We already have a couple of games where the digital price is cheaper than at retail, including this one from what's been mentioned earlier in the thread. It does seem like it's a case-by-case situation, rather than a flat option that devs and pubs can use at will, so we'll see how widespread it becomes in the next year or so.
-
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.
LA Noire might be $10 more expensive on Switch due to cartridges
- Thread starter Gamezone
- Start date
We already have a couple of games where the digital price is cheaper than at retail, including this one from what's been mentioned earlier in the thread. It does seem like it's a case-by-case situation, rather than a flat option that devs and pubs can use at will, so we'll see how widespread it becomes in the next year or so.
IsntChrisL
Member
Sucks but at least the digital version is cheaper. I'll be downloading it I guess.
He has no self awareness either? You went on a rant based on a flawed calculation that was anyhow resulting in a $2.7 additional gain per game for the producer. Practically arguing that it's BS that the game costs $49.99 instead of $47.20. All based on a flawed assumption anyway.
DeuceGamer
Member
I don't think this will affect sales too much for this particular game. It seemed like a bigger deal among Switch owners and I expect it will still sell reasonably well in comparison to the PS4/X1 counterparts.
It's apparently 60% more including Platform Holder licensing fees, Packaging, etc... for a 32 GB card. If those figures are accurate, a card that costs around $20, would cost $12 on PS4/X1.
Apparently the prices on Switch and PS4/X1 are basically the same if using an 8GB card.
It's apparently 60% more including Platform Holder licensing fees, Packaging, etc... for a 32 GB card. If those figures are accurate, a card that costs around $20, would cost $12 on PS4/X1.
Apparently the prices on Switch and PS4/X1 are basically the same if using an 8GB card.
No, I called out increasing a price solely because marketing wants a round number. All I've had are literal shrugs and accusations of being irrational in return.
...how did you get the $2.7 number anyway? Why do you think I somehow knew that number when writing that post when it hadn't been brought up even once before?
Bluray costs scale depending on MSRP. For example Sony/MS might only charge $7 for a $30 game while they'd charge $8 for a $40 game.
kitchenmotors
Banned
Yeah we've been over this already with this game and others. @ZhugeEx even went into it the other day.
Isnt Zhuge know for not being a reliable, trust worthy source? Unless Im thinking of someone else. Not that I doubt an increase, but hes just spouting bullshit numbers I think. I feel like people shouldnt post something unless theyre reliable and verified.
DeuceGamer
Member
This is my issue with the situation. I feel like some Publishers are using it as an excuse to charge more. If the figures are correct then games like Rime, Puyo Puyo Tetris, etc... should not be more expensive.
I'm sure 32 GB cards are more expensive, but I don't believe any games have released that have used the 32 GB cards yet.
This started with you taking issue with a joke about fans calling this two versions of a game when it clearly isn't two versions, it's one. I never said anything about value between consoles nor did the original post in question.
Yup i think we already know this will be true for some games
Also Street fighter 2 is a £30+ and is a game from around 1991, with a few new features and is probably a small file size.
Also these Switch cartidges may be more valuable in the future to collectors than discs
Therefore I expect Skyrim to be full price when it arrives, and I'm waiting for the thread created for the high price when its due out
Also Street fighter 2 is a £30+ and is a game from around 1991, with a few new features and is probably a small file size.
Also these Switch cartidges may be more valuable in the future to collectors than discs
Therefore I expect Skyrim to be full price when it arrives, and I'm waiting for the thread created for the high price when its due out
No. Zhuge is a smarter guy than both myself and most (all?) on this forum.
So this is all about the literal usage of the term "versions"? Whether you call them different versions or not, it doesn't diminish the fact that most Switch games can be played on the go and at home due to the inherent nature of the system. You're getting the same value as a PS4/Vita or 3DS/Wii U crossbuy game yet, because they're not different SKUs, it doesn't matter? Or are you simply arguing semantics? What are you trying to argue here?
Zhuge's numbers make sense.
The actual third party costs on a serviced packaged (from stamp to ship) is going to be in the neighborhood of 9-12$. The costs of a serviced packaged for a 32GB card being ~60% put you on the upper bound of ~7-8$ added already just from that linear increase.
Because retail cut is also based on a flat percentage, not a flat number, the increased cost of the package at retail (say, marked up to 45-48$ from BRDVD $40), results in a ~1-4$ markup added for retailer cut.
$40+8+2 ~= 50$USD
I'm actually surprised that the 32GB Masked ROM is actually that cheap, or that the 8GB is flat with BRDVD stamping + serviced package costs. Nintendo has to be eating some losses on these ROMs to make that lower end 8GB parity make sense.
The actual third party costs on a serviced packaged (from stamp to ship) is going to be in the neighborhood of 9-12$. The costs of a serviced packaged for a 32GB card being ~60% put you on the upper bound of ~7-8$ added already just from that linear increase.
Because retail cut is also based on a flat percentage, not a flat number, the increased cost of the package at retail (say, marked up to 45-48$ from BRDVD $40), results in a ~1-4$ markup added for retailer cut.
$40+8+2 ~= 50$USD
I'm actually surprised that the 32GB Masked ROM is actually that cheap, or that the 8GB is flat with BRDVD stamping + serviced package costs. Nintendo has to be eating some losses on these ROMs to make that lower end 8GB parity make sense.
Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku!
Member
time is a flat circle
The Hermit
Member
Exactly.
+1. Is the reality of the tech, sadly.
LOL.
This is why 3rd parties left Nintendo in droves 25 years ago and developed for the original Playstation.
And for the most part they never came back.
And Nintendo does not give one ounce of one fuck.
Pokemaniac
Member
This isn't directed at anyone in particular, but Switch carts use mask ROM, not Flash. They're not the same thing. Mask ROM is actually likely cheaper.
Jubenhimer
Member
How do we know they aren't subsidizing the costs though? Remember, Nintendo can't take too big of a hit on Switch cartridges because they're a platform holder, and as such they still need to make money from selling cartridges to publishers since that's where a lot of the profits come from for the big 3.
KingdomHeartsFan
Member
Tbh I'd rather have that and have the game on the cart than have half the game on the cart and download the rest.
Fredrik
Member
Definitely. That nonsense of releasing half the games on the card and a download code for the rest makes it completely pointless to go physical on the console. The only thing you get is a nice case and some predownloaded data.
Someone educate me if needed, and sorry if this has already been answered, but there are 16GB Switch carts, right? It's not just just 8GB or 32GB, is it?
And if there are 16GB carts, the game could fit on one of those, couldn't it? I'm sure they'd need to optimize it a bit, but surely not that much. After all, the game requires 16GB on PC, and huge games like BotW on Switch and Skyrim SE on PC respectively take up 13 and 12GB. I struggle to see what's so huge in L.A. Noire that it would need more space than two of the biggest open world games in recent memory.
What are the costs for 16GB carts? They've gotta be quite a bit less expensive than 32GB carts.
And if there are 16GB carts, the game could fit on one of those, couldn't it? I'm sure they'd need to optimize it a bit, but surely not that much. After all, the game requires 16GB on PC, and huge games like BotW on Switch and Skyrim SE on PC respectively take up 13 and 12GB. I struggle to see what's so huge in L.A. Noire that it would need more space than two of the biggest open world games in recent memory.
What are the costs for 16GB carts? They've gotta be quite a bit less expensive than 32GB carts.
Reallink
Member
That is much less than I'd have guessed. A 50GB BD pressed in the bulk games ship is what, $1-3? I would have figured the carts were 3x-5x the cost of a disk.
BanjoLayleeYookaKazooie
Banned
I mean that's just the most gross over simplification of Nintendo with 3rd parties as you can get. Over the last 25 years Nintendo went through the entire lifecycle of the GBA, Wii, DS and very soon 3DS along with their few unsuccessful systems that obviously got no major 3rd party support. Switch looks like it'll be on the successful end of things, so I don't see why your assessment of the situation is a LOL in big capital letters. I certainly don't think the 3rd parties who missed out on the massive userbases Nintendo have had these last 25 were laughing for avoiding them, unless they're just not in the business of making money or are Rockstar with GTA, and even that wasn't too good for the beast that was the Nintendo DS.
This is certainly a problem, but your assessment is waaaaaaay off.
Chû Totoro
Member
Zhuge is smart but making a tweet telling people that they should blame the cost of cartridges for the 10$ different is just dumb.
There's way more behind these 10$ than the 8-32GB cartridges difference cost.
But like always (and really for gaming it's just nothing vs. what some important "news" can make) people will rather take the bait and go in full fight mode instead of trying to understand if it's true and more importantly how does it come from (sources, facts, ...).
Open world games aren't necessarily that "big" in terms of data (mostly because it's more about the number and quality of assets, most of which are reused to make the world bigger).
It's the CG/video/audio compression that take up a lot of space. And I thought LA Noire is basically running a type of video mesh over the character's spaces, which I'm sure is quite a bit of data.
Doominated
Member
Fuck all this talk about cart costs
LA Noire was a fucking terrible game and I sincerely hope nobody buys it on switch.
LA Noire was a fucking terrible game and I sincerely hope nobody buys it on switch.
shouamabane
Member
..and it will hold its resale value better.
Bronetta
Ask me about the moon landing or the temperature at which jet fuel burns. You may be surprised at what you learn.
Why were Vita carts cheaper than PS3 versions?
Whoever said Nintendo should be subsidising the costs is correct. But we're talking about Nintendo here. This is why third parties dont give a shit about Nintendo, because Nintendo doesnt give a shit about them. .
Whoever said Nintendo should be subsidising the costs is correct. But we're talking about Nintendo here. This is why third parties dont give a shit about Nintendo, because Nintendo doesnt give a shit about them. .
Jubenhimer
Member
What are you talking about? The GBA and DS had great 3rd party support, the Wii's was decent too. The 3DS may be a case, but even then it wasn't all bad.
Because most Vita games were in the 2-4 GB range? I may be wrong, but I don't think many Vita games came on 16 GB cards (the highest capacity for the system) and if they did, it still isn't enough to warrant a $10 price hike. Also, this doesn't explain 3DS games, which hold roughly the same as the average Vita card, if Nintendo was over charging, why are 3DS games the same price as Vita games? People are so quick to blame Nintendo without actually looking at all the angles here.
Pretty much.
The moment they agreed on the switch design being a portable home console they had to ditch the huge disc drive.
DeuceGamer
Member
This is what I would like to know as well. Currently no games have released with the 32GB cart so the more interesting comparison would be the 16GB cart.
WPublishers still charging more for games that use the 8GB cart despite those apparently being the same/similar cost seems like an excuse, but maybe there is more to it.
In the end it will be interesting how it affects La Noire, but I have a feeling it will still sell relatively well in comparison to the systems with a larger install base because it seems like a more important release to Switch owners. Guess we will know soon.
Yeah, we've already had games ship on 16GB cards, like BotW and Just Dance 2017.
From what we know, Nintendo offers 1GB, 2GB, 4GB, 8GB, 16GB and 32GB cards for games that publishers can order for their games.
Chû Totoro
Member
Simple:
devs and editors are not our friends, they just want to take the biggest profit so they don't take risks and depending on their sales projections they fix a price. You can see that they are really really making money on the MSRP because this can be cut 50% and sometimes more just a few months after release.
I've learned not to think gaming industry as a magical world. Games are magical (some at least) but business is business and sadly (big) devs and editors are all dirty bastards !!!
None of them would make a sacrifice in its profits for its audience. Never !
Failing a lack of optimization, the video data angle is my take as well... But again, the game weighs 16GB on PC, so what's so different about the Switch version that it couldn't get squeezed onto a 16GB cart?
[EDIT] Chû Totoro, I definitely see your point and I don't even really disagree with it, but it only works if the publisher assumes they'll get just as many sales and money from selling the game at a $10 markup with less space optimization vs. no/a $5-markup on less expensive carts. The road to profit isn't just about margins-per-cart, but also about sales volume potential.
BanjoLayleeYookaKazooie
Banned
That's what I was saying, sorry if my point wasn't clear.
All those systems were 'underpowered' and relied on 'gimmicks' and had a different audience but 3rd parties came round and overcame those hurdles and some saw great success. This could be seen as a bigger hurdle to overcome but if there's a console selling well and software also keeps selling on it well these companies are in a business and need to show results. EA for example were in a mess at one point last generation and were desperate to get a slice of the Wii pie, most of the 3rd parties seem much more stable now but they're still owned to shareholders and will those shareholders be best pleased if they've got nothing out of the Switch over the next few years if they go through a rough patch? Will the carts be too much to overcome then?
I think Skyrim should give some clarity on the future. That is an old game that will be full price and isn't something publishers believed could be successful on Nintendo. If that does well? Well then...
Council Pop
Member
I dunno why people are getting so angry about this. It's just a fact, that we all could have anticipated.
A disk drive was never going to work in a console like the Switch, and making it digital only would have pushed the price up considerably. So the issue isn't "evil third parties" or "evil Nintendo"- it's the fact the whole Switch concept exists in the first place. And I think most of us can agree that the core concept and execution of the Switch is awesome, and this is a price I'm willing to pay for that.
With the digital prices being cheaper, as well as the lack of region locking meaning I can often find the game cheaper digitally anyway, I really doubt I'm even going to bother with many physical games on the Switch.
I just don't see how this is "lol typical Nintendo it's just like the N64 days!!" when it's absolutely nothing like that at all; Nintendo's insistence on using cartridges is not due to them being stuck in the past, but because it's literally the only way to utilise physical media on their very forward-looking new console.
A disk drive was never going to work in a console like the Switch, and making it digital only would have pushed the price up considerably. So the issue isn't "evil third parties" or "evil Nintendo"- it's the fact the whole Switch concept exists in the first place. And I think most of us can agree that the core concept and execution of the Switch is awesome, and this is a price I'm willing to pay for that.
With the digital prices being cheaper, as well as the lack of region locking meaning I can often find the game cheaper digitally anyway, I really doubt I'm even going to bother with many physical games on the Switch.
I just don't see how this is "lol typical Nintendo it's just like the N64 days!!" when it's absolutely nothing like that at all; Nintendo's insistence on using cartridges is not due to them being stuck in the past, but because it's literally the only way to utilise physical media on their very forward-looking new console.
Council Pop
Member
Bronetta
Ask me about the moon landing or the temperature at which jet fuel burns. You may be surprised at what you learn.
They werent overcharging then. They're overcharging now.
The Vita, where Sony made you buy 40$ proprietary memory cards to save games even though they were already on carts? They were very obviously hiding the costs.
Jubenhimer
Member
Why would they start overcharging now? They could've overcharged on the 3DS and even DS, but they didn't. What makes you think they'd start with the Switch?
Bronetta
Ask me about the moon landing or the temperature at which jet fuel burns. You may be surprised at what you learn.
Sony overpriced memory cards. Nintendo overpriced literally every other accessory (hello $100 controllers and docks)
New management? In case you didnt notice Nintendo has increasingly been on some fuckboi shenanigans. Switch being a breakout success further emboldened them.
Source?
Megatron
Member
I mean, sure, if you are ok with rockstar never releasing another switch game....