Not to be stingy, but why should GBA games cost $4 more than SNES games? I think it should be $9 at most...
Hmmm...you're right. I think that was a little high. I was thinking that GBA games was during the GCN era and I based my price off of that. I'll change it.
EDIT: I think I can bring the DS games down to $12 as well.
I'd be willing to go to $15 for some games, but $12 does sound more reasonable in general.
Formally called brewsky before becoming the lovable, adorable Yoshi.
Now playing:
Final Fantasy XIV (PC) | The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening (Switch) | Celeste (Switch)
I think the price should depend on the content of the game, not the system it was designed for. It seems a bit ridiculous that simple NES games like Urban Champion cost the same amount as Super Mario Bros. 3. It's not like Block Drop U and F1 Race Stars: Powered Up Edition cost the same because they're both Wii U eShop games. Keep the prices within a certain range, though. Like, NES could be $2-$5, SNES $5-$8, N64 $8-$12, GameCube $12-$15, GBA $5-$8, DS $10-$15. Or something close to that.
goodbyes are a sad part of life but for every end there's a new beggining so one must never stop looking forward to the next dawn
now working at IBM as helpdesk analyst my Backloggery
3DS Friend Code: 3995-7085-4333 | Nintendo Network ID: GustavoSF
I think the price should depend on the content of the game, not the system it was designed for. It seems a bit ridiculous that simple NES games like Urban Champion cost the same amount as Super Mario Bros. 3. It's not like Block Drop U and F1 Race Stars: Powered Up Edition cost the same because they're both Wii U eShop games. Keep the prices within a certain range, though. Like, NES could be $2-$5, SNES $5-$8, N64 $8-$12, GameCube $12-$15, GBA $5-$8, DS $10-$15. Or something close to that.
I agree, VC prices should be more dynamic. Who would pay $5 for a game like Donkey Kong?
Formally called brewsky before becoming the lovable, adorable Yoshi.
Now playing:
Final Fantasy XIV (PC) | The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening (Switch) | Celeste (Switch)
I think the price should depend on the content of the game, not the system it was designed for. It seems a bit ridiculous that simple NES games like Urban Champion cost the same amount as Super Mario Bros. 3. It's not like Block Drop U and F1 Race Stars: Powered Up Edition cost the same because they're both Wii U eShop games. Keep the prices within a certain range, though. Like, NES could be $2-$5, SNES $5-$8, N64 $8-$12, GameCube $12-$15, GBA $5-$8, DS $10-$15. Or something close to that.
I agree, VC prices should be more dynamic. Who would pay $5 for a game like Donkey Kong?
I am completely happy paying the same price as a happy meal for a great game that I get to enjoy over and over again
People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...
3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan
I am completely happy paying the same price as a happy meal for a great game that I get to enjoy over and over again
Which is not Donkey Kong. Why does Nintendo think they can continue to get away with rehashing the same game several times already when IT'S MISSING A LEVEL. Considering that the arcade version had four levels and the NES version only had three, that's a quarter of the game missing.
Formally called brewsky before becoming the lovable, adorable Yoshi.
Now playing:
Final Fantasy XIV (PC) | The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening (Switch) | Celeste (Switch)
It should depend on the game. If a game is a rare download, it should cost in the triple digits.
Why?
It's not like it's a physical copy.
It's digital.
There are pretty much infinite digital copies of everything.
Digital stuff isn't worth much, physical is worth so much more.
If they did rare downloads, no one would buy it and people would just emulate it instead.
I am completely happy paying the same price as a happy meal for a great game that I get to enjoy over and over again
Which is not Donkey Kong. Why does Nintendo think they can continue to get away with rehashing the same game several times already when IT'S MISSING A LEVEL. Considering that the arcade version had four levels and the NES version only had three, that's a quarter of the game missing.
And yet still a really fun game.
People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...
3DS Friend Code: 2621-2786-9784 | Nintendo Network ID: DefHalan
I am completely happy paying the same price as a happy meal for a great game that I get to enjoy over and over again
Which is not Donkey Kong. Why does Nintendo think they can continue to get away with rehashing the same game several times already when IT'S MISSING A LEVEL. Considering that the arcade version had four levels and the NES version only had three, that's a quarter of the game missing.
And yet still a really fun game.
To each their own, I guess. For now, however, I'll stick to Donkey Kong 64 for my arcade Donkey Kong cravings that has all four levels. And Jetpac. Gotta love Jetpac.
Formally called brewsky before becoming the lovable, adorable Yoshi.
Now playing:
Final Fantasy XIV (PC) | The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening (Switch) | Celeste (Switch)
I am completely happy paying the same price as a happy meal for a great game that I get to enjoy over and over again
Which is not Donkey Kong. Why does Nintendo think they can continue to get away with rehashing the same game several times already when IT'S MISSING A LEVEL. Considering that the arcade version had four levels and the NES version only had three, that's a quarter of the game missing.
I hate to say this, but we might just have to deal with the NES version of Donkey Kong.
This is the reason why we don't get the arcade versions of Donkey Kong.
Bascially, if you don't want to click link, here's the short version of the story. Nintendo does not legally own the code to the Arcade verson of Donkey Kong, and by extenstion, Donkey Kong Jr which was built off of DK's code. Because of this, its unlikely Nintendo can release the arcade version legally, without having to pay some kind of royalties to another party.
The NES version is not based on this code, which means Nintendo owns everything in that version.
This may help explain why we never get the arcade versions of Donkey Kong.
Bascially, if you don't want to click link, here's the short version of the story. Nintendo does not legally own the code to the Arcade verson of Donkey Kong, and by extenstion, Donkey Kong Jr which was built off of DK's code. Because of this, its unlikely Nintendo can release the arcade version legally, without having to pay some kind of royalties to another party.
The NES version is not based on this code, which means Nintendo owns everything in that version.
This may help explain why we never get the arcade versions of Donkey Kong.
Ah, perhaps I shouldn't have been so harsh on Nintendo. But the fact remains that it's missing a level. However, why does Donkey Kong 64 have all four?
EDIT: Hmmmm....that article was interesting, but I don't think that's the reason. The court ruling was that the code in the Donkey Kong and Donkey Kong Jr. Arcade machines belonged to Ikegami. But, Nintendo wrote their own code when they released it for the NES. This leads me to conclude that the game simply couldn't handle a fourth level. It came out in 1983, so all the tricks to making a game didn't exist yet.
Formally called brewsky before becoming the lovable, adorable Yoshi.
Now playing:
Final Fantasy XIV (PC) | The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening (Switch) | Celeste (Switch)
Nintendo needs to offer a good amount of titles at 99 cents, like on mobile app games, in order to stay competitive. In this approach, it'll match the "pricing" standards as mobile app games, without having to actually offer their games on mobile devices.
From there of course, customers can be enticed into purchasing more higher priced games.
I'm glad to see this topic as I came here to discuss this very subject. I play a lot of iOS titles and PSN downloadable games. With iOS' low prices and PSN's constant sales and PS+ offerings, it is quite the rare occurrence for me to pay anything significant for digital games. Heck, on iOS alone it is a rarity for me to spend more than one or two dollars. Now that I'm so used to these prices, I don't think I'll give Nintendo any business for their Virtual Console service so long as they refuse to stay competitive. I'm not dropping five bucks on an NES game; I'd rather spend one more dollar and get a PSOne classic.
If I could wave my hand and change the pricing structure this is what I would like to see:
Forums
Topic: Virtual Console Prices: What should they be?
Posts 21 to 40 of 51
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.