Why does nintendo insist on making i so hard to be a digital gamer? I want other M simply for the sake of completeness, but $20? And the inevitable mynintendo 30% off just won't cut it with this game. Anything less than 50% off is unacceptable for this game!
Seriously. They want the switch to be for mobile gaming, but if they pull this bull with digital games on the switch, I'm just not gonna get it! I don't want to have to carry cartridges in case I feel inclined to play a specific game with friends on the fly!
I think nintendo will save the video game market just like after the crash of '83.
They will never be big. Why? Because their primary market are gamers who care more about quality games than tech specs (this doesn't mean they don't care about tech specs, but they care about quality games more).
Sony and microsoft are trying to cater to the general masses. People are stupid, we can all agree on that. A person can be smart, but people are stupid. Each person may have a single unrealistic expectation, but together, they combine to become absolutely destructive. Soon, sony and microsoft will attempt to make 4k graphics the norm, and still shoot for 60 fps. As tech rapidly improves, the cost to make cutting edge games will rise. Gta V was almost (if not more than) $1 billion! (Including marketing). The high end direction they're going will become unsustainable. There's a good reason the ds and 3ds so solidly beat the psp and vita. Sony and microsoft will crash hard in the gaming market within the next 20 years or so. VR gives a respite, but by 2018, the public will be demanding 4k+ graphics in VR. Games will take 12+ years to develop! Soon, playstation and xbone will be indie games (which will easily be available on steam and nintendo) shovelware, and maybe 5 AAA fps/tps cinematic experiences with 2 VR games.
@UmbreonsPapa I buy my phones outright, a few gens behind too, for under $300. I got the galaxy note 4 now.
I think older people will recognize mario more, and young people may be more familiar with minecraft. The paradigm is shifting. I think mario is still overall well known, but minecraft may be more popular at the moment.
At the very least, I'd say it's a debatable issue.
As for the microtransaction thing, more than $10 a week, not everyone contributes that much weekly, and I doubt people go in planning to spend that much. It's impulse spending. Small amounts that all add up. Same reason stores put $1 candy and and other cheap things at the checkout line. Impulse buys. The higher the price, the less impulsive people will be. You can't compare spending over $10 on several microtransactions to spending $10 on 1 thing. People are just lesa likely to bite/buy as price goes up.
@Turbo857 You can always go up, especially after establishing youself. Look at angry birds moving to console for $60!
But they can appeal to a wide market. This looks like the best runner out there, and those games are a staple. Many casual mobile gamers would buy it on impulse.
Anyway, yes, nintendo believes that they are setting the price at the equilibrium price, I disagree. I argue that the price that will maximize profit is lower.
The first quote suggests that they are going with a narrow and large approach, expection 45 billion yen (about $450mil) from mobile gaming, for 5 games for the year.
In the second quote, iwata in 2015 describes how narrow and large (cater to small audience at a larger price/scope) works well in the japanese mobile market, but states that the worldwide market prefers wide and small (appeal to a larger audience, but with smaller price/scope). He expresses interest in appealing to a larger market.
They expect a $450 million profit and are catering to the japanese market with the price point. If they sold it for $2, they could make 100m sales (like minecraft) on android alone. That's a gross of $200mil right there, in one country I believe.
Iwata had the right idea, but it seems things changed, likely due to miitomo's poor profits.
They DO want to sell to everyone and maximize profit, but based on those answers you cited, it seems they don't expect a large audience. Which explains the higher price point... and when it sells modestly, it becomes self fulfilling.
@Kalmaro I'm sure data could be gathered to show which is more popular. Nintendo's youtube policies definitely aren't helping them here (another greedy self destructive business practice). I'm sure google has data regarding searches on google and youtube.
But popular is different from how known a franchise is. Which are we talking about?
Final fantasy 7 is very well known. It's had spin off games, a movie, cloud was in smash, a big ps4 release is the final fantasy 7 remake. I will not assert that it is close to mario, but it is fairly well known among gamers, and closer to mario than most other franchises. Amiibo sales will help illustrate popularity, but that is likely a ways away.
Minecraft is insanely popular. Popular on many platforms, is one of the wiiU's better selling games, very popular on youtube, has it's own toy sections in many stores, plushies and apparel in pop culture sections in normal stores and heavily featured in stores like hot topic. I would say minecraft is just as popular and well known as mario. Fnaf is pretty close too, and is pretty successful on the mobile market.
@whanvee I don't think all games are overpriced. I don't think minecraft on phones are overpriced, nor is nba2k17.
I wouldn't necessarily say that mario run is overpriced, though I believe it likely is. It really depends on what one means by overpriced.
I would say my point is that mario run will be much more successful as price decreases, and would be more beneficial to Nintendo's mobile endeaver.
Will it profit at $10? Probably, but there is more to this than pure profit. And if their fanbase regrets spending the money? That will also hurt their business.
They really need to build consumer confidence in the mobile market first.
@Kalmaro "Yes, more people know Mario than those paid games. " Final fantasy yes, but not by a lot. I mean, there have been movies of final fantasy, a lot of people know about it.
and Minecraft? I'd say Minecraft is far more popular than mario, especially with younger people.
"I see no evidence of Nintendo being self destructive with this decision though."
I mean, all the data I presented. Final fantasy free games dwarf the paid games. lower price games own the top paid games. if you don't see the evidence suggesting that this price is self destructive, then you're just not looking.
a point to keep in mind is that this is evidence to support speculation, not definitive proof, but there isn't much evidence to the contrary.
@DrRandle you're obviously missing the point. it's not about individuals complaining about price points. it's nintendo making poor business decisions that will effect our future gaming.
We are all Nintendo fans. we want nintendo to succeed and finally make sequels to games we like, like F zero and metroid. if they fail in the mobile market, they will take a loss and it will mean less risky games on consoles.
I want nintendo to stop being so self destructive and make smarter business moves. They've been messing up with the WiiU, messing up with MyNintendo, Messing up with the Eshop and digital marketplace, and now it looks like they're messing up with the mobile market. We just want them to get their heads out of their rectums and pay attention to the world around them!
@Kalmaro "You are comparing games that are, for the most part, lesser known when compared to Mario."
final fantasy, minecraft and clash of clans?!?
"For the record, when I searched for the top paid games on android alone I'm pulling up minecraft, which is only a few dollars cheaper with over a million installs."
for the record, I already stated it, and it has over 10m installs. it's 30% cheaper than mario run. most of the top games are lesser known games at $1-3 price points. if minecraft were lower, it'd likely reach the 100m installs of clash of clans. that is the point of what I'm saying. below 10m installs? is that what nintendo should aim for? Minecraft on mobile is pretty much minecraft as people know it.
Mario run =/= a mario bros game.
"I'm just saying that they are making a statement by making it more expensive and I agree with it. This isn't just another mobile game, it's Nintendo's baby."
that's fine you agree with the statement they're making. the statement most of us get is "we're nintendo and we do business our own way. we charge more to third party developers, we never lower the price of mario kart games, even from previous gens, and we charge more for digital than physical.", because that's what they've been saying to us for a long time. but that's subjective and not the point.
whether you agree with the statement or not, my claim is that the statement they're trying to make is self destructive.
@DrRandle "By your logic, there's a difference between player bases, therefore the price should be different."
no, my logic is, look at the market. There are many more consumers on the mobile platform. It's simple supply and demand, basic lesson taught in all economic courses. There is something called the equilibrium price. At this price, you will sell the most units that will meet demand and end up with an overall profit. Raise the price too high, and demand falls, especially when there are market alternatives.
The point is, because there are more users, and Nintendo WANTS to sell to ALL users, the equilibrium price is lower.
"So if this game were on 3DS, would you have any problem paying 10 bucks for it?"
yes, because there are plenty of alternatives for $20 that would provide me with more than double the value. I would be tempted to buy it on 3DS for $5, thus such a venture would likely not be worthwhile on 3DS due to the smaller userbase.
Mario maker will be available for 3DS soon, and it offers everything Mario Run does and more. I would only settle for Mario Run for $10 on 3DS if I absolutely couldn't afford a $40 game, which being an adult, well, I can, so the point is mute.
" You're basically arguing with a lot of people in these comments that people on mobile basically don't want to pay for a game."
no, I'm arguing that people wouldn't be willing to pay $10 for a mobile game. looking at paid games, the top 100 games are $8 and under. NBA2k17 has licensing fees, which explains the $8 fee. Minecraft with a huge download count of 10mil (this is a flat price game, so the download count means people bought the game) is just $6. Final Fantasy 3 has 100k downloads at $15. FF7, the most famous of final fantasy games has 10k downloads at the same price. Mincraft with about half the price has 100-1000x more sales on android.
The point isn't that people don't want to pay to play a game, but that more people will play it at a lower price.
essentially, the perfect counter argument to every defense of the $10 price point is "look at the market".
@Kalmaro "people are willing to pay $10 for a game upfront and people have paid even more than that for a free game."
while true, I offered EVIDENCE that "people" is about 10k for paying upfront games.
People pay more in Free games, yes, but you use that to argue that people would be more likely to buy a game that is paid upfront rather than a game with microtransactions. in the google play store, the first pay upfront game in the "top grossing" list is number 200+, and is NBA 2k17 for $8, the rest are all free.
"It's all about first impressions right now and it's clear they are trying to make this game stand out."
yes, the game stands out as being more expensive than EA games. Being cheaper than only Squenix games. They are giving a bad impression right off the bat, and limiting their audience. impressions ARE important, so they should try to impress the most people right now.
I am NOT claiming they should go microtransaction. I simply mention their success to defeat your argument that they will win people over simply by virtue of being flat priced.
My claim is, for $2, they would put the full game in more hands and also end up making more money. More people would impulse buy the game, and as we can see with clash of clans, there are at least 100m+ mobile gamers to cater to, who are impulse spenders.
@Kalmaro What facts? You think the facts show, but what facts?
Why would someone put down $10 for a free game? If everyone downloads it and just plays for free, then mario run is a failure, and nintendo takes a hit.
The point is, we want nintendo to succeed, but they're like turkeys drowning in the rain.
I speculate, sure, but most economic concepts. Are not opinions, but statistical trends. YOU like it better than microtransactions. YOU think it's a better idea. It's convenient for YOU!
People don't like games with microtransactions, but they are sure darn popular for something everyone hates! This isn't opinion, this is fact. So many top grossing games are f2p with microtransactions. The market has spoken.
What's better for you, isn't necessarily better for Nintendo. Good vibes don't pay employees nor cover dev costs.
@Kalmaro It's not aboit an individual caring to pay $10 or not, whether it's too much for them. It's about nintendo being successful in the mobile market. I, like others, would love to see nintendo succeed. We are sayong that the $10 price point won't give them a good foothold in the market.
A low price point is necessary to get that foothold and become a major player. It's just that nintendo is once again being nintendo and trying to ignore economics and do whatever they want, which will lead to failure in the mobile market which would fund endeavers on major consoles, like a new legit metroid game
@DrRandle Okay, so, you have mario maker on wiiU. Spending $10 on mario run is better than $40 on mario maker 3ds. Why not spend $0 and just keep playing mario maker on wiiU? Why even consider mario run when you have a better game.
@whanvee First off, why do games go to $20 when they're best sellers?
Second, regardless of quality, it's the market. You don't invest $500m into a wiiU game (gtaV's dev cost) because you will never recoup that cost unless everyone buys the game at $100 each. Would that ever work? No!
You design for mobile, you follow the market's rules. You may not like that the game is much cheaper on a phone, but considering a phone is like $700+ and a 2ds is under $100, well... I don't feel all that ripped off.
@leo13 I rather pay more and get a full game on my dedicated gaming device. Where is that $10 better spent? On a 3ds game? On a wiiU game? On steam sales?
@Kalmaro No, we don't need to establish what is 'good' amount of money. nor really can we, but in terms of building a consumerbase, we can all agree that numbers matter. In the example of final fantasy 7, there aren't many people buying it, nor is it listed within the top 200 of the istore top selling games. They may be making profit, but they are definitely not making themselves a major player in the mobile market. They're like the RADIX of mobile gaming.
You claim that people spend lots of money on clash of clans, then claim it is an inferior system. It's not about what you like better, it's about what the market likes better.
On android: Clash of clans(free) - 100m+ downloads Mobius final fantasy(free) -1m+ downloads Final fantasy 7 ($15) - 10k+ downloads
The market certainly likes pay as you go gaming, doesn't it?
Final fantasy 7 is #48 on google play store for paid games. Minecraft is #1 at $7 with 10m downloads. 1/10th of clash of clans.
Downl the line, if nintendo can establish themselves as a major player, then overcharge for games, but this isn't their platform, and they have yet to prove themselves. If mario run were $2, I'm sure it would quickly break both grossing and download records across the board on android and apple!
@DrRandle yes, as a nintendo fan, your opinion matters, but means nothing in terms of the argument. My claim is that among nintendo fans, there are those who are willing at that price point. Naturally it means that there are those who are. The fact that the hardcore who buy overpriced vc games is divided is telling in and of itself. The difference between mobile and 3ds is the userbase. The amount of mobile device users greatly dwarfs the number of 3ds users. Number of mobile devices per household is likely more than double that of 3ds' s too. When you sell in greater bulk, the cost goes down, holds true in pretty much every market, and the lower the cost, the more sales!
The amount of content doesn't matter, because it's not a comparable market. It's like saying that motorcycles should cost 1/4 that of a car since it is 1/4 of the mass, but things aren't that simple.
@Kalmaro Which one sells fine? On the android store, FF7 is listed under 10k to 50k installs. At $16, it's capped at $800k on android, likely lower. I don't know where to find iphone data, but it can't be more than 10x higher, which are still paltry numbers for a big name game.
Also, where do you get the idea apple users pay that? Look at the top selling games. Mincraft is at the top of their chart at $7, the only ones on the top 100 higher is an nba2k game for $8 and actual non game apps at $10 and $15. Where do you get this idea? Most of the games are $1 or $3. Mario run outprices EA mobile games! E FRICKIN' A!
@Shadowkiller97 But nintendo is not known for premium mobile games. The point now is to get people onboard. We have miitomo and pokemon go as examples of nintendo mobile games, and neither are anything special or new.
Going in with the first game on mobile at a premium price makes them seem greedy and arrogant. Just look how divided people are in the comments about getting it. They want their first game accepted in as many hands as possible.
Also, the 5m at $10 and 25m at $2 is assuming equal amount, the fact is, as price goes down, demand will increase. Think about how many iphones people have (or ipads too right?) There are in the places where this game will be available. I'd wager it's at least 5 times all consoles+handhelds in those same regions. I'd argue that selling at $10, maybe 50m will sell, while at $2, 800m would likely sell, with many people double dipping on multiple phones and tablets.
Console games are already priced very low compared to the cost with a much smaller userbase. Charging $10 for a mobile game is like charging $100 for a console game (and that's being generous). That's a premium price for console games, and people would buy it, but profits would be smaller as would the customer base.
@Kalmaro But freemium games dominate the market, why? They reach a broader audience by being initially free, which mario run also accomplishes, but preys on people's lack of impulse control. They make more money overall.
The issue with the price isn't about the quality of the game nor the content.
Just look at these comments. These are the voices of nintendo fans! People who pay $20 for old wii games that are like $5 on ebay, and these same people are divided on getting this game at that price.
If the hardcore fans aren't sold, why would the casual market jump on board?
If you sell 5 million copies at $10 or 25 million copies at $2 each, which is better? They are trying to break into the mobile market, and when you try to break into a new market, you want to draw in a customer base even at a loss.
They want their product on more phones first. Even if it is free to play at first, it's going into the super short attention span market. They risk losing too much potential money and losing a market's attention.
And with squares overpriced games, how well do those actually sell? Since they are known for jrpg games, I'd guess their mobile games are comparable to the actual console experience, so their customerbase from consoles probably don't mind the cost. They are targeting a small customerbase who will pay a premium price, but nintendo doesn't want to appeal to a niche market, which is obvious because mario + runner style game. They are going for mass appeal!
And nintendo overprices their stuff again. $10 for a phone game? Seriously? You CAN get an N64 game overpriced on the wii instead!
It makes me sad that people will encourage this practice by buying a $10 phone game. People, send big N a message and at least wait for the inevitable my nintendo 15% off with platinum points!
I personally wouldn't even consider it for more than $5, and $2 is an insta-buy. Would prolly sell better at that price and advertise the brand better, making mario extremely relevant among mobile users.
This isn't the wiiU nor even the 3ds! There is a much larger userbase for mobile gaming!
@Tempestryke my girl as in girlfriend. Thankfully, I have no children.
@KTT don't really get it, but trying to get a girl to go outdoors rather than the mall? that's just madness! The girl spends an hour at forever 21. gives me plenty of quality time with my 3DS sitting with all the other boyfriends though.
particularly hard to do in FL... we have summer and then we have super summer. outdoors is just unbearable here.
@ErnisDy well, for budget gamers, price matters most to them, but that being the case, they likely buy used copies of the games anyway, not adding to this chart.
The ones who really add to these sales are people with the disposable income and really want a physical copy.
Games like Mario Party Star rush is better digitally, because it's multiplayer, and not meant to be played continuously. You never know when you will want to play it, and it's not all that practical to carry the game with you all the time. It's also not likely to be a game to be traded in by many, since it's one of those spur of the moment games.
RPG games, and other such that have no replay value, people will probably get physically so they can trade it in later. I have no idea what kind of game monster hunter stories is, but I think monster hunter is better as a physical copy, since new versions come out often and you can trade in to upgrade. it's also a long game that people likely play continuously, and thus will just keep in their console until they finish it. stories a spin-off though, right? so I'm not sure which way it'd go, but there are plenty of digital only gamers who'll get it digitally regardless.
@plug313 well, this chart is only for physical copies, right?
I mean, I get all my games digitally on 3DS. it's waaaay more convenient to have a digital library for a handheld mobile console. I hate when I run into people who play smash, but say " oh, I don't have the game with me right now, sorry".
home console, yeah, I can understand physical's pluses and digital pluses, but for mobile gaming, digital is just better... especially because if the game ejects itself, your game freezes and you lose unsaved progress! My girl regrets it every few days not getting animal crossing digitally.
I'm still hoping for a challenge mode, 1 new character, and maybe lv 4+ weapons for all dlc characters and weapons. I really don't understand why dlc characters get no alt costumes and no lv 4+ weapons!
@KTT My girl plays, and when I take her for walks, I just hold on to her arm to keep her from running into things as she passes pokestops. In busy areas like malls, there appears to be things to do non-stop
so, NES games, $5 SNES games, $8 N64 games, $10 the pattern seems to be $2.50 per gen rounded up. in that case, the pattern should be GCN should be priced at $13 Wii should be $15
And this is according to their own overpriced rules. They should really have sales to move those unloved VC games. I'd buy some of those oddball ones for $1 even offer them as MyNintendo rewards... what's the deal NOA?
@JaxonH "But if you're using MegaMan as an example than that gives away right there that you've never actually played a game with real story"
wow.. such burn... ow! actually, mega man zero says hello, pretty damn good story in that one.
"But it's pretty clear you're not asking because you're actually interested in playing the game. The reason you're asking is because you're hoping that if I don't give a satisfactory answer you can say "Aha! See it's not a good game" with that gotchya approach."
while yes, I don't plan on playing the game, not for a while anyway. My backlog is kinda in the way. BUT, my purpose isn't to propose that the gameplay is bad, but to bring attention to the distinction between gameplay and story.
I don't believe the gameplay is bad, but I don't know whether it's generic or unique. whether that is good or bad depends on how it is implemented.
The thing is, I ask why, because had I not seen some gameplay, based on your discription, I wouldn't even know what genre of game it was. it could be a beat'em up with fisticuffs for all I know.
With those reviews, there's a lot of vague discriptions of the gameplay, and I get a somewhat interesting view of the gameplay. It makes it obvious it's a shooter. there is a crafting system where you supposedly have to wander around searching every nook and cranny for junk to put together. The game is a shooter, but not a "pure shooter" (whatever that means). The combat is about strategy, and mistakes can be costly, so moves need to be planned out carefully. it's essentially a strategic shooter, similar to how I played rainbow six vegas 2 (and now I can relate to the gameplay).
but the most important message of those reviews :"...or if you have the shiv in your arsenal, you can kill them for a faster death"
puzzled are also mentioned, but the order and emphasis (or lack thereof) suggests they are not integral to the game, and the game could easily go without them. They're welcome breaks from combat supposedly, so they could simply be replaced with a cutscene. The game would probably be better off for it.
see, if you want to argue that last of us is a good GAME rather than a good story, then you need to at least be able to describe what the game is, then you can argue why it's good.
with first hand experience, you can probably even say why it distinguishes itself from other similar games. It doesn't necessarily have to though, as a good game doesn't have to distinguish itself. it just has to do what has been done before well. otherwise sequels would never sell.
Here's the viewpoint though, the story and gameplay are distinct. They are not one unit, they are usually two distinct things. Story is usually not blended into gameplay, and gameplay is not blended into story. when you are shown story, you are not playing the game, and when you are playing the game, the story has been put on pause. Some games allow you to play while story is given, but usually not.
It is essentially no different from watching a movie and frequently pausing the movie every 3 to 5 minutes and playing tetris upto some arbitrarily selected goal.
I would argue that a great story doesn't enhance a game, since it is distinct from it, but forces you to take a break to break the monotony, like doing math homework and taking a break to watch a youtube video. essentially the game aspect can be seen accomplishing the same role, giving you breaks from the story to break up the monotony.
Now, it's not to say a game with story is worse than a game without, nor that a game with story is a better game than one with. It may a greater net worth, but story doesn't make the game better, but motivates the player more.
But I'll make an important point. gameplay is more important than story. This isn't really something up for argument. a game with a terrible story, but great gameplay is still playable. Especially Mighty No. 9 since you can skip dialogue or just put it in Japanese (I personally hated the english voices, but it is a budget title, no particularly high expectations). If you couldn't play due to bad dialogue, then the gameplay just wasn't interesting enough for you to continue on.
But take the converse, a game with a fantastic story, but terrible gameplay. it goes without saying that the game won't be liked. you can make a game with an incoherent story that doesn't make sense with no real conclusion, and fans may be upset by that, but if the gameplay is solid, it's usually overlookable and may be a source of fame for the game. If you make a game with nonsensical mechanics and terrible controls. people will not accept it. Thus I assert that gameplay is greater than story, To the player, to the developer, to the producer, to the entire industry. That's why most movie tie-ins are called shovelware. they rely on the story to sell copies, even when gameplay is incomplete.
That aside, you have vague descriptions of the gameplay that really say nothing of the gameplay. I'll make an example, take mighty No. 9. The gameplay is good because the controls are responsive, and the dash mechanic really puts a lot of focus on speed. the game is about wearing away enemy health and dashing through quickly, giving you bonuses that further encourage speed. it's about memorizing enemy and hazard placement and moving through quickly to make your way to challenge areas and bosses. challenge areas spawn various enemies in various positions, and you must strategize as to which enemies to target first and you learn the pattern. Bosses have interesting patterns of attacks, each with their own ways to be avoided. the game boils down to memorization, hand eye coordination, and strategy. you earn a greater arsenal of weapons as you progress and there is even an alternate character who pushes the speed aspect of the game further with a depleting lifebar, and quick close range attacks. The jumping physics are well done, similar to mega man games. not too floaty, you can alter direction in mid air and the dash mechanic allows you to cover great distances with a risk of extra knockback on impact.
when you described the gameplay of "the last of us", you only gave one bit of real discription; "The combat was fantastic with just the right amount of tension". essentially "the combat was tension" why was it tense? what distinguishes this game from other's in terms of the combat? is combat all there is gameplay wise?
Comments 690
Re: 3DS Hardware Sales on the Rise in Japan as Miitopia Makes Chart Debut
Xbone seems to have had a surge of sales.
Re: Rumour: Images Related to the Upcoming Fire Emblem Mobile Game Have Been Found in Miitomo
@Mega_Yarn_Poochy
You know we'll be getting a shoulder poochy when wooly world 3ds comes out!
Re: Fresh Download Discounts Come To My Nintendo In North America
@mjharper
I know, so much hope only to be dashed quite expertly!
Well, as a miitomo fan, at least I can use the plat points to get 15 tickets every month through myNintendo.
That, zelda picross and warioware touched have really made myNintendo better than nothing!
Re: Video: Let's Count Down Our Top Five Best New Moves from Pokémon Sun & Moon
@papershrimp @craigmoss19
What really matters is how the japanese people who named it pronounce it.
Re: Rumour: Images Related to the Upcoming Fire Emblem Mobile Game Have Been Found in Miitomo
@Mega_Yarn_Poochy
It could also be a background for a miitomo drop stage...stage? Is that what we call those? Game? Page?
Re: Poll: How Important is the Virtual Console, and GameCube, for the Nintendo Switch?
It sounds like everyone wants everything, and they want it free.
Such entitlement in the comments
Re: Nintendo Download: 8th December (North America)
Why does nintendo insist on making i so hard to be a digital gamer? I want other M simply for the sake of completeness, but $20? And the inevitable mynintendo 30% off just won't cut it with this game. Anything less than 50% off is unacceptable for this game!
Seriously. They want the switch to be for mobile gaming, but if they pull this bull with digital games on the switch, I'm just not gonna get it! I don't want to have to carry cartridges in case I feel inclined to play a specific game with friends on the fly!
Re: Talking Point: The Nintendo Switch Pitch - A Jack of All Trades
I think nintendo will save the video game market just like after the crash of '83.
They will never be big. Why? Because their primary market are gamers who care more about quality games than tech specs (this doesn't mean they don't care about tech specs, but they care about quality games more).
Sony and microsoft are trying to cater to the general masses. People are stupid, we can all agree on that. A person can be smart, but people are stupid. Each person may have a single unrealistic expectation, but together, they combine to become absolutely destructive. Soon, sony and microsoft will attempt to make 4k graphics the norm, and still shoot for 60 fps. As tech rapidly improves, the cost to make cutting edge games will rise. Gta V was almost (if not more than) $1 billion! (Including marketing). The high end direction they're going will become unsustainable. There's a good reason the ds and 3ds so solidly beat the psp and vita. Sony and microsoft will crash hard in the gaming market within the next 20 years or so. VR gives a respite, but by 2018, the public will be demanding 4k+ graphics in VR. Games will take 12+ years to develop! Soon, playstation and xbone will be indie games (which will easily be available on steam and nintendo) shovelware, and maybe 5 AAA fps/tps cinematic experiences with 2 VR games.
Re: Talking Point: The Nintendo Switch Pitch - A Jack of All Trades
It's nintendo, so it's likely going to start out strong, but nintendo will do something super backwards that will keep it from being a major success
Re: Nintendo Picks Up Mobile / Handheld Nominations for The Game Awards 2016
@Mr_Zurkon
I wish I could stop playing it... but everyone almost has legendary on all their weapons! Just 100k more KOs!
Re: Famicom Mini Leads The Way In Japanese Charts, Leg Warmers May Be Next for a Big Comeback
@SLIGEACH_EIRE
The 2DS isn't that much more expensive.
I would argue not to include it as it is simply a high quality plug and play device, no associated software sales.
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@Kalmaro
Well, I won't, but I still say an argument can be made.
And by worldwide, I'm assuming we're considering the parts that matter.
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@UmbreonsPapa
I buy my phones outright, a few gens behind too, for under $300. I got the galaxy note 4 now.
I think older people will recognize mario more, and young people may be more familiar with minecraft. The paradigm is shifting. I think mario is still overall well known, but minecraft may be more popular at the moment.
At the very least, I'd say it's a debatable issue.
As for the microtransaction thing, more than $10 a week, not everyone contributes that much weekly, and I doubt people go in planning to spend that much. It's impulse spending. Small amounts that all add up. Same reason stores put $1 candy and and other cheap things at the checkout line. Impulse buys. The higher the price, the less impulsive people will be. You can't compare spending over $10 on several microtransactions to spending $10 on 1 thing. People are just lesa likely to bite/buy as price goes up.
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@Turbo857
You can always go up, especially after establishing youself. Look at angry birds moving to console for $60!
But they can appeal to a wide market. This looks like the best runner out there, and those games are a staple. Many casual mobile gamers would buy it on impulse.
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@cleveland124
First off, I love souced info! Gg!
Anyway, yes, nintendo believes that they are setting the price at the equilibrium price, I disagree. I argue that the price that will maximize profit is lower.
The first quote suggests that they are going with a narrow and large approach, expection 45 billion yen (about $450mil) from mobile gaming, for 5 games for the year.
In the second quote, iwata in 2015 describes how narrow and large (cater to small audience at a larger price/scope) works well in the japanese mobile market, but states that the worldwide market prefers wide and small (appeal to a larger audience, but with smaller price/scope). He expresses interest in appealing to a larger market.
They expect a $450 million profit and are catering to the japanese market with the price point. If they sold it for $2, they could make 100m sales (like minecraft) on android alone. That's a gross of $200mil right there, in one country I believe.
Iwata had the right idea, but it seems things changed, likely due to miitomo's poor profits.
They DO want to sell to everyone and maximize profit, but based on those answers you cited, it seems they don't expect a large audience. Which explains the higher price point... and when it sells modestly, it becomes self fulfilling.
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@Kalmaro
I'm sure data could be gathered to show which is more popular. Nintendo's youtube policies definitely aren't helping them here (another greedy self destructive business practice).
I'm sure google has data regarding searches on google and youtube.
But popular is different from how known a franchise is. Which are we talking about?
Final fantasy 7 is very well known. It's had spin off games, a movie, cloud was in smash, a big ps4 release is the final fantasy 7 remake. I will not assert that it is close to mario, but it is fairly well known among gamers, and closer to mario than most other franchises. Amiibo sales will help illustrate popularity, but that is likely a ways away.
Minecraft is insanely popular. Popular on many platforms, is one of the wiiU's better selling games, very popular on youtube, has it's own toy sections in many stores, plushies and apparel in pop culture sections in normal stores and heavily featured in stores like hot topic. I would say minecraft is just as popular and well known as mario. Fnaf is pretty close too, and is pretty successful on the mobile market.
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@whanvee
I don't think all games are overpriced. I don't think minecraft on phones are overpriced, nor is nba2k17.
I wouldn't necessarily say that mario run is overpriced, though I believe it likely is. It really depends on what one means by overpriced.
I would say my point is that mario run will be much more successful as price decreases, and would be more beneficial to Nintendo's mobile endeaver.
Will it profit at $10? Probably, but there is more to this than pure profit.
And if their fanbase regrets spending the money? That will also hurt their business.
They really need to build consumer confidence in the mobile market first.
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@Kalmaro
"Yes, more people know Mario than those paid games. "
Final fantasy yes, but not by a lot. I mean, there have been movies of final fantasy, a lot of people know about it.
and Minecraft? I'd say Minecraft is far more popular than mario, especially with younger people.
"I see no evidence of Nintendo being self destructive with this decision though."
I mean, all the data I presented. Final fantasy free games dwarf the paid games. lower price games own the top paid games. if you don't see the evidence suggesting that this price is self destructive, then you're just not looking.
a point to keep in mind is that this is evidence to support speculation, not definitive proof, but there isn't much evidence to the contrary.
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@DrRandle
you're obviously missing the point. it's not about individuals complaining about price points. it's nintendo making poor business decisions that will effect our future gaming.
We are all Nintendo fans. we want nintendo to succeed and finally make sequels to games we like, like F zero and metroid. if they fail in the mobile market, they will take a loss and it will mean less risky games on consoles.
I want nintendo to stop being so self destructive and make smarter business moves. They've been messing up with the WiiU, messing up with MyNintendo, Messing up with the Eshop and digital marketplace, and now it looks like they're messing up with the mobile market. We just want them to get their heads out of their rectums and pay attention to the world around them!
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@Kalmaro
"You are comparing games that are, for the most part, lesser known when compared to Mario."
final fantasy, minecraft and clash of clans?!?
"For the record, when I searched for the top paid games on android alone I'm pulling up minecraft, which is only a few dollars cheaper with over a million installs."
for the record, I already stated it, and it has over 10m installs.
it's 30% cheaper than mario run. most of the top games are lesser known games at $1-3 price points. if minecraft were lower, it'd likely reach the 100m installs of clash of clans. that is the point of what I'm saying. below 10m installs? is that what nintendo should aim for? Minecraft on mobile is pretty much minecraft as people know it.
Mario run =/= a mario bros game.
"I'm just saying that they are making a statement by making it more expensive and I agree with it. This isn't just another mobile game, it's Nintendo's baby."
that's fine you agree with the statement they're making. the statement most of us get is "we're nintendo and we do business our own way. we charge more to third party developers, we never lower the price of mario kart games, even from previous gens, and we charge more for digital than physical.", because that's what they've been saying to us for a long time. but that's subjective and not the point.
whether you agree with the statement or not, my claim is that the statement they're trying to make is self destructive.
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@DrRandle
"By your logic, there's a difference between player bases, therefore the price should be different."
no, my logic is, look at the market. There are many more consumers on the mobile platform. It's simple supply and demand, basic lesson taught in all economic courses. There is something called the equilibrium price. At this price, you will sell the most units that will meet demand and end up with an overall profit. Raise the price too high, and demand falls, especially when there are market alternatives.
The point is, because there are more users, and Nintendo WANTS to sell to ALL users, the equilibrium price is lower.
"So if this game were on 3DS, would you have any problem paying 10 bucks for it?"
yes, because there are plenty of alternatives for $20 that would provide me with more than double the value. I would be tempted to buy it on 3DS for $5, thus such a venture would likely not be worthwhile on 3DS due to the smaller userbase.
Mario maker will be available for 3DS soon, and it offers everything Mario Run does and more. I would only settle for Mario Run for $10 on 3DS if I absolutely couldn't afford a $40 game, which being an adult, well, I can, so the point is mute.
" You're basically arguing with a lot of people in these comments that people on mobile basically don't want to pay for a game."
no, I'm arguing that people wouldn't be willing to pay $10 for a mobile game. looking at paid games, the top 100 games are $8 and under. NBA2k17 has licensing fees, which explains the $8 fee. Minecraft with a huge download count of 10mil (this is a flat price game, so the download count means people bought the game) is just $6. Final Fantasy 3 has 100k downloads at $15. FF7, the most famous of final fantasy games has 10k downloads at the same price. Mincraft with about half the price has 100-1000x more sales on android.
The point isn't that people don't want to pay to play a game, but that more people will play it at a lower price.
essentially, the perfect counter argument to every defense of the $10 price point is "look at the market".
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@Kalmaro
"people are willing to pay $10 for a game upfront and people have paid even more than that for a free game."
while true, I offered EVIDENCE that "people" is about 10k for paying upfront games.
People pay more in Free games, yes, but you use that to argue that people would be more likely to buy a game that is paid upfront rather than a game with microtransactions. in the google play store, the first pay upfront game in the "top grossing" list is number 200+, and is NBA 2k17 for $8, the rest are all free.
"It's all about first impressions right now and it's clear they are trying to make this game stand out."
yes, the game stands out as being more expensive than EA games. Being cheaper than only Squenix games. They are giving a bad impression right off the bat, and limiting their audience. impressions ARE important, so they should try to impress the most people right now.
I am NOT claiming they should go microtransaction. I simply mention their success to defeat your argument that they will win people over simply by virtue of being flat priced.
My claim is, for $2, they would put the full game in more hands and also end up making more money. More people would impulse buy the game, and as we can see with clash of clans, there are at least 100m+ mobile gamers to cater to, who are impulse spenders.
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@Kalmaro
What facts? You think the facts show, but what facts?
Why would someone put down $10 for a free game? If everyone downloads it and just plays for free, then mario run is a failure, and nintendo takes a hit.
The point is, we want nintendo to succeed, but they're like turkeys drowning in the rain.
I speculate, sure, but most economic concepts. Are not opinions, but statistical trends. YOU like it better than microtransactions. YOU think it's a better idea. It's convenient for YOU!
People don't like games with microtransactions, but they are sure darn popular for something everyone hates! This isn't opinion, this is fact. So many top grossing games are f2p with microtransactions. The market has spoken.
What's better for you, isn't necessarily better for Nintendo. Good vibes don't pay employees nor cover dev costs.
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@Aussiephoenix83
Ha!
In the US, minecraft is $7, and 2k17 is $8. Looks like mario run will be $20 over there!
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@Kalmaro
"One allows you to rush through levels made specifically for running and go for high scores and compete against friends."
Okay, so you can't do any of this in mario maker then?
The set of features in mario run is a subset of features in mario maker, but vice versa is not true, so logically, mario maker is better.
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@Kalmaro
It's not aboit an individual caring to pay $10 or not, whether it's too much for them. It's about nintendo being successful in the mobile market.
I, like others, would love to see nintendo succeed. We are sayong that the $10 price point won't give them a good foothold in the market.
A low price point is necessary to get that foothold and become a major player. It's just that nintendo is once again being nintendo and trying to ignore economics and do whatever they want, which will lead to failure in the mobile market which would fund endeavers on major consoles, like a new legit metroid game
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@DrRandle
Okay, so, you have mario maker on wiiU. Spending $10 on mario run is better than $40 on mario maker 3ds. Why not spend $0 and just keep playing mario maker on wiiU? Why even consider mario run when you have a better game.
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@whanvee
First off, why do games go to $20 when they're best sellers?
Second, regardless of quality, it's the market. You don't invest $500m into a wiiU game (gtaV's dev cost) because you will never recoup that cost unless everyone buys the game at $100 each. Would that ever work? No!
You design for mobile, you follow the market's rules. You may not like that the game is much cheaper on a phone, but considering a phone is like $700+ and a 2ds is under $100, well... I don't feel all that ripped off.
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@leo13
I rather pay more and get a full game on my dedicated gaming device. Where is that $10 better spent? On a 3ds game? On a wiiU game? On steam sales?
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@Kalmaro
No, we don't need to establish what is 'good' amount of money. nor really can we, but in terms of building a consumerbase, we can all agree that numbers matter. In the example of final fantasy 7, there aren't many people buying it, nor is it listed within the top 200 of the istore top selling games. They may be making profit, but they are definitely not making themselves a major player in the mobile market. They're like the RADIX of mobile gaming.
You claim that people spend lots of money on clash of clans, then claim it is an inferior system. It's not about what you like better, it's about what the market likes better.
On android:
Clash of clans(free) - 100m+ downloads
Mobius final fantasy(free) -1m+ downloads
Final fantasy 7 ($15) - 10k+ downloads
The market certainly likes pay as you go gaming, doesn't it?
Final fantasy 7 is #48 on google play store for paid games. Minecraft is #1 at $7 with 10m downloads. 1/10th of clash of clans.
Downl the line, if nintendo can establish themselves as a major player, then overcharge for games, but this isn't their platform, and they have yet to prove themselves. If mario run were $2, I'm sure it would quickly break both grossing and download records across the board on android and apple!
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@DrRandle
yes, as a nintendo fan, your opinion matters, but means nothing in terms of the argument. My claim is that among nintendo fans, there are those who are willing at that price point. Naturally it means that there are those who are. The fact that the hardcore who buy overpriced vc games is divided is telling in and of itself. The difference between mobile and 3ds is the userbase. The amount of mobile device users greatly dwarfs the number of 3ds users. Number of mobile devices per household is likely more than double that of 3ds' s too. When you sell in greater bulk, the cost goes down, holds true in pretty much every market, and the lower the cost, the more sales!
The amount of content doesn't matter, because it's not a comparable market. It's like saying that motorcycles should cost 1/4 that of a car since it is 1/4 of the mass, but things aren't that simple.
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@Kalmaro
Which one sells fine?
On the android store, FF7 is listed under 10k to 50k installs. At $16, it's capped at $800k on android, likely lower. I don't know where to find iphone data, but it can't be more than 10x higher, which are still paltry numbers for a big name game.
Also, where do you get the idea apple users pay that? Look at the top selling games. Mincraft is at the top of their chart at $7, the only ones on the top 100 higher is an nba2k game for $8 and actual non game apps at $10 and $15. Where do you get this idea? Most of the games are $1 or $3. Mario run outprices EA mobile games! E FRICKIN' A!
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@Shadowkiller97
But nintendo is not known for premium mobile games. The point now is to get people onboard. We have miitomo and pokemon go as examples of nintendo mobile games, and neither are anything special or new.
Going in with the first game on mobile at a premium price makes them seem greedy and arrogant. Just look how divided people are in the comments about getting it. They want their first game accepted in as many hands as possible.
Also, the 5m at $10 and 25m at $2 is assuming equal amount, the fact is, as price goes down, demand will increase. Think about how many iphones people have (or ipads too right?) There are in the places where this game will be available. I'd wager it's at least 5 times all consoles+handhelds in those same regions. I'd argue that selling at $10, maybe 50m will sell, while at $2, 800m would likely sell, with many people double dipping on multiple phones and tablets.
Console games are already priced very low compared to the cost with a much smaller userbase. Charging $10 for a mobile game is like charging $100 for a console game (and that's being generous). That's a premium price for console games, and people would buy it, but profits would be smaller as would the customer base.
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@Kalmaro
But freemium games dominate the market, why?
They reach a broader audience by being initially free, which mario run also accomplishes, but preys on people's lack of impulse control. They make more money overall.
Impulse buyers won't usually bite for $10
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
@DrRandle @HappyMaskedGuy @Lucina @WilliamCalley
The issue with the price isn't about the quality of the game nor the content.
Just look at these comments. These are the voices of nintendo fans! People who pay $20 for old wii games that are like $5 on ebay, and these same people are divided on getting this game at that price.
If the hardcore fans aren't sold, why would the casual market jump on board?
If you sell 5 million copies at $10 or 25 million copies at $2 each, which is better? They are trying to break into the mobile market, and when you try to break into a new market, you want to draw in a customer base even at a loss.
They want their product on more phones first. Even if it is free to play at first, it's going into the super short attention span market. They risk losing too much potential money and losing a market's attention.
And with squares overpriced games, how well do those actually sell? Since they are known for jrpg games, I'd guess their mobile games are comparable to the actual console experience, so their customerbase from consoles probably don't mind the cost. They are targeting a small customerbase who will pay a premium price, but nintendo doesn't want to appeal to a niche market, which is obvious because mario + runner style game. They are going for mass appeal!
Re: Super Mario Run Jumps Onto iOS on 15th December, Priced $9.99 for Full Unlock
And nintendo overprices their stuff again. $10 for a phone game? Seriously? You CAN get an N64 game overpriced on the wii instead!
It makes me sad that people will encourage this practice by buying a $10 phone game. People, send big N a message and at least wait for the inevitable my nintendo 15% off with platinum points!
I personally wouldn't even consider it for more than $5, and $2 is an insta-buy. Would prolly sell better at that price and advertise the brand better, making mario extremely relevant among mobile users.
This isn't the wiiU nor even the 3ds! There is a much larger userbase for mobile gaming!
Re: Random: Even Xbox Executives Are Desperate To Get Their Hands On The NES Classic Mini
It's like amiibo. When stock is plentiful, no one wants any. When stock is low, you impulse buy any and all amiibo you see!
Re: Poll: Retro Delights and Stock Shortages - What Are Your Thoughts on the NES Mini Launch?
@SLIGEACH_EIRE
4 months isn't all that much time. How long does it take to manufacture a nes mini?
Re: Random: Desert Bus for Hope Aims to Raise Big Money for Child's Play
Wouldn't it be more effective to just buy a toy for your local hospital?
Re: NVIDIA CEO Talks Up 'Incredible' Nintendo Switch
Hundreds of engineering years?
Re: Pokémon GO's Designer Wants You To Look Up From Your Phone
@Tempestryke
my girl as in girlfriend. Thankfully, I have no children.
@KTT
don't really get it, but trying to get a girl to go outdoors rather than the mall? that's just madness! The girl spends an hour at forever 21. gives me plenty of quality time with my 3DS sitting with all the other boyfriends though.
particularly hard to do in FL... we have summer and then we have super summer. outdoors is just unbearable here.
Re: 3DS Hardware Sales Grow in Japan Despite Lack of New Releases
@ErnisDy
well, for budget gamers, price matters most to them, but that being the case, they likely buy used copies of the games anyway, not adding to this chart.
The ones who really add to these sales are people with the disposable income and really want a physical copy.
Games like Mario Party Star rush is better digitally, because it's multiplayer, and not meant to be played continuously. You never know when you will want to play it, and it's not all that practical to carry the game with you all the time. It's also not likely to be a game to be traded in by many, since it's one of those spur of the moment games.
RPG games, and other such that have no replay value, people will probably get physically so they can trade it in later. I have no idea what kind of game monster hunter stories is, but I think monster hunter is better as a physical copy, since new versions come out often and you can trade in to upgrade. it's also a long game that people likely play continuously, and thus will just keep in their console until they finish it. stories a spin-off though, right? so I'm not sure which way it'd go, but there are plenty of digital only gamers who'll get it digitally regardless.
Re: 3DS Hardware Sales Grow in Japan Despite Lack of New Releases
@plug313
well, this chart is only for physical copies, right?
I mean, I get all my games digitally on 3DS. it's waaaay more convenient to have a digital library for a handheld mobile console. I hate when I run into people who play smash, but say " oh, I don't have the game with me right now, sorry".
home console, yeah, I can understand physical's pluses and digital pluses, but for mobile gaming, digital is just better... especially because if the game ejects itself, your game freezes and you lose unsaved progress! My girl regrets it every few days not getting animal crossing digitally.
Re: Short Hyrule Warriors Video Signals the End of a DLC Era
I'm still hoping for a challenge mode, 1 new character, and maybe lv 4+ weapons for all dlc characters and weapons. I really don't understand why dlc characters get no alt costumes and no lv 4+ weapons!
Re: Monster Hunter Stories amiibo Are Compatible with English Copies of Animal Crossing: New Leaf
Are mega man and ryu usable In monster hunter stories?
Re: Pokémon GO's Designer Wants You To Look Up From Your Phone
@KTT
My girl plays, and when I take her for walks, I just hold on to her arm to keep her from running into things as she passes pokestops. In busy areas like malls, there appears to be things to do non-stop
Re: Donkey Kong Jungle Beat Hitting the North American Wii U eShop This Week
so, NES games, $5
SNES games, $8
N64 games, $10
the pattern seems to be $2.50 per gen rounded up.
in that case, the pattern should be
GCN should be priced at $13
Wii should be $15
And this is according to their own overpriced rules. They should really have sales to move those unloved VC games. I'd buy some of those oddball ones for $1 even offer them as MyNintendo rewards... what's the deal NOA?
Re: Nintendo Switch to Reportedly Include 4GB of RAM
@JaxonH
"But if you're using MegaMan as an example than that gives away right there that you've never actually played a game with real story"
wow.. such burn... ow! actually, mega man zero says hello, pretty damn good story in that one.
"But it's pretty clear you're not asking because you're actually interested in playing the game. The reason you're asking is because you're hoping that if I don't give a satisfactory answer you can say "Aha! See it's not a good game" with that gotchya approach."
while yes, I don't plan on playing the game, not for a while anyway. My backlog is kinda in the way. BUT, my purpose isn't to propose that the gameplay is bad, but to bring attention to the distinction between gameplay and story.
I don't believe the gameplay is bad, but I don't know whether it's generic or unique. whether that is good or bad depends on how it is implemented.
The thing is, I ask why, because had I not seen some gameplay, based on your discription, I wouldn't even know what genre of game it was. it could be a beat'em up with fisticuffs for all I know.
With those reviews, there's a lot of vague discriptions of the gameplay, and I get a somewhat interesting view of the gameplay. It makes it obvious it's a shooter. there is a crafting system where you supposedly have to wander around searching every nook and cranny for junk to put together. The game is a shooter, but not a "pure shooter" (whatever that means). The combat is about strategy, and mistakes can be costly, so moves need to be planned out carefully. it's essentially a strategic shooter, similar to how I played rainbow six vegas 2 (and now I can relate to the gameplay).
but the most important message of those reviews :"...or if you have the shiv in your arsenal, you can kill them for a faster death"
puzzled are also mentioned, but the order and emphasis (or lack thereof) suggests they are not integral to the game, and the game could easily go without them. They're welcome breaks from combat supposedly, so they could simply be replaced with a cutscene. The game would probably be better off for it.
see, if you want to argue that last of us is a good GAME rather than a good story, then you need to at least be able to describe what the game is, then you can argue why it's good.
with first hand experience, you can probably even say why it distinguishes itself from other similar games. It doesn't necessarily have to though, as a good game doesn't have to distinguish itself. it just has to do what has been done before well. otherwise sequels would never sell.
Re: Nintendo Switch to Reportedly Include 4GB of RAM
@JaxonH
Here's the viewpoint though, the story and gameplay are distinct. They are not one unit, they are usually two distinct things. Story is usually not blended into gameplay, and gameplay is not blended into story. when you are shown story, you are not playing the game, and when you are playing the game, the story has been put on pause. Some games allow you to play while story is given, but usually not.
It is essentially no different from watching a movie and frequently pausing the movie every 3 to 5 minutes and playing tetris upto some arbitrarily selected goal.
I would argue that a great story doesn't enhance a game, since it is distinct from it, but forces you to take a break to break the monotony, like doing math homework and taking a break to watch a youtube video. essentially the game aspect can be seen accomplishing the same role, giving you breaks from the story to break up the monotony.
Now, it's not to say a game with story is worse than a game without, nor that a game with story is a better game than one with. It may a greater net worth, but story doesn't make the game better, but motivates the player more.
But I'll make an important point. gameplay is more important than story. This isn't really something up for argument. a game with a terrible story, but great gameplay is still playable. Especially Mighty No. 9 since you can skip dialogue or just put it in Japanese (I personally hated the english voices, but it is a budget title, no particularly high expectations). If you couldn't play due to bad dialogue, then the gameplay just wasn't interesting enough for you to continue on.
But take the converse, a game with a fantastic story, but terrible gameplay. it goes without saying that the game won't be liked. you can make a game with an incoherent story that doesn't make sense with no real conclusion, and fans may be upset by that, but if the gameplay is solid, it's usually overlookable and may be a source of fame for the game. If you make a game with nonsensical mechanics and terrible controls. people will not accept it. Thus I assert that gameplay is greater than story, To the player, to the developer, to the producer, to the entire industry. That's why most movie tie-ins are called shovelware. they rely on the story to sell copies, even when gameplay is incomplete.
That aside, you have vague descriptions of the gameplay that really say nothing of the gameplay. I'll make an example, take mighty No. 9. The gameplay is good because the controls are responsive, and the dash mechanic really puts a lot of focus on speed. the game is about wearing away enemy health and dashing through quickly, giving you bonuses that further encourage speed. it's about memorizing enemy and hazard placement and moving through quickly to make your way to challenge areas and bosses. challenge areas spawn various enemies in various positions, and you must strategize as to which enemies to target first and you learn the pattern. Bosses have interesting patterns of attacks, each with their own ways to be avoided. the game boils down to memorization, hand eye coordination, and strategy. you earn a greater arsenal of weapons as you progress and there is even an alternate character who pushes the speed aspect of the game further with a depleting lifebar, and quick close range attacks. The jumping physics are well done, similar to mega man games. not too floaty, you can alter direction in mid air and the dash mechanic allows you to cover great distances with a risk of extra knockback on impact.
when you described the gameplay of "the last of us", you only gave one bit of real discription; "The combat was fantastic with just the right amount of tension". essentially "the combat was tension" why was it tense? what distinguishes this game from other's in terms of the combat? is combat all there is gameplay wise?
Re: Nintendo Switch to Reportedly Include 4GB of RAM
@BiasedSonyFan
best example of gameplay and no story, widely beloved: Tetris