Nintendo Confirms Wii U Software Pricing
- Thread starter Sarah LeBoeuf
- Start date
I think that the big difference is that while PS3/X360 games may start at 59USD, even big-name releases go down in price at a rapid pace, but Nintendo-games almost never make that huge price-drop. I mean Super Mario Galaxy 2, released more than 2 years ago, still basically costs over 45USD new. All the while, Max Payne 3, released just a few months ago, can be found for basically half price.
Also, it somehow feels much more justified to pay full price for a game such as Deus Ex Human Revolution or other AAA-games, because you know they cost ALOT to develop. But for games such as New Super Mario Bros or the Punch Out-game for Wii, I just feel slightly ripped-off if I pay full price for it. I feel like a price point similar to the firs Katamari Damacy, that they sold for around 30USD if I remember correctly, would be more reasonable for these low-cost games.
Also, it somehow feels much more justified to pay full price for a game such as Deus Ex Human Revolution or other AAA-games, because you know they cost ALOT to develop. But for games such as New Super Mario Bros or the Punch Out-game for Wii, I just feel slightly ripped-off if I pay full price for it. I feel like a price point similar to the firs Katamari Damacy, that they sold for around 30USD if I remember correctly, would be more reasonable for these low-cost games.
I draw the line at 60. If big name companies want more, I just won't play their game, which is perfectly manageable. Just stinks that most other people will pay more and nothing will really change. On another note, I believe that as games become more expensive, fanboys and girls become more rabid because they can afford less games to branch out with their interests. Every big release could be even more of a mini console war.
So now we pay the same for worse stuff, awesome.
60 is already too much for 90% of the games. And some games understand that (arma2 for example sells at 15 dollars, and i would value it at more)
So, Wii will shake its costumers for PC fanbase. More fanboys that arent nerds? oh well will have to deal.
60 is already too much for 90% of the games. And some games understand that (arma2 for example sells at 15 dollars, and i would value it at more)
So, Wii will shake its costumers for PC fanbase. More fanboys that arent nerds? oh well will have to deal.
Only console I own and ever owned is a Commodore 64.
Looks like that will stay that way for a while. Hurray open platforms, hurray PC gaming, for having to compete with pirates is apparentelly the only reason developers have to set reasonable prices.
Looks like that will stay that way for a while. Hurray open platforms, hurray PC gaming, for having to compete with pirates is apparentelly the only reason developers have to set reasonable prices.
The suggested retail prices were in the press materials Nintendo released alongside their announcement yesterday. So Nintendo is the source, which is why there's not one listed.j-e-f-f-e-r-s said:
Yeah but if you check any nintendo game you want right now thats still above the $40 mark and see their sales chart they are minimal at best. Nintendo just has a habit of putting their foot down on prices which makes me wait 3-5 years to play any given game. That is also bad business.Sean951 said:
Also most people are thinking of mario and zelda games with the $60 price tag. But the Wii was most well known for weaker version of series and the massive shovelware that will also share that 60 dollar price tag with glee.
If the games weren't worth the money, then the USED first party games, the prices of which ninty doesn't really control, wouldn't still have their really friggin high prices.
meanwhile, the third party shovels are dead in the ditch, so that can't be it, either
hmmmmmm
could the games actually just be good?
nah, that doesn't meet the ridiculously biased standards that we use to judge games
meanwhile, the third party shovels are dead in the ditch, so that can't be it, either
hmmmmmm
could the games actually just be good?
nah, that doesn't meet the ridiculously biased standards that we use to judge games
many console players only got a wii because ps3 and 360 were far too expensive at the time... wont be a killing blow for the already dying nintendo but sure wont help will only speed up the inevitable death, with the arcadey light hearted games microsoft and sony are pumping out lately it leaves nintendo as why bother with them, imo nintendo was a safe bet for cheap clean fun (I have all 3 consoles over the course of the years) never been fond of it only really mario n zelda were pretty good the rest were pretty rubbish not really "full" games, so i just stick to pc and use emulators to play the console exclusives from yester year and pic up the games that are multi platformed
Super Nintendo games, when new, were $70. I'm tired of people complaining that they are paying $60 for a game they may not like. In the Super Nintendo era, it was even riskier, because you either relied on reviews completely, or got lucky enough to have a friend who had the game. Or rented it first, if a rental place was nearby.
I'm not ecstatic that Nintendo raised the price. Just trying to add a bit of perspective for people.
I'm not ecstatic that Nintendo raised the price. Just trying to add a bit of perspective for people.
Haven't people been saying that Nintendo is dying since the N64 era? That is a long death, and they must be the most popular dying company ever, struggling to maintain their number one spot in console sales this generation.SnowBurst said: