dead souls
Member
$50 to play LA Noire again in 2017 is a complete waste of money. I paid like $15 for a new copy when I played it originally and still felt ripped off.
Even if Rockstar offered to pay me $50 I wouldn't suffer through it again.
-
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
$50 to play LA Noire again in 2017 is a complete waste of money. I paid like $15 for a new copy when I played it originally and still felt ripped off.
Even if Rockstar offered to pay me $50 I wouldn't suffer through it again.
……forgetit
Member
It's the switches fault by concept and design. Their really wasn't a way around this.
So one should not take into account the advantages of each console when deciding on what version of the game to buy? Or are you just arguing semantics, because "being able to play at home and on the go" is exactly the same as "getting a handheld version and home console version," in terms of what they actually mean. I'm really confused as to why someone can't consider the portability of the Switch as a bonus in their decision to buy LA Noire for it. Can someone not cite, say, free online and KB+M support as a reason they'd prefer Destiny 2 on PC because they're inherent features of the console?
Note that I'm not saying it's a justification for the flat $10 increase, but more a reason for why someone might be more susceptible to it than they would have been otherwise. This ain't like the N64 where, say, Resi 2 might have costed $10+ more despite offering no real benefits.
It being a better rounded figure isn't really a good excuse (not that you're saying it is). We have those prices in the UK all the time due to currency conversions and nobody's confused or perplexed; hell, LA Noire itself is £35/£45 here.
That's not entirely true though. How many Switch games have been reviewed with the mention of the portability of X game making it much more appealing than if it was just a console game?
Saying you get two different versions isn't necessarily right if you're strictly looking at it as SKU's, but it is kind of two versions in how you play.
Just so you know, I'm not saying you're wrong. I just don't agree.
What stupid decision are you takling about, CDs would be a bad idea for a handheld console
Sho_Nuff82
Member
You're demanding that he (or I) put out a ledger that states the exact cost difference is $10 - I don't think such a thing exists.
There's probably volumes of marketing data that suggest people's buying habits don't change substantially between $46.99 and $49.99, that cynicism would probably cover up any minor differences. *shrugs*
For smaller games, the retail margins shrink accordingly. The math changes, but the difference remains. When given the option "do we ask our shareholders to eat $5 a copy on a system with the lowest projected LTD sales this year, or do we mark up the price", marking up is going to win 90% of the time.
You're using a lot of assumptions for numbers you don't have access to. I'm speaking in general terms for a reason.
Being back my boy UMD.
I know this a joke but, since you already brought it up, thinking about it a UMD sized disc for Switch would actually be worse than the current game card solution in every way other than media cost.
- The switch would have to be physically larger (or have a much smaller battery) to accommodate the disc drive.
- Assuming the disc has the same physical dimensions as UMD but the data density of a bluray, then the discs would max out at 19.1GB for a quad layered disc.
- Assuming Nintendo did go with quad layer capabilities, then the Switch's disc drive would need to use a fairly pricey laser which would compound on the already notably increased cost over a card reader.
- Since it'll be a proprietary design with relatively low production volumes (not to mention the extra expense for four layers), the discs will still probably be more expensive than a typical dual layered bluray and not probably not that much cheaper than a 16GB Switch cart is now.
- Everything else that sucks about optical disc drives (slow seek speeds, power consumption, noise, vibrations, unreliability).
TheLegendaryN
Member
The game just isn't for you in that case. But I think that the vast majority of people who will buy it on PS4 or XBO for $40 would also get it if it was $50.
BanjoLayleeYookaKazooie
Banned
I asked them that question ages ago.
I don't think they're coming back and I don't think they're one for backing up their claims ultimately.
Team Filler
Member
Yeah we've been over this already with this game and others. @ZhugeEx even went into it the other day.
Yep, just like how going from Xbox to Xbox 360 there was a $10 jump in games because of the added expense of DVD's.
Er, wait a minute...
Rellik
Member
I should have also probably linked to his followup. You can read the thread here if interested.
https://twitter.com/ZhugeEX/status/906053345206566912
@ZhugeEX said:
It's not for me to say what's true or not (I'm just passing on what ZhugeEX says since he's usually pretty accurate) but as someone who is considering a Nintendo Switch in the future, this is definitely a concern of mine.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Why is he adding platform fee's into it. Unless something has changed Nintendo charges the same 30% everyone else does. The only question mark is the packaging and shipping fees. Which is weird as switch boxs are actually smaller than PS4 and xbox boxes so unless the weight is substantially more it should be cheaper to ship them (you can pack more in a single container).
……forgetit
Member
The difference in costs between DVDs and Blu-rays is a lot smaller than the difference between blu-rah and comparable sized flash storage.
Depends on the size of the cars, but yeah, their's probably some rounding going on. Blu Ray disks are dirt cheap though, so $10 more could be possible.
Sho_Nuff82
Member
It's well documented that the $10 increase over generations was due to the increased cost of AAA game development.
PS3 and Xbox360 games consistently cost more than Wii games for years.
What's *shrugs* to you is price gouging to me. You not caring is not a justification.
And how does the difference remain for smaller games that use smaller cartridges? The evidence we're going on explicitly states that games less than 8GB can have the same margins as PS4/X1, so why is it fine for them to be given the £10/$10/10 increase? He says it's due to the "dev-pub-platform" relationship but what does that even mean?
HamsterExAstris
Member
Don't forget, the retailer's cut is based on percentage, not a fixed amount. So if the publisher needs to receive an extra $6 to cover the price difference, then the MSRP difference has to be $10-12 for the publisher to receive those extra $6....
When they charge $10, retail, distribution, etc all get a cut. They are not increasing the price just to cover the extra manufacture cost.
Yeah, they should just have slapped on a bluray drive on the Switch. Nintendo, you dumbasses.
Seriously though, i would really like to know the actual cost of production for these cards, and how much publishers have to pay. I bought a 128GB micro SD for €28 including shipping from China to Europe last month, Read speed 90MBS and write speed 40MBS. These guys also have to make money on these cards. Switch cards don't need fast write speeds, they are physically larger and IIRC, the memory inside should be cheaper. While 32GB micro SD cards with similar speeds can be found around €10 total.
Everlya_Apocryha
Banned
Profit margin must be a thing hard to you to understand. Businesses don't do businesses just to break even.
Stallion Dan
Member
But platform holder cut doesn't change, and packaging costs cannot be much different between a BR disc case and cart case.
It's an additional cost that somebody has to eat.
Nintendo could eat that cost... but part of the main reasons of being a platform holder is that other publishers have to purchase the disc/cartridges from you, so that's part of their business.
Publishers could eat the cost... but they already have a hard enough time justifying porting to Nintendo consoles to begin with. If PS4/Xbox/PC owners buying the same game vs. Switch owners meant that the publishers would receive more money, then Switch Owners would literally be less valuable to the Pubs and no amount of port-begging could change that fact. It wouldn't
Consumers could eat the cost... but not many people want to pay more for the same thing that others get for cheaper. It's always up to us to prove how much we want stuff though... which is probably why the cost was bucked to us.
There's no easy option, so let the people "vote with their wallets" as we keep on saying.
Nintendo could eat that cost... but part of the main reasons of being a platform holder is that other publishers have to purchase the disc/cartridges from you, so that's part of their business.
Publishers could eat the cost... but they already have a hard enough time justifying porting to Nintendo consoles to begin with. If PS4/Xbox/PC owners buying the same game vs. Switch owners meant that the publishers would receive more money, then Switch Owners would literally be less valuable to the Pubs and no amount of port-begging could change that fact. It wouldn't
Consumers could eat the cost... but not many people want to pay more for the same thing that others get for cheaper. It's always up to us to prove how much we want stuff though... which is probably why the cost was bucked to us.
There's no easy option, so let the people "vote with their wallets" as we keep on saying.
Refreshment.01
Member
im not defending Nintendo or publishers pricing practices. i was just surprised that the cost divide between Switch flash and optical media wasn't even bigger.Chû Totoro;248381567 said:
But if we think in future terms, prices tend to drop down. So in the end we end up getting better physical media for preservation than Blu Rays at even closer prices and storage per MB. And that's good for everyone.
The footprint does matter when you have many games independent if the console is portable or not. Boxes alone are smaller comparing Switch to Blu Ray cases, if you ditch the boxes the gap even gets wider.
Collecting is a very important aspect for people in this hobby. And Retro gaming gets bigger every year hence the importance of durable media for preservation. Add to this how reliable is the hardware reader for the media also.
"Technicaliies"? That's a funny way to qualify factual differences between the mediums. Specially in a board where minor pixel differences between game versions fueled 1000s of debates since the 7th gen of consoles. "Technicalities" is what make sites as Digital Foundry bring home the bacon.
For gamers is also an argument about collecting and preserving games.
Like i said what surprises here is not the extra cost, that was a given that Switch would use cardtridges if it was going to be a portable hybrid console. The surprise is that prices are fairly close to BR, more than ever before between flash vs optical media for games.
……forgetit
Member
Well a single 50 GB Blu-ray is about $1.50 or $1.25 euro, so the math still add up. Flash storage just isn't as cheap as disks, you won't get 32gb of flash memory for nearly as low as a Blu-ray disk.
OrbitalBeard
Member
I think ultimately it doesn't matter if cartridges cost an extra $1, $5, or $10, compared to the price of discs.
The reality is that most third party publishers don't consider Switch to be a core component of their strategy, especially compared to Xbox, PlayStation, and PC. They see it as a supplemental portion of their business and as such aren't willing to eat the extra cost of carts, which would lead to smaller profits per copy sold.
If companies like THQ Nordic and Rockstar were committed to the Switch long term and felt the platform was a viable part of their business strategy moving forward, they'd price their games similarly to their games on other platforms, in order to cultivate an audience for their games on Switch. Until these companies see Switch as a core part of their business, this will not happen.
I have absolutely no way of proving this, but if Sony launched a Vita 2 with the exact same type of physical media, Rockstar would almost certainly charge $40 for LA Noire on the system, as they'd likely feel more inclined to cultivate a long term audience on the platform and would be willing to eat some of the cost in order to do so. I mean, assuming the Vita 2 was a successful system, of course. Otherwise, they wouldn't bother bringing the game over to begin with.
The reality is that most third party publishers don't consider Switch to be a core component of their strategy, especially compared to Xbox, PlayStation, and PC. They see it as a supplemental portion of their business and as such aren't willing to eat the extra cost of carts, which would lead to smaller profits per copy sold.
If companies like THQ Nordic and Rockstar were committed to the Switch long term and felt the platform was a viable part of their business strategy moving forward, they'd price their games similarly to their games on other platforms, in order to cultivate an audience for their games on Switch. Until these companies see Switch as a core part of their business, this will not happen.
I have absolutely no way of proving this, but if Sony launched a Vita 2 with the exact same type of physical media, Rockstar would almost certainly charge $40 for LA Noire on the system, as they'd likely feel more inclined to cultivate a long term audience on the platform and would be willing to eat some of the cost in order to do so. I mean, assuming the Vita 2 was a successful system, of course. Otherwise, they wouldn't bother bringing the game over to begin with.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
He's admitted the storage costs increases are minimal. This largely packing those slight ncreases and platformers cut (for some reason).
KawabataSan
Member
Maybe the platform cut is different between Nintendo and Sony.
Not all flash memory is created equal, in both lifespan and resistance to damage/being manhandled.
additionally, economy of scale is a thing. there are a lot more SD cards being made than Switch cartridges. And if you do proper lot testing, a batch of cartridges failing their lot check has to be accounted for in the price Nintendo charges publishers. SD card makers just assume you're gonna buy another SD card, you only get failure guarantee if you, unsuprisingly, pay for a premium brand of SD card (or USB drive, or spinning drive, etc)
Team Filler
Member
I never mentioned blu-ray...
Right, that was the justification then, similar to the justifications we hear for the continuing encroachment of onerous DLC practices on damn near every new game from major publishers, and no doubt we will hear something similar again when they have another opportunity to increase the cost for consumers.
It's not that I don't necessarily believe there is increased costs Switch's media format, but you'll have to excuse my being skeptical of any excuses made by these companies who won't even pay their taxes.
Notice the bold. Youre arguing my point for me. Youre deciding on the CONSOLE for the version of the game not the fact that the game comes with two versions of itself if you buy it for switch. I'm not arguing semantics haha, I'm arguing the game is the same exact game no matter how you play it, so calling the switch version 2 games is absurd.
I never once said portability wasn't a factor to consider. It is, but thats because of the console, not the game. LA noire is the same exact game no matter where you play it. You aren't getting two versions of it, youre buying it for a console that allows you to play it in different settings. Is candy crush also two games because I can play it at home and on the go? The only argument I started with is the absurd notion that Noire on Switch is coming with two versions of itself. It comes with one version, same as the other consoles, but the switch allows you to play it on the go as well as at home.
You don't have to agree but the game is the same game no matter where you play it. The Switch allows for more ways to play the console, but the game never changes how it functions based on where youre playing. Its disingenuous to suggest Noire is two games on Switch.
……forgetit
Member
Misunderstood your post, but that increase was due to the increased cost in making games and not due to the cost of media.
Their may be some fudging going on, but the increased cost of media on switch is real, you can go online right now and compare the price of a 10 pack of 50gb Blu-ray disks and a single 16gb SD card and see that.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Yeah but I've never heard any developer say or imply that before which is why I found it weird.
Who's, that's actually better than I anticipated. I'd have thought even the smallest cart would be way more expensive than a blu-ray.Yeah we've been over this already with this game and others. @ZhugeEx even went into it the other day.
But I guess it's a mix of blu-rays costing more to produce than CDs and DVDs were, while carts have been able to get really cheap, especially when going down to a single ROM chip rather than an array of them on a large board.
Seems Rockstar managed to strong arm Nintendo into decoupling the digital and retail price at least. Nintendo should allow publishers to do so going forward to compensate for the expensive 16GB and 32GB cartridges. Since the Switch is still a hot item and also generates lots of accessories sales, they should be able to do that without pissing off retail (which is the main reason behind the digital/physical price matching).
What I'm surprised to hear is that 8GB carts actually have the same margin as discs: that's as big as a dual layer DVD. I expected even 8GB carts to have a slightly larger cost than a disc.
What I'm surprised to hear is that 8GB carts actually have the same margin as discs: that's as big as a dual layer DVD. I expected even 8GB carts to have a slightly larger cost than a disc.
Sure, i'm not debating any of that. I'd just like to know the actual production cost.
Jubenhimer
Member
It's not BS, It's a policy put in place as to not piss off retailers, who Nintendo needs to sell hardware and software. I'm sure Sony and Microsoft have similar policies in place. That being said, it does seem like Nintendo is willing to make exceptions on more than one occasion. Puyo Put Tetris for example, is $10 cheaper on the eShop than it is at new at retail.
KawabataSan
Member
Well no one discloses that information when they're under NDA.
If I remember correctly the Wii had a different pricing structure compared to 3DS. So it's not unreasonable to assume the Switch is different to the 3DS and Wii too.
Team Filler
Member
I get that, I just don't for a second believe it to be as substantial enough for $10 markup to make sense as anything other than a pure cash-grab. Especially if that bit is true about 8GB carts being comparatively equal to blu-ray.
Yeah we've been over this already with this game and others. @ZhugeEx even went into it the other day.
60% higher than a bulk order of blu-rays for the 32GB cart is actually cheaper than I was guessing lol.
Edit: also isn't 8GB 2x the size of what Vita carts maxed out at? That's actually pretty good overall.
So what are you arguing then if you aren't arguing semantics? I'm honestly incredibly confused as to what your argument is, because all I'm saying and all I've ever said is that the game can be played both on the TV and on the go whereas that isn't the case for other consoles. You are, essentially, getting a portable version of LA Noire and a home console of LA Noire when you buy the Switch version; it's like cross-buy but more streamlined. All your talk of functional differences doesn't remove the fact that the Switch version offers added value to the Xbox One and PS4 versions due to it being a hybrid console.
I think Rime's probably the most justifiable of the four cases I mentioned tbh. You have to remember everything scales and even a $1-2 difference on one title can add up fast when you're dealing in volumes that are in the thousands or tens of thousands. If they need an 8GB card and at $8 per unit it comes in $1 more than they pay on PS4/XB1 for a $29.99 MSRP unit, or equivalent to what they'd pay for a $39.99 MSRP on PS4/XB1, then it probably makes perfect sense from a publishing perspective. Also consider the Switch port was developed externally and has it's own separated production budget to account for.
For Axiom Verge or especially Puyo Puyo Tetris (coming from a large preferred partner publisher) it really does seem like pure gouging though. They're both on 1GB cards so there no real rationalizing the $10 hike versus other versions. Cave Story's maybe more a fringe case given it generally doesn't see physical release (and the only other one was actually $10 more) but keeping digital price parity feels like gouging there.
Sorry no. I also don't know the exact prices for 1/2/4GB but I'd assume a couple bucks max more or less given how 3DS unit pricing scaled.
This is also why DS, 3DS and Vita games were still priced lower than home consoles despite higher cost media. Budgets were lower so there was less risk overall even with slimmer margins. That sort of goes away with Switch, home and handheld consoles have never seen their performance gap this close before.
Astral Dog
Member
Ok. This is the most we will know on the subject. UnfortunateYeah we've been over this already with this game and others. @ZhugeEx even went into it the other day.
TangoAlphaLima
Member
Right, because publishers don't make any profit margin when selling games on PS4 or Xbox One...
I just can't even.