CoffeeJanitor
Member
Will doAceBandage said:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Nintendo Turns Up Its Nose at Garage Developers [Update: Reggie Clarifies Comment]
- Thread starter FoxSpirit
- Start date
Nuclear Muffin
Banned
MatthewB92 said:
Hell no! Trying to find anything good on the iPhone itself is completely impossible!
There's a reason why there's a huge gulf in sales for games that are in the top 25 compared to everything else. Finding games on there is completely impossible! (unless you already know what you're looking for and choose to search. But you can do the same thing on the Wii and DSi shop channels)
Finding games on the Wii and DSi shop channels is much easier. The interfaces may be slow to load and sorely lacking in features such as background downloads and videos (which are relegated to the Nintendo Channel) but finding what you want is much easier.
The 3DS shop has an interface that is leaps and bounds ahead of everything else out there from what I've seen of it so far (not just Wii/DSi but also 360, PS3 and iOS) and the ability to download games to, and run directly off, SD Cards will fix their storage problems (packing in 2GB internal and a 2GB SD Card was a great move!).
Nintendo seem to have fixed all of their interface problems with the 3DS, but their biggest issue lies in the marketing of their services. The main media outlets flat out do not cover the Nintendo download services to any significant extent (that's why Nintendolife became popular. They are the only ones who cover them properly) and they are unlikely to change their tack considering that they cover Nintendo platforms poorly in general (partially down to an anti Nintendo agenda and partially because of demographic differences).
Nintendo have done a poor job in promoting their services this generation and it is their biggest challenge with the 3DS Shop Channel. Hopefully they really push their Spotpass auto download feature, because that could really be a silver bullet if handled correctly (also allowing them to sidestep the lack of media coverage to some extent)
MatthewB92
Member
I can't change your opinions on the games because well they're your opinion but I agree Nintendo should change the rules a little.Shiggy said:My problem just wasn't that it was too hard to find them (there's NintendoLife), but that I did not find any of them worth my money. I bought Lost Winds, which was boring and short, I got Cubello, which had some broken gameplay mechanics, I bought Orbient, which was only a subpar remake of my favourite GBA game. Jett Rocket was fine, but had no mid-point saving.
Compared to retail titles (Another Code R, Wario Land Shake Dimension), which cost just little more, I had much more fun and they lasted much longer. Maybe I'm just really disappointed with WiiWare as it has not become something like ArmorGames or some other flash site, which do feature some pretty great titles which I found more fulfilling than titles from Nintendo's service. And then again, the iOS service has some titles which I would love to see on WiiWare, but it's just not possible due to Nintendo's stupid regulations.
MatthewB92
Member
Well first I think we should work on getting off cap limits then fix the problem with who can develop a game for Nintendo's download services.Shiggy said:
Nintendo is behind when it comes to the internet but lets hope it's all fixed by Wii 2 or whatever the next console is because if it isn't who knows what's going to happen.
Alexios
Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
Bit.Trips? I mean, you don't have to like them, they're not for me either, but obviously they have an audience and are unique... World of Goo? NyxQuest? Bonsai Barber? Art of Balance? Fluidity? Tomena Sanner? Toki Tori? Lit? Chick Chick Boom? Cave Story? Yeah, not all are exclusive. You can't just invalidate a whole service because you tried 5 games and didn't like them... Others did, and found more to like, including some you dissed (I thought Lost Winds was excellent, obviously of slower pace than something wacky like Super Meat Boy, but it fit and created a great atmosphere, which is why I got the sequel also - NyxQuest has some similar ideas but is faster, try it)...Shiggy said:
DXB-KNIGHT
Member
I think even if Nintendo sneezes the gaming media will misinterpret it to something against Apple, applications, Sony, Microsoft, 3rd party, 1st party, Ghaddafi, Charlie Sheen, Fox News Obama, Jews, Middle East...etc... take your pick.
Alextended said:
The Bit.Trip games and World of Goo were great, please don't name Chronos Twins DX with them. The demo was pretty crappy. What I'm saying is that there are way to many bad games for a too high price on the service. Why should I buy them when I get much better retail titles for a similar price? Take a look at other services, Broken Sword for 7 EUR - that's reasonable for me. Art of Balance and Fluidity were also just fine based on the demos I played, but then I see so many outright bad games there...
At the moment, I only anticipate three titles on WiiWare: Liight, Fast and Retro City Rampage. Why does Nintendo neglect it so much?
Concerning Lost Winds, didn't you think it was pretty short? 4 hours and I never felt like it was worthwhile to return to it. With NyxQuest I only tried the demo and I didn't really feel that I wanted to buy it for 10 EUR, especially as it would not be much longer.
Alexios
Cores, shaders and BIOS oh my!
There aren't many bad games on iOS that cost the same as good games? You always feel you get 100% of your money's worth in every single retail or dd title everywhere else? Nintendo is the exception to this rule? Shit happens, some games you buy you don't like as much as you hoped. Oh well. Nintendo didn't make those.
If Broken Sword counts when it's a (somewhat enhanced, mostly made easier and with a different intro sequence) port of a 90s game then we might as well count Virtual Console alongside WiiWare which has similar prices for similar era titles and plenty of classics to choose from.
As for what's upcoming, I mentioned a couple more you may want to look into in the last page. No there aren't many but there aren't many games for Wii in general. Obviously the whole platform isn't at its best in terms of third party (or first party, until those supposed unannounced titles surface) titles regardless of retail or dd.
No, I thought Lost Winds was just right. Just like I thought Portal was just right. It was a complete experience imo. Same for NyxQuest.
Broken Sword isn't even by a garage dev so doesn't play into this discussion. Ubisoft just wanted to rip people off and try and sell that game in retail for Wii/DS instead. When that didn't work out so well they dumped it anywhere they could. It's $6 on gog.
As for buying older titles in retail, yes, that's a great money saving strategy since anything that isn't evergreen is discounted after a while. Great for us, we can buy Another Code R for 15 instead of buy Crysis 2 for 60, and buy Crysis 2 for 20 when Half-Life 3 (lol) arrives. This isn't just Nintendo, you can save money on any platform by buying older discounted titles. I don't get your point with this. It's how the market works for better or for worse.
You can also go play Beneath a Steel Sky or Monsters' Den: Book of Dread or other high quality games for free instead of pay for some iOS game just as well.
If Broken Sword counts when it's a (somewhat enhanced, mostly made easier and with a different intro sequence) port of a 90s game then we might as well count Virtual Console alongside WiiWare which has similar prices for similar era titles and plenty of classics to choose from.
As for what's upcoming, I mentioned a couple more you may want to look into in the last page. No there aren't many but there aren't many games for Wii in general. Obviously the whole platform isn't at its best in terms of third party (or first party, until those supposed unannounced titles surface) titles regardless of retail or dd.
No, I thought Lost Winds was just right. Just like I thought Portal was just right. It was a complete experience imo. Same for NyxQuest.
Broken Sword isn't even by a garage dev so doesn't play into this discussion. Ubisoft just wanted to rip people off and try and sell that game in retail for Wii/DS instead. When that didn't work out so well they dumped it anywhere they could. It's $6 on gog.
As for buying older titles in retail, yes, that's a great money saving strategy since anything that isn't evergreen is discounted after a while. Great for us, we can buy Another Code R for 15 instead of buy Crysis 2 for 60, and buy Crysis 2 for 20 when Half-Life 3 (lol) arrives. This isn't just Nintendo, you can save money on any platform by buying older discounted titles. I don't get your point with this. It's how the market works for better or for worse.
You can also go play Beneath a Steel Sky or Monsters' Den: Book of Dread or other high quality games for free instead of pay for some iOS game just as well.
AceBandage
Banned
Jokeropia said:
Don't bother.
He's gone.
tetrisgrammaton
Member
Nuclear Muffin said:
iOs is actually pretty decent for finding games. You can use Genius to get recommendations based on your library, and use GameCenter to see what your friends are playing.
AceBandage
Banned
tetrisgrammaton said:
I dunno how Genius is for games, but it's pretty bad for music.
If I like Pink Floyd, don't suggest Korn...
tetrisgrammaton
Member
AceBandage said:
Yeah Genius is definitely not genius, but I usually get at least a few games I'd like to play in my list.
edit:
For instance, now it's giving me Liqua Pop, SpikeDislike, League of Evil, a game called Horror Vacui 2 which I never heard of and looks really cool, and Reactable. All which seem pretty cool or that I've heard positives about.
On the downside, it gives me a RSS feed for rabbit pics, Carnivores- that dinosaur hunting game, and nanosaur 2. Apparently it thinks I'm into dinosaurs. :\
edit 2: ok damn this illustration i'm blowing money
I think Ping would show a lot of potential for games.
m.i.s.
Banned
Nintendo says no to cheap games
Nintendo's Hideki Konno, project lead on 3DS
I think Nintendo's missing a huge opportunity here.
Remember those Mini Mario minigames on Super Mario 64 DS and New Super Mario Bros? And those minigames like the laser hockey and tank game on Wiiplay? Nintendo excel at those types of casual games.
I'd totally buy each of those games for .99 cents each [equivalent] - the sheer convenience of having it there on the 3DS home menu and ready to play instantly.
Nintendo's Hideki Konno, project lead on 3DS
I think Nintendo's missing a huge opportunity here.
Remember those Mini Mario minigames on Super Mario 64 DS and New Super Mario Bros? And those minigames like the laser hockey and tank game on Wiiplay? Nintendo excel at those types of casual games.
I'd totally buy each of those games for .99 cents each [equivalent] - the sheer convenience of having it there on the 3DS home menu and ready to play instantly.
So if they are against cheap downloadable games - why establish download services like Wii ware, DSiware and 3dsware ? What about their Art Style Games ....?
It's like people want to misunderstand everything that comes from Nintendo concerning the 3DS.
It's like people want to misunderstand everything that comes from Nintendo concerning the 3DS.
Cosmonaut X
Member
cw_sasuke said:
They're not against cheapER downloadable titles (or even retail titles) but they do seem very set against a DD model that sets the price for a huge range of content at $1 (or the equivalent), and even against regular sales. The position from the top-down is that it's better to set a suitable price at the start and then stick with that - a position that isn't incompatible with their bargain Everyone's Recommendation line in Japan, or a select range of 200/500pts DD games - rather than teach their customers to expect games to drop in price quickly (or ever).
I think they're right about setting a reasonable price and sticking to it - how often have you seen the classic GAF attitude of "meh, I'll wait for the bomba sales" - but I think they're wrong about some of the prices they set, and that they're wrong about the positive benefit of sales.
m.i.s.
Banned
magash said:
I understand that. It shouldn't be a binary either / or proposition. The nature of the highly specialist console market [handheld or console] means that they'd remain closed systems. However, that shouldn't mean that Nintendo and other specialist game companise should just ignore new price and market opportunities where they arise. They could still maintain their strict control and selection processes.
Why would you do that?
Member
He said pretty much the exact same thing in this very recent interview:
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/6312/leading_the_3ds_charge_an_.php
The app discussion starts on Page 3 and continues through the rest of the interview.
Maybe the gamesindustry article cited this interview? I don't know.
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/6312/leading_the_3ds_charge_an_.php
The app discussion starts on Page 3 and continues through the rest of the interview.
Maybe the gamesindustry article cited this interview? I don't know.
The oversupply issue sounds like they're equating the issues which caused the mid-eighties videogame crash with what's going on now. They may be correct, but I think they may not be giving due thought to the price issue; throwaway crappy games on cartridges back on the 2600 would have significant manufacturing costs which would be passed on to the consumer, which just isn't as much of the case with DD products.
I can see both arguments, and if you consider it in the light of the video games crash, I can see Nintendo's trepidation; however, it's not the eighties, and I can't be sure whether such a comparison is justified.
I can see both arguments, and if you consider it in the light of the video games crash, I can see Nintendo's trepidation; however, it's not the eighties, and I can't be sure whether such a comparison is justified.
charlequin
Banned
Cosmonaut X said:
People say they'll wait for a game to hit the bargain bins because when you're looking at many games in the US market (especially single-player titles outside the very top tier), there's a near-guarantee that they'll bomb quickly (due to being overproduced and then underselling) and you'll get the same game only a scant few months later, losing nothing but gaining a much cheaper price. That's certainly something worth avoiding -- but that doesn't affect Nintendo's titles anyway because they produce sensible print runs and tend to release fewer games that people will buy, play once, and immediately resell.
Dropping a game's price by 50% a year or two after it comes out is completely different. If someone's willing to wait that long to play the game cheaper, they were never a potential customer for it at full price anyway. By insisting on maintaining high prices on single-player titles which are old, whose sales have already fallen to zero, Nintendo is ceding sales in the $20 range to used copies and shovelware and losing out on potential sales of that software that are now failing to be met.
Almost all of Nintendo's irrational pricing decisions stem out of this fallacious idea Iwata seems to have adopted that if a product ever, at any point in its life, becomes even a small bit cheaper, that will permanently eliminate the ability to sell it or equivalent products for a higher price later. That's just wrong, provably wrong, and it leads Nintendo to all kinds of poor decisions: avoiding pricedrops on the Wii (when an earlier drop might've helped the system remain a bit more viable in Japan), avoiding temporary sales on content (even though sales are one of the best available promotional mechanisms and desirable content that goes on sale can often stay at an elevated sales level even after the sale is over), avoiding a Player's Choice line (even though that pushes customers to buy shovelware crap used instead of Nintendo games new), etc.
mclem said:
It is indeed no longer the eighties, and Nintendo's concerns in this are are pretty much that outdated. Konno's comments come off to me as quite naive -- Nintendo are already competing against free and $1 software, and trying to pretend they don't exist is not going to prove a great strategy for doing so.
This is certainly an area in which Nintendo needs to open up a bit more and at least develop a process for allowing quality small-scale productions onto their services, but thus far Nintendo has shown very little understanding of online whatsoever - and I cannot imagine anyone remotely business-minded targeting Nintendo platforms for their indie development, not with the PC offering so much more freedom from a creative and model viewpoint.
charlequin said:
Going back to all that blue ocean stuff way back from the start of this generation, is their discomfort the fact that they're now effectively trapped between two red oceans, both of which are saturated with content; big-budget HD titles on one side, small-budget mass-market App Store titles on the other.
They're trying to forge a third path, which I don't think ought to be dismissed out-of-hand, but it's an ambitious approach when there's a possibility that there *is* no third path.
I'm not sure why people think Nintendo's feet should be held against the fire for keeping so many titles at $49.99 for so long... they're still selling.
I think they've proven that successive price drops aren't necessary if you make quality product that all new adopters want and current customers may have never gotten but decide to buy later.
When Nintendo produces a game that doesn't sell well, they let it quickly fade away and then just don't produce it anymore. They don't value the $20 budget price game because they know they're going to be able to fill that gap with another $50 title that people will want and may likely be evergreen.
This is the problem so many of the big 3rd parties can't solve: Making games that are evergreen titles that they can retain a high value price on for extended amounts of time. Instead those 3rd parties make yearly updates to keep recycling customers with a new game similar to the last one.
Activision has sort of solved this with Call of Duty as Modern Warfare and Modern Warfare 2 had very long legs at retail in spite of the new yearly update's arrival. I can't think of much else that has worked that way for a 3rd party.
Anyway, more on topic, I do like a lot of indie stuff, but the $1 price is not sustainable for anything that matches modern console $50 and $60 games. And yet the $1 game may scratch the "gamer" itch enough for people that they never buy a single $50 or $60 game, thus destroying the ability to make games most gamers here really want to play. iPhone and whatever other games costing a buck do devalue games in general. It's not good for the industry as a whole if that becomes the defacto price people think games are worth.
I think they've proven that successive price drops aren't necessary if you make quality product that all new adopters want and current customers may have never gotten but decide to buy later.
When Nintendo produces a game that doesn't sell well, they let it quickly fade away and then just don't produce it anymore. They don't value the $20 budget price game because they know they're going to be able to fill that gap with another $50 title that people will want and may likely be evergreen.
This is the problem so many of the big 3rd parties can't solve: Making games that are evergreen titles that they can retain a high value price on for extended amounts of time. Instead those 3rd parties make yearly updates to keep recycling customers with a new game similar to the last one.
Activision has sort of solved this with Call of Duty as Modern Warfare and Modern Warfare 2 had very long legs at retail in spite of the new yearly update's arrival. I can't think of much else that has worked that way for a 3rd party.
Anyway, more on topic, I do like a lot of indie stuff, but the $1 price is not sustainable for anything that matches modern console $50 and $60 games. And yet the $1 game may scratch the "gamer" itch enough for people that they never buy a single $50 or $60 game, thus destroying the ability to make games most gamers here really want to play. iPhone and whatever other games costing a buck do devalue games in general. It's not good for the industry as a whole if that becomes the defacto price people think games are worth.
devildog820
Member
Clott said:
Right, but Nintendo specifically means developers without publishers or a publishing division. I understand why Nintendo is doing this. It's a conservative Japanese company that is trying to protect its current business model. I think publishers pay Nintendo $15-$20 per DS cart (Sony used to get $35 per PS3 disc, I believe). That's a huge moneymaker and they are loathe to lose it. It's just like Hollywood holding on to DVDs over digital distribution.
It should be noted that Hollywood has fought VHS, Beta, DVD, and Blu-ray because they thought it would kill the industry. In fact, each successive tech they fought massively increased their profits. Executive bonuses are not tied to future earnings, but what they make now. The execs will probably be gone by the time a new tech fleshes out so they are protecting their own earnings. (I don't believe Nintendo is being short-sighted for bonus protection.)
Stephen Totilo nailed it when he said (and I'm paraphrasing) that Nintendo may not be interested, but that may Nintendo's Little Big Horn. Angry Birds would cost $20+ on the 3DS. It costs $0.99 on the App Store (and is free for Android). It has sold millions of copies and has probably helped sell a few iPhones and iPod Touches. Apple wins in both situations.
Nintendo also may be afraid of an App Store model because they currently get 50% or more of each DS game sale and that 30% will hurt the bottom line. That is too short sighted, because cream rises and you can sell more because it becomes an impulse buy. A Zelda game could sell for $20. Easily. Call of Duty could sell for $15-$20 easy on the 3DS. Even if it sold for $10, the distribution costs would be so much lower.
Starchasing
Member
devildog820 said:
Nintendo wants is to deal with bussiness so they can communicate with them in bussiness terms.
Imagine you have a complex bussiness and you have lots of bussiness partners. You need to share with them lots of information, from legal information to marketing information. You have to impose them NDA and security measures for the dev kits.
That comunnication costs you money, so you want to harmonize that flow of comunication to keep the costs of the relationship down. In order to harmonize you need to impose restrictions on with whom you deal with. And that is what Nintendo does.
Another example can be seen in The Wire, when Marlo goes to talk with the Greek.
devildog820
Member
Let me preface this response by saying that none of this is in a snide or nasty tone. I am a huge Nintendo game fan, but I think much less of their non-game implementations.
That's not true. The front page of the App Store has tons of great stuff. So do the top 25 lists. Plus word of mouth goes a long way and it's extremely easy to email a link or search. They can do a better job, but to say the WiiWare shop is better is incorrect.
I think you may be looking through tinted glasses on this one. It is definitely not easier, at least to a vast majority of users. Plus the slowness, poor navigation. and other UI problems are a net negative.
They haven't nearly fixed all their problems. They may have fixed the things you care most about, but again a large majority of people still find the WiiWare store clunky and slow.
Also, the media doesn't have an anti-Nintendo agenda. The media follow the zeitgeist. Nintendo looks old and stodgy comparatively. Nintendo isn't doing anything to catch up with the current digital distribution trend. To me it seems Nintendo is being dragged into it. PSN and XBL don't get a ton of coverage for their game services either. Again, because, while they provide awesome things, the weekly downloads just aren't exciting. Weekly downloads sell thousands or hundreds of thousands. But not millions. Angry Birds sold millions. Exciting and innovative software is coming from one-man development houses now. A new Call of Duty is cool, but expected.
Nuclear Muffin said:
That's not true. The front page of the App Store has tons of great stuff. So do the top 25 lists. Plus word of mouth goes a long way and it's extremely easy to email a link or search. They can do a better job, but to say the WiiWare shop is better is incorrect.
Nuclear Muffin said:
I think you may be looking through tinted glasses on this one. It is definitely not easier, at least to a vast majority of users. Plus the slowness, poor navigation. and other UI problems are a net negative.
Nuclear Muffin said:
They haven't nearly fixed all their problems. They may have fixed the things you care most about, but again a large majority of people still find the WiiWare store clunky and slow.
Also, the media doesn't have an anti-Nintendo agenda. The media follow the zeitgeist. Nintendo looks old and stodgy comparatively. Nintendo isn't doing anything to catch up with the current digital distribution trend. To me it seems Nintendo is being dragged into it. PSN and XBL don't get a ton of coverage for their game services either. Again, because, while they provide awesome things, the weekly downloads just aren't exciting. Weekly downloads sell thousands or hundreds of thousands. But not millions. Angry Birds sold millions. Exciting and innovative software is coming from one-man development houses now. A new Call of Duty is cool, but expected.
devildog820
Member
Starchasing said:
Apple treats individuals as businesses too. As a (non-game) app developer for a large company, our terms are almost identical to one-man dev shops.
It should also be noted that Nintendo is afraid of the crap storm that sank the 2600. Except that is bogus because the crap storm didn't bury the Wii or the DS. It helped sell. So that argument rings hollow.
edit: I've signed plenty of NDAs. Apple gives everyone with a Mac a "dev kit" of sorts. However, after a system is released, there is no need to keep secrets. Apple does give people advance software and hardware, but only the major publishers. Which is fine. Let people use their personal 3DS as a dev kit along with a PC for development. That's all the dev kits are anyway. Just like my iPhone. Apple gives me a certificate to run software I write only on my device. Bam. Instant dev kit.
Starchasing
Member
devildog820 said:
Im not saying that it can not be done. Im saying that it makes bussiness sense to normalize who you deal with as a bussines and impose them restrictions.
charlequin
Banned
Jokeropia said:
Well, they have something like it (which is still good) although IIRC it's all third-party titles so it doesn't cover some of the specific games I think would be well-served by this approach. But yes, that's true and it's a very good thing. (And the third-party focus is actually pretty commendable for Nintendo.)
Dave Long said:
Nobody's complaining about NSMBW, WSR, or MKW sticking at $50, because those titles are still selling. The issue is games like Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn and Super Paper Mario and Twilight Princess and Metroid Prime 3 -- single-player games below the AAA tier, all of which are selling literally zero copies per month now.
Fallen_Hero
Member
People need to stop saying "Stay classy." It's really annoying.
Stay classy, FoxSpirit.
lunchwithyuzo
Banned
I think the Minna no Susume line is really genius. It's purely 3rd party titles, an area that's been something of a problem for Wii, and it's based on review rankings (via the Nintendo Channel) so there's still an a element of holding selections to a quality standard for approval. And better yet, that standard isn't press based, but user based.charlequin said:
I'd really like to see Nintendo do something similar in western markets. But I also agree they should consider putting their own secondary properties on it (especially in Japan), and they could afford to add titles into the line more frequently. Since it launched about a year ago in Japan, I think it's only had 3 rounds of additions.
charlequin said:
And besides, there's such a thing as giving BACK to the consumer. That's why Nintendo is so often lambasted for being at the top of the pack. They refuse to give their customers any value for their purchases, and consistently overcharge for outdated technology or ancient games that should have been price dropped ages ago.
All other companies are smart enough to understand the value in exhibiting a little goodwill.
Cerebral Assassin
Member
charlequin said:
Why do you not count Twilight Princess a AAA title? As for the rest I would assume that it isn't worth the money to bother with a re-release (especially as they dropped very quickly in price originally).
I don't understand the bolded, how do they give any less value to its customers than other publishers? Do you mean in terms of features(online, etc) or length(or something else)? As for ancient games perhaps things are different in the US, non-"mainstream" Nintendo titles can usually be found cheaply( S&P2, Disaster, etc.) until stock goes (Hell, I've even seen SSBB given away with Pringles).
devildog820 said:
I've never understood this logic. There are a variety of $2-$3 titles on DSiWare. When Angry Birds is released for DSi/3DS, I fully expect it to be around the same price there as it has been everywhere else. Nintendo has a system for inexpensive, smaller games -- I don't get the "____ WOULD COST $20+ ON THE 3DS."
If stores are already stocked with these titles, and stores already do internal price drops, is there really enough of a demand to print up another run of these for $20 each? Fire Emblem is the only title that's really "hard to find" in your list . . . and I had the impression that Twilight Princess was still selling reasonably well.charlequin said:
Okay, this is really stretching things. Heck, I could make a contrived argument that Nintendo was the only company caring for consumers, as its titles retained their resale value for years (unlike EA, for example.) I could argue that Nintendo gives value by enabling free online play, unlike MS. I could comment on the fact that Nintendo's titles are $10 less than titles on MS and Sony systems, and use that to argue that Nintendo is giving back more by charging less. We could even get into a wacky discussion about how Nintendo was giving customers the #1 selling game, FREE, with their home console and still selling it for less than their competitors.Amir0x said:
Trying to argue that Nintendo "refuse(s) to give their customers any value for their purchases" sounds like meaningless hyperbole, honestly. Perhaps your point would be better made if you rephrased it, but I can't see how you can argue against Nintendo giving customers "value" and retain a straight face.
velvet_nitemare
Member
DavidDayton said:
When Nintendo releases games that are lacking in content like Pilotwings(3hrs) and Steel Diver(5 hours) and charges $40 for them, i think it's reasonable to expect Angry Birds to cost more on the 3DS than it costs on the iphone. They are the manufacturer, and they're setting a precedent over what's acceptable to charge for content.