• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Zelda oot 3ds same price as infamous second son. Why?

Kimppis said:
Yeah? Well, I'm not. (That's what my reply was about.) Too bad, I just have to deal with it. Can't wait to get Wolfenstein PS4 for 15€ in a few months, though.
Click to expand...

This goes both ways I feel. I would love to play more games than I currently do, but I just dont have that much time, so I would rather pay a bit more for an excellent game, than pick up a game just because it is cheap like Infamous. This is one of the reason I dont really have a problem with paying full price for Nintendo-titles because I know they are great, while a lot of other games isnt really worth a penny as I dont have time for mediocricy.
 
baconcow said:
It is not greed, it is because the game is absolutely incredible. It will still be worth $40 in 10 years, as the game has aged well, which is obvious in this "remake" that barely had to do anything but add some graphical and minor gameplay (and UI) elements.
Click to expand...



No denying that it is a classic, but would it be fine if something that most likely costs millions to develop like Dark Souls, Metal Gear 4, The Last of Us, Super Street Fighter 4 or Ninja Gaiden Black stay $60 for 6 years? Nintendo is legendary, but they are not the only company who makes amazing games. Technology such as TV's, cars, monitors, computers, phones, movies and music drop in price regularly. If people are buying 3DS games for that price though, I can't really blame Nintendo or any company for leaving the prices as is, but I still think portable games are overpriced though. I might just be crazy or something, but I have a hard time paying $50 for a portable game while I can get an HD console/PC/Mac game for the same cost. I know a good game is a good game, but I feel funny paying so much for antiquated technology when good games are available on most major consoles. Not saying I would never do it, but it just feels weird to me. Mario 64 was one of the best games of all time, but that doesn't mean I want to pay $40-50 for it on a portable system with slight enhancements.
 
chadboban said:
You expect originality from a remake?

Also what are you trying to say here?:
"In other words, Sucker Punch worked hard on an original new game in the Infamous series, while Nintendo were just doing an upgraded port of an old game."

Let's say that the games in question were "Shadow of the Collosus x Ico HD collection" and "Xenoblade Chronicles"

What you said would basically be the same as me saying:
"In other words Monolithsoft worked hard on an original new game while Sony were just doing an upgraded port of an old game."

These games have absolutely nothing in common and are not the only things Nintendo and Sony are working on yet I get to essentially call one company lazy who love to feed on nostalgia and the other a hard worker simply by mentioning only two games they made.

See how that works?
No wait, you can't because it absolutely doesn't work.
Click to expand...
My reply was directly to the post that said that just because it is a Zelda game and "best game of all time" it's rightfully selling for the same price as a fairly new released game.

If you take my post out of context it sounds silly, but as a response I thought it fitted.
Generally I pointed out the fact that only Nintendo can manage to sell upgraded ports at full price consistently over a few years and still sell like hot cupcakes, and that's because of the nostalgia factor, not because it is somewhat above other games in quality etc. That's completely subjective.

Also, mind you, your comparison, out of place as it is, was flawed because the ICO/SOTC hd remaster did drop in price quite a bit after a while, and in fact you could get it for free if you've had PS+, while Xenoblade chronicles' price skyrocketed because of demand. See how that works?

Wasn't even saying Nintendo are "lazy". Their pricing method is just absurd in my eyes, is all. I mean, a new original game that took years and tons of effort to make has the same price tag of an upgraded port, when said game was released 3 years ago? but it works for them so who am I to call them out on it, right?
 
elhav said:
Also, mind you, your comparison, out of place as it is, was flawed because the ICO/SOTC hd remaster did drop in price quite a bit after a while, and in fact you could get it for free if you've had PS+, while Xenoblade chronicles' price skyrocketed because of demand. See how that works?
Click to expand...
PS+ is not free and you don't keep the games. So no.
 
elhav said:
My reply was directly to the post that said that just because it is a Zelda game and "best game of all time" it's rightfully selling for the same price as a fairly new released game.

If you take my post out of context it sounds silly, but as a response I thought it fitted.
Generally I pointed out the fact that only Nintendo can manage to sell upgraded ports at full price consistently over a few years and still sell like hot cupcakes, and that's because of the nostalgia factor, not because it is somewhat above other games in quality etc. That's completely subjective.

Also, mind you, your comparison, out of place as it is, was flawed because the ICO/SOTC hd remaster did drop in price quite a bit after a while, and in fact you could get it for free if you've had PS+, while Xenoblade chronicles' price skyrocketed because of demand. See how that works?

Wasn't even saying Nintendo are "lazy". Their pricing method is just absurd in my eyes, is all. I mean, a new original game that took years and tons of effort to make has the same price tag of an upgraded port, when said game was released 3 years ago? but it works for them so who am I to call them out on it, right?
Click to expand...

My comparison was out of place merely to show how out of place I thought yours was. But now that you've explained yourself I can kinda see where you coming from. I do think simply calling OoT3D an "upgraded port" is really selling it a bit short though.
 
Novocaine said:
Wow, the insanity in this thread. Justifying the cost of a game based on the fact that it's of a higher quality than another. Come on guys, OOT might be considered a good game but really?
Click to expand...
Supply and demand, how does it work?

Is this really that surprising to people? Nintendo games almost always stay at their starting price, save for that line of "value" games or whatever they called it. Hell, Mario Kart DS is still full price at the stores near me.
 
Nintendo believes that sales devalue their software. Maybe they're right. All I know is that I'm not buying OOT in 2014 for $40, and I'm probably not the only core gamer that feels that way.
 
I think the OP's case would be much more effective if he was talking about Skyward Sword or something that isn't arguably the GOAT.

Though even then -- Nintendo does drop prices every blue moon. Mario Galaxy is $20. Still, generally they seem to treat every game they make as a timeless masterpiece price-wise, even though many of them obviously aren't.
 
I like the idea of pricing games based on innovation and quality.

I suspect we can all agree that Bayonetta 2 should be $100 and The Order should be $20, right?
 
elhav said:
Also, mind you, your comparison, out of place as it is, was flawed because the ICO/SOTC hd remaster did drop in price quite a bit after a while, and in fact you could get it for free if you've had PS+, while Xenoblade chronicles' price skyrocketed because of demand. See how that works?
Click to expand...

Are you really using PS+, a service where you will never own the game as an example?
 
Rhazer Fusion said:
No denying that it is a classic, but would it be fine if something that most likely costs millions to develop like Dark Souls, Metal Gear 4, The Last of Us, Super Street Fighter 4 or Ninja Gaiden Black stay $60 for 6 years? Nintendo is legendary, but they are not the only company who makes amazing games. Technology such as TV's, cars, monitors, computers, phones, movies and music drop in price regularly. If people are buying 3DS games for that price though, I can't really blame Nintendo or any company for leaving the prices as is, but I still think portable games are overpriced though. I might just be crazy or something, but I have a hard time paying $50 for a portable game while I can get an HD console/PC/Mac game for the same cost. I know a good game is a good game, but I feel funny paying so much for antiquated technology when good games are available on most major consoles. Not saying I would never do it, but it just feels weird to me. Mario 64 was one of the best games of all time, but that doesn't mean I want to pay $40-50 for it on a portable system with slight enhancements.
Click to expand...

The games you mentioned ain't even in the same league as Ocarina of Time though.

They are just regular AAA games.
 
Novocaine said:
You're not understanding. I'm not talking about the justification by fan boys, I'm talking about the justification by Nintendo themselves.
Click to expand...

And I'm talking about how the market reacts.

You should read up on it, or wait until your high school class teaches it.
 
MattyG344 said:
No you're right, they're keeping the price at $40 because nobody wants to buy it.
Click to expand...

Do you think they would sell more if they cut the price? Would that not be a smarter option rather than sticking to a static price after the initial sales rush? Steam sales have proven this method works, the game makers make more money and more people get to experience their games.

Tookay said:
And I'm talking about how the market reacts.

You should read up on it, or wait until your high school class teaches it.
Click to expand...

Keep your petty insults to yourself.
 
Tookay said:
And I'm talking about how the market reacts.

You should read up on it, or wait until your high school class teaches it.
Click to expand...

Daaaaaamn.

Buy yeah, pretty much. When any company wants/needs to boost sales they drop price. Clearly Nintendo doesn't have that need here.

Simple economics.
 
Novocaine said:
Do you think they would sell more if they cut the price? Would that not be a smarter option rather than sticking to a static price after the initial sales rush? Steam sales have proven this method works, the game makers make more money and more people get to experience their games.



Keep your petty insults to yourself.
Click to expand...

Clearly not, because Nintendo's playing a long-term game here, where they retain higher profits by selling at a higher margin and avoid damaging the value of their brands.

It isn't simply about "selling more," because that's a meaningless metric in and of itself. That doesn't communicate anything without a dollar value (and profit) associated with it.

Hence the "petty insult" (a quaint phrase, considering your belligerent entry into this thread bashing "Nintendo fanboys").
 
Tookay said:
Clearly not, because Nintendo's playing a long-term game here, where they retain higher profits by selling at a higher margin and avoid damaging the value of their brands.

It isn't simply about "selling more," because that's a meaningless metric in and of itself. That doesn't communicate anything without a dollar value (and profit) associated with it.

Hence the "petty insult" (a quaint phrase, considering your belligerent entry into this thread bashing "Nintendo fanboys").
Click to expand...
stahp dude or I might have to call the cops for attempted murder.
 
Tookay said:
Clearly not, because Nintendo's playing a long-term game here, where they retain higher profits by selling at a higher margin and avoid damaging the value of their brands.

It isn't simply about "selling more," because that's a meaningless metric in and of itself. That doesn't communicate anything without a dollar value (and profit) associated with it.

Hence the "petty insult" (a quaint phrase, considering your belligerent entry into this thread bashing "Nintendo fanboys").
Click to expand...

Yup, with Nintendo game people are more inclined to buy at launch because they will not be dicked over by a price drop in a month. While on steam (even I do this) people will just wait for the sale.

I find it funny that this is coming up during the launch month of Mario Kart 8 where Nintendo is literally giving there $60 games away for free with a game everyone was going to buy anyway.
 
Tookay said:
Clearly not, because Nintendo's playing a long-term game here, where they retain higher profits by selling at a higher margin and avoid damaging the value of their brands.

It isn't simply about "selling more," because that's a meaningless metric in and of itself. That doesn't communicate anything without a dollar value (and profit) associated with it.

Hence the "petty insult" (a quaint phrase, considering your belligerent entry into this thread bashing "Nintendo fanboys").
Click to expand...

I don't consider fan boy an insult. I could have easily said something more insulting/offensive, but I'm not trying to be an asshole here, I'm being genuine and asking genuine questions. You don't need to try and intellect bash me.

You're way smarter than me. Does that help you? Okay then let's move on.

Selling more for less does not always mean less profit. As I said it happens on all the time, and developers have claimed they have made more money from things like Steam sales and Humble bundles.

Avoiding damage to their brand by keeping their prices high puts their game in less peoples hands. If that makes sense to them then fine, I don't really care. I would think these people would want more people to play their game not less.
 
I have to be honest, the fact that Nintendo games never drop in price is a huge reason I'm willing to buy them day 1.

There's nothing worse than buying a game for 60 euros, beating it in a week, then seeing you could have bought it for 30 euros a month or two later. Which is what I now do. With Nintendo games, that just doesn't happen, so you might as well jump in whenever you want - that shit's never coming down in price anyway.
 
They make polished games that are clearly worth the price that they. Online to sell for many years later. If SS was just as good there would be no reason for a price cut.
 
So, I just have to ask, why are some people here acting as if Nintendo is personally visiting each and every retailer, holding a gun to their heads, and threatening that if they put their games on sale, that they will get a bullet to the brain?

Retailers are obviously the ones who have control over the price. The price has remained more or less the same since launch, so obviously they do not feel that it needs to be lowered, which means that people are still buying these games at these prices. Otherwise, if they are not, retailers always have the option of a) returning unsold stocks to Nintendo, or b) slashing the price down to clear inventory.

So, again I ask, how is this Nintendo's fault, exactly? Because they are making games that people obviously want and consider the price justified?
 
Kageshinzo said:
So, I just have to ask, why are some people here acting as if Nintendo is personally visiting each and every retailer, holding a gun to their heads, and threatening that if they put their games on sale, that they will get a bullet to the brain?

Retailers are obviously the ones who have control over the price. The price has remained more or less the same since launch, so obviously they do not feel that it needs to be lowered, which means that people are still buying these games at these prices. Otherwise, if they are not, retailers always have the option of a) returning unsold stocks to Nintendo, or b) slashing the price down to clear inventory.

So, again I ask, how is this Nintendo's fault, exactly? Because they are making games that people obviously want and consider the price justified?
Click to expand...

It's exactly this.
 
Rhazer Fusion said:
No denying that it is a classic, but would it be fine if something that most likely costs millions to develop like Dark Souls, Metal Gear 4, The Last of Us, Super Street Fighter 4 or Ninja Gaiden Black stay $60 for 6 years? Nintendo is legendary, but they are not the only company who makes amazing games. Technology such as TV's, cars, monitors, computers, phones, movies and music drop in price regularly. If people are buying 3DS games for that price though, I can't really blame Nintendo or any company for leaving the prices as is, but I still think portable games are overpriced though. I might just be crazy or something, but I have a hard time paying $50 for a portable game while I can get an HD console/PC/Mac game for the same cost. I know a good game is a good game, but I feel funny paying so much for antiquated technology when good games are available on most major consoles. Not saying I would never do it, but it just feels weird to me. Mario 64 was one of the best games of all time, but that doesn't mean I want to pay $40-50 for it on a portable system with slight enhancements.
Click to expand...

If those games had legs like Nintendo games did, then they would would still be 60 dollars after a couple years. The fact of the matter though is that they don't. Most other games do the majority of their sales in the first few months of release, even though prices drop shortly after. Nintendo games like this do most of their sales outside the first few months, and that is at full price. It makes absolutely no sense for either the retailer or Nintendo to cut the price.

Also I have no idea why you are comparing works of art to pieces of technology like a TV or phone. OoT still stands up today. So does Super Mario World. And many other games. A phone from 20 years ago does not.
 
Kageshinzo said:
So, I just have to ask, why are some people here acting as if Nintendo is personally visiting each and every retailer, holding a gun to their heads, and threatening that if they put their games on sale, that they will get a bullet to the brain?

Retailers are obviously the ones who have control over the price. The price has remained more or less the same since launch, so obviously they do not feel that it needs to be lowered, which means that people are still buying these games at these prices. Otherwise, if they are not, retailers always have the option of a) returning unsold stocks to Nintendo, or b) slashing the price down to clear inventory.

So, again I ask, how is this Nintendo's fault, exactly? Because they are making games that people obviously want and consider the price justified?
Click to expand...

Some people must think Nintendo has full control on their games being on sale, which is simply not true. Nintendo games do rarely see price drops though, which I honestly like. I like that I can buy a game day one, knowing that in a month it won't cost half as much and in a year I can sell/trade it in close to what I got it for and not at around $5. It's one of the reasons why Nintendo games are some of the only games I'm willing to buy day one.
 
Crossing Eden said:
Because OOT is literally considered by many to be the historical greatest game ever made and people are willing to pay that price for it.
Click to expand...
This is taking advantage of the gamers wants for their benefits without caring Gamers in the long run by price drops. They should realize not everyone can afford that price and there willl be many people who want to buy but can't afford and wait for the drop which doesn't drop for long time so many have to skip where Nintendo fails to care the gamers.
 
co1onel said:
Zelda games take forever to go down in price. Nobody wants to resell their zelda games so prices never go down.
Click to expand...

I didn't have a problem selling my GC\Wii Zelda games... but I've held on to the 3DS ones because of my save files. I actually find it harder to sell DS\3DS games where I've invested a ton of hours.
Edit: I was also hoping for HD releases of GC\Wii Zelda games, and so far WW HD came through.
 
biglittleps said:
This is taking advantage of the gamers wants for their benefits without caring Gamers in the long run by price drops. They should realize not everyone can afford that price and there willl be many people who want to buy but can't afford and wait for the drop which doesn't drop for long time so many have to skip where Nintendo fails to care the gamers.
Click to expand...
The original game is $10 on Virtual Console.

The original game is $10 on Virtual Console.
 
biglittleps said:
This is taking advantage of the gamers wants for their benefits without caring Gamers in the long run by price drops. They should realize not everyone can afford that price and there willl be many people who want to buy but can't afford and wait for the drop which doesn't drop for long time so many have to skip where Nintendo fails to care the gamers.
Click to expand...
My goodness, a business taking advantage of their market's wants for their own benefit? How is this allowed!
 
Thread is insane. And its only Pre-E3 Gaf season. Let us pray:

Dear words written in the codex of Lore found in Evils blood we bow our heads. In this beautiful land of GAF , a storm approaches. In the coming hours we shall see bloodshed. Brother against brother. Men broken by the pangs of denial and unprecedented disappointment. Other overjoyed and giddy with exuberance, lost to the depths of hype that they so choose to wallow in. Juniors will reveal their suicidal nature. Bans will be met out expeditiously and Bish will not rest until his palette is satiated. The fear of Y2Kev will be felt and EatChildren shall upon the corpses of rotting Juniors and Elders alike. We pray CBOAT mayhap include his blessings. Yes my Gaffers. Welcome to E3 2014! May you be strong... May you be stronk. A'Kappa.

OT: Let Nintendo eat. Price your quality products right and keep your brands strong. Top notch handheld games (or console for that matter) aren't required to experience the curse of the price drop just because the oversaturated "TripplEA" market makes it the norm. Quality will sell at any price when proven. If the imitation is cheap then don't let people get confused. Its why we have a handheld shovelware market vs a handheld GOAT market. And sometimes discounts are offered and price drops are had. But for Nintendo this is not necessary.
 
Nintendo creates artificial demand for their games by limiting the supply so that there is never a surplus, it's why Mario 64 DS is still $30 or something ridiculous like that. It's extremely anti-consumer and they've gotten in legal trouble from it before.
 
Ocarina of Time is regarded by many to be the best game ever made. So it makes sense that it'd hold it's value. Infamous is not at that level (my opinion).
 
Zelda is the better, more polished video game.

Edit: nvm, I thought the OP meant Link between the Worlds. Yeah the OoT remake is expensive as fuck, but that's Ninty's strategy. Their games float very high in price because they have managed a position in the consumers mind where the games are timeless and they all "serve a purpose" in the consoles lineup.
 
mgs2master2 said:
Zelda OoT 3DS is considered "rare". At least that is the story GS managers tell me. Considering this ,

BTg1Kl7CQAEVky5.jpg


Which is the same price for the new copy, which is not in stock anywhere anymore.
http://www.gamestop.com/nintendo-3ds/games/the-legend-of-zelda-ocarina-of-time-3ds/89884
going that xenoblade approach i see GS.


At least amazon, you know you are getting a new copy for that price.
Click to expand...
Gamestop also artificially controlled the scarcity of Xenoblade: Chronicles so they could keep selling "used" versions for $90. http://www.polygon.com/2013/8/13/46...arket-value-of-89-99-for-xenoblade-chronicles
http://kotaku.com/extreme-gamestop-pricing-leaves-some-fans-calling-scam-1108627828
 
biglittleps said:
This is taking advantage of the gamers wants for their benefits without caring Gamers in the long run by price drops. They should realize not everyone can afford that price and there willl be many people who want to buy but can't afford and wait for the drop which doesn't drop for long time so many have to skip where Nintendo fails to care the gamers.
Click to expand...

Wat.
 
I'm amazed at the vitriol thrown at other posters in this thread. Clearly, Ocarina of Time is a sacred cow, and Nintendo knows it, which is probably why the price hasn't gone down!
 
Colonel Mustard said:
They continue to sell substantive amounts at that price, so they're kept there.
Click to expand...

This.
Nintendo games rarely drop in price.

Mario Galaxy which is from 2010 is still being sold for over $30 in many places.
Meanwhile some of the other big games from the same year (read dead redemption, Mass effect 2, god of war 3) can easily be found for $15-$20.

It's one of the reasons I'm more inclined to buy Nintendo games at launch. Because I know it can take years for them to get a considerable price cut while most other games you can find for $30-$40 within months
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Poll
Do you expect the Zelda OOT remake for the Switch 2 to receive the same graphical upgrades as the Starfox remake?
Analysis  2
92
339
Sooner replied
is the Zelda OoT dungeons just as complicated today?
35
320
Heimdall_Xtreme replied
Zelda needs to be zelda again
Opinion  2 3 4 5
242
243
MagiusNecros replied
Possible inFAMOUS Remakes in PlayStation Development
2
72
166
Vick replied
  • Locked
  • Poll
A mother is punishing her son by making him slam his PS5 the same way he had slammed her pet cat
Opinion  2 3 4 5
210
730
PlayStaytion replied
Top Bottom