The upside is we get cheaper games eventually and people don't end up paying $250 for a game a few years later. Or are you going to start defending Nintendo and saying that they deserve all their games to be bought at full price or they'd lose money?
As a consumer, I like Nintendo's policy to maintain games' prices
- Thread starter walking fiend
- Start date
The upside is we get cheaper games eventually and people don't end up paying $250 for a game a few years later. Or are you going to start defending Nintendo and saying that they deserve all their games to be bought at full price or they'd lose money?
WrenchNinja
Member
Poe's law in full effect
sir_kevith
Member
Artificial scarcity is different and not really bad when we have so much competition like there is on Steam. Sales on digital games exploits artificial scarcity because the games aren't going anywhere. They'll always be available to download on the servers (in theory).
Nintendo not shipping enough units is just scarcity. Whether or not they exploit that is debatable and probably depends a lot on the market. From what I understand is you guys have it way worse in the UK than us in the US. So I think I agree with what you're saying overall and don't mean any offense.
Shpeshal Nick
aka Collingwood
In Australia, day one seems to be the cheapest time to buy Nintendo games with tin the first year or two.
Gotdatmoney
Member
I bought it refurbished for $30 canadian off nintendos site. I have 2 copies actually since my other version decided to start working again after 4 months
How About No
Member
Stockholder Syndrome?
Kagoshima_Luke
Member
It definitely encourages you to buy day 1, especially if you have GCU or something similar. You know in the next several years, the price will not go below that initial 20% off and you may in fact be stuck trying to find the game, because of a short run (especially if you are dealing with NoA).
It has everything to do with Nintendo. They have an explicit "evergreen" policy with their games, which is precisely why they don't make a billion Mario Karts for the same system.
To the topic I'd say I would love it if Nintendo also had a policy to maintain games. Their burning the candle at both ends with every platform they release is what's quickly making them feel the most primitive. They had no intention to make the future of video game input with the wiimote, they just wanted a hook to sell hardware, and the fact that it anchored those games in time and made them sink with the Wii ship was of no consequence to them. There's a short sightedness to Nintendo in terms of preserving games that is really starting to worry me.
Elsewhere, games are actually finding a semblance of timelessness and staying power. They may go for crumbs on Steam or whatever, but at least they're sticking around.
GCU is another thing to consider. Thanks for bringing that up
Gotdatmoney
Member
Honestly with Nintendo games I dont really have an issue buying day one because thr price isnt cratering 3 months later. If it does I take the L. I aint buying any AAA at launch. The price will drop by half so fast its pointless. I got SSB4 for WiiU for $45 CAD and its still that expensive used.
Its like, I wont even take a loss if I ditch it.
I still would rather Nintendo games crater in price though.
Its like, I wont even take a loss if I ditch it.
I still would rather Nintendo games crater in price though.
Unless I'm mistaken WiiU sells like shit there.
So there's already a hard cap on how much they can sell.
They probably have projections on how much they expect to sell and work with retailer to make as many copies as they need to.
If you're mad at something, be mad at how they expect to maximize their profit like any kind of companies out there.
It's not unnatural to expect them to not be able to afford to lose retailer trusts overshipping their stuffs (although they're funny like that they tend to force their customers (retailers here) to stock a set number of not really appealing product in exchange of preferential shipping with high demand products, shitty but smart).
It's not that they deserve their games to be bought at full price, it's that they know the market enough to not have to lose money when they don't have to.
It's not perfect, they clearly didn't expect the NES mini to be anything more than the Atari 2600 emu console.
1- The world is not the US, and certainly all countries don't have the same minimum wages (mine is $200US MONTHLY).
2- Videogames have higher utility margins than most other media (besides books, I'd suppose).
3- The price of the discounted game often includes the wages for those respectable professionals (isn't the breakeven point like $20 or something?)
4- Whenever a sale happens, barring true bombs of the type few are, the offset is paid by the retailer and such, so buying a $5 game on steam last christmas doesn't mean the developers got 5, steam probably paid them enough for the $5 to be direct profit for them, with the business model based on scale economics.
humansarehorses
Member
Nintendo fans are weird. Anyway, the pricing of their games is a big reason why I'm not interested in future Nintendo consoles. Sure, Xenoblade Chronicles X doesn't look great to me but for a low enough price, I'd pretty much buy anything (e.g. bought Mighty No 9 for $8). No reason to buy an expensive console with expensive games that I don't think are worth the asking price.
you're right that it isn't more to do with retailers. ultimately i think they share equal responsibility when it comes to pricing games. otherwise nothing would get sold. the buyer and the seller both have to agree on what they're buying and selling and for how much. furthermore, additional negotiations, including price protections, returns, markdowns, ber, etc, are decided between the retailer and the distributor. the way it appears ea does business is that they will intentionally flood the market with titles, with an agreement in place that they'll cover stock that doesn't sell at the initial price point. i would assume they even plan for this on the books, where they make $80m off that initial price point, $40m off the first price drop, and $10m off the holiday sales (just as an example). it's good for their short-term profit because they need that money right away to funnel into other games that are constantly in development because being a third-party in this day and age is crazy scary and risky.
nintendo, meanwhile, has income coming in from hardware sales, merchandise/licensing, and now mobile. but even before that, the sheer volume of games they had on the market selling a steady amount was enough that they didn't need an influx of cash. when they do, it's sudden and drastic - like selling the mariners - instead of working it into their business plan. pokemon can then sell millions of copies around the world in a month to customers and nintendo won't ever have to worry about a price drop because what retailers ordered is what they needed. the same goes for lesser titles. when a game doesn't get a lot of preorders, retailers tend to order fewer units, which is logical. however, to mitigate that, some companies will sign those deals like i'd mentioned. instead, i believe nintendo simply shipped to the preorder count and let demand take care of the rest. this is why there are shortages of games and hardware from nintendo. having an excess stock is a huge risk that would need to be taken care of through price protection, markdowns, etc, and you'd have to eat inventory costs on a monthly basis as well.
i don't think either scenario is ideal. i think that with nintendo's structure, you put off people who would want to enjoy their games, but have other things they'd prefer to play if in 3-5 years games are still as pricey as they always were. on the other end, i think the instant markdown structure is poisonous to the industry as a whole, where even small companies that can't afford it get pressured into it. i don't think exist archive was meant to be 25% of its initial msrp a month after launching on ps4, but it was.
going for a cheaper standard msrp, and dropping prices less frequently, i think would do more to bring people in at the beginning and probably increase the general health of the dedicated hardware market. $39.99 standard would be fantastic.
MisterHero
Super Member
I love how conservative Nintendo is. Doing something like preserving the sale value of their games adds a little prestige as well.
Sometimes it's a double-edged sword. Gamers pay more now, but the more money Nintendo makes, the more they can do. For Nintendo, as with any fan favorite company, making money is good for everyone. Bargain bin prices don't help your favorite developers; except maybe word of mouth, but that's all.
Now just get me a damn NES Mini.
Sometimes it's a double-edged sword. Gamers pay more now, but the more money Nintendo makes, the more they can do. For Nintendo, as with any fan favorite company, making money is good for everyone. Bargain bin prices don't help your favorite developers; except maybe word of mouth, but that's all.
Now just get me a damn NES Mini.
I think that's what the OP is trying to convey very badly....or at least I hope.
I know I'm there.
Poot Poot Splash
Member
This is how I feel about reading some responses here
ronaldthump
Member
What's good for customer is whatever makes them happy following the regulations set in place.
If it means higher value for the customer at a higher price so be it.
If prices are incredibly low and the result is shit games at shit prices I don't think anyone is happy in that environment.
FinaruDensetsu
Member
As far as physical games go, most Nintendo games do eventually go down in price, so it's only Nintendo's loss with respect to my purchasing dollars, because it just means I wait way longer to buy both their games and their consoles.
Gone are the days when Nintendo games were somehow more "worthy" of holding a high price. MS and Sony and the major third parties are capable of making games equally as good and with as much production value or even more production value and yet their games go down in price. Of course it's Nintendo's prerogative to price their games how they want, but they should know that the group that feels the prices for years-old games are reasonable grows smaller and smaller and if Nintendo wants to just continue focusing only on the hardcore Nintendo fans, then they can go right ahead.
Their digital games, lol. I'll be old and grey before they go on sale.
Gone are the days when Nintendo games were somehow more "worthy" of holding a high price. MS and Sony and the major third parties are capable of making games equally as good and with as much production value or even more production value and yet their games go down in price. Of course it's Nintendo's prerogative to price their games how they want, but they should know that the group that feels the prices for years-old games are reasonable grows smaller and smaller and if Nintendo wants to just continue focusing only on the hardcore Nintendo fans, then they can go right ahead.
Their digital games, lol. I'll be old and grey before they go on sale.
OP,
Scenario 1: price drops so you get game you wanted cheaper, but you have to wait a little bit.
Scenario 2: price never drops so no matter how long you wait you have to pay the same price (or near full price).
If you don't care about waiting scenario 1 is much much better for your pockets. Idk in any way that scenario 2 would be good for you unless you want the game day one, and don't care for the price. Either way you cut it scenario 2 is not in any way, shape, or form and investment in the context you're describing.
Scenario 1: price drops so you get game you wanted cheaper, but you have to wait a little bit.
Scenario 2: price never drops so no matter how long you wait you have to pay the same price (or near full price).
If you don't care about waiting scenario 1 is much much better for your pockets. Idk in any way that scenario 2 would be good for you unless you want the game day one, and don't care for the price. Either way you cut it scenario 2 is not in any way, shape, or form and investment in the context you're describing.
ronaldthump
Member
you're assuming higher prices will equate to better games.
Johnny Cage
Member
I'm amazed at the lengths people go to justify a game being out for 5 years but still being £50. Could you imagine if that happened with TVs, blu rays or any other electronic device. Defence force for everything.
walking fiend
Member
That is exactly what I meant. The word investment completely derailed my argument though
Gravy Boat
Member
Red Dead Redemption, arguably one of the best games of the last decade, can be bought for practically nothing these days. Quality games still drop in price on other platforms without annual sequels.
Between 2 trends, 1 with products getting more expensive and the other with products getting less expensive it's safe to say that generally quality will follow the price.
You get what you pay for, it ain't magic.
You can't make something like Amazon's website on the budget it takes to run Gaf for example.
Of course there's such a thing as a happy medium and it's not with games at 100bucks or being virtually free either.
Or you can argue that Candy Crush is somehow a better game than Shadow of the Colossus or something.
And the flipside is that I can actually make the argument that CC is the better product but still.
mocolostrocolos
Member
I'm a die hard fan of Nintendo and this is bullshit.
ronaldthump
Member
as a consumer, the more games I can buy on the cheap, the better. It means that as a gamer, I can play more games. What's this nonsense about wanting high prices. Just crazytalk.
Movalpolos
Banned
Better call Vanguard.
GametimeUK
Member
When Mario Kart DS and Mario Kart 7 are sitting on the same shelf at the same price then you know something is fucked up big time. I'm not a fan of it.
Yep, MK7 should be cheaper.
Generalpsyduck
Banned
Y'all fanboys are crazy sometimes.
MisterHero
Super Member
Sometimes bargain prices are a gateway for other ways for devs to make money
like DLC
Nintendo makes money on both retail AND DLC. Isn't that wild
AntraxSuicide
Banned
It's hurting their business, honestly. I'd buy so many more games (especially on the eShop) if they ever did any good sales.
Nintendo needs to accept that a lot of people don't own only Nintendo systems. So while I could drop $60 on the eShop (and get 1 or 2 games), I know in my head that the next XBL sale might get me 3 times the games with that $60.
Nintendo needs to accept that a lot of people don't own only Nintendo systems. So while I could drop $60 on the eShop (and get 1 or 2 games), I know in my head that the next XBL sale might get me 3 times the games with that $60.
sir_kevith
Member
Just sell your copy of Mario Kart DS and buy MK7 for nothin
Spirit Icana
Member
In a Blue Ocean Strategy, you don't want to be cutting your prices. The goal for the value proposition is to hit the best mark from the start and stay right there for as long as possible.
Iwata talked about the value of games dropping as a result of markdowns. He believed this practice was very harmful to the industry. So they've been acting on it.
I also remember, several years ago, saying on this board how cutting the price of the Wii, when they did, was a big mistake. That Nintendo was "admitting defeat" for cutting 50 bucks off the Wii value, the same holiday their massive megaton, New Super Mario Bros. Wii, was scheduled to come out and prop up the value of the system. The reason they did it was cause while Wii was still killing it, the sales were declining (it was actually available on store shelves), and others like Pachter, Activision, etc, were pressuring them to cut the price so it can sell out again.
Looking back, I still think it was a big mistake. A better time would've been May of 2010 alongside Super Mario Galaxy 2 since Wii wasn't getting another big game until Donkey Kong Country Returns later that year.
But anyway, Nintendo wants the value of their games to remain high for many years. The quality of those games is important, but so is the prices. If it's quick to crash, then there is not much value in it.
Now of course keeping the value at a premium forever is not likely to happen. Competitors catch on, a Red Ocean forms, competitive pricing becomes necessary to compete with strong foes.
Right now, Nintendo's got 2DS as their big price cut to 3DS and Pokemon has been mainly driving that system since the summer thanks to the Go app with X/Y, Ruby/Sapphire/ and now Sun/Moon (all software are fully priced). NES mini is selling for $20 less than 2DS, and they can't keep that in stock. The hardware legacy on top of the strength of the 30 classic titles that comes with it are the main drivers. Gotta love that nostalgia. Makes me wonder what next gen kids will be getting nostalgic for.
For some other games, Nintendo is now doing their "Selects" line and pricing them at $19.99. I don't think we'll be seeing certain games like Splatoon enter that line, since I believe Nintendo see's huge potential for that IP moving forward, had been proping up that software up with updates, and the Switch version will probably be some kind of expansion than a true sequel. Switch version will be the new main version of the game, and the Wii U disc's will just be phased out.
New Super Mario Bros. U won't join the line either. They updated it by adding the Luigi expansion to it to help keep the $60 point value at retail. With Wii U out the door now, I'm sure a true sequel will be coming.
But seeing as they're recalling Wii U's though, I'm not sure there will be any more Wii U titles at all being added to the Selects. It's all about the Switch and 3DS now.
Iwata talked about the value of games dropping as a result of markdowns. He believed this practice was very harmful to the industry. So they've been acting on it.
I also remember, several years ago, saying on this board how cutting the price of the Wii, when they did, was a big mistake. That Nintendo was "admitting defeat" for cutting 50 bucks off the Wii value, the same holiday their massive megaton, New Super Mario Bros. Wii, was scheduled to come out and prop up the value of the system. The reason they did it was cause while Wii was still killing it, the sales were declining (it was actually available on store shelves), and others like Pachter, Activision, etc, were pressuring them to cut the price so it can sell out again.
Looking back, I still think it was a big mistake. A better time would've been May of 2010 alongside Super Mario Galaxy 2 since Wii wasn't getting another big game until Donkey Kong Country Returns later that year.
But anyway, Nintendo wants the value of their games to remain high for many years. The quality of those games is important, but so is the prices. If it's quick to crash, then there is not much value in it.
Now of course keeping the value at a premium forever is not likely to happen. Competitors catch on, a Red Ocean forms, competitive pricing becomes necessary to compete with strong foes.
Right now, Nintendo's got 2DS as their big price cut to 3DS and Pokemon has been mainly driving that system since the summer thanks to the Go app with X/Y, Ruby/Sapphire/ and now Sun/Moon (all software are fully priced). NES mini is selling for $20 less than 2DS, and they can't keep that in stock. The hardware legacy on top of the strength of the 30 classic titles that comes with it are the main drivers. Gotta love that nostalgia. Makes me wonder what next gen kids will be getting nostalgic for.
For some other games, Nintendo is now doing their "Selects" line and pricing them at $19.99. I don't think we'll be seeing certain games like Splatoon enter that line, since I believe Nintendo see's huge potential for that IP moving forward, had been proping up that software up with updates, and the Switch version will probably be some kind of expansion than a true sequel. Switch version will be the new main version of the game, and the Wii U disc's will just be phased out.
New Super Mario Bros. U won't join the line either. They updated it by adding the Luigi expansion to it to help keep the $60 point value at retail. With Wii U out the door now, I'm sure a true sequel will be coming.
But seeing as they're recalling Wii U's though, I'm not sure there will be any more Wii U titles at all being added to the Selects. It's all about the Switch and 3DS now.
Nintendo prices stay the same. Most everyone else's eventually drop.
Over time, the amount of games I buy leans more heavily into the 'not Nintendo' camp. Nintendo has its staples that I like and I will buy, but for everything I may be on the fence about, I just might not buy because there's a bazillion other games out there.
Over time, the amount of games I buy leans more heavily into the 'not Nintendo' camp. Nintendo has its staples that I like and I will buy, but for everything I may be on the fence about, I just might not buy because there's a bazillion other games out there.
Head.spawn
Junior Member
Moor-Angol
Banned
you want invest into games ?
should have bought SNES/SFC games around 7-8 years ago
But its the best Mario Kart next to MK8?
If you know the game will be $15 a month later, what's the problem? Wait, and get cheap games. But but I have to play at release, if you're a sucker for release hype you only have yourself to blame for being an easy target for marketing campaigns. Keeping prices artificially high is anti consumer, and you trying to spin it only makes you an apologist.
At least we can agree on MK8 being among the best.
hear, hear.
To be fair to them, the whole point for them seemed to be to transition their new core customers to their older product lines with 3D Mario and the likes.
When that didn't happen they worked something out.
They probably didn't expect NSMBW to work as well as it did.
I mean the feedback online was fucking vile after all.
Their plan for 2009 was perfect however.
2010 was abominable in comparison, that was the right time to cut the price IMO.
Ride to 2011 and use what their subsidies had to go into 2012 without witholding titles to have Rainfall and they were good for a proper next system in 2012.
Everything they did for 3DS between 2010 and early 2012 should have been scrapped like a bad dream on acid though.
It's not artificially high.
It's what the market bears.
If they could control the price just like that you can be sure shit like Metroid Other M wouldn't have been discounted to heaven and back in a matter of weeks.
They marketed the shit out of that game, it was the highlight of their presentation in NSMBW's e3 in 2009.
Like seriously if there's 1 game they would have wanted to keep the price high for status reason or whatever BS it's this one.
They couldn't even keep the follow up to Nintendogs at high price.
Look up their less successful products and you'll see they can't keep the price because no one wants that shit.
joecanada
Member
The rise and fall of n64 documented right here. Look at WiiU prices today ... I'm pretty sure they're ET - ing these things now because stock just disappears. They're so old fashioned they actually think devaluing the product is worse than selling none.
Acerac
Banned
Many 5+ year old Blu Rays are the same price they were at release.
Ever buy a Disney movie?
NoblesseOblige
Banned
You're not liking it as a consumer... you're liking it as an investor. And not a good investor mind you as there's much better things out there to invest into.
Fuck Disney.
I love their films (and Pixar OMG) but dear god their product strategy is one of the most irritating this side of a drug dealer.