surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
@kyosuke
They are "competing" with retailers: by letting them sell their dd at competitive prices.
Sony doesn't compete with retailers at all: they disregard them altogether.
They are "competing" with retailers: by letting them sell their dd at competitive prices.
Sony doesn't compete with retailers at all: they disregard them altogether.
Looks like I won't be returning to console gaming anytime soon. I guess people forget that gouging customers on game prices is where the console makers make the biggest profit. Nintendo are exactly the same.
I'll stick to my old beige box. Thanks.
I'll stick to my old beige box. Thanks.
@Ronin4Life - to be fair, I thing Sony tried this with PSP games. The problem was they were PSP gaems.
Patapon 2 did have a retail voucher. It wasn't the greatest game to have such an initiative with, I guess. Here you can look at what games you want digitally and what you want physically and have options with sales at stores with most retail releases and their digital versions while things stay the same on the eShop -always there should a physical game become rare.
Patapon 2 did have a retail voucher. It wasn't the greatest game to have such an initiative with, I guess. Here you can look at what games you want digitally and what you want physically and have options with sales at stores with most retail releases and their digital versions while things stay the same on the eShop -always there should a physical game become rare.
@silent
I was under the impression that patapon was an exchange voucher, and therefore was more of a sony gets money, gamer gets game retailer gets nothing middleman exchange.(like the xbox live arcade and Nintendo points cards for example.)
I was under the impression that patapon was an exchange voucher, and therefore was more of a sony gets money, gamer gets game retailer gets nothing middleman exchange.(like the xbox live arcade and Nintendo points cards for example.)
Funny how Steam prices a lot of their games at the same cap as physical copies at launch and no one goes berserk. Modern Warfare 3 is still $59.99 on Steam. Portal 2's price dropped quickly, yeah. But it was still a $59.99 game at launch.
Also Nintendo said they'll allow retailers to have sales on the digitally distributed games' codes. This seems like whining and straw grasping to me.
Also Nintendo said they'll allow retailers to have sales on the digitally distributed games' codes. This seems like whining and straw grasping to me.
Because with most games on Steam, there are SALES. Name the last Nintendo digital sale.
Also again, the games are locked to the SYSTEM, where Steam is account based.
Two huge differences that are a boon to the consumer, something Nintendo lacks.
Also again, the games are locked to the SYSTEM, where Steam is account based.
Two huge differences that are a boon to the consumer, something Nintendo lacks.
This reminds me of the NES (SNES and N64 too, actually) and how little Nintendo seems to remember of its own history, which is also to say that this isn't just indicative of today's industry, but Nintendo since it jump started the industry in the 80's.
One of the biggest issues Nintendo had back in those days was that their games were too expensive because they were on carts, and carts cost a lot of money to produce because of all the plastic involved. This lead to some games being as high (if memory serves) as $70 sometimes (or more, depending on the game)--which, if you've played a classic game recently, you'd see the value in that in todays world is pretty shitty, specially since many of these games were unnaturally long because of their often "cheap" difficulty at the time.
But Nintendo's also had a long standing.. thing.. about their games "Keeping value", as though their games will never degrade with time and become a lesser beast to the most current thing -which, again in todays industry, is a ridiculous notion. It might have flown when a NES was all we had, but with so many options today that's just not going to stick, specially as the quality of those games seems to be going down sharply (I'm sorry, but in some cases, that's become true for Nintendo -Skyward Sword, and its bugs, instantly comes to mind)
Any way, what I'm getting at is that Nintendo's proving that they think you've always paid full price for the data on the game itself and not the plastic and processors its published on --which is where the value is supposed to come from if you cut their carts/discs/manufacturing/freight.If your paying them the same price your literally handing them money for nothing. Plus they're going to pull the same "these games will always have the same value" crap that they've pulled for over 2 decades, so those games will never become competitively priced compared to retail -making retail the wiser choice again, all while making sure you'll never be able to resell the game at all.
"It's always been thought that platform holders are too scared of upsetting retail by undercutting their products digitally, yet the PlayStation Vita indicates that cheaper downloads are doable"
But its $5.. All it does is make these titles -maybe- as cheap as used copies of currently released games. The only time they get truly competitive is is they decide to have a sale, otherwise these digital offerings are going to hold their value just the same as Nintendo's will despite being a few bucks cheaper then full MSRP. I think the problem in this particular case (when bringing the vita into it) is how the digital distribution model is so rigid in its pricing -if it flowed and competed the same way as retail does then the only sword we'd have to fall on would be that we couldn't resell the games if we wanted to.
One of the biggest issues Nintendo had back in those days was that their games were too expensive because they were on carts, and carts cost a lot of money to produce because of all the plastic involved. This lead to some games being as high (if memory serves) as $70 sometimes (or more, depending on the game)--which, if you've played a classic game recently, you'd see the value in that in todays world is pretty shitty, specially since many of these games were unnaturally long because of their often "cheap" difficulty at the time.
But Nintendo's also had a long standing.. thing.. about their games "Keeping value", as though their games will never degrade with time and become a lesser beast to the most current thing -which, again in todays industry, is a ridiculous notion. It might have flown when a NES was all we had, but with so many options today that's just not going to stick, specially as the quality of those games seems to be going down sharply (I'm sorry, but in some cases, that's become true for Nintendo -Skyward Sword, and its bugs, instantly comes to mind)
Any way, what I'm getting at is that Nintendo's proving that they think you've always paid full price for the data on the game itself and not the plastic and processors its published on --which is where the value is supposed to come from if you cut their carts/discs/manufacturing/freight.If your paying them the same price your literally handing them money for nothing. Plus they're going to pull the same "these games will always have the same value" crap that they've pulled for over 2 decades, so those games will never become competitively priced compared to retail -making retail the wiser choice again, all while making sure you'll never be able to resell the game at all.
"It's always been thought that platform holders are too scared of upsetting retail by undercutting their products digitally, yet the PlayStation Vita indicates that cheaper downloads are doable"
But its $5.. All it does is make these titles -maybe- as cheap as used copies of currently released games. The only time they get truly competitive is is they decide to have a sale, otherwise these digital offerings are going to hold their value just the same as Nintendo's will despite being a few bucks cheaper then full MSRP. I think the problem in this particular case (when bringing the vita into it) is how the digital distribution model is so rigid in its pricing -if it flowed and competed the same way as retail does then the only sword we'd have to fall on would be that we couldn't resell the games if we wanted to.
Companies need to learn that if you price your products low, people will buy whatever you sell. And I hate to disagree with Iwata (well, not really) but most people DO see less value in a digital product. It's not because the game is of lesser quality or anything like that; it's just you don't HAVE anything to show for your purchase. Price those things a little lower and it will make digital shopping more enticing.
The digital book market seems to be finally coming around to this idea as well. The fuck if I'm going to pay full retail price for a 420kb file of a book, especially when I can hop over to my local used bookstore and buy the thing for $3. Then, if I just have to have a digital copy of it, I can pirate it. I'm not paying $15 for a digital book. Sorry, book publishers. And I'm not paying $60 for a digital copy of a game. Sorry, Nintendo.
The digital book market seems to be finally coming around to this idea as well. The fuck if I'm going to pay full retail price for a 420kb file of a book, especially when I can hop over to my local used bookstore and buy the thing for $3. Then, if I just have to have a digital copy of it, I can pirate it. I'm not paying $15 for a digital book. Sorry, book publishers. And I'm not paying $60 for a digital copy of a game. Sorry, Nintendo.
Well what Nintendo wants and what's right for the consumer are two different things apparently. Unfortunately, other companies also see it the same way. Like Vita releases being a few bucks cheaper to buy digital. MK vita is $39.99 at the store and on PSN. That didn't take long.
10% off the retail launch price is perfectly acceptable to me. Sony seems to have the right idea with the Vita. The costs for materials, manufacturing, shipping, and the retailer's cut must amount to *at least* 10% of a $50-$60 product, if not more. There is no justification for having digital priced identically with retail.
The only reason why Steam gets away with that is retail is more or less dead in the PC space, most games are $10 cheaper than their multi-platform console counterparts to begin with, and if you pre-purchase your games you often get $5 off or some type of bonus that makes up for it, plus you get to download a large chunk of the game before launch so you can start playing it faster on day one.
What do you get on PS3, 360, and inevitably Wii U? Jack shit.
The only reason why Steam gets away with that is retail is more or less dead in the PC space, most games are $10 cheaper than their multi-platform console counterparts to begin with, and if you pre-purchase your games you often get $5 off or some type of bonus that makes up for it, plus you get to download a large chunk of the game before launch so you can start playing it faster on day one.
What do you get on PS3, 360, and inevitably Wii U? Jack shit.
Bleh, same shit that's happening with digital comics. Digital content should always be cheaper than its physical counterpart.
Guess I'll just keep buying the physical product way down the line for a fraction of the cost.
Guess I'll just keep buying the physical product way down the line for a fraction of the cost.
Nintendo haven't got a clue as usual. And you fanboys think they are gonna recapture their glory. Keep dreaming.
The games might be good from Nintendo, but Wii U is going to be a fustercluck of mess, again. Japanese companies sometimes have awful understanding of giving customers a nice deal, since they get away with daylight robbery by comparison in Japan, as standard practice.
The games might be good from Nintendo, but Wii U is going to be a fustercluck of mess, again. Japanese companies sometimes have awful understanding of giving customers a nice deal, since they get away with daylight robbery by comparison in Japan, as standard practice.
Vita's digital pricing is bunk after a month when new retail copies of the game have dropped below their $5 discount. As long as people are paying, of course prices won't drop. If they drop the prices now, if they need to do it when the industry takes a huge hit it'll be harder to swallow. They can just argue convienience anyways. Also, nobody wants to be the first people to do it, especially when funds in the industry are so tight. There are a myriad of reasons phys and dig are priced the same.
I'm relieved by this. I prefer buying things retail, and with Nintendo keeping prices the same I won't have to change my standards.
@S0lidB0ss - Only Sony is taking the cut on Vita games right now, mostly because they hope it offsets they outrageous price of the memory cards. Third parties don't have to play along.
Those waving around Steam need to realize the following;
- There is no real retail market for PC anymore
- With no retailers to worry about, games can launch cheaper
- Yet not all of them do and not all of them go on sale.
Steam has a lot of sales, but the environment around PC gaming has changed tremendously in the last seven years. Additionally, despite the revitalization of the market for gaming, the market for actual PCs is rapidly shrinking. PC gaming is NOT in a better situation than consoles and faces extinction at the hands of tablets and smart TVs just like consoles do.
Games being cheaper on Steam is not an altruistic move on the part of Valve, its just what a non-retail, non-physical media environment allows. Yet PSN, XBLA and Origin aren't even as close to being competitive with it because there is a large physical market to contend with.
You have to understand that retailers are not going to quietly and many, many, many gamers are averse to the idea of not being able to physically own a game. Additionally there are publishers positively whipped on day one and first-week sales data and it can be measured in retail easier than it can digitally.
These are three HUGE things that keep the digital market from being competitive on consoles. Sure, they have sales every now and then, but its all tightly controlled, unlike how Steam does it. Then you have services like Origin that charge retail prices for PC games at a higher mark-up than steam would. They're not being competitive. PSN and XBLA aren't competitive either.
Nintendo's approach is give retailers the ability to sell both physical and digital copies with the ability to put them on sale, if the retailer would choose to do so. Nintendo is allowing retailers to compete with Nintendo, basically.
Nintendo realizes that for now, dealing with the retail market is just the way it has to be and they're not going to make a move to alienate retailers.
So let's review:
- Stores have the option to compete with Nintendo's digital store.
- Retailers can put the digital and physical versions on sale.
- The consumer can pay various ways for a digital download.
- The consumer has the option to buy a physical copy.
- Nintendo can still charge retail on their store.
Were Nintendo only doing this like Origin, then everyone would be right to have a problem with it. Simply having a digital store with games on it is not enough to be competitive. Providing options and alternatives, however, is being competitive and that's exactly what Nintendo is doing here.
Those waving around Steam need to realize the following;
- There is no real retail market for PC anymore
- With no retailers to worry about, games can launch cheaper
- Yet not all of them do and not all of them go on sale.
Steam has a lot of sales, but the environment around PC gaming has changed tremendously in the last seven years. Additionally, despite the revitalization of the market for gaming, the market for actual PCs is rapidly shrinking. PC gaming is NOT in a better situation than consoles and faces extinction at the hands of tablets and smart TVs just like consoles do.
Games being cheaper on Steam is not an altruistic move on the part of Valve, its just what a non-retail, non-physical media environment allows. Yet PSN, XBLA and Origin aren't even as close to being competitive with it because there is a large physical market to contend with.
You have to understand that retailers are not going to quietly and many, many, many gamers are averse to the idea of not being able to physically own a game. Additionally there are publishers positively whipped on day one and first-week sales data and it can be measured in retail easier than it can digitally.
These are three HUGE things that keep the digital market from being competitive on consoles. Sure, they have sales every now and then, but its all tightly controlled, unlike how Steam does it. Then you have services like Origin that charge retail prices for PC games at a higher mark-up than steam would. They're not being competitive. PSN and XBLA aren't competitive either.
Nintendo's approach is give retailers the ability to sell both physical and digital copies with the ability to put them on sale, if the retailer would choose to do so. Nintendo is allowing retailers to compete with Nintendo, basically.
Nintendo realizes that for now, dealing with the retail market is just the way it has to be and they're not going to make a move to alienate retailers.
So let's review:
- Stores have the option to compete with Nintendo's digital store.
- Retailers can put the digital and physical versions on sale.
- The consumer can pay various ways for a digital download.
- The consumer has the option to buy a physical copy.
- Nintendo can still charge retail on their store.
Were Nintendo only doing this like Origin, then everyone would be right to have a problem with it. Simply having a digital store with games on it is not enough to be competitive. Providing options and alternatives, however, is being competitive and that's exactly what Nintendo is doing here.
I wouldn't have a huge problem with this if the prices weren't so fixed. Look at PSP titles on PSN. Some of them are $20+ more than what I would be able to pay on Amazon. That's not even bringing up the used market...
I'm face-palming at all the people who didn't get that retailers can set their own prices and make sales for digital products.
You know who's a retailer?
AMAZON DOT COM
Seriously, what the hell people? Don't you see this is actually a good thing?
You know who's a retailer?
AMAZON DOT COM
Seriously, what the hell people? Don't you see this is actually a good thing?
People forget that they can buy games off the eShop as well as through these retailer vouchers.
Also, physical copies.
This strategy is for those people who aren't as "savvy" as you are.
Also, physical copies.
This strategy is for those people who aren't as "savvy" as you are.
I buy the digital version because it's usually cheaper and I don't have to deal with a disk. Nintendo, something that is downloaded digitally IS worth less, considering the fact that you can't trade it in when you're done with it. Also there's the whole chunk of production costs that are cut out when you don't have to make the cartridges/disks.
@George Booth
Destructoid's ability to pass information effectively is astonishingly poor.
The Wii U will have multiple accounts across systems so it's possible to infer that the games would be tied to the accounts as oppose to the system.
Next is that Nintendo capped the price of the digital downloads but they have said that they will allow publishers and retailers to choose their own prices so Steam-like sales are also possible.
Finally, Steam/Origin new releases are always the same as their physically distributed counterparts. So do the math here. What Nintendo is doing is nothing detrimental given how flexible they are being with other games' prices. Really the only games you could worry about is first party Nintendo games since those are pretty much never on sale.
Destructoid's ability to pass information effectively is astonishingly poor.
The Wii U will have multiple accounts across systems so it's possible to infer that the games would be tied to the accounts as oppose to the system.
Next is that Nintendo capped the price of the digital downloads but they have said that they will allow publishers and retailers to choose their own prices so Steam-like sales are also possible.
Finally, Steam/Origin new releases are always the same as their physically distributed counterparts. So do the math here. What Nintendo is doing is nothing detrimental given how flexible they are being with other games' prices. Really the only games you could worry about is first party Nintendo games since those are pretty much never on sale.
What's Iwata smoking anyway. Whatever it is he better clear out his brain before he launches the Wii U. Get your head in the game already man.
What's Iwata smoking anyway. Whatever it is he better clear out his brain before he launches the Wii U. Get your head in the game already man.
Digital games shouldn't be as expensive as retail ones. You can earn a lot more if you can offer a great service. Steam is a great example.
am i the only one who doesn't care about this, i buy games at the store anyway i love looking at my collection of games
@OTL, tcs0 and pretty much everyone who is jumping to conclusions thanks to Jimbo's shitty reporting skills
Nintendo has said that publishers and retailers can choose prices for games so there will be the possibly of games going on Steam-like sales. Nintendo is also exploring a system where you can trade and/or sell digital games with friends.
So it's really not so bad. Stop jumping to conclusions.
Nintendo has said that publishers and retailers can choose prices for games so there will be the possibly of games going on Steam-like sales. Nintendo is also exploring a system where you can trade and/or sell digital games with friends.
So it's really not so bad. Stop jumping to conclusions.
The one extra thing to remember in this as well is that they want to have retailers sell these download codes as well, so they can continue to sell when out of stock, or not have to take risks on iffy games and still be able to advertise in stores.
Not saying i agree with equal pricing, just saying its a factor.
Not saying i agree with equal pricing, just saying its a factor.
At least if I buy the disc I know where the money is going, if this is your strategy IntendNo I'll stick to concrete matter format thank you very much. And once again let me bring up the point that as of right now WiiU has no hard drive, (which means they'll have to buy one seperate at additional cost) so what you're actively doing is punishing your customers for not wanting physical formats... which is completely childish and stupid. Good news Gamestop, you'll be in business for at least another 5 years! I'm still of the opinion that their Virtual Console games were too expensive. I beginning to wonder if the big N does any market research or consumer studies?
So what? Full retail downloads of new games on the PS3 is sometimes 15-10% more expensive than buying the physical product. Just without the option to trade it in after you are done with it.
The fact that Nintendo is letting retailers set their own prices for codes has absolutely no bearing on Iwata's attitude that digital games should be sold at the exact same MSRP as a physical copy on its own digital storefront. I am sorry I don't have the same "Oh thank you, generous and kind master" attitude as some of you folks.
I'd like to see game prices in Australia match the prices for the rest of the world. Shipping costs I can somewhat understand, but paying 2-3 times the amount for the same digital download on top of ISP bandwidth costs is beyond nonsensical. It's daylight robbery. Remind me again why people pirate games?
Retailers setting their own prices for codes is fine and all, but does any retailer sell codes for PS3 of 360? If not, would they even bother to start doing that? I'm not sure if anyone has mentioned this, but the way I see it is that any retailer who buy and sell used games is not going to start selling codes because that would be undermining a part of your own business. If people buy codes, then the retailer can't buy the game back from the costumer and sell it as a used game.
"Digital games cost less to sell"
Not that I disagree, but as devils advocate, How do we know this?
You may not have to pay for the physical material, but you do have to pay for bandwidth, time spent creating digital instruction manauals, time spent putting it in the store to download, etc.
Not that I disagree, but as devils advocate, How do we know this?
You may not have to pay for the physical material, but you do have to pay for bandwidth, time spent creating digital instruction manauals, time spent putting it in the store to download, etc.
Guys, please correct me if I am wrong but I think Nintendo was kinda forced to do this in order not to alienate brick and mortar retailers. I imagine em discussing with retailers and retailers telling em if the price of digital was lower than the physical copies one they would have stopped selling their hardware and software. For some reason that prevented em from offering digital at a lower price (which would have been convenient for em, less costs more profits). I can't imagine why they re so dependent on retailers, ofc no every retailers would have dropped Nintendo so there must be something I am missing.
Why is Nintendo expected to be able to solve this digital situation?
Steam has the exact same problem too for newer games and that's the leading digital platform out there, Skyrim is STILL full price at £34.99.
Nintendo simply can't afford to piss all the other retailers and publishers off, that would be business SUICIDE.
The fact that games can still be downloaded digitally is great, imagine all the smaller budget or incredibly niche games (like Fatal Frame, Captain Rainbow or even The Last Story) that we could get this way that NEVER would have been able to be published overseas normally.
We must remember, NOA isn't ACTUALLY publishing The Last Story, they let someone else do it...
Xenoblade also barely even made it into America because of NOA's laziness.
Progress is at least progress, but random hate without common sense is just stupid. What Sony is doing with their platforms is irrelevant, because they clearly aren't making as much money as Nintendo.
Steam has the exact same problem too for newer games and that's the leading digital platform out there, Skyrim is STILL full price at £34.99.
Nintendo simply can't afford to piss all the other retailers and publishers off, that would be business SUICIDE.
The fact that games can still be downloaded digitally is great, imagine all the smaller budget or incredibly niche games (like Fatal Frame, Captain Rainbow or even The Last Story) that we could get this way that NEVER would have been able to be published overseas normally.
We must remember, NOA isn't ACTUALLY publishing The Last Story, they let someone else do it...
Xenoblade also barely even made it into America because of NOA's laziness.
Progress is at least progress, but random hate without common sense is just stupid. What Sony is doing with their platforms is irrelevant, because they clearly aren't making as much money as Nintendo.
@Jimbo
Who here is saying anything like that? Care to generalize a little more, you ignorant twit?
The problem with your reporting here is that this is largely a non-issue for several reasons. One of them is the aforementioned sales. Nintendo has placed a cap on digital game pricing, but is allowing flexibility for retailers to choose prices and set up Steam-like sales. That is a HUGE deal when talking about prices and you are outright ignoring that portion of "Iwata's attitude" simply because you don't like that he feels that value is not lost between physical and digital copies.
Secondly, Nintendo has just introduced themselves to an aggressive plan for digital distribution. Steam was not exactly the God-tier distribution service it is now when it was first launched. Valve had to learn a thing or two and so does Nintendo now.
And now here's some info I'm almost positive many people have either never heard or have outright forgotten in favor of conclusion jumping and ignorance; Nintendo said a ways back that it is exploring the idea of letting Wii U owners sell and trade their digital games with friends for points. So yeah, they're attitude is sooo horrible. It's beyond EA standards. /sarcasm
Finally, other publishers have done this and continue to do it, including Valve (their games just go on sale quite quickly). I don't hear you or anyone else bitching about them doing it.
Who here is saying anything like that? Care to generalize a little more, you ignorant twit?
The problem with your reporting here is that this is largely a non-issue for several reasons. One of them is the aforementioned sales. Nintendo has placed a cap on digital game pricing, but is allowing flexibility for retailers to choose prices and set up Steam-like sales. That is a HUGE deal when talking about prices and you are outright ignoring that portion of "Iwata's attitude" simply because you don't like that he feels that value is not lost between physical and digital copies.
Secondly, Nintendo has just introduced themselves to an aggressive plan for digital distribution. Steam was not exactly the God-tier distribution service it is now when it was first launched. Valve had to learn a thing or two and so does Nintendo now.
And now here's some info I'm almost positive many people have either never heard or have outright forgotten in favor of conclusion jumping and ignorance; Nintendo said a ways back that it is exploring the idea of letting Wii U owners sell and trade their digital games with friends for points. So yeah, they're attitude is sooo horrible. It's beyond EA standards. /sarcasm
Finally, other publishers have done this and continue to do it, including Valve (their games just go on sale quite quickly). I don't hear you or anyone else bitching about them doing it.
@Smo5000
As I understand it, comics companies got ***** by middlemen when they tried to go digital. Apple takes 30% off the top, which immediately eats a lot of printing savings. Comics companies also use third party distribution solutions, which eat more profits.
Then you have to consider the costs to reformat a made-for-paper print book for phone/pad reading.
And comics companies really do have to continue to court the physical stores, because they can't take the loss of that revenue at the moment. Consoles could theoretically say "goodbye" to places like Gamestop, because non-dedicated stores will continue to sell their hardware and even stock games. Comics will currently die if they say "goodbye" to the direct market.
As I understand it, comics companies got ***** by middlemen when they tried to go digital. Apple takes 30% off the top, which immediately eats a lot of printing savings. Comics companies also use third party distribution solutions, which eat more profits.
Then you have to consider the costs to reformat a made-for-paper print book for phone/pad reading.
And comics companies really do have to continue to court the physical stores, because they can't take the loss of that revenue at the moment. Consoles could theoretically say "goodbye" to places like Gamestop, because non-dedicated stores will continue to sell their hardware and even stock games. Comics will currently die if they say "goodbye" to the direct market.
You really hit the nail on the head, my good sir. They're nothing but ignoramuses if they refuse to acknowledge the simple mathematics that it doesn't cost them as much to sell you the game. They act like that's not the case, but if they would just man up, do the right thing, and pass these savings onto the customer, sales would most likely skyrocket. Just like you said, good business. It's also ironic that he would say we shouldn't consider digital versions less valuable when it's really him that's considering them more valuable. When you purchase retail, let's just say 10% goes towards covering the raw material production costs, so you're only actually paying 90% of the $59.99 for the game itself, but if it's priced the same digitally, you're paying more than 110% of what you'd be paying towards the game itself if you went retail. Yes, this is very crude and ignores many of the other factors that go into pushing a game towards the market, but the logic is sound and does not change when you go real-world. Shit does definitely not seem legit!
Pretty sure the reason is so Nintendo don't get boycotted by brick and mortar stores. Sure you can buy games digital but you still have to buy the console somewhere.
Hi, I just wanted to add that Black Ops 2 is up for pre-order on Steam...
...for $59.99.
I guess Iwata isn't the only one who thinks their digital games should be priced the same as their physical ones, eh?
...for $59.99.
I guess Iwata isn't the only one who thinks their digital games should be priced the same as their physical ones, eh?
follow
