Parents will still get these games anyway
You don't have to agree with what i'm saying. So don't attack me. This is from my point of view. With that said
@NaviAndMii I'd say digital pricing is the problem not the physical price. Even GAME shops has Switch games at launch being priced generally £5 less than the digital version, that alone says a lot about Nintendo's digital pricing.
£45 is a decent price for something like NSMBU Deluxe.
Yeah I can see that. It happened to me with Spiderman on PS4. Rare that I buy a game at launch but I made an exception for that. Then despite being a huge success and record breaking launch on Black Friday it was £29.99! So that’s me not buying a first party Sony game at launch again.
Similar would have happened with Forza Horizon 4. I had it preordered, which I cancelled because I got a good deal on Game Pass but it’s £22.85 now. Again, won’t be buying one of their games at launch.
Yet Smash, which I’m not a huge fan of historically, I got Day 1 because I knew if I didn’t like it (and I’m actually really enjoying it) I’d get most of my money back.
All the platform holders go full price. They don’t want to upset retailers. And while Sony and MS offer better discounts than Nintendo do on their first party games (for various reasons) they are also almost always cheaper at retail.
Forums
Topic: The ports are too expensive
Posts 41 to 60 of 88
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.