The Price of eShop Games

[Hero-of-Time]

There was an interesting article on NL yesterday. It talks about the effect that the Smash Bros. sale has had on the VC charts.

 

When the Virtual Console arrived on the Wii Shop it was a revelation, an official and guilt-free way to download and play classics from across the history of Nintendo systems and even former rivals from Sega and Commodore. It was an opportunity to sample games from consoles that were missed 'back in the day', or for younger gamers to have an easy route into the gaming legacy that's done so much to define the modern era. Retro collectors may prefer to use the original hardware and cartridges, but for plenty of gamers the Wii Virtual Console was an exciting way to enjoy iconic or little-known gems from past generations.

 

That was in the Wii era, but like the 'Touch' craze that helped lift the DS family of systems to stratospheric sales, exciting concepts typically progress from an era of buzz and popularity to a period of over-familiarity and malaise. This has partly dogged the Wii U and 3DS Virtual Console platforms, though they've had moments of newness that have brought keen gamers on board — the 3DS had a strong start with some excellent Game Boy and Game Boy Color games, while the peculiar arrival of Game Boy Advance titles on the Wii U eShop has, despite the natural thoughts occurring that they belong on 3DS, brought some terrific experiences to the attention of another generation of gamers.

 

Though debates about the current-gen Virtual Console libraries are worth having and will always be ongoing, we feel it's time to revisit the issue of pricing — gamers are still paying relatively premium prices for Game Boy, NES, SNES and GBA titles. To begin with a defence of this, Nintendo and the increasingly small number of active third-parties on the VC do more than simply dump a ROM onto a download store. We have the various niceties such as restore points and digital manuals, the latter being particularly attractive with colour scans on the Wii U GBA games; in addition there are localisation processes and age ratings to consider. All of these factors come with associated costs, with staff in each respective region no doubt devoting decent amounts of time to complete the necessary formalities.

 

A problem with this current Virtual Console era, with the honourable exceptions of those GBA games and rare examples such as EarthBound, is that many gamers have already bought or owned a version of the releases, or perhaps think more closely before putting down $4.99 / £3.49 / €4.99 for a NES title on Wii U — the price is a little higher in the UK on 3DS — when there are retail games, download-only titles and other systems all battling over disposable income. The market is tougher now, as a general rule, than when Nintendo swept all before it in the last generation, and the conventional pricing model applied to the Virtual Console seems increasingly out of touch.

A suggestion could be that, aside from top-tier titles that will sell multiple times regardless of their level of exposure — games such as Super Mario Bros. 3 — we need to see a fresh approach to the pricing models for the variety of other excellent games that, arguably, aren't guaranteed sells. While $5 and upwards will rarely feel like impulse buy territory for games that are well over a decade old — though discounts of $1 to $1.50 can be had for those that have transferred relevant Wii data — the moment those prices are slashed in promotions we see a notable upturn.

 

Take, for example, the Super Smash Bros.-themed promotion running in the Wii U and 3DS eShop stores in Europe over the past week. A new batch has just been announced, but of the first week's deals the winners have been obvious — highly regarded retro games. Top of the Recent Bestsellers chart in both platform's stores in the UK is Mega Man 2; on the Wii U five out of the six Blue Bomber titles are in the top 10, while on 3DS the number is four; you can add Super Punch-Out!! in third place on the home console. Discounts also generally boost sales on all download games, whether DL-only or retail titles, yet it strikes us that when an NES game is the equivalent of $2-3, a psychological shift makes it more appealing as an inexpensive dip for some retro goodness.

 

What's interesting with the Virtual Console stores is that, due to multiple generations and entries for franchises, we have various IPs represented by a number of games. We're sure plenty would love to sample these games — the popularity of NES Remix and its sequel attest to that — and it seems that Nintendo should embrace that enthusiasm to aim for volume of downloads, rather than maximising profit off each purchase. It's not just about discounts, but new models could be used to make the Virtual Console an indispensable extra in the eShop.

 

One option is a subscription service that entitles gamers to choose a set number of games per month at a reasonable discount — $10 a month (renewed each month, not an ongoing or annual commitment) could perhaps allow picks of three GBA games, three SNES, four NES or a mixture across platforms, with equivalents also incorporating the 3DS store; Nintendo Network IDs could allow switching between systems when working towards an allocation. It could be a lot more generous, of course, especially when comparisons can be made with the PlayStation Plus and Xbox Live Gold offerings. We suggest this model for the Virtual Console, initially, simply as it would be easier on a logistical and royalty level for Nintendo, with the number of involved publishers far smaller. This would also play into Nintendo's general policy of trialling ideas before rolling out on a larger scale, as a big N equivalent to PS Plus — assuming it can be made profitable and that it would likely have a rather different form — across new games would also be an exciting development. The key here is that there'd be plenty of bang for buck on retro games.

 

Another option, that'd also be simpler, would be to simply lower the pricing categories — they're still, in terms of core cost, the same as on Wii. Bundles could also be an option as the libraries fill out: grab all six Mega Man NES games for $10-12, or Super Mario Bros. 1-3 for $5-8. We've already heard Nintendo talk of potentially supporting 3DS and Wii U cross-buy on Virtual Console games in future, which would also be hugely welcome.

 

It's less a debate about whether these older games should be devalued, but more about assessing the reality of the current market, especially in an era when emulators and ROMs are also around on PCs, phones and so on. Nintendo is entitled to charge for its content, but we're in a different gaming world from the days of the Wii's service; perhaps the target should be mass sales, rather than reasonably high prices in smaller numbers. We're not convinced Nintendo's anywhere near ready to simply lower its standards of presentation and dump masses of content onto its stores without the bells and whistles, but it can do more to entice us to the options that are in place.

A number of the all-time bestsellers on the eShop are Virtual Console titles, in all cases the 'usual suspects'. Yet we feel some complaints and the lingering apathy around the VC would lift with a pricing revolution. It's not as if Nintendo hasn't hinted at pricing ideas that will reward gamers for their loyalty and spending. Satoru Iwata, in the January investor briefing, spoke of developing "flexible price points" and new pricing schemes to tackle the current market. If the company needs a testing ground, the Virtual Console would be ideal.

 

I know the recent sales on the eShop have enticed me to buy a bunch of games. Scram Kitty, Megaman 2-6, Super Punchout and Fire Emblem and Donkey Kong 94 will be bought today. Getting a NES game for around £1.50 is a bargain!

 

Do you think that eShop prices are too high for certain games? Or do you think lowering the price will devalue the software?

 

It's a tricky one, I mean you don't just want to give these games away but at the same time the market has changed a lot and people are used to either getting games for free on their phones or paying pittance for them. I know Iwata talked about the devaluing of games thanks to mobile games and it really has happened.

[Serebii]

Well the thing is that the Virtual Console releases all require some level of recoding and testing, which can get costly so they do need to recoup the costs. It isn't what some people think where they just upload the game and be done with it, they try and get it as close to the original performance as possible.

 

However, they need to be a bit more flexible. Games like Pinball, Baseball etc. aren't worth that high cost, but then if they were flexible, you'd have people asking why Mario is higher than Baseball seeing as they're both "old" games.

 

Iwata is right, though. Smartphones and Steam Sales have really devalued games. It's ridiculous. When I revealed Pokémon Art Academy, people were saying "This should be free". I mean what the hell?

[dazzybee]

The argument for how long a game takes is so so dull. It isn't how business works. How much is that product worth? That's all that matters, selling less and selling more, selling high and selling less. These are the factors. Other things like making them cheaper to drive more people to the store and maybe push them in the directions of other software too.

 

The games are too expensive, it's obvious, not much, but they are. Slightly less and I genuinely think Nintendo would make more money, and more people would have more games to play, and play in their Wii us more and maybe not be quite so "it's collecting dust" about it.

[Wii]

I think the GBA game prices are too high regardless of quality. They should be €5 or lower. I want Metroid Fusion and The Minish Cap but won't pay €7 each. I'd bite at €5. Games too like Super Mario World(€8) are too high. It's been flogged to death, I'm sure there's very little recoding needed for it. If they want to entice the masses and todays consumer the prices need to be lower.

[Pestneb]

I think the argument is that is is better to sell 3 games for 50p profit than selling 1 game for £1 profit.

 

The article appreciates there are costs associated with a VC release, but those costs are spread out over all purchases.

 

If it costs £10 to release a game on VC, but the game is priced so high only 2 people buy that game, it has to make £5 a sale just to break even.

 

If it is cheaper and sells 1000 copies, it only has to make 1p a sale.

 

Personally I think Nintendo have an ok method, promotional reductions.

 

people who LOVE a game and must have it will pay the full amount. Then Nintendo can do promotions like the smash sale to encourage further purchases, or the SMK + MK8 promotion they did.

 

I'd prefer the cheaper prices of course, but psychologically, this way you feel good, that you got a nice bargain.

 

Also, at the lower price there is no guarantee that it will result in a larger sales volume. By doing promotions they draw focus on the cheaper games, artificially increasing sales volume and making the cheaper price viable. If ALL the games were made cheaper (even with the exception of AAA games) the sales boost would be spread too thinly for it to counter the cheaper price.

[Dcubed]

The prices are absolutely fine (in fact if anything, their games on average are worth far more than what they're selling for on there).

 

Not only do you have to account for the fact that emulators are written for each individual game, but you also have to account for the notion of perceived value. Putting these games up for a high price (relative to other retro re-releases) grants these games a sense of worth. If you frequently bundle your games together in cheap retro compilations or put them out for ridiculously low prices, then they suddenly become worth nothing - look at what happened with SEGA's Mega Drive games now. They can't sell them for anything over $1 each anywhere now because they've constantly slashed prices and put out low quality compilation bundles for years!

 

At that point, there's no profit to be made anymore and the service becomes devalued to the point where it is no longer really a selling point of your hardware (especially if the emulation quality dropped, which it would have to in order to sell your games for that cheap as a standard price).

 

Infrequent sales are fine to drum up some interest, but they should be used sparingly and shouldn't become something that is expected; lest you get the same situation that persists across Steam...

Edited August 21, 2014 by Dcubed

[f00had]

The Virtual Console games are definitely way too expensive, on Sony's systems I can buy a PS1 game that can be shared between my PS3, PSP and Vita for the price of a single NES game for just Wii, Wii U or 3DS. Nintendo should either introduce cross buy or reduce the price of things if they want my money.

[RedShell]

Do you think that eShop prices are too high for certain games?

I reckon, yeah.

Especially digital downloads of retail titles, they should definitely be cheaper than physical versions. I mean there's no packaging/media, we pretty much have to provide our own storage space for the download, you're losing the ability to sell the game in the future, Nintendo's safeguards for digital content aren't exactly great, etc...

 

I think if a game has an RRP of £40 it should be at least £30 in the eShop, not £50+ which has often been the case.

Nintendo's presence at retail is shot to shit at this point, so they shouldn't be concerned with undercutting retailers now.

[Dcubed]

I reckon, yeah.

Especially digital downloads of retail titles, they should definitely be cheaper than physical versions. I mean there's no packaging/media, we pretty much have to provide our own storage space for the download, you're losing the ability to sell the game in the future, Nintendo's safeguards for digital content aren't exactly great, etc...

 

I think if a game has an RRP of £40 it should be at least £30 in the eShop, not £50+ which has often been the case.

Nintendo's presence at retail is shot to shit at this point, so they shouldn't be concerned with undercutting retailers now.

 

While everything you said is true, you also have to remember that the 3DS is doing well enough at retail and that they rely on these retailers to sell their hardware (as well as their future hardware too). We're not quite at the point where you can download a piece of hardware just yet

 

Kicking the hornet's nest is only going to come back to sting them later on in the future...

Edited August 21, 2014 by Dcubed

[Hero-of-Time]

The Virtual Console games are definitely way too expensive, on Sony's systems I can buy a PS1 game that can be shared between my PS3, PSP and Vita for the price of a single NES game for just Wii, Wii U or 3DS. Nintendo should either introduce cross buy or reduce the price of things if they want my money.

 

This is another interesting point. With the introduction of cross buy, gamers are now becoming accustomed to buying one game but having available on multiple machines. I think Nintendo will probably implement this with their next devices.

[Serebii]

This is another interesting point. With the introduction of cross buy, gamers are now becoming accustomed to buying one game but having available on multiple machines. I think Nintendo will probably implement this with their next devices.

 

There's no probably about it. They are.

 

I reckon, yeah.

Especially digital downloads of retail titles, they should definitely be cheaper than physical versions. I mean there's no packaging/media, we pretty much have to provide our own storage space for the download, you're losing the ability to sell the game in the future, Nintendo's safeguards for digital content aren't exactly great, etc...

 

I think if a game has an RRP of £40 it should be at least £30 in the eShop, not £50+ which has often been the case.

Nintendo's presence at retail is shot to shit at this point, so they shouldn't be concerned with undercutting retailers now.

 

Problem is that if they do that, then retailers will cut all Nintendo support. As such, where would people buy the consoles? Even online retailers would cut support. It would be a catastrophe. It would be the worst thing for Nintendo to do and would kill their business.

 

It would be nice, sure, but it's not happening. It's the same on Sony and Microsoft's stores so it's not fair that Nintendo is being picked on for it when it's a standard that is being forced by retailers.

[Cube]

The Virtual Console games are definitely way too expensive, on Sony's systems I can buy a PS1 game that can be shared between my PS3, PSP and Vita for the price of a single NES game for just Wii, Wii U or 3DS. Nintendo should either introduce cross buy or reduce the price of things if they want my money.

 

Yup, Sony's method of a single emulator for all games (with tweaking when required) is much better for the consumer than Nintendo's quest for perfection. Especially as they stopped doing that with GBA games.

[Dcubed]

This is another interesting point. With the introduction of cross buy, gamers are now becoming accustomed to buying one game but having available on multiple machines. I think Nintendo will probably implement this with their next devices.

 

Cross-buy is already here, Squid's Odyssey was the first game to support it (buy 3DS version, get Wii U one for free). The eShop also supports cross platform loyalty discounts too (Own Pullblox or Fallblox on 3DS? Get a discount on Pullblox World - same with Steamworld Dig 3DS/Wii U too)

 

Developers can choose to support it right now if they wish.

 

That being said, I don't think Nintendo will apply it to Virtual Console until the next generation - where their handheld and console will share the same hardware architecture (theoretically allowing them to both run Wii U VC games as they are, with no re-coding required); as this will allow them to offer cross-buy with no additional development costs involved (unlike now, where there would be significant dev cost involved in preparing separate Wii U and 3DS versions of NES VC games).

 

Yup, Sony's method of a single emulator for all games (with tweaking when required) is much better for the consumer than Nintendo's quest for perfection. Especially as they stopped doing that with GBA games.

 

Huh? No they haven't. It's the same per-game emulation effort as always. Dunno where you're coming from (unless you're on about their reluctance to emulate the link cable features of GB/GBA games), because the GBA emulation quality is utterly superb!

 

Meanwhile, the Vita can't run FF7 without randomly crashing with garbled graphics and the PS3 can't run Silent Hill without all sound becoming completely garbled at random times - unfixable without a game reset too BTW!

Edited August 21, 2014 by Dcubed

[Serebii]

Yup, Sony's method of a single emulator for all games (with tweaking when required) is much better for the consumer than Nintendo's quest for perfection. Especially as they stopped doing that with GBA games.

It's better for the consumer to have glitchy, unstable games?

[Cube]

Huh? No they haven't. It's the same per-game emulation effort as always. Dunno where you're coming from (unless you're on about their reluctance to emulate the link cable features of GB/GBA games), because the GBA emulation quality is utterly superb!

 

Meanwhile, the Vita can't run FF7 without randomly crashing with garbled graphics and the PS3 can't run Silent Hill without all sound becoming completely garbled at random times - unfixable without a game reset too BTW!

 

I'm talking about link cable features, yes.

 

It's better for the consumer to have glitchy, unstable games?

 

When I can get the entire Spyro trilogy for less than the cost of an N64 game or the Crash trilogy (plus the kart game) as part of my PS+ subscription and have them work with no problems then yes, it's better.

 

So far, I've seen one person complain about how games run (and that's in this thread), and is something I didn't encounter when I tried Silent Hill (which was another game in the PS+ subscription).

[Hero-of-Time]

I reckon, yeah.

Especially digital downloads of retail titles, they should definitely be cheaper than physical versions. I mean there's no packaging/media, we pretty much have to provide our own storage space for the download, you're losing the ability to sell the game in the future, Nintendo's safeguards for digital content aren't exactly great, etc...

 

I think if a game has an RRP of £40 it should be at least £30 in the eShop, not £50+ which has often been the case.

Nintendo's presence at retail is shot to shit at this point, so they shouldn't be concerned with undercutting retailers now.

 

You get the odd title on sale but nothing major. It's crazy the difference in sale prices of digital retail titles between the PS3 and the Wii U. Just look at how much you picked up Ni No Kuni for. Around £4.00 was it?

[Dcubed]

You get the odd title on sale but nothing major. It's crazy the difference in sale prices of digital retail titles between the PS3 and the Wii U. Just look at how much you picked up Ni No Kuni for. Around £4.00 was it?

 

Well to be fair, there have been similarly good deals on the eShop (ZombiU for £7.99 about a year after it released springs to mind - I think Tekken TT2 was about £12 at some point last year too and Asscreed 4 on Wii U is currently £10 - which I believe is the cheapest price you can get it for right now.)

 

The prices are set by the publisher, so the onus is on them The fact that there aren't nearly as many games on the Wii U as on the PS3 doesn't help though...

[Hero-of-Time]

Well to be fair, there have been similarly good deals on the eShop (ZombiU for £7.99 about a year after it released springs to mind - I think Tekken TT2 was about £12 at some point last year too and Asscreed 4 on Wii U is currently £10 - which I believe is the cheapest price you can get it for right now.)

 

The prices are set by the publisher, so the onus is on them The fact that there aren't nearly as many games on the Wii U as on the PS3 doesn't help though...

 

Yeah, I'm not point fingers at Nintendo just saying that the price drops between the two services are nuts. I mean £4.00 for a massive JRPG was a bargain. Especially as it was just over a year old. I think Demon Souls was that price as well.

 

Did anyone else pick up a bunch of games during this Smash sale then?

[Serebii]

The thing is, such large price reductions further what Iwata has been saying about devaluing the products. Look at the Steam Sales. Many people don't buy games initially and just wait for heavy discounts in the Steam Sale. It's not a good business practice.

 

Dropping a full retail game to £4 shows that there's a lack of faith in it and its sales. It's also typically being sold at a loss due to it. Sales for the sake of sales is not the best thing for the industry. Same argument I make against massive price cuts of Wii U or 3DS. It'd sell, sure, but it'd be more damaging.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Serebii

[S.C.G]

Did anyone else pick up a bunch of games during this Smash sale then?

 

I picked up all of the Mega Man games that I didn't have, on BOTH formats... in fairness some of them I hadn't played since the Wii VC days but I just figured well, now is the time so I probably won't ever have to buy them again now. : peace:

 

Oh and I picked up Super Punch Out!! as well, just because. :p

[RedShell]

they rely on these retailers to sell their hardware (as well as their future hardware too).

Problem is that if they do that, then retailers will cut all Nintendo support. As such, where would people buy the consoles?

Interesting points. I wasn't thinking about it from a hardware perspective to be honest. But seeing how bad the situation at retail has become, and looking at how the industry is changing (the shift towards digital) it gives me the impression that hardware could actually be the only thing being sold at retailers in the future.

Do you think Gen 9 hardware will even have the option to utilise physical media? I have my doubts.

 

Just look at how much you picked up Ni No Kuni for. Around £4.00 was it?

That's right, 4 quid. Absolutely insane.

 

Did anyone else pick up a bunch of games during this Smash sale then?

Nope.

Probably wont be getting anything on the next one either. Would have picked up Kirby Triple Deluxe, but apparently it's not eligible for a discount in a sale based on Kirby.

[Serebii]

Interesting points. I wasn't thinking about it from a hardware perspective to be honest. But seeing how bad the situation at retail has become, and looking at how the industry is changing (the shift towards digital) it gives me the impression that hardware could actually be the only thing being sold at retailers in the future.

Do you think Gen 9 hardware will even have the option to utilise physical media? I have my doubts.

 

Of course it will. Digital is not that popular, especially in the US where there are still slow speeds and bandwidth caps.

[Wii]

Did anyone else pick up a bunch of games during this Smash sale then?

 

No I've not bought anything. Might get Fire Emblem GBA and maybe a Megaman game. I haven't played it since the NES, loved it back then. I can't remember which ones I played. Which one should I get? I hear Megaman 2 is the best. Opinions please?

[Hero-of-Time]

The thing is, such large price reductions further what Iwata has been saying about devaluing the products. Look at the Steam Sales. Many people don't buy games initially and just wait for heavy discounts in the Steam Sale. It's not a good business practice.

 

Dropping a full retail game to £4 shows that there's a lack of faith in it and its sales. It's also typically being sold at a loss due to it. Sales for the sake of sales is not the best thing for the industry. Same argument I make against massive price cuts of Wii U or 3DS. It'd sell, sure, but it'd be more damaging.

 

I do agree that such sales can devalue games but at the same time a lot of the games that go on sale have probably seen their sales peak already. What a few people have said is probably true, better to sell a bunch at a cheaper price than sell just the one at a higher price. This method gets the product into more consumers hands ( again after the sales have dropped off a cliff ) and could potentially get more sales due to word of mouth.

 

To those who think the prices of VC games are too high, what would you say is a fair price for them? Do you think they should be priced by value, lets say Mario 3 is a higher price than something like Baseball or do you think a set price across the various platforms ( like it is now ) is the way to go?

 

No I've not bought anything. Might get Fire Emblem GBA and maybe a Megaman game. I haven't played it since the NES, loved it back then. I can't remember which ones I played. Which one should I get? I hear Megaman 2 is the best. Opinions please?

 

2 or 3 is regarded as the best. Personally I would go with 2.

[Serebii]

I do agree that such sales can devalue games but at the same time a lot of the games that go on sale have probably seen their sales peak already. What a few people have said is probably true, better to sell a bunch at a cheaper price than sell just the one at a higher price. This method gets the product into more consumers hands ( again after the sales have dropped off a cliff ) and could potentially get more sales due to word of mouth.

 

To those who think the prices of VC games are too high, what would you say is a fair price for them? Do you think they should be priced by value, lets say Mario 3 is a higher price than something like Baseball or do you think a set price across the various platforms ( like it is now ) is the way to go?

 

 

 

2 or 3 is regarded as the best. Personally I would go with 2.

Agreed, but that brings in the next point. Nintendo games are, for the most part, unlike the rest of the industry. They are not as frontloaded and continue to sell well even years after their initial release.

 

As such, a massive drop like that would do more harm than good.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Serebii