nuke13

I will absolutely still argue that it’s priced poorly (for the record , I’m a switch one and two player, and have the game) It is selling ok… but without actual numbers this chart doesn’t tell us anything about the sales numbers. It just tells us where they rank in September compared to other switch games. It might have sold 10000 copies or 1000 copies, all we know is where in the rank it is ( still impressive that it snagged number one being out only a few days) … the only sales numbers I can find our Japans. Admittedly I have not looked that hard. The Japan numbers paint a modest success but still about 1/7th of the original games sales during the first week. I’m still hopeful that Nintendo will see these sales figures as less than they could have been if it was priced more fairly .

Sorry if this has been answered elsewhere, does the switch 2 cartridge work on switch 1? Or is it better to buy the switch 1 cart and pay the $10 upgrade .

As games… 10/10

As a package 7/10.

Price is only part of that. This is part of the 40th anniversary celebration and there is next to no extra material added ( the story book being the only real addition) and the only supplemental material / extras item being a music player . This is as barebones as it can get without just calling them straight ports with a makeover.

@electrolite77 Then what are the points of reviews? Why does it matter whether they mention it or not...if it has no impact? Why bother with them at all? I am all for trying stuff out on your own and not letting a number dictate whether I buy a game or not...but I don't think everyone will agree with it meaning nothing.
The inflation argument is so tiresome and far more complex than then just throwing out "well adjusted for inflation...." I'm sorry if that sounds a bit snarky....but at that point you are saying you would be ok with them re-releasing super Mario brothers by itself for $70 and exclaiming how great a value it is because...adjusted for inflation the original was actually $140 when it was released. My point is that when super Mario all stars came out it was the price of every other game Nintendo was releasing for the Super Nintendo and had twice the number of games as this collection. This collection is $10 more than their normal switch games and has half the games of that collection (Allstars) despite their being much more to choose from to throw in the collection and even 1 less than a collection released in this generation. At the end of the day...it is all subjective as you said (and I would never disagree with that)...regarding value. Pricing is more objective. This is an objectively higher price than their past and future switch one releases (with the exception of TOTK). The pikmin collection ...whether it holds the same value or not to you...absolutely subjective (for me personally the Capcom fighting collection 2, is a much better collection then this)...but it is 2 older games brought together as a package. It retailed for $50. I am as close to absolutely sure that this is collection can be priced at $70 not because of the "value" to the consumer...but because of the value of the brand. To Nintendo Mario is very valuable...they can take two 15 plus old games, make some updates (which no doubt, does take some effort...but not nearly as much as a new game) and sell it for $70. If Pikmin was as popular as Mario that collection would have been $70 as well.

In the end, these are amazing games. Nintendo can sell them for what they feel is warranted. The general consensus is that it is too high for what it is...and I am ok with reviewers calling them out on it. I will be buying it...but I can still think it cost too much. I can still voice that opinion. I am also 100% ok with it being a 9/10 package instead of the 10/10 package it could have been, if the price had been better.

@electrolite77 What is pointless? Ultimately I get it...everything is an opinion. I am just talking about the price being considered in review scores for repackages of previously released games (especially if said games are over 10 years old). I am not saying anything about value. The value of both of those games in relation to them being great video games is nearly unanimous: they are both tremendously fantastic and are peak Nintendo game design. The price, however is not that great (and there are things to compare too: other collections, prices of other switch games) in mine, and many others opinions. This is why I think this collection is a fair to bad price (my apologies though, I had used that in an earlier post and totally forgot to add in that is indeed my opinion...my fault). While I agree that is an opinion ...It is not an opinion that Mario Allstars bundled together 4 games ( ..included one of the greatest games of all time - Mario 3-, a stone cold classic in super Mario brothers, a never been released game and Mario 2) and still managed to be the normal price of a wide release. It is not my opinion that Pikmin 1 and 2 were $50 as a 2 pack. Nor is it my opinion Pokemon ZA (the other switch one release this month, is a normal $60 release). To be fair it's not my opinion either that donkey kong country HD was a full price game and only had the one game. That price was far worse than this package. Thankfully it looks like the market agreed and It has sold about 1/6 of what the game sold on Wii. If that game had sold more, I think this package would have likely been $80 and priced at $50 individually.

As I stated Mario 3 and Mario World are both incredible games with great value. If they were bundled and released with a price of $70 next week...I would expect the review scores to reflect that it's not a good price. I do not see value and price as the same thing. Something can hold a lot of value for someone...but it is totally ok to call out the price. I believe reviewers should call it out. It is controversial after all. The one consistent in almost all these reviews is that the games are fantastic and that they hold up. The other, nearly as consistent: the price is questionable. That is not an opinion, that is a fact (not the price being questionable...but rather that the questionable price is mentioned in nearly every review). As part of any comprehensive review...it should be brought up. Otherwise reviewers (such as this site) should just copy and paste their original review and add a few blurbs about what is new.

@Sensible
Absolutely I can choose. No argument there. I can also choose to voice my concerns when inconsistency rears its head. If a company uses the "value" argument as well as lumping in the development cost as to why certain games are going to cost more...and then turn around and release a fairly bare-bones up-ressing of 15-17 year old games and price it $10 more...then yeah I am going to agree that knocks the package down a little. This is a 11/10 package if it's priced at $50. A 9.5/10 at $60 and a 9/10 at $70 in my opinion.

I am simply pointing out that the price is not good and responding to your hypothetical argument regarding review scores and their impact. I consider gaming a wonderful hobby. I would like more people to be able to partake in it. Not everyone is in financial position to buy new games...historically collections of older games are priced better. Pricing this collection at $50 or $60 would not do anything to devalue these games...just like them dropping to $20 and $30 in the Wii era did nothing to do that. I feel that by charging $70, it makes it a little worse overall as a package. To answer your other question: the experience stays about the same (much more subjective them games...though...more people argue that its getting worse then getting better) and prices keep going up. Doubling/tripling in some cases year to year. The CEO is on the record as saying they want to maximize ticket yields....that they know they can because previous prices were more geared to families. They can basically keep raising their prices because "someone will buy them". Would you have been ok with game prices going from $60 in 2015, to $85 in 2020, to $144 in 2025? That is what's happening there... For the record I am not a fan...but it has opened up a conversation so I have been doing some research.

@Sensible

This 2 pack of games is going to likely score an average of 9s anyway and has one of the most popular gaming characters headlining it… so I’m sure it’s safe for wishlists. Kids are not asking for v bucks because they score or don’t score well on reviews. That I can assure you.
Use this as a teaching moment. Kids are smart. Explain that these games are better than their review scores because most think they are charging too much, then have them read the reviews…where they will quickly learn that they are masterpieces. Use it to show them a number doesn’t always tell the whole story.

My 13 year old is ok with pricing at these wrestling events he likes to go to , not because they are fair… but because he knows that “they can charge whatever, because some one will buy it” . That feels a little scummy and doesn’t sit right with me. If there is no push back on prices what is stopping any company from releasing their older games and charging full price? I want my kids to play new games too… not just re-releases. All things being equal… new games cost more to make… and If price is not actually a factor they get pushed back on … if I was corporation I would simply just start using more resources to re re-release more of these old games, package them as new and charge full price.

@electrolite77 yes but for these kind of rereleases you can compare it to original offerings … and as part of a comprehensive review it should be considered anyways. If the last time these were commercially available the price was 19.99 and 29.99 for them, a discussion about whether charging $20 more in total is warranted. If a normal switch 1 release is $60 and this one is $70 , what justifies the $10 increase in cost? the reasoning should be at least explored or mentioned. If these were new games , they would be lauded as brilliant with an amazing price . They are not new games though. They are being repackaged and sold for the most premium price the company has sold their switch one games for. Therefore they are brilliant games with a fair to bad price… and review scores are reflecting that. Super Mario brothers 3 and world are still both 10/10 games if you ask me… but if they sold a two pack for $70, I would not expect them to score that way. If want reviews on gameplay alone …as long as there is nothing significantly changed… then go read the original reviews. If you wanna see what was added… read the new reviews and ignore the discussion in them about price.

@DarkFighter my apologies … I didn’t word my response correctly. To be fair you didn’t mention release prices… you just said 15 years ago ( that works for galaxy 2 but not 1), so my bad…You are correct , 15 years ago they would have been both been $50…. But 14 years ago you could have had both for $70 (galaxy 1 for $20 and galaxy 1 for $50. 12 years ago if you had walked into a store they would have been 29.99 (galaxy 2) and 19.99 ( galaxy one) , $50 for both. I don’t feel that it’s reductive (or whiny for that matter ) to call the pricing of this new collection out, when taking that into consideration. Also the only real point I was trying to prove was about inflation… because this is the first switch 1 release of this collection…. There is nothing to compare it to. I could argue that it actually is inflation because it is $10 more than other switch 1 releases… but like I said… that really isn’t it… it’s the popularity of the brand ( if it truly was inflation related… Pokémon za and Metroid prime 4 would also be $70 for switch 1). So I agree with you… no inflation detected, but that doesn't mean it’s a fair price.

@DarkFighter If memory serves me correctly, Mario Galaxy was 19.99 last time it got a retail release (the Wii greatest hits collection) and Mario Galaxy 2 was $29.99 last time it was being sold at retail. Inflation can't be detected, because Mario Galaxy 1 and 2 collection has never been out on the switch. It is $10 more than nearly every other switch one game...but that isn't because of inflation...thats value of the brand.

These are two great games no doubt. I agree that price should not be factored into the quality of the game, but a comprehensive review should cover that and reference that (as it may be important to the consumer). Ultimately both sides have good points and we can all come up with multiple examples and theoretical arguments. This is the second $70 Nintendo produced switch 1 game. Thankfully Metroid prime 4 and Pokemon ZA are not also being sold for $70 as switch 1 games. In my opinion (key phrase) this is a great value being sold at a fair to bad price. Pikmin 1-2 collection in contrast is a great value sold at a great price. Mario 3d Allstars was a great value sold at a great price. Again those are my opinions. The price may be contentious but ultimately, by the end of this week, switch owners will have the chance to play 2 all timers that brings 1 of Marios greatest out for a whole new generation of consoles.

@ogbert . Absolutely, agree that together when originally released they did take as much effort… I’m talking about as much effort to put this collection out. No doubt that porting these took some effort , but I will stand by my point… certainly a fair bit lower resources/ personal were on this then totk. Not saying they didn’t put any effort… it takes a fair amount to get it on modern hardware … but if you are trying to say that it’s anywhere close to TOTK in production cost… then I will disagree. These 2 games sold 20 million copies already originally, some more on virtual console and galaxy one was already on the other collection. It also took effort porting the 3 games on the collection 5 years ago … or on the original Mario all stars. This is a product being provided …not an ongoing service like a hotel room ( who has to pay ongoing cost such as property tax, electricity etc…) and who I am sure have already made Nintendo quite a profit … My 1st dvd player cost like $300 … the same company released one 10 years later that played blu rays and looked similar … and it cost $150. I was not angry in the slightest, because that is how this normally works… it was no longer a new technology, but there was some effort to put it together, add some bells and whistles, and an ability to play a new format…yet it was half the cost…because the tech was developed / the groundwork laid . These games have been cleaned up and improved no doubt… but by pricing it at $70 … when all but one of nintendos other switch one games are $60 ( including a collection of 3 Mario games… again with 1/2 this collection on that one) or less ($50 for pikmin 1 and 2) …it is inconsistent ( which is the original point of the letter to the editor) and , in my opinion, not a good price.

T130 calculators cost $30 in 1970… now they can be had for $10. I’m not saying it has to be that extreme with games. I also recognize that Texas Instruments would still sell them for $30 if they could… so in the end , like I said in my other post,… I get the business side of it. Nintendo can still sell these at the price they are offering ( or whatever price they see fit for that matter) I am merely pointing out the inconsistencies of the pricing and can be upset that they are selling this for $20 more than another 2 game collection they recently released and $10 more than a similar collection with one more game. Not to mention that their peers ( square, sega , Capcom, Konami )do it so much better… capcom fighting collection would have been like $200 if they followed these pricing conventions. I don’t think it’s a great price, but the market will determine that. Great games , no question… they are.

I do disagree with the authors response about it affecting the perceived values of new games. I’m not expecting the next mortal kombat game to cost like $20 just because MK kollection is $60 and has like 10 games. Im not questioning why Final fantasy intergrade is $40 (lower than anticipated however) when pixel collection is 74.99….but has six games. Give gamers some credit here. I mean consider the following for a more Nintendo centric view on it:
Why didn’t Nintendo charge $60 for Mario all stars on Wii? I believe it $30 upon release. Which at that time had a similar response to mkw being $80 from most Nintendo fans ( well the kind who are active on forums anyways). Still, it was half the price of what the original release was. It did nothing to devalue new Mario games….i still paid $50 for galaxy 2 (released the same year) $60 for odyssey etc… and didn’t bat an eye, because i knew those were new games and all stars was a collection of previously released games. Mario all stars Wii collection sold a third of the units galaxy 2 on the Wii…I don’t think making it $60 would have helped it sell more.

Of course , all this could be moot. Maybe once the game releases… we will see that it’s more of a Metroid prime situation and it’s actually a remaster/ closer to that. Then the price would seem better.

1. Nintendo is a business…they know what they can sell their wares for and what they can charge. You as the consumer can decide and vote with your wallets.
2. You can be upset and vent/ write letters , and disagree with the price.

These are not mutually exclusive, you can do both. Just because I understand it the first point doesn’t make the second point evaporate. I do believe Nintendo is being inconsistent. In the US, this will be Nintendo’s second $70 switch one game, after tears of the kingdom. I am sorry, but I doubt this had anywhere near the development effort of tears of the kingdom. I do understand ( and appreciate @ogbert for pointing it out here) that just because something is older doesn’t really change the value. I just was not expecting $70 for two games that have already been made ( 1 already being re-released). If I want a physical copy of it…I’m actually paying more than the Wii release ( already have galaxy one physical on switch). If we are going by value only…then final fantasy pixel collection at $5 more runs circles around this release…not to mention other great collections ( orange box, halo, Mario all stars ).

To me this is less about the value it offers and more to do with the popularity of the series. If Metroid was more popular, you bet that Metroid prime rerelease would have been $60. ( speaking of which, if they had followed their pricing for Metroid prime and just released galaxy 2 physical for $40, that would have been fine.). When pikmin 1 and 2 collection released it was 49.99. Not to mention the 1st Mario 3d Allstars collection, which had 3 games ( including one in this collection) that was released at $59.99. The price is high, because of the “name” not the value it actually has.

When releasing older media- how you present and bundle it is important.Let’s say Disney releases a Toy Story 1-3 blu ray collection. People are confused that it didn’t include 4…but buy it anyway. It’s priced at $50. It goes out of print. 5 years later they decide to print another collection …it’s got a couple extra things plus the 4th movie…but omits Toy Story 1 and 2….and now costs $60. That is ostensibly what happened here. Not saying old media has less value….but it’s hard for me to argue that people should not be upset with the price of this collection .

It doesn’t even make sense from a “economic factors” standpoint point. Pokémon and Metroid both have switch one releases this year at $59.99 after the release of this collection. At worst Nintendo should have released this at $60 and charged 9.99 for the switch 2 update.

Again I understand from a business perspective. They can price it at that , because it will sell. It’s ok to be critical, though. I do agree that arguing about it on forums isn’t what will lead to change. I’m not actually sure what would. Many people will still buy it , and we will never know how many more would have at a lower price. We will never know if this does any damage reputation wise.

@GrailUK that’s a good point

I echo some of the the sentiment here in that I am tired about all the complaining about pricing…and yeah, no one is forcing you to buy this. Despite this, I feel it’s most warranted here. What Nintendo has ostensibly done here is make galaxy 2 physically available for $70. The 3d all stars collection was released at $60….and included three games. If you are a fan of Nintendo or Mario , you likely got that. The issue is that one of those 3 games was Mario galaxy….so the only “new” thing here is galaxy 2. I appreciate that you can buy it separately. I do wish a discount (maybe $30 instead of $40) was available for owners of the original collection…but if you want a physical version of galaxy 2 you must spend $70 for a collection that has one less game then a similar collection from only 5 years ago. I understand this one may not be limited release, but come on that should lower the price then (more availability =more chance of revenue). This is also a switch 1 game also being released on switch 2 …why is it $70? This is not on the effort of tears of the kingdom. I get that cartridge production costs , world economic stuff is happening…. But Pokémon and Metroid switch 1 games are both $60 and releasing after this. Ultimately the market decides, and I have no doubt this will sell…but I offer the above as my complaints. Hopefully there are updates that justify the cost, otherwise Nintendo continues their streak of a company with a rich and great history that throws together the most barebones collections for the highest price.

Absolute Megaton for gamers of a certain age.

Really love being able to get to play this. Air/ ace combat is one of favorite game series and I have fond memories playing this particular game when I was 14/15. Yes some of the excitement is lost without the full set up ( it requires it more than ridge racer in my opinion) but it’s still a fun arcade experience. I just wish it gave you the option to do full rolls when maneuvering. If it does , I have not figured it out. It seems to use the “ novice” control scheme later games in the series utilized with no option to change to advanced. Still a fun experience that I have hopped into daily since purchasing.

@gsilver unless I’m doing it wrong ( this is based on my experience with ridge racer)… buying the switch 2 version does not include the switch 1 version…. It doesn’t give you the choice to pay $1 to also get the switch 1 version ( the price it would be if you got the switch 1 version and paid 2.99 to upgrade )… so basically if you want it on both I would suggest you get the switch 1 version and buy the upgrade. I’m doing something similar in keeping my OLED and was bummed that I couldn’t download it to that… so going to be buying this game on switch 1 and doing the upgrade thing. Super looking forward to finally being able to play this. Used to stop at a truck stop back when I was a kid and play this.

@RiasGremory yes… And the Nintendo ones are $10-$14 more than the previous amiibos…. Making the capcom price more egregious. Yes the Capcom ones are bigger… But 29 would be the max I would pay for one of those… They really should $24.99. I get that the price reflects all the financial stuff going on in the world, such as tariffs… but as @Yomerodes observes they are just sitting there on shelves now. Hopefully the prices will reduce soon… They don’t seem to be selling that much with the current price, at least where I am (California). I was at Best Buy yesterday and most accessories had low stock…but these Amiibo’s look like they were fully stocked in more than one place at the store (up front and back in the game section) it’s the same whenever I go to target as well.

Nice to see the interest. Hoping for capcom vs tatsunoko on the next collection.

@DTFaux I get what you are saying ,but I feel it doesn’t capture the whole story. Consider the minimum wage at that time in California was $4 or so… you would have had to work 20 or more hours for the price of the game. Right now in California that same place is probably paying $20 an hour…. So you would need to work 4 hours or so. So yes minimum wage went further… but the offset here is you are expending much less time to get to the cost of the game . Still pretty tone deaf of him to say the quiet part out loud .

I have already changed… Not that much due to prices, though. It was the realization that time is more limited than I ever gave it credit for or at least thought about. I’ll go with one of the examples The author used.Yes ghost of Yotei does look awesome… but yeah as the author stated if Metroid prime four comes out at the same time… Let’s just say Nintendo goes to $80 route instead of the $70 route like they did for donkey Kong… then spending an extra 10 over what it may have been is not that huge a difference I would just need to budget around it. Let’s say Sony decides to raise their prices to 80 so now that’s $20 more than what it may have been ( Yotei and prime 4 being $160 instead of $140). Still not a gigantic amount, with some careful budgeting could be over come, especially since gaming is my favorite hobby. However, what I came to realize is why would I buy two of these big games at about the same time when I simply just don’t have the time to play both? In the past, I would rationalize that once I beat one I would go onto the other… but what usually ended up happening is I would beat one and another big game I wanted would be out and I would simply go to that one… This leads to backlog and $70 ( or 60 in the case of switch one games) spent on something I don’t really touch. Worst of all in the case of non-Nintendo games by the time I get to a certain game it usually is much cheaper or has seen significant sales. If Nintendo keeps up their release cadence and releases about 10 games per year this $10 increase leads all their games costing $100 more for that year..so in that case I may buy one less. I had already planned on their games being $70 based on everyone else… and I’m thinking most of their games will actually end up costing $70… but we’ll have to wait and see on that one. In the end, my change in buying less games comes more from the fact that time is limited and I just don’t have time to play them all… and it’s kind of pointless to pay 70 or even $20 if I’m not gonna play it for a while. I’ll make exceptions for those games that seem like they might have a limited release. ( maybe a game based on license that could expire -marvel fighting collection for example or if the company said it was limited kind of like the Mario collection a few years ago).

@Grandiajet ha ha ha ! It’s the thing that plays those key cards that seem to be taking up a lot of the share around here !

Looking forward to it. My only concern is that it’s a smooth experience… a lot of people will be logging in / downloading Mario kart etc… at the same time. Hoping Nintendos servers are up to the task.

@Vectrex do you know for sure that the budgets are much smaller? And if they are , do you know why? Most of their games seem at least as polished /playable as any other game. I don’t have an answer but I am curious and want to know your opinion on it.

@KevinP absolutely. It’s not the Mario kart price that makes me upset regarding this… it’s the prices they are charging out of the gate for the upgrade packs etc… they should have dropped all those switch 1 games to 39.99 or 29.99 then charge 49.99 at most … definitely voting with my wallet … not going to touch those if I have already purchased them… and I will decide based on reviews and community conversations if I purchase the updates .

@KevinP I’m not sure we are defending Nintendo but more against this notion that these prices are outrageous and are shocking …. When, if you look at the bigger picture , it was quite expected .

@-wc-

I don’t have time to go and look but I’m going to assume they have gone up , otherwise there would have been talk of a crash … but cost of living etc… has also gone up. Inflation has occurred . Video games have been relatively protected from price increases …. But they found revenue streams elsewhere… the games in the 90s / early 2000s didn’t have dlc or expansions to boost revenues. I know the argument you are trying to lay out, and I understand where you are coming from… but prices will increase over time because the cost of living etc is as well…. Video games have not risen with the rate of inflation thankfully.

@Yoshi3 they were talking about Nintendo switch games… Not switch two games. If anyone thought that new games for a new system were not gonna be $70 then they were not paying attention to the market. Most big first party and major third-party releases have been $70 on the newer systems released since the switch one came out. Yes of course there are exceptions… I think a couple were highlighted in the article… But this is the world of variable pricing most big releases are gonna be $70 nowadays… We switch fans got grandfathered in to $60 being the norm because the system was released in 2017.

@tektite_captain thank you for saying this… game prices have been pretty stagnant over the past 20 years… they did get a decrease initially with cd rom/disc technology … But I remember paying $70 for games back in the super Nintendo era. Sometimes to make me feel old my kids will ask me about prices for things like movies, going out to eat, computer stuff, etc., when I was their age… like they don’t understand why I complain about movies costing $12 or that buying a sandwich cost like $10 or more now. I explained to them that I still have movie stubs from the mid 90s where it was $4.25 Or that you could still go out to eat for less than $7. They are always shocked though when I tell them that I either pay less or the same for a video games as I did back then (early to mid 90s)… often quite a bit less thanks to the digital distribution system, allowing more publishers and smaller studios to get stuff made. Games like dead cells or Balatro simply did not exist back then… sure similar game types might’ve existed(well maybe not balatro ha ha) but in the console world you were paying at least $60 for even the small experiences or you had to wait for it to go in the bargain bin or wait for a good sale… And in the first year of a game that usually meant paying at least 39 or 49 on sale anyways… now Major releases get discounts way more than that in their first six months . That’s a problem to discuss another day. So as gamers nowadays, we are spoiled for choice. Yes $80 games are a sticker shock… but in the current system, we have prices are probably always gonna go up unfortunately. Yes it can be frustrating, but as always, the market will vote It’s wallet . Also, I’m happy to see that this does not mean the end of the sub $20 game that look amazing, with fast fusion coming out at $14.99. I’m talking about just the games of course… Console prices definitely have gone up… but they also do a lot more of of course.

Perhaps this is a generational thing. People who grew up on the Internet, expect news and such to be freely available. I know Nintendo life provides an option to support them financially… But how many people actually take that up? That of course, is a much bigger conversation then could be had in a comment. I do agree that the infusion of politics and everything is quite a drag. Don’t give me wrong. It’s still occurred in the old days in magazines… but I do feel it not to the extent now. It’s one of the reasons I enjoy this site… It does not seem prevalent here, at least not to the extent on other places. That being said, I think one of the points this article is trying to make is that you should support sites you enjoy.… They have to make money somehow… Keeping the lights on and such. We as a population have gotten so cynical about paying, and who the money goes to that we sometimes forget most of us are getting all of this information for free… And those who use ad blockers are cutting a primary source of income for a lot of these places. It takes creativity, dedication, and dare I say consistency to make entertaining content that one wants to consume regularly. This industry, if it is to survive is gonna need a better revenue model. Otherwise, who is going to do it? Pre-Internet you paid $20 a year or so for subscriptions… those magazines still had ads. Perhaps it is time that these places put more stuff behind pay walls. I understand that is an incredibly unpopular opinion… But I feel that the writing is kind of on the wall… This approach isn’t really working. So yes, support the sites you like and the people in them.

@Spider-Kev $20 …. The $30 ones are capcom. Nintendo’s are priced at $20…. It’s the current conditions that put them at $30 at least at GameStop ….but yeah I miss the 12.99 days

@progx totally get what your saying …it’s an individual decision on value and what they add for the person. The point I am zeroing in on is even new amiibos are $20 ( Totk and the new unreleased ones)… so $40 is an effective doubling of the price. I cannot believe they are trying to sell them for $30…but you are correct in that is “only “ 10 over the normal price of 20 now… but for me ( and I would suspect for many who still collect them) , when you see a $ 40 price tag on something that other versions are selling at $15.99 and other new ones are $19.99 it’s like a 20 increase. The 30 price makes sense with current market conditions…but 30 normally(remove the market conditions)is a bit out there…but as you alluded to it will be a decision for individuals to make based on the value they bring to a collection.

@Friendly yeah it’s gonna be pretty awful … not getting an amiibo is no issue but when these increases start hitting the important stuff it’s gonna be tough.

@Friendly …understood…it’s why I thought these were maybe the bigger ones….they look more in line with the 15.99 ones. Ganodorf is 20…so seeing 40 still makes it seem like a 20 increase.

@NinChocolate
If in a few years Nintendo releases a second alarmo …lets say with some different characters but in every other way is the same and charge $180 for it, then that would be more like this situation. Besides I think this is more on capcom. Amiibo are currently $15.99 and they are pricing theirs at $30.. $14 more. Nintendo raised theirs by $4.

Yes at $100 the alarmo was/is overpriced in my opinion but that is a little different then this situation since there are current/same products being sold.

@progx

It’s only a 10 increase from the msrp…. Which was already almost double the current. I went looking last night …and yeah amiibos are still $15.99. They started at 12.99. So to me it really is a $24 increase over what they currently sold for and I am surprised there is not more of an uproar from collectors . The only reason, as you alluded to is that it’s “only” 10 over the msrp…but that doesn’t tell the whole story here….

….Despite really liking amiibo , I had missed the price announcements for these a couple weeks ago. I was planning on getting one of the street fighter characters. My jaw dropped when I saw $40 popping up yesterday, but with current market conditions and where they are from, the pricing made a little sense and I figured I would wait until they were back to normal price…and then I saw the normal price of $30 and I couldn’t believe it. It’s like double the price of current amiibo!( ok technically 88% more if you are doing the math. ). I thought that I missed something else and maybe they were the bigger ones or something. Will not be buying one. For reference if the switch price had increased at same rate it would be around $560 and not $450. Donkey Kong would have gone to $112 instead of $70 and joy con a cool $150 instead of the $95 price right now ( compared to the current $60 and $80 msrp prices respectively). This isn’t really on Nintendo either ( on some other forums, people are blaming Nintendo), but more on Capcom. I don’t recall how much the monster hunter amiibos were msrp but they cost the same as other amiibos when I would see them… but I do believe capcom set these prices. Nintendos being $20 represents a 25% increase…still not at all desirable but more reasonable. At the end of the day the market will decide, and It’s an individual decision on value, but at these new msrp, my amiibo collection is likely not to grow.

@swoose I also see it partly a result of the decentralization of how we get our news. This is a microcosm of a bigger issue, but when hundreds and thousands have a way to be a news source ( blogs, posts , video platforms etc…) chances are a few will not have the training in journalistic integrity necessary to evaluate and interpret information being given (or if they do, they still may know how to get click baity headlines). Couple that with our current culture of needing information right now along with a developing situation ( this issue leads to conspiracy theories when large events occur) and you have the perfect recipe for a spiraling narrative.

@Cheez I’m not educated enough in how all that works… But from what I’ve heard it would still impact the prices… Basically the companies try to spread the cost over everyone in a global economy. So instead of say US customers paying 50% more, they might pay 25% more… The other 25% is spread out over other countries and economies. Like I said, I’m not educated enough in that and I may have that totally wrong… I do think that the current situation led to a price hike across all areas.

@Ryu_Niiyama . That is solid financial advice for purchases like this. I did something similar and had been budgeting for the switch 2 the last 2 and a half years, putting 10-30 dollars aside each month. When I went to update my budget based on the numbers given, that’s when I realized it wasn’t as bad as the narrative is making it (at least in the U.S]. Sure I don’t think anyone would’ve complained if it was cheaper then predicted, but most had it coming in at 400…which in my budget plan is where I put it. I also figured Nintendo would go along with the industry at large and the games would be 70. I had planned to get Mario kart and one other game. So my numbers looked like this: 400 plus 140 for two games . Adjusting with the numbers /info given I ended up planning to get Switch 2 plus Mario kart and street fighter 6. 500 plus 60 ( I was a bit surprised to see that was only $60). So 560 vs 540…not a gigantic difference. I get that if you don’t want Mario kart that changes a bit…but worst case scenario is switch 2 with 2 $70 games would be $590… where as it would have been $540 if it come in at $400. Don’t get me wrong , $50 is a chunk of change especially if you’re on a limited budget but in this case it would mean to hold off on one game or maybe get a smaller downloadable game. What this tells me is they should make the Mario kart bundle more prominent ( hopefully it will be ) and permanent. 80 for Mario kart on its own is a mistake with out explaining why. Maybe it took a bunch of development time or all dlc will be free , which would be good to know. Dropping the bombshell in a press release with no context, was an unforced error. The other nice thing is that this is a continuation from the switch. Most of us are going to , out of the gate, have extra controllers and a collection of games . I would reckon most of us would have one that would be available for an update pack. Nintendo did a poor job communicating the price and such which allowed the narrative to spin out of control.

I actually laughed out loud with my sarcastic/what are they thinking laugh while I was watching the direct . A lot of the other pricing issues, while hard to swallow, are at least understandable given current circumstances and reflective of the industry at large. This could’ve gone a long way though to make that price point seem a little more digestible and is a very odd move… Well, actually, I would say it’s a very bad move.

While it is definitely hard to believe it’s been five years already… The more difficult thing for me to wrap my head around is that the switch existed for a little over three years without the game. It’s one of my favorite games and I play it quite a bit (still checking in every other day or so). It really does feel like I’ve been playing it for the entire lifespan of the system, that’s why it’s so crazy to me at the game didn’t even exist until a little over a third of the way into the lifespan of the console.

While you could argue that the game quality may have been surpassed by some its sequels, if you were there ( as I was) there really was a “wow” factor that can really happen once . Still remember playing snow barrel blast , thinking how great everything looked and being like “ wouldn’t it be awesome if it started snowing “ and when it did , I couldn’t believe how cool ( ha ha ) it looked . I got that game for Christmas that year ( 13 at the time) and it truly is something I associate with Christmas time. Been enjoying listening to the music on the Nintendo music app.

I have really enjoyed my time with this game. I do wish the backgrounds were a bit more inspired, but it’s counterbalanced by the absolutely delightful (albeit with early 2000 sensibilities ) pre-match dialogue. I find the AI to be less cheap than other SNK games around that era. I am hoping that they got this one out of the way to eventually get to SNK battle coliseum and SNK vs Capcom 1 and 2.

@scoot this is a very poor comment. have you been to the area at all lately? I am no fan of Fox News … and when I was first working in the area I thought that it was being overblown… but the first week I was there i had 3 instances of finding a certain thing on the ground that should be in toilets, 2 drug deals done in my proximity ( and in broad day light ) , 2 car break ins, and I won’t even mention some of the stuff I experience on BART. Also I feel I should mention that this stuff occurred in what are considered nicer parts of town. I won’t mention stuff I have seen working in the tenderloin. I had to admit to my wife, whom Fox News would be considered enemy number 1 , that they were pretty on point about some of the stuff. Listen I still like the area and the people i know from there are great, but that does not mean that attention should not be drawn to the situation occurring there. When I shared with my friend that they were putting it there, she had the same reaction… (we both frequent the area). I am hopeful , as a few others on this thread have alluded too, that this will help with revitalizing the area.

@bananamal I live 1 hour from where they are putting the store ( well depending on the time of day … if you know you know) and have worked in the city for the past 6 years and do have to regularly go to union square. I can confirm that this is an odd choice … several stores have closed in this area (it can appear to be a ghost town at times) and they do have issues with smash and grab robberies there. While I do enjoy working in the area , unfortunately some of the stories you do hear about the area are not that far off base. That being said the Apple Store in the area seems to do well and I am hopeful the area will be restored / businesses will come back. SF was able to clean up pretty well ( and quickly ) for the APEC summit last fall after all. Most of all, I am excited that if I want to go to a Nintendo store I know longer have to make a transfer at the sf or Oakland airport on the BART and endure a 5 plus hour flight.

Disney afternoon collection.
Mortal kombat trilogy
Symphony of the night

…. And why is it that to play a Nintendo version of street fighter 4, do I have to pull out my 3ds!? I thought the engine was even ported or something ( I recall it being in the mini game in ultra street fighter 2) . When usf2 came out… I thought it was entirely overpriced for what it was… but bought it hoping to show support for future street fighter on switch…. Don’t get me wrong I like the collection… but I feel that ultra street fighter 4 is a great fit for the switch.

@Goofonzo While this may be true (or not depending on the player) I would still say this deserves the score. If it was a full priced game, perhaps not, but $5 for 9-10 hours (especially when that time is great fun) is a great value.

This poll should include an option for Switch lite. The other models (Gameboy, GBA, DS and 3ds) all have multiple options. While I rarely play my regular switch while out and about, my switch lite is a constant go to. The smaller (and one continuous piece)form factor make it more portable in my opinion. Depending on where you live and need for a jacket...it can even be considered pocketable, even with a case (I have mine in my jacket pocket right now) it can fit in most jackets. While I absolutely love the GBA SP, Its a bit of an eye strain if you don't have the AGS 101 model (although that could be my age talking).