-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
I bought a switch and everything game costs crazy money.
- Thread starter Sikamikanico
- Start date
Doesn't that mean that the Sales of Breath of the Wild even more impressive than the Horizon sales? It's a game selling on a 17.88 mil userbase vs 80 mil userbase.
Then dont but the DLC? You can still get hundereds of hours of fun out of splatoon 2 without playing the dlc.
You don't have to but the game + DLC at the same time. You could always buy the game first, and the DLC afterwards at some point.
This doesn't really make sense, I don't see other companies closing down just because they are discounting their games.
The F.
DS got DQ9. A mainline DQ. Thats as big as support as possible from SE.
It got all Layton which sold millions for all its release.
It even got a Grand Theft Auto title which had never shown up on any Nintendo platform ever.
Thats not adding title that got huge on DS like Scribblenauts, Drawn to Life(Thq), Multiple Castlevania, multiple sonic games and even an exclusive Kingdom Hearts game at that time.
We are not even adding huge remake like FF3,4 and DQ remake.
Again. To said that DS third party support is not comparable to Playstation ecosystem is just false and stupid.
have you been around the last ten years
how many studios have closed down
how many Nintendo studios have closed
Using Tropical Freeze is a bad example. That game is a 4-year-old port that is $60 from the $50 Wii U version.
There wouldn't be any problem with that if there was DKCR as a download code.
But just an assist mode that I will never use? Hell no.
The game's price is unjustified compared to Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, Hyrule Warriors, and Bayonetta 1+2
Even Captain Toad Treasure Tracker is $40
There is no excuse for Tropical Freezes price point and I say it as someone who considers it to be one of the best platform games of all time.
This has been going on for a while. The DS port of Mario 64 was still selling at full price long into the 3DS era.
It's up to you, but I'd say get GameStop Elite Pro membership. I just bought (all preowned) Xenoblade 2, Bayonetta 2, and God of War for a total of $90 because they had a B2G1 weekend. So I'll be busy for awhile.
Also, You can check your local GameStop's via the app and see what preowned copies they have of games, and then if you sign up or GameStop Elite Pro they'll send you a B2G1 coupon to use in store only. You can make a purchase there.
Obviously I know some people don't like GameStop or preowned games but it's worked for me.
Your next best bet is to stack up on Black Friday imo.
Also, another thing to note is Nintendo first party games hold their value really well. That means when your finished with a game you can see it for a decent price.
the broader market decides. that's what you guys don't get. TF is charting really well right now at a full price. If they turned it into a game you can get for 6.99 at gamestop in 2014, nobody would buy it now.
Probably because of how rare the thing is to find. Hell Bowsers Inside Story is $67 on Amazon.
Buy physical when possible. Digital is almost always the more expensive option for anything on console.
Zelda's £47.99 on Amazon right now.
Your list is Japan heavy, I've said in an earlier post that Japan is always on board with Nintendo console, it's the rest of the world that are not which makes the support lacking in comparison.
No, I was born in 2011, remember?
Studios closing down have nothing to do with them cutting prices, you'd see every company except for Nintendo closing down if that was the case.
I dont mind paying new game prices when a game is actually new. It kind of sucks when they stay that price many years after though. Nintendo could definitely be more pro-active about having a 'greatest hits/platinum" range for their older games. Some money is still better than no money afterall.
On the flip-side, their shitty pricing makes Nintendo stuff great for selling second hand. I recently made over $1500 selling my old games and about 70% of that income came from my Gamecube library alone.
On the flip-side, their shitty pricing makes Nintendo stuff great for selling second hand. I recently made over $1500 selling my old games and about 70% of that income came from my Gamecube library alone.
Actually, right now my biggest hang up with the switch. I was a step away from pulling the trigger on the $224 switch deal, but I aint spending 60 dollars on really old games.
Not really since one of them is an established franchise that has existed for 30 years vs a new franchise. Another reason could (a little fanboyi) is that when you have a brand new console buying the first AAA is probably given versus a console that has many AAA game to select from.
Not really since one of them is an established franchise that has existed for 30 years vs a new franchise. Another reason could (a little fanboyi) is that when you have a brand new console buying the first AAA is probably given versus a console that has many AAA game to select from.
Now we are exclusive to western third party only? Anything to suit your argument then.
DS never lack any support from even western market especially when DS got, Call of Duty, GTA, Scribblenauts, Nano series, Drawn to Life, Sims, Aliens, Age of Empires and Civilization
Hell, even Microsoft supported Ds that time with Viva Pinata.
Of course DS will not got as much support from western 3rd party considering how much they push for console but to said there is no support is false.
Literally just look at the entire list of games released on the DS. Do your own research before saying that a console has no 3rd party support. Why do we have to prove it when you made the claim?
Yeah they dont close down because of discounts. They close down because their games didnt sell enough regardless of price to make up for rising AAA dev costs.
It's more than fair to call Nintendo for Tropical Freeze and Mario Kart pricing on the Switch, but calling anti-consumer because Breath of the Wild isn't $30 a year later is a little ridiculous. The "it's been a year, this needs to be $30 less" expectation is a silly one when several games drop in price simply to stay relevant.
I'm... very lost by this question. Not sure what it has to do with anything.
I own a charge grip, for the convenience of keeping all of my joycons constantly charged (2 on the Switch, 2 in the grip) and the convenience of instantly grabbing a "conventional" controller when I want one. But I think it's a fair price since I've never even had to think about charging a joycon since launch.
Defend what? Paying full price for games? Are they supposed to just drop the price because you want to?
Buy the game, play it, sell it for almost the same price you got it. Or get a PS4 and wait 3 months for their games to drop to peanuts because they make it up in services.
Two different sales models. Not everything has to follow what Sony does because you think so.
I buy every game at full price because I appreciate and respect the work and talent developers put behind their games.
unless they like to devalue their own work.
Because ...
I can tell you why Wolfenstein dropped in price.
I can tell you why Horizon dropped in price.
I can tell you why Assassin's Creed dropped in price.
And none of those answers are "because they're old".
Not devaluating your product to move stock is anti-consumer??
aHahjahahahahahahahahaha
It would be wise for everyone to remember, most discounts aren't done for the sake of the player. They are done because the game wasn't making enough at it's original retail price. If they could, other publishers would keep the game at the release price for as long as Nintendo does.
What??? There are plenty of good games that cost $15 or less on the platform, one recent big one being Hollow Knight. Get out of here with the ignorance...
And there are a lot of sales to be had currently...
One of then is selling for 30$, the other still at premium price, I asure you if horiZon kept its 60$ price, it would not be close to whatever sales they have right now
Before launch, there were many people that doubted that Zelda would be that good of a system seller for the switch.
That's why games drop prices, so they can sell more. Nintendo doesn't get to do that because they already have an established history of not doing it, also it doesn't hurt that there are less AAA games to compete with.
Well those people are stupid because Zelda games on console (not handheld) have been a 4+ million dollar franchise
Won't someone think of the poor banker and investment funds.
Dunno if someone else responded to you yet, but did you ignore the part where the poster said Nintendo Portables too and not just home consoles? The DS was a MONSTER brimming with 3rd party support (competition) and the 1st party games still stayed at full price for most of DS lifetime. Get off your high horse and accept what you said is wrong, competition will NOT change Nintendo's pricing strategy...
EDIT: Lmfao you also conveniently ignored the Monster software seller the Wii was haha...
this thread is mindblowing
like this is some kind of bizarro world, some form of the twilight zone
where people are actually defending practices out of their own self-interests entirely out of what can only be pure ignorance....and a depressingly misguided sense of loyalty
these people have actually convinced you lot that....it's better for you to spend more money than you should for no reason other than that they've convinced you that you should
I can fully understand accepting this, or being okay with it....but defending it is something else entirely
I'm actually at a loss for words, this is eye opening lol
Their business model prevents me from buying a lot of their games. If the games were cheaper, I would buy more. A lot of the games Nintendo keeps at full price aren't worth that for me relative to what the competition offers. Would the added sales from people like me be enough to make up for the lost profit? Who knows, but it's certainly not a simple matter of being a "better business model".
Older products receiving discounts is common for most consumer products, not just video games. Video games actually do age directly relative to the technology used. They're not like novels, which are really immortal and unchanging. But guess what? Novels get price reductions are often on sale.
Every game from everyone other than Nintendo drops in price. It has nothing to do with quality. Plenty of Nintendo titles have mediocre reception and remain at full price, while higher selling better received titles from others get price drops. Nintendo is alone in their approach.
This is nothing new. Nintendo has specifically been arguing against the devaluation of games, and the race to the bottom in pricing for a long time. Iwata gave a speech on it at GDC, and this was their primary criticism of the mobile industry for years.
Nintendo always has believed that games should hold their value for much longer.
And by the way, this isn't even just them that do it. I worked at a used game store for 5 years, and used copies of any first party Nintendo game held it's value too, for years.
Thats up to the pulisher, if they want bigger sales number with lower income per sale. Or lower sales number with higher income per sales.
Who said anything about quality? I listed those three examples because they each dropped for three different reasons that juxtaposed against some Nintendo titles.
Nintendo leverages their brand name and they know that they sell very well despite the lack of price drop. It essentially creates the perception of value and a long tail. Given I never grew up with Nintendo, I don't think I could ever get into them now, especially if every game I ever wanted was at full price (here in Canada....) from cradle to grave.
Sometimes i compare the prices of a game that i can found also on Steam, psn or xbox and that game its always more pricey on Switch. When you have multiple consoles its pretty noticeable.
I must confess i payed that extra cost because playing that game on the go makes it worth it for me. Just i wish to see sales in the eshop more often that can compite with other stores.
I must confess i payed that extra cost because playing that game on the go makes it worth it for me. Just i wish to see sales in the eshop more often that can compite with other stores.
The price of media has increased with inflation, except for video games. They've been $50-60 for 30 years. This whole concept of "things should just go down because reasons" doesn't apply due to the fact that games have been devalued already.
This goes for any company, not just Nintendo. The companies set a price that they find the value in. If the market doesn't respond, that price is lowered. There's no moral obligation to drop a price just because someone feels like it. If the demand drops, the price will drop, much like Nintendo's lesser selling properties.
Sony's concept of just killing prices after a few months is due to the fact that their sales are incredibly front loaded and made to keep players in their ecosystem, so they can sell other services like PS+ or advertising. The games are so cheap because Sony doesn't find the value in the software itself, but the continued attachment to the Playstation brand.
Nintendo on the other hand lives and dies on it's software to sell it's hardware. Nintendo doesn't have ad algorithms or services like PS+/PS Now (yes the Nintendo internet thing is going to happen, but $20 doesn't cover nearly as much that PS+ does as a viable income stream.)
That's the whole crux of the situation: what is the fundamental value of software? For Sony, it's nothing. For Nintendo, it's the backbone of their company. Has nothing to do with being pro or anti consumer, it's just a business value practice. That's what makes these wild ass demands so annoying to see, because some people don't want their software to be devalued into insignificance.
Most older Nintendo products maintain their resale value, which is what a lot of Nintendo consumers want. It's not a defense of the company, but a defense of the value of their investment. If someone disagrees with that value, that's on them but it doesn't make the people who do see that value some kind of corporate apologist.