Because they didn't think they would sell nearly as well for $60?
I'd have thought that was obvious.
-
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.
Nintendo (NCL) wants to avoid devaluing indie games, sees them the same as AAA, wants both on Switch
- Thread starter ggx2ac
- Start date
Because they didn't think they would sell nearly as well for $60?
I'd have thought that was obvious.
I don't think promoting titles in the news section is enough. I'm immediately clicking after I turn on the screen these days and never felt all that compelled to go to the News section from the main menu. I actively browse the eShop though.
I think the lack of differentiation is probably hurting the potential sales of higher profile retail titles. Games like NBA, Fifa, and Doom probably could have used more promotion. $60 is a big ask for these titles (platform options, content, late release) and on a Nintendo platform users are far more willing to bet on Nintendo titles for those big purchases. Keeping those titles in the spotlight for a period like this when releases cool and prices can come down is important. I'm sure indie developers that didn't chart in the top 15 on their launch weeks would have appreciated the opportunity for more visibility in a separate section of the store.
The 3DS's eShop did a good job of promoting exploration imo.
I think the lack of differentiation is probably hurting the potential sales of higher profile retail titles. Games like NBA, Fifa, and Doom probably could have used more promotion. $60 is a big ask for these titles (platform options, content, late release) and on a Nintendo platform users are far more willing to bet on Nintendo titles for those big purchases. Keeping those titles in the spotlight for a period like this when releases cool and prices can come down is important. I'm sure indie developers that didn't chart in the top 15 on their launch weeks would have appreciated the opportunity for more visibility in a separate section of the store.
The 3DS's eShop did a good job of promoting exploration imo.
I don't see a compelling point in here, could you elaborate?
I could be missing something but it looks like "I have more fun with these sets of indies so Nintendo games should be cheaper."
(for the record tropical freeze is better than all of those indie games by a wide margin)
Nintendo is only playing catch-up here. I mean, I see no distinction at all on PSN or Microsoft Stores - games are games.. here on the UK stores at least. And wasn't it Nintendo that was doing the whole 'Nindies' thing just recently?
I like it. I much prefer searching for games by genre and features rather than having a term like indie
This is an interview with NCL, the Japan branch. Nindies is mainly a US thing, not sure about PAL regions tho.
Your post amounts to "I personally like these indie titles over these Nintendo titles" which is incredibly subjective and completely useless to both everyone in this thread and to Nintendo's business strategy.
I mean you basically just said Nintendo shouldn't charge more than $40 for their titles....wtf.
A significantly large number of people I have met, who play Video Games, will not play a game because it is an "Indie". Especially the most "hardcore" gamers. It's pretty smart to avoid giving that bias to the more casual consumer.
I had DKTF on WiiU and the game has problems. The Boss difficulty spikes are not fun. The load screens were constant and terribly long, though this might be less of an issue on Switch. The level design and gameplay were alright but nothing special or memorable. It's just a solid 2D platformer, of which there are hundreds. The only memorable thing about that game is the great soundtrack. It was $50 on WiiU too. It's a 7.5/10. I get it that fun is subjective. For me and my fun, I get a lot more out of the indie scene. I would buy the 2D sidescrollers from Nintendo if their value felt stronger. Like I said, $30 digital or $50 physical. If I'm spending $60 on a game I expect a lot more. The mega Man collection just announced is literally 10 games for $40 and many of those will be remembered far longer than any 2D game Nintendo is releasing this year. Another reason spending $60 on a Nintendo sidescroller, especially an old port, is just crazy.
This feels like the WiiU days when Nintendo would release lowball game after lowball game and point to it like its a big deal like a new Mario or Zelda.
This is all based on opinion.
In terms of production values, it's obvious DK, Yoshi, Kirby, etc. are far beyond most indie games. If that's the metric used on how much a game should cost, then it's understandable.
After all, there are a ton of AAA games that suck balls, but still charge $60 + DLC + MTX. It's just that no one has the courage of going further than the infamous $60 initial price point.
Last edited:
The level design in Tropical Freeze is some of the best I've ever seen in a platformer. That game is worth every cent.
Not to pile in too much with the others, and feel free to Avatar quote me because I'll be the first to admit my bias, but it sounds like you just didn't really care for Tropical Freeze and that's perfectly okay. However, it likely cost 10-100x the cost to develop and market the big beefy Nintendo platformers compared to the Indie games you listed, and no way is Nintendo making that money back selling them at comparable prices. Tropical Freeze is in my opinion the most brilliant 2D platformer since Super Mario Bros. 3, and the age of the original Wii U game is the only reason I could see a discount as justifiable. I can't speak to the quality of Yoshi or Kirby as they haven't released yet, But Nintendo long ago earned my benefit of the doubt with these games, and that kind of security also helps me swallow a reliable $60 pill vs an unknown $20 one.
I don't think so. There hasn't been a distinction since the WiiWare days. Ever since Nintendo started having full retail games via download (on the 3DS), there has never been a "indie section" as far as I can recall.
One thing that's been shocking to me about the Switch library thus far is that Nintendo themselves hasn't released many "indie" style games. They used to do this all the time in the DS/3DS/Wii eShops, but the only thing that really qualifies is the 2nd party Snipperclips.
Not sure I agree that Nintendo is catching up to Sony in terms of "not devaluing indies". If anything Sony in my opinion has really counter-productively trained consumers to devalue indie games as "free trash" with PS Plus on the PS4 almost exclusively giving away multiple indies a month, and Nintendo is trying to avoid their mistakes.
I think that's part of why you see games like Celeste sell much better on the Switch than on the PS4 even with the latter's larger market. There's a lot of reluctance to pay for indies once you're trained to see them as free giveaways.
I dunno, lets get past the first year and see what Nintendo offers in terms of VC (subscription or whatever) and we'll see if indies keep selling at such a good pace.
I remember Sony being all pro-indie when they needed them to flesh out the PS4 library, similar to what Nintendo is doing with them now.
You're missing:
- Flip Wars
- Nintendo Labo
Actually, Nintendo Labo is considered to be a completely different genre in terms of AAA, mid-tiered (AA, B), and indie games....
It's not a noble or even business minded thing, it's that they would have to make some effort to segregate them or give them different billing on the eshop when they can just throw titles up there next to each other.
This is laughable. The rationale for how they are doing things today is SPELLED OUT on this interview, and indie games are booming on switch at a pace no one expected.
They are clearly doing something right. Not to mention they had indie games categories on prior consoles and handhelds. So no.
What I stated has no bearing on the success of the games. I'm merely stating that there is no concerted effort on their part to differentiate indie and AAA titles on the eshop, they're all just games in the store. There's no credit to give for something they aren't doing. It's not like it's any different on the other platforms.
Still a completely subjective opinion. In my personal opinion DKTF is every bit worth of it's original price point in the Wii U version, it's a fully fledged 2D platform game with really good gameplay, fun and varied stages, good visuals and one of the best soundtracks in the whole series.
Will not comment on the Switch version though because I don't plan to get that one for now. Will wait to see if the product is worth the price asking for (in my case of course since I already have the original release).
"Nindie" is a NoA (I think it was Damon Baker who started it) and to some extent NoE term, not NCL.
One of those silly amalgamations that corporate types tend to use. :op
Nintendo indies
Because those games would have bombed at $60. Heck, two of those weren't big sellers even at $40. DK, Kirby, and Yoshi will outsell all of those games at $60, even Ratchet.
They didn't release many small games on the Wii U eShop either. It sucks and I hope that wasn't a preview of what's (not) to come. I love Nintendo's smaller games on 3DS.
But how does it compare to other Nintendo first party efforts like Zelda or Splatoon? I'm not calling for equal pricing as indies. I'm calling for more rational pricing, more like $30 digital or $50 physical.
I can't really compare them to be honest. It's like, yeah they're all games but they satisfy in different ways. With time trials, I've definately put more time into Tropical Freeze than I have Splatoon 2 (about 45 hours into Splatoon last I checked), but probably not as much as Zelda. But I mean, I like steak and I like ice cream and even though I eat both, it's hard for me to call one better than the other.
You can't say it had no bearing on the success of the Game's though. That's my point. You say they are just being lazy when they are spelling out that their strategy is exactly that in this very interview. They put thought into it.
And correct me if I'm wrong, but the news section on switch is particular to that platform and every other platforms labels Indies as such on their store fronts, right?
There's an indie section on the PS store but outside of that they don't seem to separate indies from the rest:
What's New section: https://store.playstation.com/en-us/grid/STORE-MSF77008-NEWTHISMONTH/1?gameContentType=games
That's a question that is in no way remotely exclusive to Nintendo and is entirely subjective because the value anyone gets out of any piece of content is going to vary based on tastes/preferences.
You aren't talking about rational pricing for the market as a whole, you are talking about rational pricing based on your tastes and preferences, which is not always going to align with the broader market.
Like I personally would say DK:TF is a little bit better than Splatoon 2, so does that mean that I think Nintendo should have priced Splatoon 2 at $50 physical?
Lets go with a hypothetical. Lets say Tropical Freeze sells a couple of million units. This implies that a couple million people finds (or think they will find) $60 of value (however they judge that is on them) for the game. How would Nintendo suddenly be more rational if they launched the game at half of the price?
There is no strategy, though. It's just games on the store, whether it's The End is Nigh or Mario Kart 8. Same kind of deal on the PlayStation and Xbox stores. Indies are right there alongside AAA games. Sony and Xbox have the same 'strategy'.
I don't know about Wii U but PAL 3DS eshop has a specific indies tile to promote indie games.
-----------------------------
Speaking only for myself, indie 2D platformers just don't do it for me [or 2D platformers in particular]. Some of the puzzle games by indie developers I find to be excellent. Not what I would buy a system for but important additions to the system library.
They basically stated that's their strategy in this very interview!
As a business bachelor I should also add there is no such thing as no strategy. FYI. No decision is still a decision in business terms. But that is not the case here. They don't want to make distinctions between games to avoid a set conception to the labels such as "indies" because they come with certain price-quality-scope expectations. Their strategy regarding how they showcase these Games on the system derives from this mentality.
But no action has been taken. There is no effort to speak of. Sony and Xbox put indies on their stores alongside AAA games the same way Nintendo does, and put forth the same level of effort to do that which is zero. Why are we giving Nintendo credit here?
I mean it wasent just any game,it was a 2d platformer and which still sold well on the wiiU btw but GF didn't have the wiiU cross their mind apparently
I'm convinced you just wanted to post nonsense, because I don't see what this has to do with what was said at all
Nintendo has to pay like 200 people, compared to those indie games that at max like have 20 employees
Because Sony built their base to value AAA high end graphics experiences and anything that's not that is seen as lesser, a indie game like Celeste would never get the big font ad at the top of the digital store unlike the eshop which treats every thing as equal which is why Celeste is number 1 on the eshop
That's not strictly true, at least for Xbox. If you go to Xbox One store the first thing you're greeted with is a big banner for a single game(right now it's Super Lucky Tale in the UK, a first party release) with smaller boxes underneath, similarly if you go to the deals section there's a big banner for a sale. Right now the deal in the banner is the 2K Publisher Sale and then underneath that is an Indie sale, at least in the UK.
You don't get that on the Switch eShop as Nintendo moved away from the promotional banner format.
We're still early in the Switch's life. We'll see those games soon. DS, 3DS, and Wii didn't start off with small scale titles right away.
What do you mean by this? I don't think Nintendo cares about brand perception for these games since the mostly release them to fill gaps in between big first party releases anyway.
Yep. If I were an indie game developer, I'd stay far away from Sony -- what's the point of having a big userbase if everyone's just going to sit on the sidelines like buzzards, wait for my game to bomb, then swoop in and grab it for free? Ungrateful parasites.
well i get it in the metaphorical sense, its beautiful to see them embrace indies since they are thriving on the platform. but I'm still bringing up the value of indies on the eshop in the literal sense atleast from the consumer standpoint which seems in line with the topic at hand.
yikes. i guess its good you're not an indie dev lol
I'm sure there are pros and cons to it, but it doesn't seem like a wholly bad thing if devs have been on board with PS+ for years now. Some indie games have even launched as a PS+ freebie..Rocket League is the big one off the top of my head.
Last edited: