There's a worrying trend at present, in which ambitious and creative independent developers announce a sizeable Wii U exclusive, and then have to defend their pricing. That's happened twice in recent times with Affordable Space Adventures and - this week - Swords & Soldiers II. We've also had a reliable source in the eShop development community tell us today that, beyond problems with age rating costs in Europe, many developers are struggling to hit 3000 lifetime sales for their eShop games; that's barely enough for the infamous WiiWare sales threshold. Combine these factors and multiple past examples and there's a problem with the eShop that threatens to undermine - in the long term - its diversity and volume of games.
As a key point before this article gets underway, I'll be writing in first-person, breaking the usual Nintendo Life style. It's branded as an 'editorial' as this is more my personal opinion than, for example, a feature I'd produce to represent Nintendo Life. Nintendo Life's official stance is more balanced than my own, perhaps, but I want to really make a point. With that said, let's consider the pricing dilemma of the eShop, those at fault and the dangers it poses.
To reinforce those recent examples cited above, we've seen developers of two Wii U eShop exclusives driven to defend their pricing. When we ran a community interview with KnapNok Games and Nifflas on Affordable Space Adventures the most prominent questions were about the price; in fact, the studio even had to head off the 'it'll be discounted soon' arguments by explicitly stating it will not be reduced in price until Fall at the earliest. We then had Ronimo Games (Swords & Soldiers II) be so moved by the issue that it sent us a statement defending its own pricing.
These games share the same prices - $19.99 / €18.99 / £16.99. That's about a third of a full price retail game in the US, and perhaps about 40% of a retail game in Europe, or half the price of a discount retail game in both regions for Wii U. That's clearly a problem for a number of consumers, but it's also a conundrum with no real answers for developers. In fact, if sales of these games struggle they could act as a warning to other 'Nindies'; we could be kissing goodbye to sizeable eShop exclusives in the future, especially in the home console space.
Paying for creative work is too unfashionable
We're in unprecedented times in media, whether that's books, film, music, newspapers, magazines or video games. The rate of change has been extraordinary; for example, just a decade ago I bought a newspaper every day, and purchased a lot of physical books - as my creaking book shelves testify. Now I very rarely buy a newspaper, I just visit its website, and I spend so much of my time online that books I read are either eBooks or rare 'treats' that I pick up the old fashioned way from a book store.
Like I do when reading my newspaper of choice, you're reading this for free, with the only cost being some adverts that'll occasionally encroach on your screen. Our hunger for free content has taken over our lives and crept into all kinds of media - many stream music for nothing or pay a low monthly price for services, as opposed to actually buying albums. I once setup and ran an eBook business and failed, as my naive goal was for talented new writers to get a modest payment for their work; my inexperience was the killer. Thousands flog their eBooks for next to nothing, and now you can even subscribe to something like Kindle Unlimited to access a whole range of eBooks for $7.99. It's basically Netflix for literature.
The victims here are creators, be in absolutely no doubt of that. Rather than produce a book, film, video game or newspaper and receive a fair one off price from a consumer, the scrabble is over ad revenues, product placements and commissions. The economies of creative industries have changed, and now musicians have to embark on lengthy tours to make money that album sales once did, and even book authors have to earn their crust in public speaking appointments and festivals. It's all about stealth advertising, a life on the road and diminishing returns, and yet many consumers - me included - have the cheek to complain about annoying pop-up ads or excessive product placement in TV shows. As a 'creator' myself in various aspects, I sometimes catch myself and wonder what the hell is wrong with me.
The problem is that video games have more limited options, and often make bad calls in their business practices. Free-to-play mechanics that are manipulative, or offering discounts on games a couple of weeks after release. Yet we are part of that problem, I most certainly am, and we're making creativity increasingly worthless.
Developers and publishers share the blame
I'll break out of consumer bashing for a moment and revert to the eShop stores, and the errors that have been made by multiple publishers and developers that effectively condition our behaviour, as gamers.
First of all, the eShop is rampant with publishers that let their fans down by rapidly discounting games shortly after they've arrived. Most committed Nintendo gamers have at least one example of supporting a game on day one and feeling like a fool when its price is slashed within a month. Some developers are also downright cheeky and use discounts as a bizarre store-front positioning tactic. As I produce two download update summaries a week I see some of the same names with surprising regularity - I often wonder when Atlus doesn't have games on discount, while games like Trine 2: Director's Cut and various titles from Joindots and EnjoyUp Games pop up regularly. These aren't the only offenders and my goal isn't to single them out aggressively, they just spring to mind.
I understand the business logic here - some are manipulating the system to get their games on a 'shelf' regularly through the discounted section. Yet it's a strategy that's damaging, as it's trained eShop gamers to wait and expect - often demand - a quickfire discount. Consumers don't like to feel like fools, and excessive discounting can have that effect.
We also have broader pricing issues. While the Wii and DSi Shop had locked pricing brackets - for better and worse - it's been open season on the eShop. Nintendo's open door policy on content has also had pros and cons: on the plus side we've had a whole range of new developers bring interesting games, but a negative aspect has been some games of undeniably poor quality that should arguably have never made it to the eShop. The issue of quality control has been covered before, but with a focus on pricing we've seen a mix of racing to the bottom and others asking surprisingly high prices for shoddy products.
When you combine factors like these the trust of eShop buyers gets dented, and there's the wider picture as well. Smart devices in particular have made free-to-play and microtransactions a lucrative emerging practice, and these have bled into 'traditional' gaming on consoles. Nintendo is dabbling in both with mixed results, and that also distorts the 'value' of gaming.
With pricing and selling practices in flux, and individual game makers naturally worrying about themselves, we've lost a lot of structure. Gaming used to be simple, with different kinds of games typically having certain price ranges. In the past five years that's all changed, and we get a mess of a marketplace - some are sacrificing the 'value' of their work to try and go viral or achieve mass sales, and others are sticking to their guns and maintaining old-school pricing, deemed to be high pricing by many. Sometimes budget games are right to have a low price - such as Gunman Clive - but not all publishers have enough awareness to maintain a sensible price and value for what they're offering. Pricing across the stores is inconsistent, with rubbish games selling at high prices, gems at budget prices, high quality 'big' games struggling at premium rates, and all sorts of permutations in between.
We, as gamers, share the blame
So, there's been a lot of upheaval and disruption in recent times, but many of the worst practices in game pricing have been driven by us, the consumers. The race to the bottom in pricing wouldn't have happened if the wider market hadn't supported it, and we now have largely negative reactions to pricing that isn't in line with how much we'd spend on a cappuccino. KnapNok Games / Nifflas and Ronimo Games are small businesses that devoted a lot of effort and time into a product, yet when they consider what it's 'worth' the reaction online seems to be "nah, I'll wait for a discount". When did we stop valuing our gaming experiences?
And hands up, I'm part of the problem, I'm a hypocrite. I've bought my share of eShop games at full price to 'support' them, but just this week I uttered the following words in a conversation - "I don't buy anything full price on Steam, everything gets reduced". I can count the number of PSN games I've bought on two hands because I just add PS+ titles to my backlog. Yes, I've been conditioned to do this by Steam and Sony's subscription service, but I've just reinforced these models. I'm a massive contradiction.
I suspect many are, though, and that's what's driven this editorial. I want us to really think about what kind of eShop market we want, and how far we're willing to go to get it. If we want a store of cheap games, slightly sloppy multi-platform ports and constant discounts we should continue our spending habits - I'm referring to the overall userbase, I know some of you aren't following these patterns.
Yet if we want a store with enticing, clever exclusives and a variety of ports that use Nintendo's hardware in interesting ways, then we need to act like it. If a game is $20 and you like the look of it, consider whether you feel the developer deserves to be paid fairly for their work, decide if games have value. It's easy to wait a few months and get something for $10 instead, but even those of us on tight budgets can consciously replace one week's treats with a game at full price. Not everyone has that luxury of extra money that can be saved, it's true, but plenty of us choose to demand our entertainment for free or at low prices, then spend our disposable income on other things.
Games can have value, if we let them
That's our choice though, and we can put our money where our mouth is. That perspective can apply across all sorts of games at varied price ranges; when a developer sets a price, ask yourself - is that price 'fair' and does the creator deserve that trust? If I'd produced a game like this, on my own or in a team with others, would I want others to pay that price? The first question shouldn't be 'when will it be discounted', but 'is this a game I can and want to support at that price?'
Some developers come in too high with pricing, it's case by case, and I've raised my eyebrows at various examples on the eShop. Yet I get frustrated when titles of genuine quality and scope dare to place value on their work and get criticised. My gut instinct is that not all of those criticising the price are asking themselves those questions I've highlighted above, nor have they thought about the consequences of demanding more for less. If creators produce a quality product, we should consider truly supporting it. Behind every game is an individual or team trying to make a living, and the more we devalue their efforts the quicker we drive them away.
Perhaps I'm a hopeless idealist yearning for the days when creators were supported, not simply sources of low-cost or free entertainment. I only hope there are a good number of other hopeless idealists that agree with me.
Please note that some external links on this page are affiliate links, which means if you click them and make a purchase we may receive a small percentage of the sale. Please read our FTC Disclosure for more information.
One more reason to end region locking...
One word, yep! Oh and, 2nd!
Look, the low sales on the eShop are extremely sad, but the problem is primarily the fanbase: Nintendo fans do not support non-Nintendo games.
Nintendo fans have, since the N64 era, been cultivating starkly adversarial relationships concerning all third parties. This is just how this fanbase, overall, operates. For every one Nintendo fan supporting a game, there is seemingly 3 thousand refusing to even pay attention to anything that doesn't have Mario, Link, or Pokemon emblazoned on the front. Remember when you start attacking this post--just because you bought one game, your personal anecdote does not change the reality of the situation, and that the general Nintendo audience is buying in exactly this way to the detriment of Nintendo.
This is basically inarguable at this point. It's a common theme and a problem that has plagued Nintendo since the N64 era. Nintendo fans have a history of not supporting 3rd party games.
This, this is handily the biggest reason the company should just go third party. Even their own dedicated fans only use Nintendo hardware as "Nintendo boxes" instead of "game consoles." It's a losing endeavor and has led to Nintendo following an obvious downward trend in industry relevance and console sales, barring the fad-driven flukes of the Wii and DS, this downward trend continues.
If you aren't buying 3rd party games for the machine, why do you even need the machine? It would be better to have those Nintendo games on other hardware. Then, at least, they would reach way more people.
Nintendo's biggest hurdle to reaching mass audiences is their own hardware.
Nintendo's biggest hurdle to console sales is a combination of their gimmicky nature and their fans spending 4 generations telling third parties to "get bent."
Nintendo fans use the machines as Nintendo boxes first and foremost.
So if Nintendo fans, by and large, do not care about using their consoles as game consoles, then why does it even matter what hardware the games are on?
When Nintendo rakes in the money on mobile, hopefully they too will start to lose interest in hardware development.
Nintendo fans love to pull out the "quality over quantity" argument (despite MS and Sony having both quality AND quantity), yet do they support quality games with their money? No. But they certainly supported the hell out of pure drivel like The Letter and Spikey Walls. This is the bed Nintendo fans have made for the Wii U. It's time to stop complaining when the support continues to dry up.
This article has a good point, that many developers, like Atlus and Rcmadiax, have grossly abused the system by repeatedly putting their games up for sale, but the biggest problem is consumers. Consumer behavior drives developer behavior. And if consumers aren't supporting the games, the developers will go elsewhere.
Just wanted to say Shin Megami Tensei 4 is one of the best JRPG on 3DS and the artstyle of demons' sprites is fantastic. Only a fool would miss this game.
But yeah, the eshop is very competitive and our wallets are limited. It's capitalism. Not everyone can win.
Monster Hunter 4 Ultimate is the best selling Monster Hunter game in the west. Yes it sold more in the west than any psp episode despite the 3DS market being much smaller than the psp. Nintendo fans support third parties when they reach Nintendo quality. Stop with your console war propaganda.
I have a hard time spending any money on something that I wouldn't be able to "flip" later on. Why spend a ton of money on virtual games that lose 100% of their monetary value after you purchase them? I'd rather have physical copies that I can sell or trade to a friend after I've gotten my use out of them.
A few thoughts:
1. Supply and demand.
2. Supply and demand.
3. Gamers don't understand basic economics.
4. Supply and demand.
Thank you for your time.
The film industry isn't a good comparison for the games industry. Movie studios have multiple revenue streams for one film: box office, DVD et al release and HBO/Netflix/broadcast deals.
The music industry has also gone through its pains when CD sales were falling and pirating was much more rampant. Then Apple came along with its revolutionary iTunes service and created a viable and profitable revenue stream for record labels and themselves while crafting a fair service for consumers.
As far as games devs get paid once and pricing will always be a tough proposition. Nintendo gets criticized for not slashing prices on games but they practice what the article writer seems to advocating in that the think their product is worth a certain price. I do take some issue with VC pricing on SNES/NES/GBA games but that's a different issue.
@bitleman asking quorthon to stop with his anti-nintendo tirade is a bit like asking some of the third parties he seems to adore to cut down on rip-off DLC. It's going to have exactly the same effect...or should I say non-effect.
That said, Monster Hunter is a very good example. It's a shame others will ignore it, or attempt to downplay it to push through their agendas
@BLPs Good points. This is a big reason why I never buy Ubisoft titles day one. They always slash their prices 50% or more shortly after release.
I comment frequently on how ridiculous it is to buy retail Wii U and 3DS games as digital downloads, especially in the UK as physical stores and online retailers charge much less than the 'RRP' that Nintendo charges, so you often end up having pre-orders be less than HALF the price of what Nintendo charges. Considering the fact that that half the cost of a physical product is probably just recouping manufacturing and distribution, the profit margins must be so much ridiculously higher for digital copies.
So with that said... I don't think I've actually had any problems with the pricing of eShop only games. I think SMT IV is fantastic value even without the frequent discounts it gets. It would be nice to see more frequent sales, but that's just to have a chance to try new things I'd never have bought anyway at full price. Dual Destinies is another great game that's easily worth the price they ask. What's said is how many comments I see on here from people that refuse to buy digital, because they like to look at a box on their shelf. That's right. The same people that say Playstation or Microsoft owners care more about graphics than gameplay, actually themselves care about a plastic box more than gameplay.
You could bother being an adult and reading my actual point, and bother to learn that one success means little against dozens of failures. That's like congratulating a guy for winning a marathon, when the 200 people who would've finished ahead of him were all killed by the people on the sidelines.
Quit having an emotional connection to Nintendo and face reality.
Maybe they should make there games better, no one is going to pay that much for a glorified flash game, Look at shovel knight and than look at swords and soldiers 2, which one would you spend 20 bucks on? And no offense to Ronimo Games but i wouldn't play there game if it was free.
Having said all that, i am under the impression that indie games sell, and play better on the 3ds. So I think the article said it better right at the top, dont make wii u exclusives, Unless you are Nintendo, of course.
@darkgamer001 IKR? Someone acts like there are never discounts on games on every other platform as well, steam being a good example.
"Nintendo fans support third parties when they reach Nintendo quality."
Monster Hunter is very much an exception to the rule and not the rule itself. What other third party games have sold well on any Nintendo system (outside of Just Dance or Infinity/Skylanders)? Shovel Knight did well, but that also was promoted heavily and spotlighted by Nintendo in the eShop and other places. Most third party titles get ignored and never sell well. Nintendo fans don't even really support new First Party IPs - look at the low/terrible sales for The Wonderful 101 and Code Name Steam!
Its a tough cycle because why would a third party put a ton of effort and resources into a game for a console that has an established history of not supporting them?
@Quorthon You're post seems to assume third party games arent garbage in comparison to Nintendo games
Excellent article. If you guys want an additional scope on the budget framework for even SMALL games, check out Katie Chironis's article on how we are often misled regarding what it takes to make a game:
It's not so much pricing that discourages me from a lot of eshop games, but I very rarely find anything I like. On Club Nintendo last year, it said I went six months without buying a single digital game, and even now all I really buy is M2 Sega classics. Very little interests me.
@SirQuincealot...to be fair, you should avoid generalizations like that. There are a number of high quality third party games, even when compared to Nintendo games.
The Wii and DS were flukes, and the evidence is in the Wii U and 3DS--not only aren't they remotely close to the sales of their predecessors, they aren't even catching up to the previously worst selling Nintendo hardware.
Nintendo has been on a downward slide for generations, and this has been pointed out by more than just me.
NES: 61.91 million
SNES: 49.10 million
N64: 32.93 million
GC: 21.74 million
Wii: 101.52 million
Wii U: 9.5 million (that is less than the Dreamcast over a longer period of time)
GB/GBC: 118.69 million
GBA/SP/Micro: 81.51 million
DS/Lite/DSi: 154.01 million
3DS/2DS/New: 52.06 million (and this is in the same amount of time as the GBA line was relevant)
Unless you have no understanding at all of statistics, the Wii and DS lines are clearly statistical anomalies, they are flukes outside of the curve. It's even more telling that immediately after the Wii and DS lines ended, their successors perfectly fell back into place on this pattern.
To even pretend they weren't flukes/fads is massively absurd.
Value is important. The value (quality- wise) of games on the e-shop are generally lower than the quality of games on basically every other service. Every other service tends to give more for less money. As a consumer, every other service gives me better games for less money (specifically PSN). I like Nintendo and the third party games available on their consoles, but the difference in quality is stark and very noticeable.
That comment is the definition of fanboyism and possibly deliberately ignorant. Your personal preference has nothing to do with quality.
One of the few times I agree with @Quorthon. Terrible eShop titles from Nintendo (such as Dr. Luigi) and VC titles that have aged extremely bad (such as the DKC 1-3) sells MUCH more than any excellent indie game can dream of.
And it's hilarious that Monster Hunter 4 is an example of 3rd party that sells well. Nintendo has promoted Monster Hunter 4 a LOT (for example in the Nintendo Directs) in all regions, and Nintendo publishes MH4 in the NoE region.
Countless indie games on PSN are $20.
Yeah, Monster Hunter 4 was a rare case of Nintendo actively supporting a 3rd party game. Something they didn't even do for Bayonetta, and I doubt they'll do for Devil's Third.
I bought Affordable Space Adventures and the latest Shantae game without thinking twice about it. If S&S2 was my type of game (it is not), I'd do the same there. I just can't see what the issue is. If it is a game that you know that you'll enjoy for hours upon end then you either need to pony up or find a cheaper hobby. Maybe rock collecting?
@Quorthon The difference is monster hunter evolves as you play it, bayonetta is a brawler, people who like the genre will play it, its pretty niche. And Devils third, in what world would nintendo heavily market a super violent first person shooter (with really generic gameplay most likely). Now whose being deliberately ignorant.
first of all we need to end the equivalent (ESRB) in Europe, they should be run exclusively by industry groups, not government, government always makes things needlessly bureaucratic and costly.
also note that I don't think any cell phone games have to play by the same rules.
I love when trolls take data out of context to try to make their point. The LOLZ are great.
Nintendo didn't support Bayonetta 2? They only put up the money to get it finished when Sega bailed. Wow, just wow.
@darkgamer001 Yeah, there are exceptions, but it seems 3rd party developers (especially on nintendo consoles) like the swords and soldiers people go for art over gameplay, or in the case of Affordable space adventure, atmosphere.
Its like Yoshis Island and Yoshis story, they both went for new art styles, but one forgot to put in fun gameplay, ones a classic the others forgotten
Anything from Atlus sells very well and the multiple discounts seems to work well for the company otherwise they would not do them as often.
Thats a nice list
That is a completely nonsensical post. Monster Hunter sold because Nintendo actively worked to make it appeal to the fans.
@jariw "VC titles that have aged extremely bad" There's no facts about whether a VC title has aged bad or not, it's all opinions. Same as whether an indie game is excellent or not. The fact there's no right or wrong answer is why the situation described in the article exists.
And then what did they do to promote it? How often did you see it advertised on TV? How many Wii U consoles came bundled with it? Did they make a big deal out of it's release with an eye-catching special edition or anything of that nature?
Nintendo paid for the game, and then failed to put up the money to promote it.
A great editorial Thomas! Very well written and you made some good points. Let us hope it will convince people to stop being so greedy. I know it convinced me so thanks for that.
Excellent article @ThomasBW84 It's disappointing that so many of your points even need to be made, particularly on a website supposedly frequented by some of the very people you would expect to cherish games, and their creators, the most dearly.
C'mon people: I may go to a pub on Friday, have two or three drinks then have something to eat after. I arrive home having spent more than I spent on affordable space adventures - one of the most exquisitely designed games I've ever played and an experience I don't think I'll ever forget. I'm sure the vast majority of you could say something similar regarding your spending habits. We all need to fix up.
@Quorthon Please just stop. You are making a fool of yourself.
Atlus is a funny case because several of their 3DS games are worth $10 more than the normal 3DS game. So they start charging a lot and then do sales, not always of the same games.
I may not be the only one who played through a great indie game like Steamworld Dig, Armillo, Scram Kitty or Gunman Clive and said "I wish it was more expensive so I can support the dev with more money". At least I try to do word of mouth so other people try them.
I don't mind paying "a lot" if I feel I will like the game. But impulse purchasing a game I may not like nor play just to support a dev won't happen for $20.
Thought I was done w/ this yesterday, but a few things caught my attention.
1. "The name Affordable Space Adventures isn't supposed to reflect pricing policy"
"We, as gamers, share the blame"
Oh come on, anybody who knows niflas' reputation knows he probably did that ON PURPOSE. Call the game "affordable" and then come out w/ the top price on eShop along w/ "Shantae" and "Swapper" to create some controversy, b/c all news is good news. . And even if it wasn't on purpose, you still can't blame consumers for having that reaction. It was the top eShop price w/ "affordable"" in the tile. If anything consumers should be commended for paying attention.
2. "downright cheeky and use discounts as a bizarre store-front positioning tactic."
"some are manipulating the system to get their games on a 'shelf' regularly through the discounted section"
What the frak? What is "cheeky" and "manipualting" about working w/in the system? "Sales" have been a standard business practice since well, probably forever. White sale, fire sale, Black Friday actually IS a national holiday in the US. Cyber Monday. I get the newspaper delivered for $20 per month. Every Thursday and Sunday it is FULL of store flyers w/ thousands of items. Probably 1% of those items are NOT on sale. I went food (grocery) shopping yesterday and spent $152, but I saved $106 as nearly every item was on sale. Coupons are practically a life unto themselves. Putting an item you want to sell on sale is what any good business SHOULD do. Not putting something on sale you want to sell is what's wrong. Wii U for example.
This whole article almost reads upside down. More games on eShop are good, at any price. Things do drop in price over time b/c their value does diminish. Should FIFA 12 have the same prices a FIFA 15? Why look at the movie and music industry, how about the fashion industry? The entire fashion industry is based on yearly obsolesce, hence the growth of "outlet malls". (That might be a US only thing.)
S&S2 and ASA got called out on price b/c they were going above and beyond what we as consumers perceive to the the norm. It has nothig nat all to do w/ the race to the bottom or sales. If a retail disc came out at $70 people would complain. Everybody complained when HD games jumped to $60 from $50, but it was a unified front, hard to fight that. Ronimo and nifflas are on the front battle lines of rising prices, so of course they are being attacked, that's what front lines are for. Maybe in a year or 2 there will be a lot of $20 eShop games an nobody will think anything of it. But consumers will always complain about rising prices. Always.
@Quorthon Being a big Nintendo fan myself, I can tell you that the reason I rarely buy games not released by Nintendo on Nintendo systems. They are usually either lazy ports or simply bad games. The exceptions to that rule, like Shovel Knight and Monster Hunter 4 Ultimate sold very well on Nintendo systems.
@Quorthon I have a lot of qualms with your logic, and I think blaming this on "Nintendo gamers" as an entity is entirely absurd.
You fail to acknowledge important details, such as the extremely poor quality of third-party ports to Nintendo hardware, or the general difference in taste between each console's audience.
You can't expect COD to sell to as large a percentage on Nintendo games as they do to Microsoft gamers, because the Xbox brand was built mainly upon first-person shooters. By the same token, Rayman will never sell as comparatively well on Xbox as it does on Nintendo consoles, as Nintendo has always been a haven to fans of platforming. Wanna bet which platform will see the largest sales for Yooka-Laylee?
The sad thing is: due to a cultural focus on testosterone-flaunting in every media imagineable, it just so happens that COD is what the "mainstream" gamer will want. Fine by me, as long as there are options. A Nintendo console, for me, is where I'll find more of the kinds of gameplay I crave, even if they're not what teenage boys deem as cool these days.
What this also means is that, in this era of ever-escalating costs, large third-parties such as Ubisoft or Activision will keep the vast majority of their catalogue dedicated to what the mainstream wants. This is a problem to the "outlier" with a different kind of console and different kind of focus as far as gameplay and mood goes, which these days is obviously Nintendo.
What I mean is: it's a complex chain of events which led to this situation. It's not as simple as "Nintendo fans, GO BUY THIRD PARTY GAMES", when those third-party games aren't the kind of experiences that fanbase wants in the first place.
Of course, this is an article about the e-Shop, and there we have a different panorama with different problems. I'm just sick and tired of people spewing the fallacy that "Nintendo gamers don't buy third party games" as if it were hard, innate fact, rather than a very complex situation that you can't really assess without taking a long, hard look at the history of pop culture itself and the way it's been shaped over the years.
I'm terrified my game will be priced wrong and will sell badly. I'm aiming for a £5/$6 price tag, with 6 worlds and about 10 levels each.
@Quorthon Everybody passed on Bayonetta 2. Theres a reason its not on Xbox, if anything you've brought up a good point how Nintendo supported a game when no one else would.
It all comes down to value for money for me. I support people charging more for quality or it gives me a decent value. It doesn't help that retail games are so aggressively priced, I got Arkam city for £6 and that has given me hours!! so for so to pay more for a non physical game I can't trade would be hard if it wouldn't last long or be fun enough to justify the cost.
I don't know about that. Opinion and personal taste will always be a factor, that's true. But there are also universal "norms" in gaming that can follow whether or not a game has aged poorly.
The original Super Mario Bros has aged well because the control is solid and the gameplay still works. Today, platformers still play in similar manners to this original game. There's been some evolution and improvement, but for the most part, it has aged well.
Donkey Kong Country games, on the other hand, were very much a "graphics over gameplay" title back in the day, and the way the games are played has not only arguably aged poorly, but they've been topped in recent years by titles like Rayman Origins/Legends. The DKC games feature shallow gameplay. Personally, I think that entire franchise has aged poorly and felt Tropical Freeze was a painful slog that felt archaic across the board after the beautiful control and smooth use of the Origins/Legends titles.
Urban Champion is also another turd that has aged ludicrously poorly--but Nintendo still seems intent on churning it out as much as they can.
Compared to modern gaming standards, there can be a pretty solid consensus made on which game have aged poorly or well, within a margin of error for personal taste. Some people like DKC games.
@rjejr I'm sorry, I often agree with your posts on here, but, in my opinion, anyone who thought the title 'affordable space adventures' was some indicator of price and subsequently became angry/indignant upon hearing about the premium price is an absolute idiot - a complete moron, utterly beyond help.
I ask myself these questione, buy a lot of games happy to support the developers, but would we be honest with S&S II? The new features don't justify the doubled price, at least for what I've seen so far. The game hasn't even online multiplayer while I'm pretty sure I played some online battles in the first one steam version.
Ronimo dropped the price a lot of times and went on every platform?
Yes, please let's not forget iOS store gave this game away for FREE, they jumped in some humble indie bundle sweet party of these, because this was convenient. If they have produced S&S II it's because the first one went well.
The same is gonna happen here, go on every existing Platform, go HIB, Steam sales and PS+.
I liked the first one but I just don't need this now, but I can tell you for sure Thomas, for 10€ it'd have been a insta DL just for supporting them, try the game, maybe master it before my backlog, but 19€ there's no way I'm doing this, I'll definitely wait for a sale.
Developers Will go away from eShop this way?
Not my problem, not my fault, and i don't care since I'm a videogamer and own multiple platforms, never risking to fall short of good games to play.
Its not just consumers at fault, consumers are on a budget and i wont buy a game on impulse for more than £10. Also, due to the now massive indie market, and all the competition it is now indies holding other indies back, in the end there is TOO much competition and that sends prices into the dirt, in the same way there are too many books for new authors to get noticed.
@ricklongo I honestly think Wii U will be one of the worst selling versions of Yooka-Laylee. Why you ask? Simple, Nintendo will announce the NX far before the game's launch and if it turns out to be a 2016 release then the game's sales will be poor.
@sinalefa - ninja'd me again. I should probably stop typing such long posts.
And I've been considering Scram Kitty since it looks like they "nerfed" it, though maybe that is just the PS3 version? armillo was a good purchase in case I never let you know I did buy it a while back on your recommendation. .
Perhaps opening up development would be good. Not in a silly, 'open the floodgates', Steam Greenlight opening, but a way to develop games on any given system. However, they would need to sandbox the programs.
I see people blaming third party ports as being bad. What many people tend to forget that the first round of games at launch were very good - with system specific effort put into them. Zombi U and Batman Arkham City: Armored Edition are a couple examples. One of which may have been a late port, but it was a fully focused effort to exploit and used all facets of the console.
But when those sold poorly, third parties began to see the trend of anything not made by Nintendo selling bad, and lost interest in the system. Then its easy to blame them for putting out lazy ports and selling badly.
The Wii U probably had around the highest number of third party games at launch than any Nintendo console... Nintendo's focus at E3 2011 was mainly on third party games. So to say third party games don't sell well because they don't put the effort into them may be true now, but it never starts out that way.
I think the digital nature of these games has a big part of why these games price points are criticised, I admit I have a great difficulty justifying buying any digital download game for any more than £10 as I am on a budget (I will on occasions but only when its a game series with a proven track record like Phoenix Wright), which is strange as if I saw these games as physical objects sitting on a shelf in a physical store at the same price I would likely see it as a bargain. I prefer physical media and hold it at higher value than digital only content, even if the content is the same. Simply for some reason I (rightly or wrongly) see more value in holding something physical than digital. Other stores like Steam also have there part on this issue as that service that is constantly holding sales and selling digital content for low prices, are they causing gamers to expect more for less or simply catering to a demand? Are consumers expectations unreasonable and should they change them to support game developers, or do these developers have to simply adapt to the market? Sometimes selling games cheaper can mean more sales so you make more money overall...
What reason is there to acknowledge the bizarre different taste of Nintendo's audience? Their tastes are predominantly for games that look like Saturday Morning Cartoons, so what? That still shows Nintendo fans themselves as wholly different and still part of the problem concerning the sales of 3rd party games.
You accuse Ubisoft or Activision of "doing what the majority want" and are apparently completely ignoring that Nintendo does exactly that. Nintendo knows that their fans will rebuy hardware--which is why they sold the New 3DS without a charger. They know their fans will rebuy literally anything with Link on the cover which is why they released an absurd three Zelda remakes in four years for full price.
You are doing an excellent job of illustrating the adversarial relationship Nintendo fans have toward third parties. Even when they have substantial quality or special Nintendo-exclusive features (Rayman Legends, ZombiU, Mass Effect 3, Arkham City, Need for Speed, etc.), Nintendo fans ignore them. And before you try to truck out the tired old cliche of "well, we don't want ports," remember that Nintendo fans had no problem supporting the hell out of ports of Zelda games and that consumers on other hardware get this same treatment during the first year of their consoles, and they still bought the games.
@Quorthon A lot of indie games are included in Playstation Plus for free, especially on PS4. Many bloggers complained in the past about how basically ALL indie games were ending up on Plus (hyperbole, but true to an extent. Most of the value I put into the services rest in their respective virtual consoles. Nintendo has a good virtual console, but it doesn't support it as well as it should. The same can be said for PSN, but its catalog is a bit more robust. Nintendo wins as far as backwards support is concerned (no PS3 support on PS4), and HD remasters tend to be a tad pricy.
PSN wins the Discount category though. I can still remember when the eshop first started offering discounts (not long ago). With PS+, there are A LOT of discount frequently. The Flash sales (especially the $1 ones) are amazing. Nintendo and its eshop tend to only have discounts for 3 party titles (many of questionable game quality).
Sorry to gush. I like Nintendo's eshop, but it has been a tad lackluster by comparison. Don't have much of a problem buying indie titles IF they are good (bought Shovel Knight and Azure Striker Gunvolt Day 1). FYI, only have a nn3dsxl (no wiiU).
My problem is with digital content in general. Has nothing to do with eShop, PSN, XBLA, Steam, whatever. I simply don't like spending large amounts of money on intangible objects. Not to mention I don't like the idea of having to spend money on more memory as well (be it a harddrive or bigger SD card, whatever).
Obviously you get the same content, but I don't like the idea of buying a game at a higher price that I can't return/resell if I don't enjoy it or if it is locked to my system with no guarantee that I can move it if something happens to my system.
For example, my Wii broke arbitrarily (literally, did nothing and always took care of it, but it stopped showing anything on the screen one day) before LostWinds was finally fixed and movable to Wii U's Wii Mode. That game is now trapped on a broken Wii. Unplayable, unsellable.
My 360 RROD'd and I have tons of XBLA games on it that I can't play now, and I can't sell them or return them. I need a new 360. Granted, I CAN move the games over, but I can't move them to an Xbox One. There's also a game that I can't play at all, despite paying for, because it was taken off the marketplace (so I couldn't even RE-buy it) and when I bought it back when I first got the 360, it did something weird where apparently I don't actually own it, and Microsoft wouldn't help me.
So unless I can guarantee I won't be screwed over, I'm not that down with paying more than $10 for most eShop titles. Especially since $15-20 (or more) is a bit much in the event you don't actually like the game and you're just stuck with it.
There's also the fact that the eShop is, and always will be, competing for my money that is likely being spent on retail games or, you know, things far more important than playing games. It's unfortunate, but that's how it has to be.
You seem to be confusing "support" with something else. They absolutely helped Bayonetta 2 to get made, but what did they do afterwards? They briefly promoted it and moved right on to promoting their Mario/Zelda/Pokemon/SSB stuff that sells without even needing promotion. Bayonetta 2 came and went.
Compare the way they promoted Bayonetta with how they're promoting Splatoon right now, and how they promoted SSB4.
I don't even know what the hell your point is at this point. Bringing up Bayonetta 2 only further supports my original point that Nintendo fans do not support 3rd party as even when Nintendo pays for the game, the fans don't buy it, especially when Nintendo doesn't do anything to support it after launch.
Monster Hunter is a lame argument no matter what as it is a lone duck, a stand-alone. A fluke compared to the norm. One 3rd party game selling well means nothing when 50 or 100 third party games are completely ignored.
@MoldyClay87 Bayo 2 actually had TV commercials and they did some promotional thing with Playboy as well. Was it enough? Who knows, it sold ~600k units now and I don't know what their internal projections were for it. I would say Nintendo as a whole doesn't do great marketing but it seems they have stepped it up with Splatoon at least.
Sadly when a few companies try to take advantage of consumers it destroys the trust. Then consumers won't be willing to give another company a chance on high priced items, even when those items are good quality. People claim they want an open market, to make it easier for indies and others to create and sell games but they don't want to take the responsibility to actually support those indies that try. People, don't wait for sales. If you have the money and are interested in a game then buy it. Waiting for sales just shows that the company should make smaller cheaper games and it is a downward spiral.
Also surprised the article didn't bring up Shantae and the Pirates Curse
@luke88 - Fair enough. I still blame this game - A Space Shooter for $2 - for giving people that impression. And the world is full of loud compaling idiots. Begs the question though, if nifflas had done it on purpose to gather attention to the game, are people still idiots?
I find myself halfway agreeing with this piece, and halfway stuck on the fact that "value" is defined precisely by what people are willing to pay.
@Quorthon , @MoldyClay87 Please to tell how you would advertise an M rated game about a stripper? How many parents will buy there kid that game?
The fact that it got made and is still currently playable on the console is the Nintendo support. Who care if no one but you buys it?
@Quorthon If other companies put the time and money that capcom put into monster hunter, i think they would sell well. But they dont.
This stuff has bothered me for a while as I am apparently in the extreme minority of Nintendo fans--I don't have a spiteful, adversarial relationship with 3rd parties or indies, and have historically bought Nintendo hardware as a game console, not a Nintendo box.
I supported Shovel Knight on Kickstarter for the Wii U. And Cloudberry Kingdom. And Shantae--which I will probably now take for the PS4. And Hex Heroes. I really like the PSN shop, and my occasional disappointments will be stemmed by time, as the PS4 is only a year and a half old. Thankfully, I do have the PS4, so while Nintendo fans are busy driving away 3rd parties and indies, I will be able to find their games on there.
I'm not too concerned about all the indies ending up on PSN+ freebies just yet. It will change over time, and many of them are really good games. I have still purchased several others.
Affordable Space Adventures. With name like that and nobody believes it to cost more than few euros at max. I was interested about that game before release.
Man I wish I could comment, but money isn't exactly something I have very much of for games right now...
I can say one thing though: I'm sick of Steam and the way it makes me buy a ton of games that I hardly care about because its on some super sale. I'm pretty much done with Steam, that service can be a bunch of baloney.
@Quorthon - "Something they didn't even do for Bayonetta"
Actaully I thought they did support Bayoentta 2. They must have at least partly funded it as an exclusive. They had a Nitnedo Direct for it, w/ a demo on home consoles right after - no going to Best Buy at a set time. They had the 1st game remastered and released. even including some Nintneod costumes for Cereza.
Heck, I'd say it could be argued they supported Bayonetta 2 more than they do some of their own games even. I don't think Pikmin 3 had much more support than that.
Sure they didn't support it as much as Sony did Destiny, but comparing Ntinedo's support of Bayeontta to their support of other Wii U games I'd say it at least got some.
The question you're asking is absurd. You are automatically saying that parents should be buying Bayonetta for their kids. So what are you saying? That Nintendo is a kiddie console?
Your other comment is pure hyperbole. Lots of companies have put ample effort into their games and gotten nothing out of it on Nintendo consoles. Deus Ex was the ultimate edition. Mass Effect and Arkham City had exclusive features. Ninja Gaiden 3 was the highest rated version of the game, remastered in some elements. ZombiU was an exclusive built specifically for the Wii U. Rayman Legends was also heavily built around the aesthetics of the Wii U. None of them sold.
Monster Hunter sold because Nintendo has partially worked with Capcom to create a fanbase for the game, and in large part because Nintendo worked to build hype for it. What, do you expect every third party game to somehow have Nintendo Directs focused just on them? You expect every 3rd party game to have special edition Nintendo hardware like Monster Hunter did?
You are grossly over-simplifying and your argument is completely and totally faulty. You keep saying "Monster Hunter sold because Capcom worked hard." Lots of developers worked hard and got nothing. It has nothing to do with that. Nintendo fans don't care about quality, they care about Nintendo hype and no doubt, being able to dress your Monster Hunter character as Link or Samus helped sell several copies.
Otherwise known as the Soulcalibur II effect, if you will. Shoehorn in some "Nintendo stuff," and maybe it'll sell. Shoehorn in some Link, and it will. And that's why Hyrule Warriors exists.
I'll clarify: Nintendo funded development of Bayonetta 2 and featured it strongly in Directs and at E3, but post-launch did virtually nothing to support it as it led into a busy holiday season. Television ads barely existed, if they did at all--I never saw one, personally. Post-launch bundles with Wii U consoles didn't happen. It was never front and center.
Nintendo basically paid to have the game made, and then just stopped caring about its existence after launch. And the sales reflect this.
@Quorthon I'm not accusing Ubisoft and Activision of anything. I was just acknowledging their line of thinking. I never once said it was "wrong" of them, I only said it was unfortunate for Nintendo.
You're also misrepresenting facts - Rayman Legends sold better on Wii U than Playstation 3 and Xbox 360, in HARD NUMBERS. When you take install base into account, it's not even a contest. ZombiU, by Ubisoft's own admission, sold well for a launch title - the problem, again, being the escalating development costs for realistic titles, which makes it pretty hard to justify a sequel that, due to how that game plays, would pretty much have to be an exclusive.
You speak of old tired clichés (one I didn't use, by the way; I talked specifically about BADLY OPTIMIZED ports), yet spew one of the most overused fallacies in the industry, in bold letters, during large chunks of your comments. It seems you really don't want an answer to that, because then you even ask why tastes enter in consideration when it comes to a specific audience buying third-party games or not.
The point I get from your posts is that you just don't like Nintendo games, never did, never will. Which is absolutely fine. I just don't get why you insist on spewing out your (mostly unwarranted and overdramatic) vitriol on a Nintendo site when that's the case. I love having discussions about stuff like that, including with people who don't necessarily enjoy the same games I do, but most of what you write is just one-sided, arrogant, know-it-all drivel.
As for your pandering "Saturday Morning Cartoon" comment... not everyone needs blood and gore everywhere to validate themselves as an adult, but I'm pretty sure you know that deep down already.
Posing this as a solution: Should nintendo put their likeness and characters into 3rd party games, to drive 3rd party support similar to hyrule warriors?
i.e. let EA have access to nintendo characters and world for their sports games?
the next Need For Speed is a cross over of F-zero or things of this fashion?
Just an idea, what if the next nintendo system is just that a system with games always featuring nintendo in one way or another. Instead of going 3rd party, let the 3rd parties be Nintendo.
I think the issue is quality control though.
@Quorthon When I was a kid, I didn't think of a system as a Nintendo box or a games console. It was always a games console. I treated my N64, GC, and Wii as games consoles. After picking up the PS3, I realized the distinction between a Nintendo box and a games console. For the last 10 years or so, the Nintendo console has essentially been a Nintendo box (filled with Nintendo games and not much else). Third party support has been awful on Nintendo home consoles for a while. The support is much better on Nintendo's handhelds, hence why I have a 3dsxl but not a WiiU. The other home consoles have had far better third party support, so I've stuck with them as the home games console.
Regardless of your feelings about Ubisoft (smartly) taking Legends multiplatform, the game is still solid and arguably my favorite Wii U game, now that I really think about it. My son and I spent hours charging through those often brutal, but addicting levels and the game loaded, ran, and flowed with such smoothness and grace, I consider it the pinnacle of the modern platformer.
A couple months ago, I get DKC Tropical Freeze as my final Platinum reward. And it sucks. The design, especially for two-player, feels downright archaic. Instead of quickly restarting after a screw-up (like Rayman), it feels like a waiting room. Donkey Kong does not move with anything resembling grace, and it feels like he needs to be forced to merely move forward. It's still crammed with outdated "collectathon" themes with levels stuffed with crap to collect that, ugh, I just don't have the patience for. Bad enough Alan Wake had that stupid "find 100 thermoses" sub-sub-sub objective for just an achievement (gave up on them), but DKC is made entirely of this stuff. In half an hour, my son and I would blast through several levels in Rayman and be inspired to keep going. In that same time, we barely got through three levels in Tropical Freeze and we forced ourselves to continue with the third one.
I say this with all confidence: I hate Donkey Kong Country.
And the original on the SNES was the first game I ever pre-ordered.
@rjejr ha, yes, I think I agree with your thoughts on the world unfortunately. I'm not sure what I think about your point but the title is a reflection of a recurring them throughout the game. This has been, and was, (I think?) stated by both knapnok and nifflas. if they've explained the reasoning behind naming the game as they did, and we believe them, then your scenario is just a hypothetical?
There was a Nintendo Direct on September 4, 2014 for Bayonetta 2. It was around 30 minutes long and was followed by a 30 minute treehouse session as well. I bought Bayonetta 2 after seeing the details presented on the direct.
I buy games that I want to play. Whether or not they are 1st party or 3rd party does not effect my decisions. I bought Rayman for the Wii U because we love platformers. I also recently picked MH4U over Code Name Steam & Xenoblade. On the other end of the spectrum, I chose Fire Emblem over Bravely Default. Did I do something wrong when I purchased Fire Emblem over Bravely Default? I can't support every single game. Like most people, I have a budget that drives how much money I can spend on video games. I also have limited time set aside for gaming in general. Is it wrong to buy what I know I'm going to play & like? Is it wrong to buy games on sale? I've bought many many Xbox Arcade games after they went on sale.
And sadly for Nintendo, this has become a norm. I no longer look at Nintendo as a place where I can get a lot of games. I look at Nintendo as a place that will have Nintendo games, and I even find my tastes in those waning. I found Mario Kart 8 boring and predictable. Same with Smash. Same with Pikmin (coupled with terrible control options). Same with New Super Mario U. But I loved the hell out of Bayonetta and ZombiU. Alas, when NX rolls around, I will likely be one of the lapsed Nintendo fans.
These consoles are a lot of money for such small libraries.
Products and services are worth whatever the market is willing to pay.
@Quorthon you hate all DKC? You like the SNES trilogy, right?
Short answer: Yes.
Nintendo should farm out their franchises to other developers--more and more other developers, both to make crossovers and original games. There is no guarantee of quality in anything. Even Nintendo has released a huge number of lackluster or poorly-reviewed games over the years. Nintendo's stubbornness is a bigger problem. F-Zero GX is notable in this as it was extremely highly reviewed and loved, but apparently Miyamoto and Nintendo hated it. And if Nintendo doesn't like something, they don't do much to support it, even if they paid for it.
When I was a teenager, I loved the original Donkey Kong Country, but never bought the sequels until I downloaded them for my ex-wife on the Wii. And then I realized I didn't like them.
Then I bought DKCR on the 3DS. And hated it. Downloaded DKC:TF. And hated it.
This is not the only time this has happened. I also completely played through three God of War games before I realized I hated them.
I think Retro's talent is wasted on Donkey Kong.
@rjejr The release date was pretty much what doomed Bayonetta 2. "Should I buy this awesome looking game or save my money for 3 weeks when Smash and amiibo are released of which the latter I expect to be rare?" I believe that Bayonetta 2 would've sold well if it was released during the 4 month game drought between Mario Kart 8 and Hyrule Warriors, July would've been perfect.
@TheRegginator There's nothing wrong with buying stuff on sale. Most people have a budget.
@Quorthon - "Nintendo basically paid to have the game made, and then just stopped caring about its existence after launch. And the sales reflect this."
But usually they stop caring about their games both before and after launch, so at least B2 had before. Before Splatoon I was seriously doubting Nintnedo even had a marketing department.
And I don't think a bundle was ever going to happen for B2, they didn't even bundle SSBU, they bundled MK8 instead, a 5 month old game. Still not sure how that happened. They should have really had a Hyrule Warriros bundle though, that was a Zelda game spin-off.
If you're going to pull a fallacy to just completely dismiss my points entirely--by pretending I never liked Nintendo games, which, aside from DKC or Pokemon, I have never actually said--then your responses are entirely useless.
You want to point out badly optimized ports--well that's special pleading. Nintendo fans like to argue that "if they were quality, they would have sold," which is why I pick the quality ports, and point out that they also didn't sell.
When you want to complain about bad ports, you need to keep in mind that bad ports happen everywhere, but when they happen to Nintendo consoles specifically, you need to remember that
A) this fanbase has proven that they do not support 3rd party games, so why put in extra effort?
B) Nintendo themselves routinely gimp the consoles so that developers cannot (or it becomes financially risky) make the games as complete as they are on other systems. For instance, every time Nintendo fans complained about missing DLC, they should have complained to Nintendo, who didn't give developers a place to store it.
Your final point about "blood and gore=adult" is also a fallacy and a false dichotomy, as I never said anything about blood and gore. But if you think that's what defines any non-Nintendo game, which this seems to indicate, that ignorance is yours. I play games for fun, challenge, and enjoyment. Hardly blood and gore. To even assume that is childish.
I think a variety of bundles would have helped. Smash Bros and Nintendo Land, Bayonetta and Mario Kart, Mario Kart and Nintendo Land. Instead, Nintendo was just that backwards console that came with very little for about the same price as two new, vastly more powerful machines that offered and came with a lot more. For $50 more, you got an XBO with two games and modern hardware heft.
@Quorthon I don't disagree with most of what you're saying in this thread, which is easy since a lot of it is indisputable fact, and that applies to your other posts about other topics on NintendoLife.
However, I have to ask: do you know where you are? Ever heard the term "Nintendrones"? Well, NintendoLife is the buzzing hive, and all you're doing is throwing rocks at it; the old familiar Nintendo should go 3rd party rocks that not only does no one want to hear, but they take as a personal affront. Consider this: NintendoLife is eagerly awaiting the NX despite the abject failure of the Wii U, and 52% of them simply can't wait for more Mario Kart 8 DLC. Which of course would drive the total price of the game up to almost $90 dollars, but who cares, it's Nintendo!
Post whatever you want, but what I'm saying is you're not going to change any minds here, especially not with the tired arguments of how Nintendo should go 3rd party, or how Nintendo fans don't buy 3rd party. True though those statements may be, it's been said a million times. You're screaming at a wall.
Or console games will become ad-driven.
This is your choice, consumers.
@Grumblevolcano - Really, just being on Wii U doomed B2. It would have had at least quadruple sales on PS3 due to the 10x install base. I can't blame the timing release 3 weeks before SSBU, everything has to come out sometime. Same day I would blame it on timing. (I think that's what killed Enslaved on PS3 when it released the same day as Casltevania.)
And it's a game about a witch, didn't it come out close to Halloween? I think Nintneod actually did something right w/ that timing, and that rarely happens. Nintnedo doing something right I mean. They do the right thing about as often as I type their name correctly.
@TruenoGT Exactly, AAA games are going to suffer as well because of their massive budgets and development cycles.
I wont buy anything else from Nintendo's eshops as long as a digital purchase is attached to a console, the 3DS 'transfer' highlighted this issued for me. I would consider owning two consoles once new 3DS came out, but because they wont implement a proper account sysytem, I would not be able to play my digital purchases on both.
I bought a Vita and straight away had access to various cross buy games Id bought on PS3 and my PSP and PS1 digital purchases just by logging in to my account.
Pricing alone is not an issue for me, Im happy to pay a fair price for a good game, but I think they need to improve how they manage digital sales overall to add value in other ways, like allowing the activation of more than one console for an account.
Like I do when reading my newspaper of choice, you're reading this for free, with the only cost being some adverts that'll occasionally encroach on your screen.
No one forced you to make the site free for everyone....
@luke88 - "then your scenario is just a hypothetical?"
Yes. I know why they named the game what they did, it's about the characters in the game going on an "affordable vacation", but I still think they knew the title would cause confusion, like a pun or a double entendre. It really means 1 thing, but you could be confused into thinking it means something else.
But no, they never said that, I'm just guessing.
@Grumblevolcano People keep saying Bayoneta 2 was a failure, but the truth is we have no idea how well it sold. There are no hard sales numbers.
The original Bayonetta barely sold a million copies worldwide among two platforms with a combined install base that was magnitudes larger than the Wii U. I'm pretty sure Nintendo knew the kind of sales potential the series has when it decided to fund the sequel, and adjusted their sales predictions accordingly.
Ha, your post put a smile on my face. Kudos, sir!
It's some weird drive, to be sure. Nintendo is fascinating to talk about, and I used to be one of these blind Nintendrones that was adamant the company shouldn't go third party and adamant everything was okay and, I dare say, I even shared some of that blind hostility towards third parties.
But then in 2008, I bought an Xbox 360. And a world was opened up to me that I had been missing by being one of the Nintendrones. I realized what Nintendo was doing wrong. I realized that, as a fan, I was doing things wrong and my outlook had been warped. I started to understand gaming as a whole, not just from my closed corner of the Nintendo world.
I don't like seeing Nintendo struggle and fall. But I'm not blind or stupid. I can't deny the trends and the problems. Nintendo, despite their current, eventual ability to eek profits, is in trouble. The company is racing towards irrelevance. I want them to go third party, because I want them to counter that irrelevance, and get back to making great games--games that are finally not crippled by crap hardware. And the best way to do that is for those games to appear on other hardware and platforms. That is how they'll reach wider audiences again.
As it is, I have no confidence in NX. Nintendo isn't fixing their bigger problems, as Sony did during the PS3 era, so that the PS4 could launch to such success. They are hoping to ignore the problems and start over, I think, in 2016 when they launch new hardware.
@rjejr No other publisher stepped in to save B2 even though Hideki Kamiya brought it them prior to Nintendo. It would have been cancelled otherwise.
You have piqued my interest.
the thing that I don't get is that Wii U owners will pay $12 a pop for an old N64 ROM, or $60 for a NSMB title, and yet balk at paying $15-$20 for a brand new polished game experience built from the ground up for Wii U.
Maybe they don't understand the value of downloadbale titles is no less than retail? I think it's a line that is beginning to blur.
All this being said, the eShop has had some huge successes and I believe it can continue to. Look at Shovel Knight, for example.
I believe S&SII is the next piece of eShop gold and I'll be picking it up day one because it, frankly, looks to be one of the best 3rd party exclusives for the system and, frankly, $20 is a steal for a title that good.
There are too many games in the marketplace these days.
Growing up, it was normal to pay $40-60 for a new game and that was ok. If you couldn't afford a game, you rented it. But, back then, console games were all we had. Unfortunately, we're now living in a society where there are hundreds of options for gamers who want to play for free, or pay a specific price. I agree - I get annoyed when people complain about a $20 game. "Only 6 hours for $20 - are they crazy?" For me, I think back to Contra III on the SNES, Gradius, Castlevania IV, etc - those are not 9, 10, 11 hour games and they're amazing. People have become spoiled by the plethora of options and it's simply getting harder and harder to satisfy everyone. What's sad, is I wonder how many great games we're missing out on because of the consumer/business mentality that we've created.
Going along with my first comment, I wonder if there's a solution to higher pricing? Growing up, if you were afraid to spend the $60 blindly on a new game, you rented the game to test it out. I know some games today have demos, but they're sparse. A huge solution to this problem could be to offer a discount, demo system. Allow us to rent digital games for $2-3 for a couple of days and if we want to purchase, apply that $2-3 off the purchase price. Maybe higher price games are not selling as well because we are afraid to spend X amount on something that may or may not be good?
It'll bounce back. What I see happening in the next few years is a huge chunk of Indies and developers backing out of the industry because they can't pay the bills anymore. Sure there'll still be those that do it for free and as passion projects, but gaming as a profession will recede. In the void left behind, prices will rise and things will return to normal. This race to the bottom strategy that's been permeating the industry can't continue working, eventually we'll reach a breaking point.
@Quorthon I think you're mistaken. Nintendo's core fans tend to buy other fun and interesting games as well.
There are a lot of people out there who think Nintendo should go third-party, just like you. Most of these are people who first and foremost prefer to play PlaySation, Xbox or PC, but enjoy Nintendo's games and would rather not buy a second (Nintendo) console. As that's not an option today, many of these people buy Wii U as their second console in order to play Nintendo's games. Otherwise they focus on their main platform, and when there is a multiplatform title, they buy it for their main platform. It's usually the better version, unless Wii U offers interesting controller options (which these people in particular tend to rate lower than graphical advantages).
These are the people with Nintendo consoles who don't buy third-party games for them. Nintendo's biggest fanbase is not very large today, so it may be true that third-party games don't sell a lot because of that, but most fans do buy third-party games. In a way, this is just another reason that proves you're right, than the one you presented.
Still, Nintendo can potentially build up a larger fanbase (the recent announcement abiut smartphone games comes to mind). And a large portion of the current fanbase (including me) believe that their games benefit from having a console which was made with these games in mind.
Lastly, if we move away from multiplatform games in the style of CoD and look at games which remind more about Nintendo's own experiences, we can find that they often sell better on Nintendo platforms. One example is Gunman Clive mentioned in this article. In a very short timeframe, it outsold the long since released Android and iOS versions combined. Despite having a far smaller userbase.
According to NL, the update is for Wii U. So it is up to you if you want to give it a shot. Nice to hear you gave Armillo a chance.
@MitchVogel So you are predicting another crash maybe just not to the extent of what it was in the 80's. Makes sense and seems to be what is happening in Japan.
This makes the mentality of Nintendo, and Japan for that matter, to release their products at high prices and keep them high to evoke a high quality, look better in hindsight, doesn't it?
On the other hand, there are many parts of the world where it's the common perception that games are sold at a low price, like Latin America, most of mainland Asia and Eastern Europe. Before the internet, people just bought shabby pirated versions on the street for a converted $5, and after that, just pirated them outright, or got them from cheap sales and bundles because they were actually affordable.
Also looking at other digital storefronts, GOG is lead by people from those parts of the world and the shop and pricing policies seem to be mostly reactionary to the market conditions over there.
So maybe it's less about games lowering their pricing standards and more about readjusting them to the standards of poorer countries and today's market realities?
That Nintendo didn't put a dent in these countries aside from cheap pirate knock-offs should also be telling.
I agree though that people need to be educated more about the time and effort put behind creative projects, if not because to make them understand pricing decisions more, then because they've been repeatedly surprised that projects can change completely from their proposed concept in recent years. It's especially critical in those times when the line between creator and customer is increasingly blurred.
I dunno where people are getting that third-parties don't sell well on Nintendo platforms because Nintendo fans don't buy third-party, because that's clearly bull. The REAL reason why many third-party games don't do well on Nintendo consoles is because most publishers choose to not market the Nintendo versions or it becomes evident that they didn't put any effort into the porting of the games. Most people I talk to who own a Wii U say that the reason why they don't buy many non-Nintendo games on the Wii U is because in most cases, another platform has a better version. A good example of that would be something like Assassin's Creed IV. It's a well-known fact that the Wii U version is a horrible port, so why even get it in the first place? Publishers use baffling excuses as reasons why they won't release games for Wii U and refuse to accept responsibility for bad porting or just bad games in general.
There's an oversupply of games in the market which leads to creators being cutthroat on pricing and leads many to comment about the "race to the bottom." This will continue until either creators leave the market resulting in fewer games available or more gamers being in the market being able to support the excess games that are there.
Consumers aren't the problem, if anything they are predictable. Cheaper games = more sales. I mean nobody goes out of their way to avoid a sale or pay more than asking price. That doesn't mean the product isn't valued.
You could write a 400 page book on fair wages. But wages aren't determined by what is fair they are determined by market. And sometimes creators can make more money by selling content at a cheaper price to more people.
To Quorthon I support all video game systems. I also support third parties a great deal. I usually support them on a non nintendo system because they are usually optimized on a non nintendo system. That's nintendo's fault.
I think your editorial is way off base. Digital distribution provides licenses with no ownership interest whatsoever. I believe that consumers are reacting in a reasonable way. When confronted with what amounts to a long term rental at full retail price, they simply choose to not participate. I am a retail gamer, and I do not even bother to look at mere licenses for the most part.
Consumer advocates frequently use a phrase that is far from appropriate: vote with your dollar. The phrase is ridiculous as there is clearly no way to vote against a trend. But the trends can fail, as this one is.
I would buy more games at full price if there were a model in place that would allow me to try games out first. I don't want to drop top dollar on a game just because I think it looks cool. Oftentimes video games aren't something you can watch a trailer for and fully understand how fun it is.
Back in the day, especially on the PlayStation, I generally only bought games that I rented frequently, or played a demo of. There were only a few I bought because they looked cool, but ended up being a waste of money.
I feel like nowadays buying video games pose a risk for players. And it seems there have become less and less ways to try a game before buying it. Publishers build hype and basically just ask you to buy it on a whim,
@Quorthon See, this is why I often have the impression that discussions with you go nowhere. You claim "Nintendo fans don't buy third party games". I try to offer a point of view that Nintendo fans DO buy third party games, as long as those games are the kind of experiences that appeal to them, and that it just so happens that the current market panorama does not favor third parties developing those sort of games. You reply by saying that "this fanbase has proven that they do not support 3rd party games". Well, no s***. Because most third party games aren't what this fanbase wants. We can keep going in circles all day.
Call of Duty never sold well on Nintendo systems, and it probably never will. Final Fantasy has. Mega Man has. Street Fighter has. Rayman has. Monster Hunter has. Bravely Default has. Seriously, what does that tell you?
Again, titles like Gunman Clive are more the flukes than the norm.
Now, your other point--that Nintendo is bought as a secondary machine for Nintendo games only is not entirely inaccurate, but it leaves a lot of gaps that you now need to explain.
For instance, people buying the Wii U as a secondary console are not buying it in the first two or three years of the console. The people who bought the Wii U thus far are overwhelmingly us--the remaining Nintendo fans.
On top of this, given that the Wii U is following the "gradually diminishing relevance" of all Nintendo consoles as I illustrated way above in this comment section (and was previously listed by @rjejr), which means that there are even fewer and fewer people buying Nintendo's consoles just for Nintendo games. They are simply skipping the console entirely.
And given the swiftness with which the Wii U has fallen into it's final year droughts, those people will not be buying the console later this year or next year. Next year, we won't even be talking about Wii U. It will all be on the NX.
The primary problem is still that Nintendo's core audience does not support 3rd party games.
Now, I think Nintendo will find a large audience on mobile, and I am hoping that it will convince them that the problem with reaching wider audiences is that people are less and less willing to leap the hurdle of their hardware to play the games. If Nintendo put Zelda on PS4 and XBO, it would grossly outsell the game on Wii U. And if Nintendo was particularly smart, they would use their remaining influence to get better deals from those companies. For instance, going exclusive on Playstation in exchange for higher percentage of the revenue. That would work in their favor immensely. As we've seen, Nintendo's games will sell on hardware with numbers--as Twilight Princess is about the best-selling Zelda game because it was on hardware that had an audience.
When Nintendo's games are on popular hardware, they sell. When the hardware itself is seen as a hurdle, they suffer.
Ah, another classic Flux_Capacitor post, rife with inaccuracies and invented charges! I base my posts on reality and known information, factual reality. When I make an anecdote, I note that it is such frequently with the actual phrase, "this is an anecdote" or "on a personal note," and those are not intended to be taken as anything more than that. Do pay attention. At least once.
Just because you don't like reality does not mean your imaginary form of what I wrote is correct.
@SpykeXD Then add in the DLC situation (AC3 being late, AC4 none at all) then versions of games that come out months later like Watch Dogs after it was known that it didn't live up to the hype and got middling reviews. It all leaves a bad taste in people's mouths.
All these heated discussions, and I'm not part of them - weird.
@Quorthon You're wrong about many things but the main thing you're wrong about is that a LOT of people buy Nintendo consoles solely as Nintendo machines. I can atest to that because literally everyone at my old high school had a Wii and another console and the only Wii games they owned were the common Nintendo games. They put most of their money into their Xbox 360s or PS3s (and PCs in a handful of cases).
In fact, most people who have bought a Wii U literally bought it BECAUSE it's the only console with worthwhile exclusives, anything else they can get somewhere else.
I'm not exactly sure what you're referring to.
Nintendo has a history of not working with third parties, or working poorly with them. Or treating them like indentured servants and slaves. This doesn't help things.
MS and Sony regularly do work with 3rd parties, securing partnerships (Destiny and Batman PS4s, Call of Duty and Titanfall Xboxes, etc.), which not only helps with sales of third party games, but also helps MS and Sony build a rapport with these companies. They will bundle third party games with consoles as often as they do first party. Nintendo, except for very rare occasions (ZombiU, Monster Hunter 3), almost never bundles third party games or helps them to succeed.
@Tazcat2011 - I know, I'm the one who was saying Ntinedo DID support B2, Q was the one saying they didn't.
Your anecdotes have actually not proven me wrong on anything. And the rest of this, I already addressed.
I sometimes buy games at full price if they are niche games in a genre that I really like. I bought Codename Steam on day one.
However, like many others, I have a massive backlog of games waiting to be played. I sometimes feel guilty about how big that backlog is. When I see a full-priced game it is easy to say no because I know I will not have time to play that game any time soon. It will just go on the pile with the rest.
However, if I see a good game at a really good price then it becomes much harder to say no to myself. Thus, I tend to buy a lot of games during Steam sales (like most Steam users).
That is the reality of the modern day game industry. There are tens of thousands of games out there. The sheer volume of games available to be purchased at any one time is staggering, and many gamers already own hundreds in one form or another. Tt has never been easier to get good games than it is now and it is a buyer's market. Developers have to figure out how they are going to get their game noticed and how they are going to ensure that they can rack up good sales in the limited time before the public attention wanders away to newer titles.
I think the problem with indie digital pricing, doesn't start in Nintendo, It start with the model the largest Digital sales system, STEAM, were you can buy a lot of games just for a few dollars, and for most gamers, they think all games should be free or cheap, that is way a lot of people go with torrents. people don't believe that something that is for fun should cost money
@rjejr I know, I didn't mean it any confrontational way. It's a point that gets overlooked sometimes.
No, sir. I'm not saying they didn't support Bayonetta 2, I'm saying they half-assed it, and dropped the ball on the support when the game needed it the most.
For a completley didn't perspective -
My wife says I should buy S&S2 for $20. But she thinks I should use the money I was going to use on Splatoon b/c that game isn't worth $60. (The rest of the world getting it for an equivalent $40 isn't helping the argument any.)
Only so much videogame money to go around.
Yeah, the repeated sales are bad. There have been a number of times I bought a game full price, to watch it hit sale not long after. Its to the point where unless I'm really excited, I hold back and consider on every title. But a small sale has made me bite on several I likely wouldn't have otherwise. Going back a few months I'm 7:9 Full price to sale, discounting retail. Which adds 4 to full price. Sits me 11:9. 3 of the ones on sale are Club Nintendo grabs. I don't think that's too bad when it looks more like 11:6 depending on how you wish to count it, I'll assume eShop only? 7:6. I'm about half and half as it stands since last September.
I dunno, I'll likely keep buying most my titles at full prices and a few on sale, that I was less sure on. Not sure about how to solve the problem and aside from the sillyness for me to get games on Steam, I tend to avoid it because I see it more as collecting cheap or heavily discounted games over actually picking up titles you want and plan on playing but weren't sure on getting before.
@Thomas - I thought it was you from he writing and the download list mention. I've been seeing the same games on sale, week after week, checking the pricing for you and a friend of mine now. Sad state of affairs. Actually, is that still of use?
@Quorthon - "Yeah, Monster Hunter 4 was a rare case of Nintendo actively supporting a 3rd party game. Something they didn't even do for Bayonetta,"
"No, sir. I'm not saying they didn't support Bayonetta 2"
Yes, you did say they didn't support B2.
OK, you can admit you're wrong now.
I kind of Disagree that consumers should take any blame at all with these pricing models which were started by publishers. No reason for consumers to take any blame. Now just recently WRC Rally racing released on 3DS in the Eshop for 34.99. I run across the exact same game in the Android market for 3.99. This difference in pricing is absolutely rediculous. One Market gets it dirt cheap and the next market gets it at rddicously high price because projected sales are not going to be that great. This has been driving me nuts since Angry Birds. At least angry birds was on Cartridge. WRC Racing is download only I believe. There is a difference in getting a game on cartridge and downloading a game I don't care what anyone says. If WRC had a cartridge release I can see 34.99 but download only the game in my opinion should be about half that price at least. Doesn't that make sense at all? No cartridge, no boxes, no need to manufacturer other than programming and uploading should equal cheaper games. Am I wrong here? To me its very greedy to be putting up a game for download at its retail price. I have generally been very happy with my Eshop purchases but if a game goes retail and also has a download I'm buying retail. If its download only that's where I decide if I'm buying or not. Unfortunately for WRC racing I'm not paying 34.99 when I see it in the android market for 3.99. I don't think it will sell 3,000 copies at that price. So too sell more copies wouldn't lowering the price achieve that? Or will the publisher just let their game rot in the Eshop at the higher price by being stubborn? I'm sorry but in this case of WRC racing the pricing is just wrong.
Buy what you want! Buy the games you want at a price you're comfortable with an can afford!
Its not just the eShop. Has anyone seen the pricing for Oddworld New n Tasty. As I pointed out in the other article I think a lot of it comes from people being spoiled by Steam sales and Apple's 99 cents for everything model. If there is a game that interests me I will buy it regardless of pricing
@Quorthon. The problem people have with your statements is that your way of thinking is very black and white and heavily skewed. You assume Nintendo fans dont buy third party games because they hate anything that doesn't have Mario or Zelda on it. One thing you fail to take into account is that many gamers Nintendo fans included own multiple systems in this day and age the problem is not that the Nintendo fans dont buy third party games they really just bought them someplace else for a different system because they cant trust the developers to put out a Nintendo version that on par both content and feature wise. ZombiU was decent exclusive but I think the mixed scores are what scared a lot of people off. Akham City AE ande NFS MWU were good ports but they came out a year later and by then you could get the GOTY edition everywhere else for only 20 dollars Audience taste does play a big part it. Think of why Shovel Knight did so well. Also I have noticed Nintendo fans in general tend to be less tolarant of sub par or mediocre games than the 360/PS3 crowd as well as some of the more shady practices a lot the big fish publishers pull. I am primarily a Nintendo and PC gamer but would it surprise you when I say the majoirty of third party games these days just don't interest me especially how so of many them seem to be releasing either half finished or with half functional online and feature, The main problem with the argument that Nintendo should go third party is that you fail to realize how close related their hardware and software development is. Nintendo isn't like most other devs in that they design their hardware with their games in mind rather than the other way around.
@rjejr Game Set Match. Well played sir.
@Grumblevolcano Well, we're not even sure what the NX is, so that remains to be seen.
The Playtonic staff said repeatedly that they've been flooded with Wii U requests from day one, more than any other platform. There's little doubt that the bulk of the audience for the game they're making lies on Nintendo platforms.
I guess I'm "victim" of the discount trend, and not from digital habits. Even when games were only retail it was pretty common to find discounts after a shortwhile (it was just a matter to check regularly the stores instead than a comfy tapping on a screen); cause of this I always considered a game NOT worthy of full price if a long period passed from the release >.>;
If I'm REALLY interested in a game and the wallet is healthy then I get it at launch full price, no problem or complains, but, if I can't get it at launch or I'm simply not enough interest in the game when it launch, then I'll never consider to pay full price for it and I'll surely wait for a discount (or, as I still do with retail, hunt down a discounted copy, it's actually the only "shopping" I love to do XD).
Just for be clear, I don't mean that my logic is right, ack, if a game is a month old I could already not consider it worthy of be payed full price and I can imagine how many would disagree with me, but this is just how discounts influenced me, so I can see very directly one of the many problems of excessive sales.
No, I take that into account. Which is why I reference this going back to the N64, when it was far, far less common for people to own multiple consoles. And again this is the minority of people who own Nintendo hardware. For this to have the full effect we're seeing, we'd have to admit that the vast majority of people only buy Nintendo consoles as a secondary console for Nintendo games, which still comes back around to my original point on going 3rd party--why do we even need this hardware?
So, is this the majority or minority? Who is buying Nintendo consoles more? Dedicated fans, or people buying it as a secondary machine? Given the slumping sales over the past 6 generations, it would seem that it's mostly an ever-decreasing core fanbase first and foremost. And that the people buying Nintendo as a secondary are an extreme minority.
No one cares about the Nintendo hardware. Factoring for what I've noted--that Nintendo fans have a noted history of not supporting third parties--and that there are people who buy the machines as secondary consoles just for Nintendo games, that still means the vast majority of consumers do not care about the hardware and would buy those games on any hardware.
We will see later this year, early next year if Nintendo sells well on other platforms (mobile), which I think they will, and that will further add to the idea that they should just go 3rd party, so more people can have access to their otherwise great libraries.
Again, Bayonetta 2 had a Nintendo Direct on September 4, 2014 that was around 30 minutes long, followed by a treehouse session that lasted around 30 minutes. Is this support? I also remember seeing commercials on TV. Are commercials support?
@Aqueous It is useful, my apologies for not always replying back to you
@Einherjar Yep I dont really know why I even bothered replying to him seeing as he is that sort of guy who think he has to prove he is always right and puts down anyone who doesn't share his view
Actually as it turns out if you compare the install base of the Wii U to that of the PS3 and 360, Bayonetta 2 did in fact out-perform the first game. You CANNOT use sales numbers BY THEMSELVES as proof of a game performing well when one game is on less platforms. Given that the Wii U's install base at the time of Bayonetta 2's release was 1/10th the install base of the PS3 and 360 at the time of the original's release, the fact that Bayonetta 2 is selling a little over 1/10th the sales of the original makes sense, in fact it's a good sign because the proportion of sales is close to the same.
@Windy Its on 3DS cart in Europe, but they went and region locked the console... The Vita version is also on sale digitally at the moment for £10.
Unfortunately, when you buy a game on discount in a store (physical), chances are the developer/publisher is no longer benefiting. They already made their money when it was sold to the store.
At least when discounted digitally, the dev still gets something.
1. It's not about a stripper, but okay.
2. I don't get how it's easier to promote and sell games about killing people, or you know, Grand Theft Auto, and yet those are bought for kids by their parents all the time.
3. I don't care who buys it. The topic was about Nintendo "supporting" games. In this instance, it's in reference to promotion/marketing release and post-launch support. "Allowing it to exist" is not the same thing. That's like saying Nintendo is supporting The Letter. They didn't support B2 as much in favor of their own IPs, despite funding it's existence.
I'm not even talking about sales. I'm just saying Nintendo had a missed opportunity for Bayonetta 2 to do better. They saved the game, so it's here, but that's not what the discussion was about.
Sales directly affect what we get. People buy it, we get more. People don't, we don't. Nobody buying Bayonetta? No more Bayonetta, no more of those kinds of games or partnerships. Not a guarantee, but that's the kind of thing that happens. It matters that others buy it because the people who enjoyed it want more of those kinds of action games. The only way to ensure that is if those kinds of games sell well enough to show there's a strong market for it on the console.
I'm not part of what Quorthon is saying. I'm not saying Nintendo fans don't buy 3rd party games (as I can apply these arguments to Nintendo IPs as well) and that's not what my agenda was in that comment, as all I was doing was pointing out that Nintendo was, in fact, barely promoting the game that they went to great lengths to help make.
It doesn't affect anyone now (except Platinum Games), but could become a problem down the road, and it's one of the things that got 3rd parties off of Nintendo in the first place (in addition to NUMEROUS other ridiculous things, but it's still one of them).
Nintendo's awful with marketing unless it fits some weird criteria for things they want to do. They put out tons of amazing games or help amazing games happen, but they only really push a select few. 90% of the games they push are ones that would sell themselves by name recognition alone (Mario Kart, Super Smash Bros., etc) and Splatoon is easily an exception, as they are really pushing it and plan to support it even more post-release. However, if you look back at all the releases across even just Wii U & 3DS's lifespan so far, you can probably count the amount of games they really advertised & promoted on one hand. Especially if you cut out anything involving Zelda, Mario, or Pokemon.
They do a little bit right when the game comes out, but not much before. This also goes for Bayonetta. It was a tiny burst of late ads and the Playboy thing. If you notice, most games that do extremely well are the ones shoved down people's throats for months and months. Nintendo doesn't put much time, effort or money into hype building beyond Directs & E3, which are really only for the dedicated, not the mainstream who make up the majority of their sales. Some games luck out and just do well anyway, but yeah.
I mean, hopefully Splatoon is a sign of things to come and they will do better with promoting new games and important titles, but I can see them falling back into their old tricks.
Gets it. This editorial is as wrong as it gets when it comes to placing blame. I haven't devalued fun (as I am sure, most gamers haven't), I am just a savvy customer. Let's talk Affordable Space Adventure for a minute. Great little game (6 hours) with a great big price tag ($20). Now you can rationalize all you want about how it is a great game and it deserves to be $20, but I disagree. The price is terrible for the reality we all live in. For example, just a few days ago the PSN offered the Mass Effect Trilogy for $4.80. That's around 100 - 150 hours of gaming for pennies on the hour. It isn't like this is a unique occurrence either. A few weeks ago, I picked up GTA4 on the PSN for around $5.
In a world where hours of high quality entertainment can be had for pennies, a 6 hour game (regardless of quality) for $20 is going to fail. That is the hard reality of the gaming industry in 2015 and developers can cry about it all they want, but unless they adjust their expectations, they are going to fail.
Looking over your last comment I think I'm gonna drop out of this discussion because talking to you is like fighting a brick wall with a toothpick.
@BakaKnight You bring up a good point about "value proposition". I loved when Nintendo released Metroid Prime Trilogy on eshop since used copies were expensive. It was a deal at $20 and the intro price of $10 was a steal.
"Perhaps I'm a hopeless idealist yearning for the days when creators were supported, not simply sources of low-cost or free entertainment. I only hope there are a good number of other hopeless idealists that agree with me."
I am with you, I understand how economics works, and keeping prices too low actually hurts consumers in the long run. Simply put, I have the means to buy games I want, and I support those that I feel I should, regardless of price. Am I better than you? Not by a long shot, I just understand that if I want games to come to my favorite system, I buy the ones that I like there.
@Flux_Capacitor @SpykeXD @Quorthon
Next person to continue the argument with personal attacks gets a 1 day ban. I understand that Quorthon has strong opinions, but that does not mean you have to reply to them.
The summary I get from 80% of comments, give or take, is that it's capitalism, supply and demand, that's the way it is. I get that, I ended the article by stating I'm a hopeless idealist, after all!
I think my observations stand up, but there are no easy solutions and, I gather, the majority don't want or expect any change.
As someone who, as a teenager (I'm now 30), dreamt of forging a successful creative career, and having done a bit of publishing with eBooks where I tried to promote sensible pricing, I'm well aware of the 'realities'.
The fact is that the creative markets have been royally screwed by the digital age in the last decade. It's not fair, but it seems that it's 'economics'. Sucks to be a creative, unless you're in the 0.1% that go viral and make millions. A far cry from past times, that's my main point. Ultimately, we'll get the products we 'demand', we may just look at them and be dissatisfied in years to come.
@Ristar42 thanks for that Info Ristar I didn't know that. I'm going to still pass the game up until it gets a sale of at least 50%. Besides I bought the android version. Its actually a very good game after getting into the android version. I would love to play it on my 3DS with those gamepad Controls and 3d effects but will wait till its at least 14.99. I would still be willing to pay 14.99 even though I see it in the android market for 3.99. Playing on the more comfortable gamepad and getting the 3d effects would be worth 14.99 to me. I also wouldn't mind if it dropped to 10 bucks lol
Having read through all the above comments (lots of great points by the way), the 1 thing missing is the ability of a sale to catch a person to buy a game who never would in the first place. I have brought multiple games on both my Wii U and my 3ds eshops I would never of tried otherwise. I will always read a review or 2 and then give them a go. I like both eshops - yes they can be improved (more virtual console games please), but I generally buy a game if I like the look and sound of it. Some new, some in the sales. Note not all games get discounted. Bought Ultratron yesterday (loving it by the way) knowing that in a month or 2 it will be discounted. I just thought it was worth the money. And that may be the point. What is the game worth to you?
We never live in the times we want, so we have to accept the times we are in. The solution is very simple, developers can charge a reasonable price and make up the difference in volume of sale. Affordable Space Adventure is digital only so it isn't like they are losing money on producing extra copies. It is a 6 hour game and has absolutely no business being more than $10. You can make all the arguments about creativity you want, but it isn't going to change the world we live in.
I followed the game through production and was really interested in picking it up, but the short length and high cost made it a real easy pass. I'm not buying cheap games because they are cheap. I am buying high quality games whose prices have dropped so low that it would be foolish not to buy them.
We are adrift on a sea of high quality games at rock bottom prices. I don't envy any developer trying to make ends meet.
I'll be upfront and state I haven't read anything above, I am on vacation and have better things to do for the most part (this article did catch my attention).
Before the eShop I had three different digital marketplace experiences. The first was Steam, where it is open season and cutthroat sales are then norm. The second is App Store/Play Store, which has become a race to the bottom. The third was the Xbox 360 Marketplace.
In the first, income came from selling large volumes at a discount price. The Wii U cannot do this because there is no large volumes to sell to. The second, the race to the bottom killed all quality and most income comes from shady third party vendors selling ads. The third, the price structure is rigid and games can be quickly sorted by the pricepoint ($4.99, 9.99, 14.99 and the rare 19.99).
In all honesty, the Microsoft methodology works best for consoles. I automatically have assumptions when something is priced at each pricepoint. So if a game is listed for $14.99 there better be a decent amount of gameplay (my general rule is an hour per $1.50 or better) and that is gameplay not filler repetition to pad hours.
Whitehead hits on a subject I agree with, although the rest I do not. What does the average person pay for a cup of coffee?? Why do they pay that much? Because they think it's worth it. Marketing is a massive element in the price of a game. Romino is declaring that they are a $20 experience. I disagree but sticking to their guns is the only way they'll brand themselves the way they want to be. For me their first game was $3, now the second game which seems to be an improvement but nonetheless a similar formula I find hard to believe is worth more than 7* more. I'd look at $10 - maybe $15 if they could prove that this game is literally 5* bigger and better than Swords and Soldiers HD.
We can't blame people for this - all of this is done behind closed doors inside of every company's HQ. How often are NIntendo games on sale? Almost never (not the retail anyway) and we deem them worth full price. I KNOW that SaS2 will go 50% off at some point in time because I see the ebb and flow of the market so I honestly will not pick it up until that point. Affordable space adventures I knew was NOT going to go on sale immediately and I felt it was worth the investment although I think $15 would have been more applicable.
Sometimes we try and force our problems on society - the fact of the matter is there has ALMOST NEVER been a market for $20-$40 games. Budget big retail at $40 do just ok (see Game and Wario/Captain Toad) but $30 games on the 64? GameCube? Wii? Almost non existent. That's the demand and we can't go parading into the frey and expect warm welcome. That's like stepping knowingly into a mine field, getting blown to chunks and blaming anyone but yourself for your failure. Markets emerge and die overtime and it's the 'creatives' job to find them and blend in.
Iwata commented on this changing environment a long time ago, how $60 is no longer enough for the experiences that the world demands and this is inflicted on ourselves by ourselves (developers).
@Darknyht. Absolutely - I agree with everything you just said 100%. Different marketplace environments, different expectations and really we as developers are to blame. It's called confusing the audience and is in fact the fault of the development community.
I'd love a rigid pricing structure. If you think your game is worth $20 then by all means, just remember that for 3* in price more you're getting an experience worth 100* more in quality.
Mario Kart 8 or Super Smash Bros, whichever big party NIntendo title you want costs $60. Divide that in thirds, does Affordable Space Adventures fill 1/3 of that game? Not even close.
I don't know about everyone else but with Affordable Space Adventures, I did take the name literally. I'm not trying to say the game looks cheap. It doesn't but, it just isn't doing it for me like Guacamelee, Shovel Knight, Trine, or Steamworld Dig was. I love supporting good games regardless of if they are Indies or not. It just personally didn't grab me as a day one.
All this said I will probably buy it down the line when I have nothing left to play and there is a lull between major releases. I do that in a lot of cases with Indie games.
@Deadeyerobbie I feel about the same way. I bought all the Level 5 games on 3DS at full price and was very happy with every purchase. I even bought the level 5 soccer game (which is awesome BTW) at full price. I say if you get good entertainment out of what you bought for what you paid, its all good. I hope they will fix this dicrepancy between the Eshop and Android markets though. It drives me nuts.
Well the comments are a real warfare. It's always the same desperate troll using the same dishonest tricks: third party games don't sell on nintendo systems (the ones who do don't count because of reasons) it's because Nintendo fans are the great satan of videogames while sony and microsoft fans are angels very concerned about variety in videogaming, purposely ignoring the vita is dead and anything that doesn't cater to the COD and Fifa audience sell terribly on ps4 and Xbox One (but I guess it's Nintendo fans fault as always and it has nothing to do with the fact audience on other systems isn't as varied as he pretends). I don't understand why moderators tolerate him this much. His only purpose is to insult people and spread his hate under every article. It's the definition of a troll and nothing else. I guess his non Nintendo systems don't offer him that much games since he spends his life in the comment sections.
@Quorthon You seem bitter.I loved Mario Kart 8,3D World, Zombi U and a wide variety of indie games on Wii U. I also think that Zombi U is the best selling third party Wii U game.
@ricklongo That's not what I'm getting at, all it would take is huge first party things coming near the Yooka-Laylee release date and sales would suffer on Wii U. The game is meant to be coming out October 2016 (at least thats what the kickstarter rewards suggest), if the NX releases in November 2016 (as an example) then the game's in trouble.
@ThomasBW84 One of the cable business programs made a comment in regards to Jay Z's music service floundering that "in order to make money in music distribution you need to give it away".
This struck me as the exact model "free to play" uses and I hope it's not the future of gaming. Also with multiple games and digital distribution channels it makes it hard for consumers to separate the wheat from the chaff. I'd be curious as to your thoughts.
I guess I don't think that creative people are getting screwed. The reason we have s&s 1 or 2 and affordable space adventures is because technology has reached a point where a small team can make an AAA game that would have cost 30 million to make in the past. There are lots of creative people out there and now we get to see them.
To me it's not an either or proposition. I spend about the same on gaming whether I buy 1 game a monthor 10 games a month. There are so many great developers out there I'd rather give to multiple ones than give to just one. It's not a market where it's easy to get rich, but based on the number of games coming it appears strong. Maybe not so much for wii shop stuff, but paying $20 for a game isn't going to change that. Maybe buying all of us the game at $20 will move the needle
I think the abundance of free games has changed the market. How many times have we seen people complain that SMB1 is $5, because they're used to buying games for cheap on their Android? I will gladly pay $5, on any new device, to have SMB on that device permanently. The Flat White coffee i buy once or twice a week at Starbucks is $4.45, and it last less than one hour. Why would I then question spending $5 on a game i will have forever on a new device?
Also, the free games on XBL, PSN and even via the old Nintendo Club, have made us be patient for that free offering every month or so. Why pay for game A today, when I have a subscription to get games B, C & D, free next month?
Because we have been trained to expect free stuff digitally. It pains me to hear that some games don't sell more than 3k copies...that is terrible. I will admit that I do wait for sales on games that look interesting but are not #1 on my radar, but I gladly pay full price for games I am looking forward to.
I paid full price for Paper Mario, Mario 64 and DK64, because even at $10, those games are still a bargain and still great. Day one for me.
As far as pricing, it all comes down to quality and each game is different in that regard, but for me, paying $10-$15 for a good quality downloadable game is a bargain, and I will gladly pay it for games I truly enjoy.
As far as those who wait for the discount? That is their choice to make, as its their money to spend...but I do agree with Thomas, that for good quality games, I don't mind paying full price to reward the maker, and especially the independent game makers.
People seem to forget about casual fans and children that own any video game console. Many of them are unaware of the existence of most indie games. When a game like Mario sells more than an indie game, is it because Nintendo fans don't like indies and only buy Mario games? No, it is because of the millions of children and casual fans that don't even know what an indie game is.
@Grumblevolcano What is the Nx? I my opinion it is their next handheld.So sales would not suffer unless they are planing to put on 3DS.
I am aghast that people will complain about a good product being priced €20 rather than €15, while at the same time being willing to pay for downloadable expansions to a game they already paid €40 or €50 for.
People are of course entitled to their personal idea of value, I just feel there has to be a limit to the madness.
I don't think it is the fans who are at fault per se, but the fault of Nintendo's marketing department. MH4 showed that Nintendo can take a third-party game and make it appeal to its fans. If Nintendo made a habit of doing that for more third-party games, then it could slowly start healing its third-party image problem.
As much as I HATE Microsoft's presence in the gaming industry, Microsoft knows what its doing when it markets games. Advertisements for games like Sunset Overdrive appear everywhere; on tv, movies, billboards, etc. Large, effective, relentless campaigns can make products feel like must-buy purchases. Nintendo has advertised on the web, but only through its own outlets. I don't think I've ever seen a Nintendo advertisement on Gamespot, IGN, or another unaffiliated website. Nintendo should take a leaf out of Microsoft's book when it comes to third-party games, or its own for that matter.
I think Nintendo's main problem is that it feels it needs to scramble to preserve its family-friendly image, when really such an effort is completely wasted because everyone and his mother knows Nintendo has plenty of family friendly products. Nothing is preventing Nintendo from advertising to different audiences, or having a 13+ section on its webpage for more mature/third party games, and it should do so. There's no need to have "one front;" its a complete waste of time.
Anyway, on the subject at hand, I see no reason why indie developers who have confidence in their products can't price their products higher. Indies are GOOD for the industry, and we want them to expand and grow. How else is an indie studio to expand if they can't move from charging pennies for a low quality game, to much more for a higher-quality game? There's no reason indies should be de facto limited to a certain price bracket. Affordable Space Adventures was well worth my day 1 purchase at full price, and I've never looked back.
This article is preaching to choir in my case; so I hear you. I've been saying this for a while now. I mean I know there are some doucheballs on these services just trying to rip people off, that's most of them on the likes of iOS/Android, but sometimes a developer puts out a decent quality App at a decent price and people act like the developer has committed a crime by basically not giving their game away for free. Some people really don't appreciate what it takes to make even a very simple looking BUT GENUINELY DECENT iPhone game for the average indie out there. You've got to respect and reward genuine effort, with all things being considered relatively, or else it's all just pointless and all you will get is exploitative crap designed to abuse you and rip you off and that's just a bad future for games imo.
I only buy Nintendo hardware and mainly for Nintendo games. I'm not interested in Xbox or Playstation. You can call me a fan boy or whatever other term you'd like. I might be part of the "problem" but I don't plan on changing my purchasing habits. I do buy Nintendo and third party games selectively. I think Affordable Space Adventures looks fun but I don't think it's worth $20. I'd pay $15 or $10 so I'll wait for a discount. If I contribute to the demise of third party on Nintendo systems then "oh well". I'm just a consumer don't put that crap on me.
@Windy No problem, Im a fan of Rally games myself - I think 3DS should have had more racers as its a great hand held format for the genre with the 3D screen. I also prefer real controls, so might get the Vita version at its current price!
Very well done! Love this article. I hate when people complain about pricing when what should be a full price game or close (affordable space adventures, which I own) is actually less than the value. $20 is low for a quality exclusive (aka Swords and Soldiers 2), but our Steam and App Store mentality is creeping into our consoles and we will all be the worse for it. There is a reason I have no games on my iPhone, they stink (sans Hearthstone), and the controls are usually horrible. I am not asking for higher costs, just a mentality that understands quality costs, this is why older Toyotas retain their value, and Dodge doesn't.
Since so many people are bickering like my high school freshmen students, I'll skip the part where I read the comments already posted and just leave thoughts. Please note that I don't have any statistics to back this up; these are just my personal thoughts and feelings on the matter and may very well be quite off-base. Please take it as such.
It's always seemed to me that most "Nintendo gamers" - at least the ones who buy their own games - tend to be more old fashioned in that we want physical games. Certainly there are many of us who download full retail titles, and there are lots of gamers whose main platforms are Xbox and Playstation who also insist on physical releases, but at least from my limited experience, Nintendo gamers insist on physical retail copies the most strongly. With that comes some hesitation for eShop releases. I, personally, will impulse buy a physical game that looks even remotely entertaining for $20 or $30, but I am guilty of exactly what this article talks about in a lot of ways; unless it's really cheap or I know it's good, I'll usually pass on eShop titles. Cuff me, officer; I'm guilty as charged.
If I may just address the couple of early comments about Nintendo gamers not supporting 3rd parties (one of the few comments I did read), I must respectfully disagree with that....mostly. I think that (again, this is just my personal experience) while it's true that Nintendo gamers are often somewhat adversarial towards 3rd party developers, it's more from a sense that we've been wronged by their neglect of the Gamecube and especially the Wii than some inherent "I only buy Nintendo games" ideology. I very much feel this way, but as an economics teacher, I'm also aware that allowing myself to fall into that and act on it would help further the problem since (another earlier comment mentioned this) the markets are determined by supply and demand (Adam Smith got at least that part of "Wealth of Nations" pretty spot on), and if Nintendo's gamers don't demand third party titles, there won't be any. If they aren't released for Nintendo's console, we'll get pissed off and hold more of a grudge, so on and so forth into eternity.
With that said and in the interest of not adding to the flames of this...."discussion"....I'll say again that these were just my thoughts based on my personal experience. Having not talked in detail with every single Nintendo gamer out there, I don't claim these to be the end-all-be-all reasons the game market on Wii U is the way it is. These are just my observations and thoughts.
Hold on, what is with "Nifflas' reputation" you mentioned? Because if they did that on purpose, that's just mean. And counterproductive.
This is a new age. There is no fault of the consumer at all in this scenario. It is the producers of content who have to adapt to an ever changing market, not the consumers.
Think of it this way. Fifteen years ago, somebody would sell a physical copy of a game to a limited audience and the only real advertising they would get would be magazines and word of mouth unless it was big budget. This limited your base of buyers a great deal. Now, with the Wii U as an example, there is a base of 9 million customers to market to, and even more on the other systems. You have game websites, youtube, ad agencies, gaming magazines, and a few others I don't recall at the moment. The exposure of good games is a whole lot higher today that it was a decade ago. People can expect a lot more sales today than they would of a year ago. And yet they are willing to still charge premium in a time when premium doesn't sell as well as it used to. Developers are cutting their sales in half just to get an extra $5 per sale. While this is a guesstimate, I have no reliable proof of numbers to list.
Charging $20 for an indie title that looks like it could easily be a mobile title just doesn't fly in today's market place. That isn't the consumers fault, it is the fault of the developers and publishers who won't adapt to current market practices. They have access to bigger audiences than at any other time in history, and instead of embracing that audience, they price the game into niche category so only the few will buy it instead of the many.
That is not the consumers fault.
If Nintendo went 3rd Party, and if there really was no NEED for Nintendo hardware, no one would NEED to buy ANY home console. We'd all be gaming on PCs because they already make Playstation and Xbox superfluous.
As for why Nintendo needs to continue making hardware- They are a toy company that likes to experiment and change how we approach gaming every now and then. Regardless of whether you think their innovations are good or not, this approach to gaming is what keeps the industry fresh and interesting--not just a simple graphics war that can never contend with PCs. I'm happy to see Sony experimenting with a virtual reality device whether or not it succeeds or flops. But that is the mindset that Nintendo has and it's good to see in an industry that is becoming more and more resistant to change.
Now to respond to the article:
As for the whole pricing issue, this is nothing new, the "digital age" is hitting every other industry as well. There is no middle class online and we all expect everything that's digital to be free. The only way it can possibly change is if we change the economics of the Internet from an advertisement-based model to a micropayment-based model where everyone is paying everyone and we cannot copy files. We may be too far into the hole we dug ourselves to warm up to that idea, but the Internet is still young. shrugs
Truthfully, very few gamers stick to only one console. So, when I play on my WiiU or 3DS, I tend to buy games that are exclusive to their respective console. If there's no exclusivity, I get it on PC. Personally, my interest in the eShop is 90% VC-oriented, with the occasional Gunman Clive or Stealth Inc.
no sorry I do not feel is my job to worry about developers' economic well being... I only buy games when I feel I'm getting value for my money... that's my main problem with Nintendo they rarely put first party games on sale and I don't really fell any game is worth $60.00.... if anything, I think the E-shop has three problems; Games being tied to hardware, region lock and yes.... overpriced games and lack of major sales
I honestly think this industry as a whole is unsustainable. This article helps reflect that.
Sure, Nintendo's hardware is becoming irrelevant, but that's a minor thing. There is a FAR bigger picture here than Nintendo. The industry itself has problems.
AAA gaming is unsustainable. Period. There's a reason companies like Konami are leaving to focus on mobile. AAA games cost way too much to make these days. They have to sell tons upon tons of copies to break even, let alone make profit. If they aren't releasing huge blockbuster titles that sell like that, they're often forced to shut their doors!
This is why companies are relying on annualized franchises like CoD, AC, and Pokemon - it's a safe bet because they are guaranteed to sell. Companies are taking fewer risks and are being forced to adapt the business practices that many consider shady and anti-consumer. This is also why franchises and certain genres are rarely seen these days - games like Mega Man, Castlevania, Suikoden, etc. They won't sell well enough to make profit due to the insane amount of overhead, so these larger companies can't justify making those games.
These larger AAA companies will start leaving or dying a lot more in the next few years, mark my words.
Now, as for indies, they are just oversaturated, and the whole "race to the bottom" on pricing is hurting them. There's too many at this point. For every Shovel Knight, Transistor, or Guacamelee, there's thousands of pure crap. That's why it's harder to stand out.
Now, the mobile market. There seems to be an illusion around this market that it is far more profitable. This is only partially true. Yes, mobile CAN be far profitable, but there are many, many cases where just the opposite happened. It's a highly competitive market. Look at Rovio of Angry Birds fame - they're struggling now. It's largely a fad-based market. Many games go unnoticed - Flappy Bird was on the App Store for months before it went viral.
With the mobile market, I am both terrified and excited about these larger companies joining the scene. On one hand, it has the potential to finally set a much-needed higher standard of quality. On the other hand, I think it can also make the bubble pop. I do think the mobile market is a bubble waiting to burst. This is honestly a case where Nintendo's painfully slow approach to things will benefit them - if the bubble pops, it won't be as big of a blow to them. I can't say the same for other companies.
I'm in the middle with this.
Whilst I'm all in favour of developers charging a fair price, you also have to consider that downloadable games have no resale value. When you start to hit the £10-20 price range, then people are only going to take a chance on it if they are really excited for it.
Personally, I thought Shovel Knight was just about worth the price, and Azure Striker Gunvolt much less so, but in both cases I've spent £10-15 on something I won't play again. Whether Affordable Space Adventures is worth the price, I don't know - it may well be, but you can understand a certain amount of caution towards it at that price. I thought Shantae and the Pirate's Curse was absolutely brilliant and well, well worth £15.99, but everyone's different.
As a general rule, and as display resolutions become more standard across the board, it might be better to make everything for all platforms (see Half-Genie Hero, in fact). Nintendo exclusives might have made sense in the days when the company's handhelds had very specific, low resolutions, but they make less sense when instead you could rescale any game between 480, 720 and 1080p.
Making a game tailored specifically to a Nintendo machine (eg. one that makes particular use of the GamePad) may be a noble idea, but if the Nintendo fans don't support it (for whatever reason), multi-format is the future.
@Quorthon Nintendo haven't been around as long as they have on the back of dozens of failures and a couple of flukes, come on. Why do you come here, this place is for Nintendo fans, which you're clearly not. You blame everything on Nintendo and Nintendo fans for crying out loud! Nintendo aren't perfect and nobody, not one person on Nintendo Life claims they are, but it's very tiring seeing you pop up in every article to basically lay the blame for all your issues with gaming exclusively at their feet. I'm sorry to have a go mate but that's how it comes across
My God, whenever I see over 100 comments on NLife I know that you're there trying to start a riot. If you don't like anything Nintendo WHY IN THE WORLD DO YOU POST HERE?
1. 3rd party games are usually worst on Nintendo platforms
2. Sales of 3rd party games are erratic, not poor.
I look back on Wii and see the games that were a success. They were the fully featured games that took advantage of the hardware: Early Tiger Woods and PES games, the fully featured NHL 2k10, Shaun White: Road Trip, a couple of Star Wars games etc.
The biggest problem, if you can call it a problem, is that sales went down sequel after sequel. I wish that would happen on other platforms, it would mean more innovation. Yes 1st party almost always sales better but why is that a problem? Link doesn't always sale either know-it-all. Look at Skyward Sword. Again ERRATIC sales. Not poor. I'm not making excuses, I'm stating the obvious.
Also, for you to call out the fanboys, what are you exactly? You're likely like me, over weight and siting at the computer cause you have nothing better to do. You pride yourself on being the anti-fanboy so much you actually RESEARCH everything Nintendo has done wrong in the past. You really need a hobby.
Since I don't want the admins to completely dismantle me I'll stop with the personal attacks. As for us "fanboys" I find many even on this very site to be bitter over the lack of games like Beyond Good & Evil 2 never showing up and even expressing how the lack of sales for ZombiU is a crime.
Apparently whatever fanboys you're speaking of don't exist on the internet, so who are you calling out exactly? What is your point?
@Tazcat2011 - If anything he's saying is wrong, then correct it. Just because you don't believe what he's saying doesn't mean he's making a fool of himself. You're the one not adding to the conversation here.
I miss the Wii days. A time where "gamers" opinions barely mattered and it was stronger for it. Sure not everything was a winner but if every developer were to succumb to the "I hate waggle" mentality, nothing would ever get done.
@Geonjaha If you can say that after reading every post here then I can't help you.
Same bullpoop from @Quorthon again. Carry on people. Props to @ricklongo for pointing those to him. Of course he's "always" right so it'll just go in circles. Can we have an ignore button in the comments section soon @ThomasBW84? I'm willing to pay a subscription to have it.
Great article. Top stuff.
One thing I'd add to the conversation: I don't support, I buy. For entertainment purposes. However, I also value. So no, I don't go into discount madness too much, and yes, I'm picking up swords and soldiers because quality and fun, but support should be a natural result because we value. We're not running sponsorships, we're buying games. It's just the focus on quality and appreciation of value that we need to nurture again. Support flows naturally and in an honest market from that point.
I'll say this: I'm an avid Nintendo fan. I love their games- pretty much all of them. In fact I think the number of Nintendo games I DON'T like could be counted on my left hand.
I also love 3rd party games- but mainly just the elite few that really shine on the same level as Nintendo's own games.
I buy anything that's good on any console. And I'm content with that. In fact pre-ordering and day one purchases is all I do. I support anyone and everyone who makes a good game, be it with Nintendo, Sony, or Microsoft. On rare occasion I will wait for a price drop when I feel the price is too high but these situations are far and few between.
I have no beef. I'm a gamer who loves playing great games, and by owning all systems I never miss a great game. Although I will admit even with the Nintendo's limited libraries I still play and enjoy more great games on their systems then I do the rest of the third party industry combined. And that's not a slight against third party games- I just started playing The Witcher 3 yesterday. And it's absolutely fantastic. But the truth is I still enjoy games like Pikmin 3 and DKC Tropical Freeze more. Always have, always will.
There's nothing to be upset about if you're a gamer. Great games to go around on any console. Just buy the one that has the type of games you like most.
"I'll say this: I'm an avid Nintendo fan. I love their games- pretty much all of them. In fact I think the number of Nintendo games I DON'T like could be counted on my left hand.
I also love 3rd party games- but mainly just the elite few that really shine on the same level as Nintendo's own games."
Finally someone here actually feels the same way I do. So much win! Nintendo is one of the few companies that still focus on how a game "feels" to the player. Be it waggle, button, or vibration. Sure we can all complain that a game like Splatoon has fewer modes than other shooters, but how many other games "feel" so satifying just pressing a button or exploring a map?
@JaxonH Now to the real question. Have you started Witcher 3 and how do you like it thus far?
@Quorthon Wow. I couldn't have said it better myself. Nicely put.
Yes, and it's brilliant! In fact this was the entire reason I bought a PS4 in the first place. I loved Dragon Age Inquisition- but this game seems like it's going to top it already. Still trying to get used to the controls though. There's a lot to learn in games like this...
Personally, I buy one video game per month (on average). I try to buy a good game that I can really dig into on either my 3DS or Wii U. Since I don't buy very many games, I don't even question the price. I wonder if a lot of the problem stems from the fact that people are just buying too many games. That would definitely make me more price sensitive.
@JaxonH Good to hear. It's on the list to get.
@bitleman I finally got Megami IV this past discount and it's the best 15 I've ever spent. And I own almost all Etrian odysseys, devil survivor, and countless others...
Who is this Quorthon that seems to spend more time here than the staff themselves? Looks like he has a lot of free time and an agenda.
Nor that I read what he said... I have better things to do. What a waste of time.
@gojiguy vs @Quorthon
Now I want to buy Shantae or Affordable at full price and support the developer AND the Wii U, so job done.
In response to some of the comments above, I just noticed today that I've bought way more 3rd party titles on this Nintendo platform than any of my old ones going back to SNES, but maybe that's just me. However, some dude above made a good point about balking at paying over a certain threshold for download titles. I'm always aware that I only have only 10GB left on my HD and if the machine breaks the game is lost... so I tend to limit my spending to cheaper games. Maybe if they address that with NX...?
Too many choices; people following trends, not quality; tough times, economic-wise; not enough advertising by Nintendo: that is all. Now back to enjoy our WiiU, members of this selective club; is actually quite funny, if you think about it that way.
Look people who really think you need to spend 20+ dollars on an download. Please just stop it now, umhkyyy. Downloads are free period. Nintendo is capitalizing off the old idea from European markets ( go figure ) that people will pay for downloads. Back in Japan they had vending machines where you could get an copy of an game via a disk that would be reprogrammable.
The way I see it is like this. If it is an download it should be free. If you can hold in your hands and download it; then it should be payable. The problem is when an consumer purchase an download and then make copies of it.
$5 dollars is enough but the truth is that these companies know that you should spend even $20 dollars to line their pockets.
I will understand if the game is an low-budgeted game but if the game is made by big wig companies they should provide extra content with an body and thus via download pay as well.
Eitherway you purchase what you pay for .
The game maker is now raising prices based on the recent inflation and are gambling to see if consumers will pay the price.
"Eitherway you purchase what you pay for."
That's usually how it works
I feel for indie game creators and publishers. I really do. I think a big part of the issues is that there is just so much out there. Of course I would like to play as many games as possible, but time restraints and budget restraints are an issue. Sometimes I will admit to giving a game more of a try if it is discounted, but that's not always they case. I want to pay a fair price for a game that I think is actually worth my money and time. The issue is that these Indie games are also competing with the main titles for the console. So If I see a console game I've been wanting on sale for the same price as an Indie game, then I'm more likely to pick up the main console game. A majority of the time it's got more content than the Indie game I'm purchasing. Also with Nintendo your competing against virtual console games. Do I get a game that gives me good memories or chance it on a game that I've never played. A small solutions is to have more demos for indie games available. If I try it and like it there is a chance you have swayed me to buy it. I try to support the indie games when I can, and I think it's frustrating as an Nintendo fan to have 3rd parties give up on the system. Some of my favorite games of Nintendo history are 3rd party (Zombies Ate My Neighbors, Eternal Darkness, Illusions of Gaia, etc.). I bought the Wii U system for games like Zombi U.
I searched Amazon for my favorite books and found that none of them support Kindle Unlimited. AKA why I will never switch to ebooks.
But the issues that surround game pricing worry me too.
"and yet many consumers - me included - have the cheek to complain about annoying pop-up ads or excessive product placement in TV shows."
The cheek?! Pop up ads are never acceptable, and just drive people to use adblock. The only people having cheek when it comes to pop-ups are the people still putting them out there.
For the sites I use on a regular basis, the ones that don't have pop-ups are whitelisted on my adblocker so their ads show up. The ones that do have pop-ups stay blocked, because I don't want garbage taking over my browser with close buttons that are either tiny or don't actually close without also taking you to the target site (which could be filled with viruses, malware, or other nasty stuff).
Bottom line, if you don't want people to adblock your website, or don't want them to tell your service to screw off, don't have pop-up ads in it. Pop up ads are baloney, and I don't want to hear any crap about people having "the cheek" to complain about them. Pop ups shouldn't exist, period. They're bad marketing.
@ericwithcheese2 Wonderful 101 isn't a first party game.
It's also made by Japanese Phil Fish, so no surprise that nobody wanted to support it.
Greed does come into all of this. These companies talk like they live off of nothing but bread and water in a little shack slaving away to make some money from a little computer game. Greed is what is killing all these industries and I think its time they reigned it in. They are forcing everything onto us and convincing us that we want or need it.
@Quorthon Its nice to see someone with an opinion. I've just read everything and you handled it great. I still feel that its tiny little things that the big N do themselves that make people mistrust third parties. The Nintendo seal is 1 thing. Makes it sound like its gone through hell and passed with flying colours and another thing is that they don't really support most games with adverts or anything at all. Marketing is very minimal with Nintendo.
Or developers could just add a profanity,blood, and gore filter too all games. So if you do not wish to play with all those things in the game you could turn it off and if you do then you have that option.
Good article, I think that people don't really consider the capital outlay required to produce some of these games, but the sales in order to get eyeballs does a disservice. I tend to buy what appeals during the first month because I know that's key. Otherwise it probably will take a sale to get my attention and even then, the game has to have something going on for me to care; frankly most don't.
I've bought a lot of games for my Wii U so I don't regard myself as part of the problem - hell I even buy downloads exclusively just because of convenience and because getting more money to the publisher seems okay to me. Over saturation of the market with low-quality goods may be the real issue here...seems like the 80s all over again!
I tend to have a £10 threshold when it comes to digital titles of all kinds. Above that point I'm more careful with what I buy because of their fleeting nature in the grand scheme of things. I bought Shantae and the Pirate's Curse and Affordable Space Adventures because they looked interesting and worth the price of admission. Swords and Soldiers II on the other hand isn't my kind of thing, but at some point were it on sale I may pick it up.
Another thing to note is the loss of the Nintendo Network Premium deal, where you could get £5 for spending £50 in Wii U eShop (though VAT didn't count IIRC?)
I own a fair amount of eShop titles on my Wii U (two and a bit folder pages worth) and N3DS, and the Premium stuff certainly helped there in giving me a little more bang for my buck and incentive to spend.
@Quorthon Irony too strong.
Calls Nintendo consoles gimped yet buys and praises a gimped PC with $50 online and 120$ DLC ridden games. if Nintendo goes 3rd party they should just stay away from Xbox/PS. Sony and MS will manipulate them to their will and split their library across the two consoles. PC fits them better. Freedom to do what they want, 1080p 60 FPS Nintendo games with free online and a sizable audience already in place. Boom. Easy money.
@BinaryFragger If anything, I'm sad that all the Etrian Odyssey games combined on the 3DS (that includes Persona Q and EMD) have failed to outsell Fire Emblem: Awakening COMBINED.
It's a real shame that you still have to add the sales of DS Overclocked and Record Breaker just to get over the top.
For the record, I believe that, including digital, FE Awakening has broken 1.6 million units sold.
@TheWPCTraveler Well, Etrian Odyssey is EXTREMELY niche, though. I've been a fan of JRPGs ever since the SNES, and still couldn't find enjoyment in the map-drawing and extreme number crunching of that series.
@Quorthon I am admittedly "guilty" of being one of those Nintendo fans who continues to buy their consoles primarily for their games. I do own some third-party titles, but the vast majority of the games I buy and play come from Nintendo. If they decided to become a third-party developer, I would continue to buy their games, and I would be forced to buy whatever the best console/PC choice they would be on.
That said, my worry is that Nintendo is not just making "boxes" to play their games on. If they really wanted to, they could just stop making new consoles and focus on pumping out great game after great game. Sounds like a great plan, right? Yeah, except the problem is, look at what they've done with their consoles, and then look at what their competitors have done.
You mention the N64. That's as good a starting place as any. When the N64 came out, Nintendo's competition was the PlayStation and the Saturn. Both consoles featured CD technology that wasn't yet ready for prime time (as evidenced by the ridiculous load times and the extensive amount of prerecorded cutscenes prevalent in the games), and controllers that were little more than rebranded SNES controllers with a couple extra shoulder buttons. Nintendo innovated with the N64, creating the first home console with dedicated 3D graphics hardware and an analog stick. Sony's response was to double up and add TWO analog sticks to their controller, then force 3D rendered crap-fests like Crash Bandicoot onto a system that really couldn't handle it.
So then Sega dumped all their money and effort into a 128-bit powerhouse and Sony went with a more reasonable upgrade to the PS2. Let's see what innovations they brought to the table with those. OK, Sega's controller supported optional add-on packs (Nintendo came up with that), while PS2 came with force feedback technology out of the gate (Nintendo came up with that). Both consoles of course had powerful hardware and cost an arm and a leg, while the N64 kept trucking.
Nintendo hit a snag with the GameCube, because they fell down on the innovation front. They tried to compete by adding extra power and disc-based games, and it hurt them in the long run. They did go ahead and add analog triggers to the controller, something that both MS and Sony would copy unabashedly in the future.
So the Dreamcast died an early death and Microsoft threw its hat in the ring, creating a console with no imagination that was basically a PC in a box with a controller that combined the least innovative features of a PS2 controller and a GameCube controller. Grats.
How did Nintendo follow up the GameCube? Oh, right, they went back to their focus on innovation and created the only console that grandparents and non-gamers went out and bought, not for their kids, but because they actually wanted to play. That's amazing. They did it by innovating motion controls into the console world, something few had thought of and no one had had any success with in the past. While Microsoft and Sony chortled about the Wii's lack of power and "kiddy" motion controls, the Wii's sales slammed through the roof and kept on rising. It's telling that both Sony and Microsoft each developed their own competing motion platform, with Sony's being a direct ripoff of the Wiimote and Nunchuk.
With Wii U, Nintendo once again innovated, and with all innovation comes risk. The tablet-as-a-controller did not grab the public in the same way motion controls had done for the Wii. I continue to think it's a great idea that continues to be underutilized in games. Nintendo Land is a great showcase for how you can make party games that offer experiences you can't get on another system. Both Sony and Microsoft went to work ripping off the idea as soon as Nintendo announced it, though with the Wii U's relative failure neither company has pushed their technology much.
So now we have the two leading consoles, just a couple of high-end PCs in an expensive box, whose games are far more expensive than their PC counterparts and with multiplayer features disabled except for customers willing to shell out for premium online plans. No thank you, sir. If I wanted to play on a computer that I can't control the components of, I would buy a Mac.
So what happens if Nintendo goes third party? I can tell you really easily. Microsoft and Sony continue to put out faster and faster consoles with no imagination, and continue to ask ridiculous amounts of money for them. With the innovation of Nintendo gone, you won't get the future analog sticks, motion controls, add-on peripherals, screens-on-a-controller, or any of the other innovations they have single-handedly introduced into the world.
Hey, this post went long, but I had a lot to say. So sue me.
Over saturation is exactly what has hurt Nintendo. I remember waiting impatiently for Banjo-Kazooie to be released. Delay after delay until I finally got it and then I was the happiest person ever. After this point it seemed like delays happened more frequently and less games were being released. My friend on the other hand had a Playstation and it seemed like he was getting 7 games a week to choose from! This instantly shifted him away from Nintendo with the reasoning "why wait weeks to play games when I can play one NOW?"
He didn't care about quality at all. Just as long as he had something new to play every time he went to the shop. Gaming seems to have completely gone that way
@ricklongo My point was that Atlus - a developer that often utilizes features of Nintendo hardware to great effect (The 3D effect in Persona Q, for instance, is fantastic) in great games - is often glossed over.
Take the SMT entries on 3DS combined, and I believe they fail to outsell Bravely Default (~1.1 million copies, I believe), though they will surpass it.
I'm just hoping SMT X FE sells well enough to warrant more JRPGs coming to Nintendo consoles.
I don't know if Nintendo invented all of that stuff first but I do share your views. I have a Wii U purely for innovation. I personally think that the gaming world is missing out on a gamepad for a controller. Im pleased that Sony added a touchpad to their controller but it would have been better if they used a gamepad with a screen. It annoys me that nobody gave the gamepad a chance. It truly is "next gen". Most people have touch screen phones, tablets and use touch screen ATMs or self service check outs. We are used to touching screens all the time and it felt like the natural direction to go in.
The voice recognition thing isn't used nearly enough to make people feel comfortable doing it and that's the only "innovative" thing I can see from both those companies. Its just a shame people don't like things that are different.
Also, the feature that puts the Wii U ahead of the rest has to be the T.V remote button. What a genius idea!
@ericwithcheese2 many more than that. What about professor latyton and yolks watch? What about harvest moon? Why hasn't ace atourny made it to Sony yet? Becuse capcom is mostly happy with its performance. Why do you think they announced project x zone 2? Becuse they are satisfied with it. Why does Altus keep bringing game to the 3ds? Third party's do sell just not the typical franchises. Nintendo only owners just have diffrent tastes and the wiiu user base is to small for anything to be a true success. Oh and why did anyone expect project steam to sell in Japan or Europe? You leader is Abraham lincoln for crist sakes. Who else gives a crap about him outside of America. All the others are from western lit and not any from eastern lit. Why would Japan care about it? I live in America and am well aware at how unpopular we are around a good deal of the world. Your leader is Abraham fing Lincoln
Good article cause i really don't want to write an essay like everyone here. Holy crap you guys
lol at all these arguments. It shows the type of person the users are :3
@HollywoodHogan I have the PopCorn ready!
@Kirk It really isn't preaching to the choir, a lot of people think games like Swords & Soldiers 2 et al. are over-priced, a sentiment I disagree with completely. People don't seem to understand why paying bottom dollar for games hurts them in the long term, but few people think that way, anyway.
The reality is, the bubble has burst for video games. 70s/80s arcade explosion burst. Step in nintemdo/sega. Next 2 gems of home gaming was mostly nerds and families. Here comes ps1/n64. Finally brings great almost pc experiences to home consoles. We pc gamers then already had internet voice chat and great games like quake and half life. But then ps2 and Xbox have that too. And everyone in pop culture playing gta3 and halo 2. GameCube was left out for lack of online. Then ps3 and xbox360 are on par with pcs, like it or not. So shovel ware games like army of two were coming out every other week at $60 a pop. Selling millions. But then over exposure has drained the bubble. Free to play games like candy crush have more players then call of duty, so devs jump ship. No money making army of two 5. This gen is seeing a drought of retail games because nobody buys games amymore. If it's not an AAA $100 million budget destiny, who cares? Indie devs are just last gens 3rd part shovel ware. No offense, I support great games and pay full price day 1-5 for games like swords and soldiers. Why? because I just don't want to play candy crush like games. I will continue to buy and play whatever great game I come across. Even if it's free like hearthstone, which is the best game I've ever played since it's basically Magic the gathering but an awesome digital interface and free. and tonight is mh4 on my new 3ds.
The eShop has two key problems:
1) You never really own anything you buy digitally. There is no physical copy to hold onto or trade toward future purchases down the road, but also (and ESPECIALLY with Nintendo platforms) purchases are difficult if not impossible to carry forward to the next generation's console or even transfer between existing systems. Your purchase lasts for as long as your system and its storage medium does. Online-centric games are even worse in that servers can be practically empty the same week of release for a smaller developer, and once said servers are taken down, there goes that playability forever.
2) Other digital platforms (especially Steam) simply put the eShop to shame. Not just by selection but also pricing. Nintendo is notoriously rigid with their pricing structure and frankly the vast majority of their offerings, even the first-party ones, should be going for a third or less of what they're asking. Classic or not, we're talking two decade-plus old games that have been repackaged countless times already.
Lastly, as a writer myself I have experienced the realities of trying to sell books on Amazon and via self-publishers. Complete waste of time to self-publish physical copies; the experience I had made it impossible to sell let alone make money (Lulu got the first $25; how many books do you see going for half of that price?). As for Amazon, I felt like a guy operating a vegetable stand out of the back of his station wagon along the side of a busy highway; people just keep going and never notice you because you're buried under a mountain of bigger names. This in turn is another issue facing smaller developers on any platform, especially Nintendo's by the way.
I did however learn some valuable lessons about the absolute necessity of improving my craft; you can never stop improving because the competition is always tougher and the nature of the market is constantly changing. The only way for a smaller publisher to ever "hit the big time" is to work their butts off and make their games the absolute best they can be.
I thought that was a very well thought out article/editorial.
Regarding Affordable Space Adventures name and it somehow being seen as controversial for the game's price... I bought the game for $20, and I loved it. It's also infinitely replayable with different friends. Well worth the price point for the polish and richness of the game. That said, people are complaining that it's name belies it's price?
Has anyone mentioned that the name reflects directly on the game's presentation, plot, and scenario within the game? Loading screens are full of 'how to fly' manuals that came with the ship. The game starts with an advertisement for a company providing cheap, affordable ships designed for providing space tours of exploration and 'adventure'. The flyers in the loading screen all show off the 'cheap' nature of the company and its product. So does ended up stranded in an unknown location with a broken SOS signal nearby. The ship itself, barely chugging along at times, with old car ignition sounds and smoke coming out of it, fits the 'affordable' description to a tee!
well, very discussed topic.
consumers are right, because we're the ones spending money. you can't try to educate consumers telling them "this is how you should spend your money". we talk with our wallets. If we don't want to pay $20 for a game that we can enjoy for free on newgrounds, or pay a few bucks for on a tablet, then that's the state of things.
if indies want to charge $20 for a game, there better be $20 worth of content. AAA games are charging $60 and have something around $40 million dollar budgets if not more. kickstarted games that have budgets of about $10 million are selling for $20. you can't expect games that look like they have budgets in the thousands to sell for more than $5!
And then you have to look at the competition. compare these shoddy time wasters with the games in their price range! there are waaay better games for less, damn right we're waiting for a discount, if we even consider buying the game. we're probably better off paying <$10 for a virtual console game! wii games are being re-released on virtual console for $20. can these indies compete with wii retail games? should I buy a crappy swords and soilders game, or mario galaxy 2?
it's about supply and demand. supply is tricky to define. are we talking about supply of a particular game? because that's infinite. or supply of comparable games, because throughout time and on various platforms, the supply is rather plentiful. then there's demand. demand isn't at $20. they'd probably make much more money at $5! more people would think "why not?" and buy it. more people would play their game and they'd develop a fanbase!
@AtlanteanMan "Nintendo is notoriously rigid with their pricing structure"
Keep in mind that Nintendo does not set the prices for games they don't publish. It's not Nintendo's fault some indie game is $20. That being said, for their own games, yeah they could definitely be more flexible.
A good guide to pricing is $1.50 per hour for average completion rounded to the closest multiple of 5. Using that formula, Affordable Space Adventures should have been priced at $9.99. It currently shows 6 hours for completion on howlongtobeat.com. (This is assuming a properly developed game and not something like "Suspension Railroad Simulator" or "The Letter" although "The Letter"'s 30 minutes of play via Nintendolife's review works out to $0.75).
This is how I figure out if I think a game is worth purchasing. For example, I passed on Batman: Arkham Origins Blackgate because the average competition time is 9.5 hours. I am willing to pay $14.99 or less for that much gameplay and they want $19.99. With Super Mario 3D World, I bought at $49.99 because the math worked out to $54.99 for the completionist I knew I would be with it.
If that is satisfied and I am really interested in the game, I generally will add it to my "To Buy" list or my "Price watch" list and act accordingly when the time comes (and funds allow).
I payed for the first SS and would never pay twice that for the sequal. It was fun but there are way too many other games taking my free time and I don't find that level of value those type of games.
It's also a hard sell to charge $20 for a 2D game no matter the quality. Steam sales have been proven to get money for devs even if most games purchased never get played.
Sadly, the devs need to know their audience better and can't bank on a sequal to justify higher prices even if they add value because the market is just too full of games of every type.
I payed for the first SS and would never pay twice that for the sequal. It was fun but there are way too many other games taking my free time and I don't find that level of value those type of games.
It's also a hard sell to charge $20 for a 2D game no matter the quality. Steam sales have been proven to get money for devs even if most games purchased never get played.
Sadly, the devs need to know their audience better and can't bank on a sequal to justify higher prices even if they add value because the market is just too full of games of every type.
I payed for the first SS and would never pay twice that for the sequal. It was fun but there are way too many other games taking my free time and I don't find that level of value those type of games.
It's also a hard sell to charge $20 for a 2D game no matter the quality. Steam sales have been proven to get money for devs even if most games purchased never get played.
Sadly, the devs need to know their audience better and can't bank on a sequal to justify higher prices even if they add value because the market is just too full of games of every type.
I payed for the first SS and would never pay twice that for the sequal. It was fun but there are way too many other games taking my free time and I don't find that level of value those type of games.
It's also a hard sell to charge $20 for a 2D game no matter the quality. Steam sales have been proven to get money for devs even if most games purchased never get played.
Sadly, the devs need to know their audience better and can't bank on a sequal to justify higher prices even if they add value because the market is just too full of games of every type.
I like that this article has gotten the ball rolling on people discussing their opinions and worries with Nintendo. It took me a while to finally decide on purchasing a Wii U over the other consoles. I have an Xbox 360 and PS3, but I wanted to make one choice for this next gen console. I chose Wii U because I feel it's something my young son and I can grow to play together, as he is starting to get into games. I also really like the innovation of the controller screen. It took me a minute to come around to this though. Unfortunately Nintendo hasn't done a great job on showing how innovative their game-pad is to the world. I think this is the area where a 3rd party publisher could come in with some innovation and sweep some fans of the console away, and make it seem more worth the money invested.
Side note: The problem is Nintendo is already focused on getting ready to release their next gen model in another year or so, and they never really got anything out on the Wii U besides a few great Nintendo games. I'm tired of buying consoles every few years. I would rather have Nintendo utilize the one they have and reach out to 3rd parties to pump up the offerings on this console. Perhaps that's just old school gamer philosophy, but I can think of so many games by third parties and Nintendo on the Super Nintendo. It seems like with every console there seems to be less and less games that really wow me. I think that's a part of the problem as well Nintendo is already moving on, and it's harder for me to buy a digital copy of a game I know will not transfer on the next system in another couple of years.
@Quorthon I don't agree that Nintendo should go third party. It's undeniable that the Wii U hasn't done well. However, my small garbage can tv can't handle a PS4 or XBOne, so if Nintendo were putting games on those I wouldn't be able to play any of them. In fact, I only use off tv play with the gamepad because my tv is too pathetic to play on. Off tv play was what sold me a Wii U in the first place.
Here's another point. Even though I do like the Vita, it's totally failed in sales. Sony made several mistakes with it, but on top of that, the rise of mobile gaming helped kill it. I've been told that the Vita is the last handheld Sony is ever going to make, or at least release worldwide. If they do make a successor to the Vita, it'll be exclusive to Japan. If Nintendo quits making handhelds, mobile devices will become the "official" handheld. It would be better to suggest that Nintendo should go handheld only than become 3rd party. Nintendo is the only hardware manufacturer that is keeping portable gaming alive. Sony doesn't even remotely care about the Vita at all. The last time the PSN went down on all their platforms, they made a list of the platforms affected. PS3 and PS4 were clearly named, but the Vita was referred to as "other devices." They care so little about it that they don't even want to type the name of it. Bottom line is that if Nintendo goes 3rd party, the dedicated handheld market will die completely.
@Quorthon You have some good points, but I don't agree that Mass Effect 3 or Deus Ex Human Revolution deserved to sell more. EA put out the entire Mass Effect collection on PS and XBox in a bundle, and Wii U owners only get the third game by itself. Even if the Wii U version of ME3 got some exclusive features, PS and XBox owners clearly got the better deal. I even bought ME3 on Wii U, but I'm not even sure what to do with it now because I'm completely unfamiliar with the plot of the first 2 games. I would have to spend hundreds of hours watching let's plays of those games to get caught up in the story before I actually start playing ME3.
And I want to say something about Deus Ex Human Revolution. Square Enix published the Kingdom Hearts remasters or remixes or whatever on the PS and XBox, while Wii U owners only get this game. Even if if DE HR is any good, KH is a way more famous series that I would rather see on the Wii U. After I got a Wii U, I would have bought the KH remasters for Wii U if that is what Square had offered us. Bringing KH to Wii U would have been a nice gesture, and I likely would have picked this game up too. I probably wouldn't have had the option of buying either of them at full price since I am a very recent adopter of the Wii U and the price at that point would have already been slashed, but I would have been still willing to buy the KH remasters at full price, then would have given Deus Ex a chance.
Right now, I'm boycotting current gen Square Enix. They don't want to localize their 3DS games and out of all the games they could have picked, they ported Deadman's Cross over to the Vita of all things. Final Fantasy Dimensions, for example, would have been a much better pick for Vita owners. Square Enix is horrible at picking the right games to port over. If I buy anything by Square Enix, I'll buy their last gen and retro stuff. Even though I loved Bravely Default, I'm not likely to pick up Bravely Second brand new because I'm not liking their actions this generation. I'll probably try to pick up a used copy so they don't make any royalties from the sale. The only royalties they'll get from me is from sales of whatever last gen games from them are still in print, and whatever digital copies of their retro games I pick up. I loved Square last gen since they weren't so hesitant on localizing their handheld games. Square Enix is probably my most hated company now, especially how they are acting this gen in contrast to how they were last gen.
You are right that some third parties deserved better sales on Wii U then what they got, but some third parties deserved all the hate they got.
@Darknyht Sorry I don't get your rule of thumb there - how much is a cinema ticket in America now? $10-15 for a single experience of 90-120min in length? Are you seriously telling me that an interactive experience that is often far longer simply because you can revisit it with no additional outlay is less valuable? Even the DVD or digital film download costs more than what you're suggesting.
Now we get to the crux of it: what determines the value of the media in question and how is the price set. I agree with RCMADIAX: unless you're getting some special treatment from a platform-holder, being platform-exclusive is a risk that might not be worthwhile, given we seem to be into a culture of games not only being as disposable as Hollywood movies, but actually perceived as being less valuable (obviously it's possible to have an idea that only works well with Nintendo's controllers, but that's still a risk).
Here's a radical idea that might not work, but the only reason I go to the cinema as much as I do is a large cinema chain in the UK offers unlimited attendance and a small discount on concessions in exchange for a monthly membership fee that's equivalent to two tickets in price. If indies were to form a collective, guild, union, whatever and go to platform-holders with a similar idea in exchange for a negotiated cut could that satisfy people?
Obviously the content has to be good enough to have a strong negotiating position, so you'd need members with proven quality in the ranks, but I think pushing this kind of revenue-sharing model might end up being a better way than having multiple platforms that are effectively the same with devs on their own just chucking their stuff out there and crossing their fingers. The questions whether enough of them would risk that strategy to make it a viable option.
I completely agree with a few tiny improvements to help reward those who support games at full price.
If a title is purchased on both the Wii U and 3DS (linked account), say Shovel Knight or Shantae and the Pirate's Curse, even a tiny loyalty discount would be appreciated. Two bucks, something, to reward fans who support a title enough to buy it twice. If that's unreasonable, how about complementary download codes for the eventual 3DS Home Themes if we've bought both versions? Shovel Knight and Shante both have 3DS themes Tiny rewards would help reinforce this kind of 'buy it right away' behavior.
Another article about e-shop pricing....Nintendo doesn't give a bleep.
I still think that a multi-platform title should cost as much on Nintendo as it does elsewhere, especially since we get those titles very late most of the time. Its really unreasonable that a 99 cent mobile-game cost 10 Euro on the e-shop. Maybe its Nintendo's fault, maybe third-party's, maybe both. Either way, I would download more if it was cheaper. Though I am not rolling in dough, especially at this moment.
I have to behonest when I go on eshop I am always weary of game with 16.99 price tag. Mainly because sometimes I'll buy them and be disappointed that game is really short and hasnt got enough content warrant price tag. One example is tengami lovely looking game but so short nothing to do after completed it. Yea game only 6.99 but I've bought games cheaper and they had tripple content.
New sword soldiers 2 looks fantastic but i Wish they had done a discount for people who own first game. I kinda wish game had been £10 as i find the price little to dear for me at moment.
Am not currently working at moment after been made redundant so expensive eshop games don't catch my attention.
Plus I could go to grainger game buy full retail game for a lot less!
The problem is a person's perception of value with digital content. Thanks to the App Store, freemium games and aggressive discounting on Steam and even the free games on PS+ we expect full game experiences for next to nothing.
This was a great article. I've never had a problem with supporting the artists that I like by purchasing CDs, movies, books and games at full price (even when I was on a much more limited budget), and I find it very worrisome that more and more, the rest of the world seems to just want everything for free. Then again, I still foresee/blame smart phones for the downfall of society.
@WaxxyOne I'd follow you through the gates of hell.
@Darknyht Hi, sorry I honestly don't mean to be antagonistic here! But I think
"A good guide to pricing is $1.50 per hour for average completion rounded to the closest multiple of 5" is one of the strangest sentences I've ever read. Have you ever been deeply affected by a game? Or do you own games with which you'd say you have a kind of emotional attachment? I'd say it's hard to apply any kind of monetary value to those kinds of experiences, what do you think?
Time to sell my Wii-U and plug in the old Atari, I guess...
Atari jokes aside, sad part is, I can't see these consumer trends changing or getting any better. Mobile pricing/design trends are infecting console gaming like a cancer. But with all the KS campaigns like Shantea, Yooka-Laylee by former RARE devs, and that metroidvania style game from a former Castlevania developer, there is still a demand for quality gaming experience that isn't being met But whrn something great comes, nobody opens their wallets. Hmmm...
Yeah, blame the customers for not having the money and support for our AWESOME GAMES! Ever thought that people don't like the games or don't want to buy full priced games because they can't AFFORD them? Yes, people with small income are given nowadays and don't come and say "then why are you buying a console in the first place if you don't have the money for full priced games?" Because everyone can buy WHATEVER they want. Blaming them, like in this article, does NOTHING. Far from it, it only fuels the fire, which means people continue or buy more used games or cheaper games.
@Wolfgabe Thats why i try to avoid conversations like that. Im pretty sick of that guy.
I have nothing against being proven wrong other then a dent in my ego (but this never results in bad blood, no matter how fierce the discussion) but this guy drives me batsh*t insane. But enough of that, i wasted enough time with that bloke
@Tazcat2011 - Lol. Stop begging the question - don't stay here just saying "Everyone who says something I disagree with just doesn't get it, I cant help them". But engaging someone on equal ground is harder than simply stating that you're above them isn't it?
What a weird article. Essentially, you are attempting to justify why I should spend more for your product. Despite what the competition is priced at, and despite what the quality of your games might be, I should pay more for your games. It seemed as if you were trying to garner sympathy for the game developers, "The victims here are creators, be in absolutely no doubt of that". How about Ill pay $20 for your game if you buy my book? That certainly sounds like a good deal. You dont discuss the prices of indie games for xbox or playstation. I have always been just nintendo, so i wouldnt know. Out of curiosity, after I read your article I looked that up. How do you explain xbox could charge $1 for their games, but nintendo has to charge $20? It seems the answer to your problem, isn't bilking the consumer $20 for a game we could beat in three hours, but rather selling more wiiu. Divest your energy not in writing these sappy scripts about how tough it is for these game developers, but rather try helping nintendo sell more consoles. Make some great games that sell nintendos. That is what you should be trying to do.
You say that £16.99 is about a third of the price of a retail full price game.
The average 'hard copy' Wii u game price is £40 and if purchased on line, say Amazon, it would be £35. So to be more accurate £16.99 is almost half the price.
And there is no trade in value. If you don't like the game, you are stuck with it. Or if it is a short game with no replay value then it becomes poor value for money.
Ebooks are a good example. I download an ebook to my kobo and read it. It then has no value. I can't lent it to someone in the family unless I give them my ereader. Same with eshop games. So these games SHOULD be much less than a hard copy game.
I would suggest a maximum price of £9.99 or less for an eshop game.
I would suggest including 'value for money' to the game score rating.
Price is not the problem. It's volume
There's probably only a few tens of thousands of Wii U owners who actually bother to check the eShop for new releases, follow forums and twitter for news of what eShop games are coming up. Most people here fall into that group, but the issue is how to encourage the 9 million other Wii U owners to buy eShop games.
I completely agree with this article.
People are being groomed to a culture of expecting something for nothing, and expecting their voices to be heard if they scream loud enough.
The problem is, money is tight everywhere. People will only buy the games they want to buy. They may end up buying a game on discount if it's appealed to them but their funds don't allow for it. They may 'treat' themselves.
I have an interest in Lone Survivor but there's always been other games to demand my money. Now it's on a 50% discount I'm seriously considering buying it, but that doesn't mean I've been waiting purely for a discount.
Point of Interest, Nintendo seem to have it spot on. When both Mario Galaxy 2 and DK Country were released I made sure I put my money down? Why? First Week discount. I had no reason to believe these discounts would be repeated at any time during their lifespan. If they weren't discounted I probably wouldn't have got them, most certainly not yet. If eShop games stop going on discount and instead opt for a 'First Week' discount, people would be more likely to part with their cash straight away and then not complain about the price later on. They would know they had a fair opportunity to get it at a discount. If they still really wanted the game, they'd get it later on. Maybe exceptions could be made for when a sequel is released or something similar, like an anniversary. But not sporadic discounts. It only cheapens the product and causes a backlash like this.
God, it's taken me over a minute to scroll to the bottom here so I could comment!
The biggest surprise I've had about flowerworks on WiiU is the "sales" of the demo. Without revealing figures, the numbers are at least 10x lower than I expected. And its totally FREE.
The install base should be big enough for much bigger numbers... Unless there is something really, really wrong. Like no one is using the system 😯
I put the price down when sales dropped to basically nothing. And dropping price always boosts total revenue incoming by a lot... Maybe 5x.
So in the end I never regret it. It makes economic sense.
@Technosphile I have to disagree that Quorthon is wasting his time. For one, although I cannot speak for everyone, I for one have been quietly and patiently reading through his posts and the replies to them to weigh the different points of view. I may largely disagree with what he is saying, but I cannot say that he has not affected my overall viewpoint, or that I have forgotten everything he has said; and even where I continue to disagree, I have not tried to dismiss it off-hand by assuming he is just some [insert label here that some Nintendo fans or other opponents might want to use]. I for one appreciate hearing from 'gadflies' when they take the time to give actual replies (no matter how misguided I think them) rather than resort to all sorts of ad hominems, and repeating mantras that 'their' group often spouts against opponents.
That said, I think this is a good place to give his opinion; it is not necessarily better to preach to a choir, and indeed that may bring its own problems (such as the idea that your opinions receive more positive reinforcement, which may improve confidence but not necessarily help you 'tone' your understanding and argument). And although the majority here opposes him, I disagree with the idea that nobody is listening, and cannot be swayed. I do not think of myself as a 'Nintendrone' even though I am an avid fan of Nintendo. I think we should not be so ready to throw out such labels because, just as much as they help get a point across to whoever we throw them at, such labels may also help reinforce in our own minds that, whenever we are talking to people we disagree with, we are necessarily talking to people who can never be swayed in their opinion, and perhaps are even incapable intellectually to form a meaningful opinion. I may not be practiced in argument, but I certainly believe in its power (not merely cynically as a tactic of persuasion, but as a force for understanding and empathy). And this point in parenthesis makes me think of the words of Mark Twain, who may have been talking about another topic, but whose words can prove relevant here (the following is paraphrased): 'Nobody prays for the Devil, the one who needs it most.' Indeed, if Nintendo fans (the 'enemy' for the minority in this discussion) really are being a problem in gaming culture or in another way, then certainly it is most important to believe in the ability to convince them, rather than retreat to the choir.
Lastly, I may not have read his many posts and suddenly had a revelation about how everything he said is true, indeed, and I have been a fool, but I also believe that much of the time opinions change quite gradually, and indeed never so completely. Even that metaphorical wall you mentioned may be better thought of as numerous walls (for each person who does not share his opinion), but some of them more susceptible to breach than others, and certainly plenty without the best in soundproofing).
@Yorumi A TV commercial for Bayonneta 2 does exist and I remember seeing it during sporting events on TV back in October. Was it shown a lot? No. But it was supported. I've seen a lot of 3DS commercials, Mario Party 10 commercials, Smash Bros commercials, and Amiibo commercials in the last couple months. Nintendo does advertise their games.
I do see your point that the directs do not reach the general public, but let's be honest, how many casual gamers were going to buy Bayonneta 2?
@Sean_Aaron What's not to get? This is his rule that he created for himself. He knows what his budget is and has obviously put thought into it. You are correct that in his system, movies would not represent good entertainment value. However, this system of his only applies to video games......and again, it's his system.
"Look, the low sales on the eShop are extremely sad, but the problem is primarily the fanbase: Nintendo fans do not support non-Nintendo games."
Yep. Nintendo Fanboys are the worst. Rather buy old "poopitypoop" (VC, remakes) instead of new, innovative, high quality games. "20 bugs for indie? Too much." "Oh, 7-10 bugs for old VC games I already own and played... 20 times... I'll get those for sure!!1!" I really hate those Fanboys.
If people just want to pay 3-5 bugs for indie games they don't need to wonder and complain when there are only mini and/or trash games on eShop in the future!
@Quorthon By the way, for anyone who read Quorthon's comment about Nintendo's lack of third party support in general (as opposed to exceptions like with Bayonetta 2), there IS a source lending credence to it: the very words of Dan Adelman, former head of the indie program for Nintendo of America for nine years: http://wiiudaily.com/2015/01/adelman-on-nintendo-and-third-parties/
@ElkinFencer10 I cannot speak for other Nintendo fans, but I for one am definitely one of the old fashioned physical-copy-please people you speculated about. But more than just an old preference, I have also been concerned by my perception (correct or otherwise) that games purchased through eShop are attached to my console rather than my account, so if, for instance, my Wii U spontaneously bursts into flames and I am unable to recover data on it, I also lose my downloaded games.
I really hope I am wrong about this. Someone please tell me with informed sincerity and confidence that spontaneous flame-bursting Wii U does not put my downloads in danger.
@ThomasBW84 - No worries. Might have to send them in two waves today, but I'll get them to you
@WaxxyOne Your history goes into my belief in competition in the marketplace. I would never want or in any way contribute (if the option were bestowed on my by divine power) to the destruction of any of the console providers. I believe Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft should keep at it, and I would even love to see more competitors. And I like how you point out the direct influences Nintendo had on competitors. I would not be surprised if this influence was a 'two way street' either (I am thinking, for example, of how the Playstation was born after a potential deal with Nintendo for a next gen console went nowhere, and Nintendo's response to new competition in the next generation of hardware).
@cloudrunner64 My only real problem with the gamepad was the battery life, though this was offset by my learning of a hi-capacity battery on sale at the Nintendo website for $32. Well worth it.
@RCMADIAX Your point about the current Wii U price for Watch Dogs reminded me of another point that came to mind when another commenter mentioned Steam sales and other methods for getting games much cheaper than usual value: eBay. I have been browsing eBay frequently of late to pick up the best deals on Wii games I missed out on (I am getting them to play for the first time on my Wii U, as I never bought a Wii). And while doing this I came across Wii U editions of Watch Dogs sold in very good or like new condition for as low as $10-$20.
@shauntu I am glad you brought up the presentation of Affordable Space Adventures. I was lucky to win a free copy at a Nintendo blog I frequent, and the flight manuals on loading screens, the ship sounding like my old Volks Beetle, etc., certainly brought me to the same conclusion about the level of care put into this game, including fitting everything to the 'affordable' theme.
@JaxonH Dude! You have an excellent passion for the gaming. I like it. As I've gotten older myself I get cheaper and try to save a buck here and a buck there. However I do have a couple Genres which I buy day 1. I'm a sucker for pretty much any RPG's. Keep up the passion
I am ok to spend my money for Indie Games with creativity like Affordable Space Adventures... But for third party games ??? Hum, I have Assassin's Creed IV on PC and Wii U (thanks to Ubisoft sales) and the Nintendo port is just a joke with low framerates ! We need better ports, that's all
@Geonjaha So that's a "no" on reading the entire thread then. Ok, go try to pick a fight elsewhere then. I'm not interested.
Couple of comments/observations:
1) As far as damaging the eshop, one of the biggest culprits are the publishers themselves. I can't tell you how many times I've seen an indie game released on the Wii U eshop at full price the SAME WEEK it goes on sale on Steam for a fraction of the price. (Recent example, Ultratron)
2) I blame mobile, F2P, emulation, piracy, and all the methods by which many of us consume entertainment for little to no cost.
3) People will pay $120 for "premium edition" day one games from the big hyped up publishers, but whine if they have to pay a buck for a quality game that doesn't have big-budget, "next-gen-ish" graphics.
I agree on the fact that there is a big problem of how to own the game you download on the eShop. I will never buy a digital game on my Nintendo system for high price. As soon as your system fails, you loose the game.
For that high price, i am old school: only physical copy. If they offer me a cartridge with Affordable Space Adv. for 40 euros, i would buy it. 20 euros digital: hack no. Even worse if the game exists in another country as a cartridge, like Ace Attorney Dual Destiny. I will NEVER buy it, regardless of the price, if it is not brought to me in France as in the USA as a physical game.
If a game come out on PS4 and Wii U, I buy the cheapest version (almost always on PS4) and it depends which game but if both versions are the same I kinda want the PS4 version since I can take screenshots, record video and stream + I like unlocking trophies. If a game has touchscreen support or makes great use of Miiverse or is perfect for Off-TV play, I buy the Wii U version.
Also, I would rather pay 20 for an exclusive Wii U game made by a passionate team like ASA than buy multi-platform games at full price.
I do admit I've bought less non-Nintendo Wii U/3DS games since I got my PS4 but I try to support smaller studios when I can.
My Wii U is most certainly not a Nintendo-only system.
Hey, we just spend 4 years on this game , so better make sure to price those 4 years instead of what a consumer is actually willing to pay...
Yeah of course that goes wrong, no one to blame but yourself. Blaming consumers is just BS. Get your business strategy straight and make something worth the consumers money instead of whining about "the industry".
2 Indie games like S&S2 (digital, so no trading/returning/lending/showing off/selling/no quality garantee) or 1 Nintendogame (will have a good reselling price, different sellers, so competition --> better prices, will sell fast/ slim chance of you actually wanting to sell it)? How does it NOT make sense that your game will sell bad?!
I blame steam for starting this whole 'appeal to the budget of the broke college student' mentality that is ruining gaming. You never own digital games, people need to realize that. No matter how good a sale it is, you're still getting hosed.
It's very true, even games i get on steam sales I find hold little value to me. When I bought Infamous 2 for full price on PS3, I played the bag off it because it held an impact. I needed my money's worth. Whereas I recently grabbed Etrian Odyssey The Millennium Girl two months ago in an eshop sale, and I have yet to play the poor thing. I want to, it just holds less value than ORAS, which I dropped forty-five bucks on.
Agree completely. The pricing is ridiculous really. Why would anyone pay £20 for an Indie game when you can buy REAL games on other platforms for as little as a few pounds....
These Indie devs should price lower to attract the punters, just as happens on Steam, Android, IOS. They think they can just overcharge console gamers to cover costs. High prices do nothing for me - even some of Nintendo's own EShop releases are overpriced by a longshot.
How can ok titles such as unaffordable space adventures expect to sell well at such a high price? I would see through it if the game was earning 5 stare across the board but it didn't even.
If people refuse to pay for quality games then our hobby is doomed.
@luke88 I am not really offended. I have lots of games that I am attached to for various reasons, but that is a rare occurrence these days and most of the ones that do have no issues doing what I outlined. I will say that games in franchises I love I generally am willing to take a risk on until they lose that magic. I will also say that nothing feels worse to me in gaming than spending small fortune on an experience that can only really happen once because the game itself really has no replay value (7th Guest was probably my first letdown in that sense).
When I was younger, I bought everything that came out and was supposed to be a "AAA" hit. Eventually I discovered that I bought a lot of games at high dollar and rarely finished them or if I did, I stopped enjoying them and only finished them out of a sense of duty. Just having the newest shiny thing or flashiest graphics does not work for me anymore.
I am older now and I only have so much money to spend on my hobby. In the hundreds of games I've played, the gameplay has always mattered over the story unless it was a well known RPG franchise or related to something I was already invested in (generally from other media). I probably couldn't tell you the plot points of (especially cut-scenes) most of the games I've played unless it was good enough to get me to replay it. Generally cut-scenes are just the things that stop me from playing the game. But then I started gaming in a world where the story was contained on the first page of the instruction booklet or a paragraph before you pressed start.
@Sean_Aaron The value of the Hollywood movie for me is about $1.25 from the Redbox machine or even less if it happens to popup in the Netflix subscription I pay for. The only movies I invest in are the ones that I will use enough to justify the $15-20 pricetag and as of late that generally are only the movies my children will watch over and over again. It is an extremely rare movie that I will rewatch after seeing it once, and most of those are ones that I have an attachment to from my childhood. Cost is no longer a factor in movies, my time or my desire to be cutting edge is.
As for the theater, the value there vanished about the time Blu-Ray, 50" televisions and surround sound happened. Why spend $15 dollars a ticket to sit in a noisy theater when I can get a better experience a few months later at home for less? At home I can sit in a comfortable chair, not have someone talking behind me, and I can pause the movie when I need an intermission break.
The same for music/audio entertainment. The value of music is now almost to the point that metering it is almost pointless. I will purchase the music from the artists I love (and will listen to a lot) and go to concerts to experience live performances from artists I believe are great at their art. But everything else is free either by radio, Pandora, or podcast. Cost is no longer a factor, but my free time is.
The same for Television outside of live sports there is little there that is so important that I cannot wait the year for it to show up as part of a Netflix subscription and if it doesn't there are hundreds of other shows to take the place of that one I don't have. Cost is not a factor here either, my free time or desire to be exposed to spoilers are.
It is the consequence of a digital economy. Before these things justified their price because they were a scarce commodity and there was only a limited number of product available for a limited amount of time. That no longer is true, there is near infinite choice available on demand. The same now holds true for gaming. There is infinite choice out there including a large segment that requires no financial cost to the player.
Now you also can factor in that I have a limited budget to spend on premium entertainment: to get something now, to experience something better than the free offerings, or to be part of that initial first group that experiences it. I will pay for one of those things above, but only if the value is there to me. Ultimately I want the best value for my dollar and the best use of my time, and I have little tolerance for a developer or creator that does not understand these realities. Since the digital market is flooded with content, the quality has to be there for the product to cross that threshold.
For me and gaming, it is gameplay. There has to be enough of a game to justify the price. I won't pay for artistic crap that offers little or no game.
EDIT: It is late and my thoughts are running amok.
Been out of the picture for a day, so catching up. Read the first 150 comments but couldn't hold off any longer to read the rest.
Firstly: ridiculous opinion from the author of the editorial. Just a simple attempt at guilt-tripping some more purchases.
Secondly: As others have said above, the games market is saturated. Nintendo games outsell newcomer indies because the IPs are known entities, having been around 10, 20 and 30 years in some cases. People have built an understandable attachment to Nintendo IP because Nintendo has delivered some of the best experiences over the last 30 years. People build an affinity with the company (cult heroes like Reggie and Miyamoto) the gameplay, the music, the sound design, and of course the characters.
Newcomers have to overcome that if they want to compete. You can't expect a brand-new IP to sell on a small install-base like the Wii U when up against the myriad of great games already available. The newcomer has to find a way to establish a strong reputation for its IP. Bleating about being ignored by buyers does them no favours. Writing a good book doesn't mean you've written a best-seller - you have to find away to get yourself noticed, for a positive reason, not whinging about low sales.
Games like @Affordable Space Adventures are having to compete on my 'tempted to buy but haven't yet because of last remaining ounces of financial disciplince' list that already has Splatoon, Kirby, Yoshi, Toad, SMW3D, Pikmin 3 and Hyrule Warriors on it. Affordable Space Adventures drops to the bottom of that list because (a) I don't know the developer or the IP, and (b) because I now associate the game with articles like this that seem to want to make buyers feel obliged to buy. If your game is really good then give it time and word of mouth etc. will increase sales. If everything depends on sales in the first 6 weeks then you need to do something really special.
@Quorthon - you openly admit to not liking Nintendo's games anymore, so why do you care if they go 3rd Party or not? You don't like their games.
Please, tone it down with the personal attacks.-Morpheel
Oh, and as for the Deus Ex sales discussion...
It released in the UK for the Wii U in October 2013. I don't know the price at launch, but I'm pretty sure it was £30+.
I'd already bought it on Steam for £3.74 in January 2013.
Did I buy it on the Wii U? No, of course not.
@gcunit I'm pretty sure the Deus Ex you bought on Steam was not exactly the same game... I bought it day one on Amazon for £24, and is still arguably the best version out there.
Oh good ol' @Quorthon you just never rest do you? reading how you enjoy distorting truths and FACTS to fit your narrative that the Wii and DS were "flukes" it's....actually is funny.
I enjoy reading how you can come to conclusions twisting numbers and data and you even make a chart! that's awesome.
Too bad that the real world says otherwise. But hey! keep enjoy your fantasy world where 3d parties never do wrong, the Wii was a fad (LOL) and Nintendo will be a huge success if it goes 3d party just like sega and hudosn soft did.
Keep up the good work anyhoo.
@Gaeus If "indies" or mega third parties cannot compete with 30+ year old games then i am sorry but they should find another job. It's pathetic.
Oh and Dan adelrman link has NOTHING to do with the idiotic analysis of quorthon. but hey keep enjoy your fantasy land, whatever.
So much entitlement pjatt with you peoples.
Haven't read all the comments, but I think @MoldyClay87 hits it well on why digital is iffy beyond games' content: You're buying a license that, until Nintendo's new accounts come through, is bound to that one machine. No passing it around with family or friends, no useful backups, no selling it off later, so unless you know what you're getting in for, it's a blind commitment, not just of the game but your access to it.
But then, this is coming from someone with a 2K+ Steam games count from indie bundles.
Tap here to load 276 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...