Speedwagon
Michelangelo painted the Sistine Chapel. Yabuki turned off voice chat in Mario Kart races. True artists of their time.
This is why I always buy 3DS games on sale. Retailers often put them on sale at good prices.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
How can Nintendo keep justifying their high software prices for the 3DS?
- Thread starter Hiccup
- Start date
SatelliteOfLove
Member
Some people can't be trusted with good things. They're like alcoholics with whiskey.
blizzardjesus
Banned
My guess is that you don't own a phone. My sincerest apologies.
Actually, I do. And you know what happens if I lose my phone or get another device? I sign into my account and download whatever I had tied to it, because my phone provider employs people who have heard of the internet.
Serious question: 3DS games have high prices relative to what? Our only reference points are other handhelds and I suppose technically, mobile games. Titles like Uncharted Golden Abyss and Call of Duty Black Ops Declassified for Vita retailed for $50. Most other titles release for between $40 and $50 (Curry God being the most recent example). 3DS titles release generally between $30 and $40.
Could someone explain the premise? I see high quality software at an asking price of around $40, and them selling well. Good game retain their value until they stop selling.
Could someone explain the premise? I see high quality software at an asking price of around $40, and them selling well. Good game retain their value until they stop selling.
blizzardjesus
Banned
Sweet. I know Nintendo's phone number, if you every need it feel free to ask.
WrenchNinja
Member
Will calling them let my brother play my download copy of Tetris Axis on his 3DS?
digita1alchemy
Member
Call me crazy, but I don't think $30-$40 for a good, complete video game is too high.
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
Being frugal is fine, but don't expect companies to give up profits to please your frugality
Relaxed Muscle
Member
Maybe not but when you can get good and complete video games for much less, you understand why people think it might be to high.
Another problem is that even if other cheaper games aren't as good, ppl might not care enough to justify the cost.
Petrae
Member
Bingo. No phone calls, no police reports, no unnecessary wastes of my time to get back something that I already paid for.
This is exactly what Sony, Microsoft, Apple, and Google do with their digital content. If my console/phone/tablet breaks, is lost, or gets stolen, I can get all of my stuff back without delay when I get my replacement. Nintendo, on the other hand, requires at least a phone call-- if not more documentation.
Neon_Icarus
Member
I think going forward, rather than continue with the ages old
system of one portable system and one home console,
Nintendo should look at the price of software to differentiate
their "platforms."
1st pillar.
"tablet/smart phone" - Coproduced with another company
that knows something about making tablets/smart phones.
- Games are smaller, cheaper to make. Playable with touch
screen. (Examples: Nintendogs, Brain Training, Steel Diver,
Yoshi's Touch and Go, Kirby Canvas Curse, Legend of Zelda:
Spirit Tracks, Fire Emblem series)
- Games cost around 1 - 10€. Or free to play, episodic for
more substantial games.
- Download only, though download codes are still sold at
retail.
2nd pillar
A more "high end" Nintendo portable and a home
console, with similar architecture. Both have retail software.
- All games are cross buy, unless they rely on system.
specific features like Streetpass. Games are displayed
in higher resolution, framerate and additional effects
on the more powerful home console SKU.
- If one owns both the portable and the home console
version of the hardware, additional features like Wii U
Gamepad -like multiplayer become available. And cloud
saving with a subscription fee.
- Retail game prices range from 45€ (similar production values to
current first party 3DS games) and 60€ (current Wii U games ).
eShop games of course for much less..
3rd pillar
Quality of life stuff
system of one portable system and one home console,
Nintendo should look at the price of software to differentiate
their "platforms."
1st pillar.
"tablet/smart phone" - Coproduced with another company
that knows something about making tablets/smart phones.
- Games are smaller, cheaper to make. Playable with touch
screen. (Examples: Nintendogs, Brain Training, Steel Diver,
Yoshi's Touch and Go, Kirby Canvas Curse, Legend of Zelda:
Spirit Tracks, Fire Emblem series)
- Games cost around 1 - 10€. Or free to play, episodic for
more substantial games.
- Download only, though download codes are still sold at
retail.
2nd pillar
A more "high end" Nintendo portable and a home
console, with similar architecture. Both have retail software.
- All games are cross buy, unless they rely on system.
specific features like Streetpass. Games are displayed
in higher resolution, framerate and additional effects
on the more powerful home console SKU.
- If one owns both the portable and the home console
version of the hardware, additional features like Wii U
Gamepad -like multiplayer become available. And cloud
saving with a subscription fee.
- Retail game prices range from 45€ (similar production values to
current first party 3DS games) and 60€ (current Wii U games ).
eShop games of course for much less..
3rd pillar
Quality of life stuff
Relaxed Muscle
Member
Steam range of 10-20
Google Play
App Store
And BTW with PS+ you can get a good chunk of the Vita catalogue for just 50$/year + PS3 + PS4 games.
ChronotriggerJM
Member
Does anyone have a cost analysis of what Nintendo typically spends on a 3DS game? The big issues I'm having with handheld game costs (vita and 3ds) being $40, is that the development costs aren't anywhere near as high. The ratios for cost/budget on a PS360/4bone game versus the same ratio on a handheld game seem way skewed. If the development cost on a handheld game was half of that on a bigger system (probably less in some cases), should that game not be sold for half the cost?
And I'm also in agreement, the $40 price can remain at launch, I certainly won't be buying them at that price, but that's okay, many will. But hell, 2 year old software should depreciate. There is absolutely no reason OOT 3D should be that price. It's a rip-off and reeks of greed.
And I'm also in agreement, the $40 price can remain at launch, I certainly won't be buying them at that price, but that's okay, many will. But hell, 2 year old software should depreciate. There is absolutely no reason OOT 3D should be that price. It's a rip-off and reeks of greed.
digita1alchemy
Member
I understand the sentiment, and I like to save money on games as much as anybody. At the same time, I don't look at A Link Between Worlds for $40 and think "Man, what a ripoff." I'd like to think that the majority of people don't, but I guess the race to the bottom on game prices has skewed many people's perception of game value. And that's a shame, really, because it will eventually impact the kinds of games we get, if it hasn't already (see: microtransaction Hell).
Thanks, but it won't be necessary. I'll just continue to never buy Nintendo digital products until they get their shit together.
Do you think that the reality that the games being mentioned for the premise of this thread are purchased at the $40 price point more frequently than the Vita titles included with PS+ are downloaded for no additional cost?
Price relates to demand.
AyaisMUsikWhore
Member
See I don't mind that they sell for $40. It seems like a fair price. However what really irks me is these games almost never go on sale. It's like really, Wtf? I get they are high quality and all that jazz bit they shouldn't be invincible to sales.. Come on now.
Gonzo The Great
Banned
Because they still sell. Mind you, handheld software sales have been on a steady decline since the DS era, so a $29.99 price port is probably more reasonable.
Neither do I. 3DS is my most played system and I frequently spend 4-6 weeks on a given title. The last time I checked my system log I had multiple games at 40+ hours and a few at 100+.
I love the hardware and I love the exclusive software. I am personally happy to pay more to get high quality software.
This is also unquestionably true. It's not like Nintendo doesn't understand this though. The fight to protect the full retail pricing of their games is one of the main reasons that they haven't done more with iOS. They want a virtuous cycle and not a race to the bottom. They have discussed the topic of pricing at every investor's briefing over the last several years. They see the preservation of the high prices of their games as one of the key elements to their fight for profitability in the medium-term to long-term.
Also, I don't think anyone in this thread has mentioned that they already announced that they are going to do flexible pricing on Wii U games this year (though they haven't announced the details yet). I don't have the exact quote but Iwata said something to effect that they want consumers to play more games and spend more money but that the relationship doesn't necessarily have to relate to a fixed dollar amount per game. This was in the context of their new account system initiative.
ChronotriggerJM
Member
My problem isn't that I necessarily think it's a rip-off, sometimes I just think it's price gouging. And when a company doesn't want to go out of it's way to make some accessible to me, it reflects poorly. For a sloppy example, if a game costs 20 million to create on PS360, versus 5 to create on Vita, I don't expect that game to be $40. There's obviously a mathematical discrepancy there.
I mentioned bundles earlier, because while people are probably sick of the series by now, Sony just pushed another huuuuuge pack of God of War games together. Now for the sake of convenience, or if you're new to the series, it's a fantastic deal and it's easily approachable. Tons of great games, packed in together for the cost of a retail game (or in the saga's case, really cheap). To me they throw a bone out and give people a reasonable way to invest into the ecosystem.
Purchasing a 3DS and finding out that a ton of their old games are still selling for the $40 is a slap in the face to me. Yeah I'm just whining and bitching because I don't make "dat gaf moneh", but it was one of the advantages that people kept talking about with the Wii, lower development costs = lower prices. It's obviously not true regarding the 3DS.
Amazeballs
Member
I'm a bit confused by the question. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by game sharing.
The precedent set by many mechanism like tying digital purchases to a single system is to prevent multiple copies of the same purchased item appearing on multiple systems. This reflects Nintendo's attitude towards digital which is obviously to allow only one copy of a digital purchase to exist at any time. They do this by limiting players to linking only one 3DS per account. It doesn't solve something Nintendo probably doesn't want players doing in the first place, sadly. At least now they do something about data retrieval.
The one console per account rule could also be due to the limitations of the network infrastructure they had previously relied on and they haven't worked out the logistics to shared accounts. This would explain why there's no cross-buy between the 3DS and Wii U VC.
As for examples of something worse, just off the top of my head there are games that rely SecuRom, and then there's Sony's gawd awful PC game distribution. I had the displeasure of of experiencing it first hand after I had purchased FF VII HD (not a remake, don't get your hopes up). I don't think I've gotten an hour because of the poorly construed save system. You basically couldn't save unless the server allows you to save. I'm not sure if they fixed the issue as I've long since deleted it from my computer and never looked back.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
If we go to demand, we can see that the demand of 3DS games is way lower than DS and yet prices didn't changed.
I have no doubt that Nintendo games will keep selling well at that price (but we should define "well"). But that's not the real point here: when the market offers way more options for the customer with offers, subscriptions, variable pricing, F2P model etc... you have to wonder the premium model of Nintendo.
There's a reason why 3DS is having way lower software/hardware sales. There's a reason why Nintendo is losing marketshare at giant pace in the portable market. And one of the reasons, is that a lot of people who bought 30-40$/€ DS games aren't doing it now. Is a reality that Nintendo must face, is a reality that still means lot of money to be made without working your hardest in keep your prices for years, parity between digital and phsyical prices, is a reality that dosn't really mean cheap/bad games.
Old, poorly rated games coming down in price I have no argument with. But an argument could be made that highly rated games (particularly evergreen ones like Animal crossing) should stay at a steady price (although i feel it should be a lower one)
That said, I have yet to see anything on the PS4, or coming to PS4 that looks half as good as the new Fire Emblem.
You fundamentally don't seem to understand demand-based pricing and the challenge of manufacturing overhead. You gave an example of the PS+ service being a means for sales success for a company, and I pointed out that the sales of the "over-expensive" games were greater than even the effectively "free" offerings on PS+. You're now indicating that the sales figures are an indictment on Nintendo, when the opposite (based on the point you raised) is true.
ChronotriggerJM
Member
That's why I think self imposed systems like greatest hits, or gamer's choice can play a critical role in awareness and cost maintenance. I'm not asking for Animal Crossing to ever hit bargain bin prices. But they should certainly stabilize a few years down the road to an accessible price. Last of us for example is already going for $40 on amazon, and I suspect it'll hit that greatest hits $30 price point sometime this year. (just using it as a means of quality comparison, take it however you will, it doesn't need to get drawn into some huge pissing contest lol)
killatopak
Member
3DS- released in Feb 26, 2011 in Japan
FE:A - released in April 19, 2012 in Japan
1 year and 2 months after the 3DS was released.
PS4 was just released 3 months ago. smh
E3 and GDC hasn't even passed yet you act as if all the games coming to the PS4 is already announced.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
I don't think ALBW was a "ripoff", but when I look at games like Brothers or Valdis Story: Abyssal City. I have to wonder why I had to paid 5x more for ALBW when those games are high quality too and where released in the same year.
And they are great games. I keep hearing thatmyth of games having it's quality hurt by Steam sales and F2P models but I still see incredible quality games every year for all kind of prices.
I'm not saying PS+ is a "sales" success. I'm saying is a success in offering an option for a range of customers that don't want to pay that much for games, and probably is increasing their hardware sales and customer satisfaction.
Also we are comparing platforms. PS+ Vita free games downloads probably exceeds greatly the physical sales in more than one games. Also you keep flaguing the demand card, when 3DS software sales keeps being lower than it's predecesor.
He's pointing out the flawed reasoning of another poster suggesting that handheld games cost too much because the development costs of console games are so much higher that it's acceptable that they cost $60, but $40 is too much for a handheld game, regardless of quality. The point being that games are being sold at $60 on the PS4 which, to him at least, don't offer the entertainment value of a $40 game like Fire Emblem. He's not complaining that PS4 "has no games."
WrenchNinja
Member
I mean, a family with three kids not having to buy three copies of a game digitally for their three kids. Nintendos account system is completely lacking compared to their competitors with this in regards as well as the game retrieval process. That problem that they don't want to solve will become a bigger and bigger issue with mobile games continuing to dominate. Even Sony and Microsoft have relented on this and allow sharing, although currently poorly executed in my opinion because of the Internet connection requirement to play a game. Nintendo refusing to allow any sharing at all no longer holds up the further and further we go.
It just sort of makes me roll my eyes when people say their account system is adequate (Not you, you were just explaining)
Disposable income also has not risen.
This blanket statement is prrreeeetttttyy redic.. Here is why I think that:
* Zelda 3DS, SMT IV, Luigi's Mansion, Fire Emblem: A, Bravely Default. If you are trying to tell me that 40$ US is over charging for any of these, I will have to strongly disagree with you. All these games offer 20-100+ hours of gameplay, are polished to the core, and are easily worth the 40$ price point.
* As others have stated, the price point tends to be a bit higher outside the US, so don't bitch when we already have the best situation in that regard.
* If you don't think a particular 3DS game is worth 40$ ( there are a few that I feel that way about as well ), then: a ) Don't buy it, or b ) wait for a price drop and snipe a deal on amazon since you are obviously that type of customer.
* As someone who develops games, ( console.. not 3DS personally ) I can predict that you do not. Game already take TONS of work, ( typically, a year or more of your life per game.. ) and the industry is such that huge games like CoD will make billions or whatever sure, but smaller games are typically scraping by the skin of their teeth.. they can be that way even if they are critical darlings.
* Doesn't everyone want everything cheaper? I think at lunch today I'll tell the host that my 10$ meal would be waaaaay better for me at 6$.. No. Noone would do that. People will either research the restaurant and determine if its worth the price for them and their tastes, or they will purchase, not like it, and gain some knowledge about their personal tastes and how they relate to spending habits. That's how everything works. Games too.
... You are right about bringing back players choice though. But I hardly think that justifies "Just another box that is checked of him damaging the company.".. Everyone makes mistakes and you are free to point them out, but don't act like you would do any better just by waltzing in and saying "everything should be 30$ cause that is how I feel about it, and players choice should come back"... Nintendo is not in the situation they are in now due to those two things man..
Candy is cheaper than filet mignon, too.
Those things are not comparable. When you have the same game & same experience in two different places, then that comparison is valid. But, you don't have Mario on steam and you don't have Fire Emblem in the app store.
I'm sorry you find it disruptive when someone points out data in a conversation about data. Can you cite a few contemporary games on a dedicated handheld like the Vita that have exceeded the sales figures we're talking about? Ideally, if you had download numbers for some of the complementary PS+ game downloads you could substantiate your point. The numbers I've seen for those don't back up your point, but if you have them, it would be ideal.
As of a year ago, both Mario Kart 7 and Super Mario 3D Land sold over 8 million units. New Mario Bros 2 sold around 6.5 million. Animal Crossing sold just shy of 4 million. Nintendogs and Cats sold over 3 million. Ocarina of Time 3D was a hair's width from 3 million. There are plenty of others comfortably above a million, and this was before the sales bump from the last year's worth of releases like Pokemon X/Y and Link Between Worlds. I understand that over their lifetimes, several original DS games accrued much higher sales numbers than even these (you can see several of them in the link I supplied), but the market was in a different state then and we're talking about an additional five+ years of sales numbers.
We're talking about the current state of things. Saying that the single most successful entry in a marketplace needs to fundamentally restructure is misguided if you justify if by pointing to the "success" of less-successful competitors.
flatearthpandas
Member
If you absolutely insist on wondering about the premium pricing models... there is another handheld that could use your worry more. As has been pointed out several times already:
Nintendo is selling 3DS software at $40 faster than Sony can give Vita software away for free*.
And, in the meanwhile, MSRP for Vita games is also $40, same as 3DS.
There certainly is a reason that 3DS software/hardware isn't going to reach DS levels. There are many reasons. I'm missing the part where you explain how cutting current prices is going to return them to DS levels and increase profitability.
More importantly, let's realize that whether or not the 3DS does as well as the DS is really irrelevant to the real issue at hand, which is that certain people in this thread do not want to pay $40/ £30 for new 3DS games.
Which is certainly fine!
That is your life choice. If you would prefer buy the Vita's $40/£30 games and rent on a subscription, that is perfectly okay.
But let's not pretend you care about Nintendo's profits and are worried they are making some kind of dire mistake by not following the Vita's pricing model.
*
$50/year subscription model touted as the viable alternative Nintendo should be pursuing.
killatopak
Member
$60 and $40 is okay when its new. Even I buy them at that price when I'm interested enough. But we definitely need some sales on the older titles.
Take Last of Us for example, its critically acclaimed, has high demand and even won various awards. That's a quality title yet its getting price drops after a year it was released. This makes the barrier of entry to the series much more appealing.
Being LttP is a factor in a buyers purchase. Let's say for example Bravely Default. When the online component dies down after a year or so, you can't exactly do the MP town stuff as easy as it was on when it was first released. Having them on sale would lessen the psychological effect of being LttP.
Actually BD is also a good example for those saying that 3DS doesn't have micro transaction hell. because it kinda features micro transaction in it. Not required to use but its there nonetheless and I can see them being used by the impatient just like how every F2P game thrives on mobile.
note: BD is not a Nintendo game. I just made it an example for my scenario.
Being interested or not in PS4's games is subjective and no indication of a game's quality until it is released. Many people can easily say the same for the Wii U but I'll not say it because I'm actually interested in what's coming for that platform.
When sales of the older titles get to a point where more money would be made after a price drop, I bet they will. Chances are though, by the time that might happen, physical manufacturing of these games will have long ceased. Which means Nintendo priced the title appropriately and efficiently. That's how this process is supposed to look. What leftover stock there is at retailers (who are happy because the titles they bought didn't plummet in value and lose them money) can either leave them at MSRP or drop them as they see fit.
A company forced to drop prices, generally in a way which harms retailers, is not a good thing in a physical marketplace. You're hoping for a race-to-the-bottom that would harm the industry in the face of one of the few companies which managed to avoid it.
boiled goose
good with gravy
I actually went to target to buy a 3DS for Xmas. Saw the software prices, and did not bite.
I think this is a big problem.
Nintendo should do a soft relaunch of the 3DS with a lower price (new model?), and a cheap line of the software classics. I would bite, sure others would too.
I think this is a big problem.
Nintendo should do a soft relaunch of the 3DS with a lower price (new model?), and a cheap line of the software classics. I would bite, sure others would too.
killatopak
Member
This was not I was hoping for. I was essentially asking for the return of player's choice. Like I said earlier in the thread. I'm not asking for steam-like sales. Just something like half the price or $30 at least for older titles.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
People blame the market. But they should blame the competition. If you think losing hundreds of millions of software sales in just a cause of the market, I think I can't say anything else.
And 3DS games won't never surpass DS entries. Is a clear sign, that is not the condition of the market, is a sign that people are looking for other places. Forget PS+, it was just an example that the Vita games aren't as "expensive" as 3DS games, and look at mobile revenue growth....
For digital versions, I totally agree. We've thankfully seen some movement toward a greater frequency of eShop sales, but I think the reason we haven't seen a Player's Choice line for physical 3DS titles has to do with the cost of making a full production line for them being the same as producing a new title, which audiences and investors alike would rather see. The industry is in a more frugal state than it has in quite some time, and the fight for shelf space at retailers is as tight as ever with the new hardware releases.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
Vita is a disaster in sales, we get it. OK, that's not the point.
But Vita games get cheaper fast (Nintendo games never drop price), several Vita games release cheaper, Vita games on digital are cheaper (not on 3DS they cost the same as physical becase Iwata shanenigans) and Vita has PS+. Gaming on Vita is effectively cheaper. But the software quality is not there. But let's not pretend that is the same thing.
I never said they should follow the Vita pricing model, it was an outlook of a similar device that offers a wider range of options and pricing.
But certainly they can't keep their current premium models unless they want to shrink their marketshare in the portable space to a tiny fraction.
CriterionDog
Member
WTF? Iwata said this?! I was wondering what happened to the player's choice year's ago! That is so stupid.
ZombiePlatypus
Member
Assuming it's not a niche or limited release, your only other option is to buy used.
No discount on super old titles is pretty lame, but I'll easily put up with it, if it helps maintain the sweet library 3DS has built up so far.
Amazeballs
Member
It's not adequate by modern standards, but serviceable. Some may not mind the limitations while others do.
The limitations have more to do with combating piracy as it was a huge issue last gen, I think the ideal scenario would be something along the lines of a steam account for DD, but then again this is a company that just recently figured out the importance of user accounts so I'm not surprised they're taking so long in affording their customers those kinds of options.
Similar threads
- Poll