News Article

Angry Birds Dev Calls Nintendo Games "$49 Pieces of Plastic"

Posted by James Newton

Ruffles some feathers

Whether you think Nintendo has nothing to fear from mobile games or not, it's quite a verbal battleground these days as both sides stick up for their pricing and content structure. This time it's the turn of Angry Birds developer Rovio to send a few well-chosen word birds flying through the air to attack the metaphorical green pigs of Nintendo's boxed product business.

Peter Vesterbacka of Rovio is pleased that the issue is drawing so much discussion, but he's hardly full of sympathy for Nintendo's stance:

It’s interesting to see people like Nintendo saying smartphones are destroying the games industry. Of course, if I was trying to sell $49 pieces of plastic to people then yes, I’d be worried too.

While it's easy to assume Vesterbacka is dismissing the value of Nintendo products, it's more reasonable to assume he's referring to the company's reliance on physical production and distribution methods as opposed to the cheap fare offered for download from Android Market, Apple App Store and other similar store fronts.

What do you make of Vesterbacka's comments? Do you think he's out of line or can you see where he's coming from?


From the web

User Comments (155)



Supremeist said:

I just hope Angry Birds won't turn out to be overly expensive when you can get it on the iPhone or Android market for 99c. The same thing Popcap did with Plants vs Zombies. It was a dumbed down version of the iPhone App for it, and it cost 20$. I sold mine to Gamestop yesterday. I heard it wasn't a successful DS game for its price. Going to get my 3DS today. Don't have enough to get a game with it, but thats okay. I'm excited.



Scarkaiser said:

So what if a game costs $50! That is clearly a sign of the amount of work that went into the programming within the plastic, not the plastic itself!

Plus when you pay $50 for a game you are bound to get at least anywhere from 20-100 hours (it's different for all of us) of enjoyment out of the product whereas a 99 cent application is going to show you all of what it's about within the first few minutes of playing.



LordJumpMad said:

I wouldn't be picking fights with nintendo.
The last thing they want is a Mad Reggie.....



TeeJay said:

Man, they're really drawing blood. I still side with Nintendo. I like having physical games, for some reason.



Robo-goose said:

They make one game that sells well, and they think they know the industry.
They're getting a bit too cocky for their own good. They should look harder at how many copies of Pokemon sell with a price tag of 34.99, then look at how many downloads of Angry Birds sell with their respective price.
Plus, it's much easier to sell a game for the iPhone than it is for a console/handheld.
In the app store, you buy the game and have it instantly. For a console, you have to drive to a store, or you could buy it online, which means waiting a few days to receive said game.
It's actually a little embarrassing that they're getting such big heads.



LztheQuack said:

@Robo: Considering they're arguing with a company that made plenty of games just as (if not more) successful as Angry Birds



CanisWolfred said:


20-100 hours? What? And obviously you haven't tried completing Angry Birds. That'll actually take you quite a bit of time.

As someone who's not crazy enough to buy games at full price unless it's an RPG, I can honestly agree with what they're saying: Nintendo portable games are expensive, while they're offering more entertainment for a much cheaper price.



bboy2970 said:

firstly, its a 40 dollar piece of plastic. Secondly, I enjoy my physical media. And thirdly, Angry Birds ain't that great and you just lost a sale :/



Meta-Rift said:

I find this amusing, considering that buying Angry Birds won't even get you a "piece of plastic". Besides, all the special editions will eventually add up and be more expensive than a console game. Why is it better to buy something that doesn't have a physical copy?



pixelman said:

Haha this guy isn't doing himself any favors. He's been getting some pretty bad press lately.



ville10 said:

They do have a point, but I rather pay 50$ for a game that keeps surprising me than 1$ for a game which is the same thing over and over. I can't believe that the new Angry Birds is as successful as the first, it's nothing new at all! (and yes, I have played it)



AlphaNerd01 said:

This is just the slow, agonizing move to digital distribution. Companies like Nintendo will want to drag their feet, while companies like Rovio will want to expedite the process as much as possible. Neither side is right or wrong, and both types of content delivery have their benefits, but until the day comes when physical media is officially dead, this debate will rage on.



ArmoredGoomba said:

He makes one casual game and thinks he has a right to call out a legend like Nintendo? He should sit back down.

EDIT: Also I hope digital distribution never takes over. Physical games will always be the preferred method for me.



Denkou said:

I personally prefer having a hard copy of my games. I'm much more likely to finish a game if it actually takes up space in real life. Otherwise its.... well... a waste of space. A game that is pure digital is a game I don't feel the need, nor the desire to complete.



ToastyYogurt said:

Rovio made a good game, but they're a moron when it comes to waving the game around. Nintendo games aren't just plastic. It's not about the outside, but the inside that counts. Angry Birds is a good distraction when you got 2-3 minutes to kill, but Nintendo's games are for a real gaming fix. Handheld and cell phone games are 2 different things that can exist together in perfect harmony. Rovio is stupid to try to make the two beasts fight each other.



foxtwin said:

Agree with you all.

I'm not sure Mr. Vesterbacka fully understands what a video game is. I like Angry Birds. But if his comments indicate what he thinks of video games, then Angry Birds is more of a diversion and an activity. Zelda: THAT'S a video game--with it, is an entire world of interactive experience, something on which he has barely touched the surface.




He's MISQUOTED Nintendo and he's made a FOOL of himself. Agree with all the above comments. I know Angry Bird but I don't know who Rovio is



Morpheel said:

Well, it looks like today is the "bash nintendo day".
Nintendo you suck. Am i doin it rite?



bboy2970 said:

@abgar: I know right! These lowly developers that have the nerve to try and speak against Nintendo need to shut their traps. They aren't even close to being on the same level of greatness as Nintendo and only make themselves look like total buffoons.



FluttershyGuy said:

Cheap games of poor quality was a huge reason that video games almost died in the early 80s (and could go on life support again if this goes too far). It's largely thanks to Nintendo that we aren't back to the days of card games and board games for non-TV personal entertainment. As I can afford it, I'll happily fork over 49 clams to Nintendo, in support of quality, top-of-the-line gaming!



armoredghor said:

Honestly, I spent a few minutes with angry birds and thought it was pretty good and he needs to show some respect to massive games with at least 50 hours of content. ... but let's also look at the denotation of his statement. Nintendo 3DS needs a good sized 3DSware section with quality content for under ten bucks a piece to compete and maintain their image. They'll never achieve the volume of the apple marketplace with development kits costing 30x times that of apple kits. think subjectively



theblackdragon said:

@bboy2970: 'lowly developers' is taking it a bit far; it's that kind of thinking that has Nintendo continuing to jerk devs around regarding their strict WiiWare restrictions and limited devkit availability. if only this guy'd kept his mouth shut, though, he wouldn't have dropped himself to Nintendo's level in this argument.

aren't they trying to release Angry Birds for 3DSWare and such, though? wonder how Nintendo's gonna like this statement, haha.



KrazyBean said:

Oh yeah, I would LOVE to see a game as long as ANY Zelda game on the App Store. I would obviously pay £40 for a piece of plastic which gives me HOURS of entertainment rather than download Angry Birds for 90p and play it for only 5 minutes and get bored of it.

Also, you can't return DLC if it has a problem with SHHHUT UP and get on with your work!



GuarinoMatt said:

They can't compare the two things; a game console has a certain kind of games that are supposed to guarantee a large amount of playing time, while phone games are just something to pass some time with.
I don't think that mobile gaming should be taken so seriously.



Dodger said:

It actually was a game I thought about getting before. I don't really care about it anymore if he is going to say that because he made one really popular and probably really good $1.00 game that the games that I like aren't worth anything anymore. I respect that other people like different games like FPSers, Final Fantasy, Rock Band, Sonic the Hedgehog and other games that may not be my favorite. There is probably even some little kids out there who had a blast with Dora saves the Snow Princess or Imagine: Party Babyz. If they like them then why do I have to ruin it for them when I can go play the games I like instead? Oh well.

That may be his opinion and I respect it but he can say it in a nicer way. Of course, if he did that then he would lose attention like every game does eventually. He knows that so many people like Nintendo so now he has Angry Birds on my mind again.



JaXs said:

If Nintendo and the others intend on staying in the black they ALL need to start charging less for their games. I do not care HOW good it is, NO hand held game is worth fifty dollars, and forty is pushing it.



MasterGraveheart said:

I'm dumping Rovio. If they're developer is going to be this egotistical and talk down on physical media when physical media is still practical for larger, deeper games than Angry Birds could ever hope or dream to be, then I'm out. I will not download Angry Birds Rio, I will not download "The Mighty Eagle" ripoff add-on, and I will not download Angry Birds for Wii, DS, or 3DS. Rovio, go bankrupt.

Geesh, it MUST be hate on Nintendo WEEK! First's owners devulge their entire interactions with Nintendo, then the Fez pinheads, and now the feather dusters here. Next, we'll get a Michael Pacher report and the folks over at Sony will try to say something about the NGP. I'm with HappyHappy on this one.

Grabs his violin



Rensch said:

A game like Super Street Fighter 4 is not a game you download in a minute like Angry Birds. As long as internet connections are not fast enough to download large games quickly, there will be a huge marktet for physical games. I agree that physical games will and should be eliminated in time. also from an environmental viewpoint. That time, however, has not come yet because of technical difficulties.



LunarJade said:

It sounds like he's just saying that Nintendo is worried that mobile gaming is taking over the market. When I figure it was more like Nintendo was saying that the constant amount of cheap mobile games is helping the consumers to expect everything to be free or cheap.

While I think the market overlaps a little, I think theres room for both currently. That may change down the line.

Nothing lasts forever after all. And no I don't mean Nintendo or mobile games won't be around but if they're going to continue to be around they will have to constantly change with the market.
I think Nintendo will manage to keep changing and keep going with the market. Mobile games though... not sure... but I guess as mobiles keep getting upgraded there will probably be some sort of market there too.



Tri4ceHolder said:

Um... Rovio, you WISH you were as cool as Nintendo! Oh and if you have nothing better to do then rip on Nintendo, then that makes you look really lame.



Highwinter said:

This Angry Birds guys is really starting to bug me.. He's made one successful game (which is a direct rip off of another game) and seems to think he has the authority to comment on everything in the gaming industry.

He creates casual games that are fun to play for a couple of minutes while waiting for a train. There's nothing wrong with that, I enjoy a few of them myself, but claiming they make big budget retail games pointless or that they're over priced are ridiculous. The type of games he makes are in a completely different market.

It's like claiming Youtube videos make big budget movies pointless.. His arrogance is astoundingly ignorant.



kurtasbestos said:

I thought they were expensive pieces of plastic, too, until one day when I put one of the things in my DS and realized there's a whole game in there!



Knux said:

$49 pieces of plastic is worth buying when there are wonderful games to play within that plastic. But I also love digital games, so I think the video game market should exist for both retail and digital games. Angry Birds was going to be released on 3DSWare, but I wonder if that will change now...



NapalmHornet said:

That guy made one game. Just one game and it sucks! I would like to see the angry birds fly when they have been drowned in oil and set alight. I like those "bits of plastic" as they are more collectible than just a picture on your home screen. I hate angry birds and it's creator, he has no talent.



TheBaconator said:

The guy makes one decent game that is selling well and now he thinks he rules the industry. I want this Angry Birds phase to end soon, then we'll see what else this garbage developer can come up with. Look up other Rovio games. Heard of any of them? I sure haven't.



CapnKael said:

I would like to assume he's not trying to be a by saying that, but rather that he's all for digital sales and that he's putting himself (in a rather flat-out way) in the shoes of Nintendo executives. If he is just being a ... then he's a .



Jellitoe said:

Digital Download Games cannot be traded in, or sold, therefore they have no true value anyway. Those pices of plastic can be sold, and traded.



Boshar said:

I bought Angry Birds holiday seasons for € 0,80 and I feel cheated. What a non game this is. It's Tanks with an opponent that doesn't fire back. Even worse they SPAM this game to every platform they can.

And then they try to sell lots of plastic an plush toys. If Angry Birds is the future of gaming I will stop being a gamer. Its also funny they think they are a big player in the gaming market. They sell 80 cent throwaway apps. If their next game isn't in the 2% successful apps category they will make a loss on it.



CapnKael said:

And the fact that Reggie has stated that Angry Birds is an exception to Nintendo's stance on the majority of mobile games being crap does tend to make me wonder why he would have a shot at a company who has said that his game is pretty good.



Bobpie said:

I still firmly believe the phone and console gaming markets are completely different. There are people who will spend more money for a higher quality game, and those who will spend a tiny amount for an admittedly lesser game. Although there are games which appear on both platforms, such as Street Fighter, there is just something better about playing it on a buttoned console rather than a touch screen device.



Moco_Loco said:

He really is almost as funny as Charlie Sheen. I love me some Angry Birds during the work week when I don't have a lot of time, but I usually turn to my DS on the weekends.

The one point that I will give him is that Nintendo games are overpriced. Yes, all games start out overpriced, but most companies gradually lower the price as the game gets older. I dislike Nintendo's current "release the game at the right value point and keep it there" policy. It's a good business decision as long as they stay on top, but it's bad for the customers.



Tony3DS said:

First of all in the US they are 39 not 49. Secondly stores are always having sales a few months after. Maybe there’s a middle ground between 99 cents and $39, how do you make any money selling a game for 99 cents anyway, even without physical production costs?

I played a $39 piece of plastic all day yesterday called Steel Diver. It was great. And it really only cost me $15 after my Amazon credit (buy a 3ds get a $25 credit). I also downloaded Angry Birds Rio for free last week on the Amazon app store for Android, although I’ve been uninspired to try that yet.



CapnKael said:

Plus, another thing about the digital market. I know this isn't a full argument against it, and that's not what i'm trying to get across, but does nobody else remember the feeling you got when you were younger when you had finally saved up enough money to buy that game your really wanted for your N64 or Playstation, and the feeling you got when you stood infront if your console and pulled the shrink wrap off the game box and opened it for the first time?

To me, that satisfaction is one of my fondest memories of being a gamer.



Squiggle55 said:

the digital future bums me out. I just hope competition forces companies like Apple to make things easier on the customer. If I want to share a game with a friend or bring a movie to a friend's house it shouldn't be such a hassle. boo digital.



Yosher said:

Just because THEY don't make games that are worth the 50 bucks doesn't mean the people at Nintendo don't either. XD



MR_SUPREME69 said:

Angry Birds is overrated and these developers are sitting high and mighty because its "successful" for whatever reason, but this doesnt mean they can bash console and now the 3DS when clearly console and handhelds from nintendo and sony are better than a stupid iphone. these developers to shut up like right now.



MR_SUPREME69 said:

Also casual games and gamers are a cancer in the game industry and need to be stopped. i want to play a real game.



Noire said:

Oh man this guy is awesome.

I like want to put him and Reggie in a ring together, and have them shout insults at each other. And whoever has alienated the most people wins.



zeeroid said:

Vesterbacka is quite possibly one of the most obnoxious trolls in game development right now. He causes a whole lot of commotion for a guy who made one hit title in a sea of unprofitable peers. And instead of working on new games, he keeps iterating over the exact same design ad nauseum. If that's the future of game development, then sorry Peter, I think we're doing just fine here in the present.



killer6370 said:

actually id pay even more if its a physical piece, i like dlc too but when i buy a game i want to have something to hold for example cartige*instruction manual or a cd

Thats also why i hate browser games like the zynga things on facebook, i want to have a real game on a real medium not something that only exists on the internet



LztheQuack said:

Also, people like this guy make Gamestop unhappy. The used game industry must live on!!



KingMike said:

I happen to quite enjoy my collection of plastic boxes, small and large.

I'll play games on hardware designed for gaming, not something with tiny screen and tinier buttons all packed together (or not at all).



lunchmeats101 said:

I agree physical games are overpriced relative to digital distribution.
Also, Angry Birds is rubbish. A game in which you throw stuff at other stuff. Yay! Seriously I got bored of that game within 5 minutes.



Hokori said:

umm arnt 3DS games $40, and DS games $30-$35??? Thats what I paid anyway



Sabrewing said:

Remember back when console cartridges were between $60 and $100, mostly for chip-intensive RPGs? I do.



Dragon_Warrior said:

You can find games that offer what Angry Birds offer for free on the internet. Angry Birds is over priced even at one dollar.



BleachFan said:

The guy made a simple game. A REALLY simple game.

I don't think he's important enough in the industry to have his opinions hold much weight at all.

Angry Birds isn't even all that fun...



Sonic1994CD said:

$49 Pieces of Plastic? 3DS games don't cost that much. I bought Super Street Fighter 4 for $39.99. So I don't know where $49 came up from. Maybe your .



Tylr said:

...and Angry Birds is a $1 waste of iPod space.

Haters gotta hate.
Also, i do NOT agree that physical gaming will die someday.


and he thinks 49.99 games are too much...



NintyMan said:

It's apparently a hater day today, but Nintendo can take it. They've taken it for years, and they're not going to let some cocky developer tell them what to do. They don't have to say a verbal bomb back when they could simply crush them with their money built up from millions of copies of Mario and Pokemon. You can't tell me a cell phone game can top Mario, Zelda, or any franchise Nintendo truly cares about. Quality will always top quantity, even if it's a $50 piece of plastic that holds a game.



KDR_11k said:

Tell me, how many copies did Angry Birds sell? At what price? Now look at New Super Mario Bros, that sold over 20 million copies at 40€ a piece.



thesignpainter said:

angry birds is just a fad, they'll end up just like pac-man. different colored birds running around a big game board playing mini games that have something to do with big slingshots or pigs of a unnatural color wearing hard hats, it'll happen.



EliPro said:

I have to say, this developer is very outspoken. I guess because his game sold over 2 copies, he thinks he's the next Miyamoto or something



Slapshot said:

I don't agree with this guy, but do think the prices for physical copies of games needs to come down. $40 for a 3DS games means I'll be buying few "experimental" games, $60 for PS3 games has me buying only AAA titles anymore. It's just too dang expensive!



DrCruse said:

I think he is saying that rehashes like Starfox 3DS and Nintendogs + Cats are worth much less than $50.



Yadoking said:

Angry Birds dev knows they're more than just plastic, why would you even expect someone to take that seriously? Nintendo also has way more titles under $49.99 than at it. While a good bit are that way at launch, most of their prices drop pretty reasonably.



HandheldGuru97 said:

Because of this I will never buy any version of angry birds. I also think Nintendo will not allow them to release their game on the 3DS.



Algorhythm said:

Rovio has had only 1 successful game after several dozen failed games and they think they can change the rules of the game. Nintendo has been a company for over 100 years and in gaming for over 30. Rovio is just looking to "ruffle some feathers"...pun intended. Angry birds is a shallow fad that will be long gone when people are still playing Mario years from now.



Colors said:

Hey at least we're actually getting something!
Boy: Hi big brother, I like your new shoes, by the way I deleted $30 worth of apps on your iPod Touch.



Gameday said:

y are they acting like we are paying for just the cartridge ? lol get a clue plus some people like having the hard copy instead of a download thus the limitations of just having it download able...



Phobos said:

Please, Rovio. You just release one game that has a decent purchase rate, then you rookies start flabbing your gums on Nintendo? Pfft.

I've actually been downloading a lot of mobile phone games lately - it's no match or even comparable to Nintendo. Their 'Ware' series, I guess you can compare it too. But anything else, VOID.



naut said:

Angry Birds isn't even a good game--I've played and just don't see what all the fuss is about. But anyway, he's just being a troll--no one really gives a crap what he says,



melvin2898 said:

Nintendo said something first people. Rovio defended the App Market. I personally think Nintendo deserved it.

So yeah I'm going to go play Angry Birds now...

Angry Birds is awesome.

Here's my thoughts. Nintendo really shouldn't have said anything. Keep your mouth shut. Rovio brings great points to the table.Their game is addictive to play.

I like my Wii but usually there's not many games I want. I have around 12-18 Wii games. I only want about 2 more.

My DSlite/DSi is my main thing. I want atleast 20 or more games for it.

I love my iPod Touch. It's really awesome and I feel it's close to a phone. It's something I can take everywhere. It's much smaller than a DS and I can just whip it out when I want to use it. I have 80 apps on my iPod. Apple often has 99 cent sales. A lot of the games are good. Games are cheaper for this device but are good in quality.

Nintendo was wrong for what they said. Rovio pretty much owned them. I like all my games but since I got this iPod..I barely touch my DS. I have so many games and I have less time for my DS. I like all companies.



XCWarrior said:

Dude needs to shut his pie hole. There is a reason Angry Birds costs a $1. If it was $5, no one would have bought it. Although I dislike paying $50 for a game, I know that with Nintendo, you are getting something you will pay for years on end. Angry Birds is a flavor of the month game that will not be remembered in a year or two.



astarisborn94 said:

Surely he must be out of line with his thinking. Retail games almost always (If they are good) comes with more contents then digital downloads and until digital downloads can match or surpass that of console games, there's no need to prefer digital over retail.



hamispink said:

I think that retail and digital download should both stick around for a good long time(see: NGP)
I also think he's contradicting himself by saying that nintendo is selling a $49 piece of plastic, while he is selling a 99 cent data code



aaronsullivan said:

Seems like this crowd is very reactionary. The way I read his statement is that nintendo is making it harder for itself by continuing to distribute physical media. I didn't read any comment about the quality of games on either platform in his comment. Seems you have read a whole bunch of statements between the lines.

From a developer perspective look at it from Rovio's point of view. Made a ton of cash on a small game. That kind of opportunity was not provided by Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft.

To the comment about Angry Birds not being remembered, the commenter is seriously out of touch. I'm not.a huge fan of Angry Birds but millions of people are and a good portion of them play it regularly still. For many of these people it is one of their first addictive experience with a video game. It's hit the mainstream.

Both platforms merit attention and have their differences. I have a simple looking puzzle game on the iOS that is sucking up an irresponsible amount of my time right now — wife too — and it is deep and rewarding as well. (DungeonRaid for anyone who cares.) This is just to say that there are fantastic experiences on the iDevices for casual and hardcore gamers alike. And the new capable mobile market is only a couple years old now. It's just getting started.

3DS is tough. It's half the price of an iPad which is a far more capable device in so many respects. 3D is cool but the screen is still so ugly like previous DS handhelds compared to iOS devices and some Android phones. Going to be VERY hard for this Nintendo fanboy to justify the cost even for Ocarina and Starfox and Mario Kart — sorry going way off track.



SunnySnivy said:

Haha. I did laugh at this.

I'd rather buy I game that will keep me busy for a while for 49$, rather than spend any money on a game for my phone that will keep me occupied for 5 seconds while I'm waiting in line at the grocery store. There's free games on the App Store for that.



zeeroid said:

@aaronsullivan,107: Y'know, at present I don't think it's really a question of whether or not he's making a valid point. Frankly, there might be a smidgen of an argument hidden somewhere in his incendiary, but most of the gaming community is just offended by the assumption that he's an authority on the subject. Clearly, as far as I'm aware, no actual developers — Nintendo included — take him seriously. I think, as (not so) humble denizens of The Internet, it's our job to try and keep his mouth in check. Ultimately, we're the ones who end up reading this schlock, after all.

Facetiousness aside, I don't think any of us take him seriously either.

He just makes himself an easy target.



NintyMan said:

If he's going to hit on Nintendo for selling $50 pieces of plastic, then he should hit on Sony and Microsoft too. Will he do that? No.



Malkeor said:

@aaronsullivan: Even though it's been stated countless times that Nintendo's physical media, which also shares Sony's and Microsoft's consoles in this manner, have huge amounts of depth compared to these cheap iOS or Android games.
It may be hard for you to justify a valid and understandable price point for these games, but for the millions who enjoy these games from each of the Big Three...well that's certainly saying something.



Chubbo1793 said:

Obviously, he doesn't know what he's talking about. He hasn't been around as long as Nintendo or have made any quality games that match up to Ninty. Yeah, they've been around for over 100 years, even though they weren't making games in the beginning, but still they have had success in the gaming field. Peter Vesterbacka has no right saying that when he hasn't even made anything as great as Ninty's hardware and software. I don't see any of his games getting praised or becoming a classic in gaming history. Who cares if the games are $50, it's your choice whether or not to buy the games. Seeing how popular the Wii has been over the years and the 3DS hitting records already in less than a week of its release, that shows that Ninty doesn't just sell pieces of plastic, they sell quality.



Chunky_Droid said:

This is after they announce Angry Birds Rio is only going to be on the Amazon Android store, meaning I can't get it anyway. Screw those guys. I'ma gonna play some more Pokemon, it's got actual depth.



Rebel81 said:

updates which enbales free non-skippedable adds in a pais version is the thing we want. That why you get the paid version

(refering too Angry Birds HD)



Birdman said:

Yep, because having legions of fickle people who will only support you until the next "killer app" for the iPhone (if you have the you-know-whats to call Angry Birds a killer app) is so much totally better than having just as (if not more, considering time) dedicated legions of fans who have been dedicated fans for years or decades compared to months.



Corbs said:

I think it still comes down to what YOU think the game is worth. I don't have any problem whatsoever paying .99 for these silly little games that I play for 5 or 10 minutes here and there, but by the same token I also have absolutely no problem paying $40-$50 for a Zelda, Mario, or Metroid title either, especially if it offers the kind of gaming experience I'm looking for.



eirikr said:

I don't think so ... Angry birds is a very simple game , very simple and boring ... I could never compare that software with a Nintendo game ... Please let this developer know that Nintendo 3DS is a full game experience console ... Angry birds is just a bunch of sh** megabytes .



Wheels2050 said:

Ah, the war of words continues.

@lz20XX - he should just come to Australia. He'd get the "pleasure" of paying $68 for Street Fighter IV!

I've got to hand it to Rovio, they've managed to get a game out there and selling well. I can't help but think that it was a huge amount of luck though (considering there's lots of previous games with very similar gameplay) and a matter of the right place at the right time.

Not having played any iPhone games, but plenty of online flash ones, I think that this argument is pointless (from both Nintendo's and app-style developer's points of view). In my experience, the iPhone-style games are fun for a half hour or hour, and then the appeal wears off. A dollar well spent though. I'm sure there's exceptions to this, but there's only so much you can pack into a $1 game and keep it profitable.

Generally, forking out more for a full retail release gives you a much deeper experience. I'm not naive enough to think that all full retail games are great (I've played my fair share that definitely haven't been worth it) but you absolutely couldn't say that none of them offer $50 or so worth of entertainment.



skywake said:

Well I can tell you now that if Nintendo went digital only and started selling Zelda, Mario or Pokemon on online services I would still think they were worth as much as they are currently at retail. We have pretty good retail competition so games tend to sell for about how much they are worth. The RRP is high but prices drop quickly if people aren't interested.

Take Mario Kart DS for example. Awesome game that has been out for years..... but here in Australia it STILL sells for $69AU which should be ridiculous considering most launch games are now slashed to $49 at launch. Hell, Street Fighter 4 3DS sells for $59 at some places! ....... but Mario Kart DS still sells at that price so the price stays there and if the 3DS wasn't out and I was just getting a DS that'd still be the first game I got. Now that's what I call value.



C7_ said:

They need to stop comparing meaningless phone apps to actual game experiences; Angry Birds is something you play on the bus or in an office meeting, 3DS games are something you play BECAUSE you want to have a lot of fun and actually get engrossed and entertained by it. Angry birds a distraction, not a source of lasting entertainment.
Fact of the matter is Retail games will never die to things like angry birds, and this guy should be slapped in the face for comparing the two



Marvelousmoo said:

Physical games are the best. Time to bring back the NES cartridges!
Really, angry birds is run for a quick fix, but other than that, it has no match for the quality of Nintendo's physical games (but not all of Nintendo's games...).



AVahne said:

Yeah, pieces of plastic that I can enjoy for more than 40 seconds before turning off. And pieces of plastic that I can still enjoy years after buying it and not forgetting about it.



Wolfenstein83 said:

No offense to anyone, but I have never played Angry Birds.
It just never seemed appealing to me.
Also, having an actual physical piece of software is kinda nice, especially if you don't like the game, or just want to trade it in for something else.
I don't know of any downloadable games that you could trade back, or sell?
Lord knows there are some WiiWare games I wish I could trade back, but you can't.
I don't understand this trend towards download only content?
I guess it is good for the enviroment or something, or maybe to save shelf room?
From what I hear, the next PSP is going to be download content only, no discs!?
So how am I going to play the old PSP games, do I have to buy them again, and download them?
Back to this subject though, Angry Birds is like a little mini game compared to the high quality games that Nintendo dishes out, people buy that app because it's cheap and anyone can play it.
Not saying that there aren't any good downloadable games, but this mud-slinging from people who make cheap little games is sad and childish.
I have to admit though, I do love Peggle!



AVahne said:

@ 60
I completely agree with you. I remember all those times when I buy a new game for my N64 and even my Gamecube, those feelings always feel great. Even now with my Wii and DSi, I get that great feeling. Whenever I get a downloadable game just doesn't have any feeling at all.



1080ike said:

You get what you pay for. Which would you rather have, a game that costs $1 and only lasts a few minutes, or a game that costs $50 and lasts you anywhere from several weeks to several years (depending on the amount of content)? For shame, Rovio, for shame.



motang said:

He is just arrogant cause his shallow game is the "in thing" at the moment.

So I guess that mean no Angry Birds on the eShop, well then lets have Angry Birdos instead!



Gamesake said:

It's hypocritical for Wii owners to start bashing casual gaming. What's next? Xbots telling me graphics don't matter?

@Scarkaiser When you buy any video game you're not guaranteed or bound to get anything. Metroid: Other M is a prime example of an expensive retail game that only has enough content to last a weekend.
@Rift Good Question. Why don't you go ask these guys?



nick_gc said:

I know I'm in the minority but I just don't get what's so good about Angry Birds. I got bored of it very quickly. Something I don't do with Nintendo games.



LightSamus said:

Yeah? Well Angry Birds is nothing more then Old mechanics with New Sprites and a Touch Screen. Justifying it's pathetic 99c price tag.

Love You Nintendo



Sakura_Moonlight2421 said:

I have Angry Birds. I'm stuck on this one level and I've just stop playing it all together. If it was a physical copy of the game I've would have sold it a long time ago but as its DLC it just takes up space on my iPod.

I don't care how much I have to pay for a physical game I'd be willing to pay anything just to have something that will be meaningful to me. When that feeling has run out I trade it in so someone else can experience the same joy I had with it.

No matter what others say about physical games they have been a part of my life for the last 20 years. Nothing will change my love for physical games no matter how crappy the content may be.



Lotice-Paladin said:

I don't really care what either side thinks....but I am more concerned (well...not really but I guess you should all be as well), is that the companies we know now like Nintendo, Capcom, Konami and SEGA are going to eventually have to shift their employment to the younger, more fresher faces, I mean Miyamoto maybe very successful, but he's almost 60 now and within a few years he may want to retire and Mario will probably never be the same again...same with all of them...Square Enix may get a lot of flak at the moment, but at least they are nurturing the younger employees so they, too..will be making fresher games of Final Fantasy...those of you who hate Angry Birds shouldn't be hating on the turn may turn out to be a company you will look up to once the Dinosaurs in these other companies retire.



jer18 said:

When Rovio releases enough hits as Nintendo did, and making sure to sell them all for 99c, then they can talk . I can't image A little red bird taking off for 20+ years in sequels as an awesome little red plumber.



Rapadash6 said:

Mighty big words from a company who's success is a game that copied another game (Castle Crush) from way back when. Also, yeah, a game like Angry Birds on a cart for $50 WOULD be a rip off but he obviously doesn't realize it cost exponentially way more to produce say, a Zelda game than it does a flash diversion title.



Luffymcduck said:

Hello. I´m from Finland, haven´t played Angry Birds but I´ve played 70 hours of Pokémon White, a game that cost 50 e. And it´s awesome.



baasa said:

dude needs to grow up. he talks as if his game is better cause it is downloadable than a 50 copy of OoT 3D. case closed



Supremeist said:

Angry Birds is an..... okay game.
DEFINITELY not worth the asking price. It should be in the eShop. Don't buy this if the price is too high, they are all 99 cents on the app store and just because of popularity and hype, they are asking this sort of price for it.



SyFyTy said:

giving him that, let's consider (t)his logic... If $50. is too mcuh for a piece of plastic, that what's the suggested retail price/value for nothing (his tangible offer IS nothing...)
(or near nothing, ie code, that you could copy by hand given the time and skills)
I'm, not saying the devs time is worthless, nay in fact its valuable, but price can't be assessed by the tangible makeup of something (anything), the word is "PERCIEVED VALUE" something Nintendo has in spades...and mini games have little of. That is why thier life (over the long haul) will be short. I hope they stay but I'm not betting on it...



LoneWolfSones said:

While mobile games aren't all bad there is certainly a big difference between quality. You get what you pay for. Angry Birds has run the gamut from the original to a Star Wars spin on Angry Birds. Angry Birds simply doesn't compare to a 3DS game like Mario 3D land. And it could also be said that mobile phones themselves are jacks of all trades master of none. Alot of these devices are designed to be multifunctional which is fine. You can browse the internet, make a phone call, text etc. But the majority of games on the app store are in a similar vein as Angry Birds and Candy Crush. Nintendo's handhelds are dedicated gaming platforms. And I highly doubt that a mobile phone would offer the same kind of experiences Ocarina of Time 3D, Mario 3D land, Fire Emblem Awakening offer.



cbkummer said:

I really, REALLY dislike Angry Birds. It barely feels like a game. I guess if you're okay with making low-quality, addictive games instead of full gaming experiences you'd be bitter against anybody who puts time, talent and effort into their games.



bassoongoon said:

This is hilarious coming from the guy that made angry birds. I really do not get why that game is so popular.



katamaris4ever said:

Anyone else kinda see the twinge of irony considering that Angry birds now has a retail release at around 40 bucks? Uh...



Thatguyontheweb said:

If 3ds games are 49$ of plastic, then dosn't that means that angry birds is a big bunch of vars, and code to tap on when your board?



Wii_Win said:

Am I the only one who thinks angry birds is pretty boring? Seriously, if you're going to put an iPhone game on a bunch of merchandise, at least make it a good one like plants vs zombies or something. xD



C7_ said:

"I made a ripoff of old flash games popular by being the first to release it on smart phones and some sheer luck. Better insult people who make real games because I've acquired a fake sense of superiority for making a game that's fun to play in very short bursts"

Also when did Nintendo say smartphones were destroying the games industry? that's not something any rep would come out and say; maybe that it wouldn't be the same as handheld console gaming, but not that the industry is being destroyed.

Leave A Comment

Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...