Came to say this. All of the Resident Evil games are $30 a piece minus Revelations.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Get a trilogy on other platforms, get a single game for the same price on a Nintendo platform: Why?
- Thread starter fireflame
- Start date
Came to say this. All of the Resident Evil games are $30 a piece minus Revelations.
Lmao that's true. EA could make a killing off Switch owners if they bothered to port over older titles
The point is some people just take the concept of 'switch tax' way too absurdly.
And yes, Capcom is guilty of so many things like this on the Switch too, it's goddamn annoying.
Except one was designed for gaming at home and on the go. The other isn't and it shows, seeing as you'd need additional accessories for a laptop and, even then, they're not as convenient as simply docking and undocking a Switch. The vast majority of folk buying a laptop aren't using it for gaming, whereas everyone buying a Switch is using it to play games. It's absolutely not comparable. Only the GPD Win does something similar but it's too pricey and niche to really be something most would go for for dedicated portable gamingAbsolutely. Both are portable, dockable gaming machines that can also be connected to a wireless controller. Both can be played on a couch/bus/train/etc. It was a strong comparison in 2017 and it still is today. I also mentioned Surface there, which when combined with an Ipega controller it's even the same form factor as Switch. PC is better in every way except hardware cost. Each has great exclusives.
I had completely forgotten that Capcom is expecting more profit than last FY despite having fewer new releases this FY (correct me if I'm wrong). That's probably the reason for the price hike. Let's see if it'll work.
I do agree that PC also has great exclusives and games better played on it and you have a greater backlog. However, I do disagree that a device like the GPD Win 2 or Surface is an end all replacement for the Switch. For one thing, the GPD Win 2 is not that much more graphically powerful than a Switch and there are cases where it (and the lower-end Surface Pro) devices actually perform worse in certain games due to lack of optimization for that hardware. With specific regards to Surface Pro, they (like most other ultrabooks) have a tendency to throttle and that can have a measurable impact on the performance of a game overtime (sometimes even within a few minutes of playing, depending on the game). As you mentioned that cost is a significant barrier to both the Win 2 and Surface Pro (although even with the iPega controllers I would still say a 12" Surface Pro is still not ideal when it comes to portability compared to Switch, which in itself is also fairly large), but I would say that goes beyond cost of entry but also cost of replacement, considering dropping a Switch would cost around $300 whereas a Surface Pro and GPD Win 2 are far more expensive.
Where the fuck is my Dark Souls trilogy on Switch, Miyazaki??
I'm sure DS:R sold really well on Switch (and probably much better than on XBone)
I'm sure DS:R sold really well on Switch (and probably much better than on XBone)
The Pro is too large for that iPega controller. The Surface go is what fits inside of it and it can't even play RE4 at good framerates. Also, the pega controller is not very good.
I would say Capcom is testing the waters to see how high people are willing to pay for ports. If this ends up doing well we can expect more DmC stuff at similar prices. If it fails then Capcom might lower the price on subsequent releases or, unfortunately, (much like EA) say the game not selling is indicative that there is no audience for it and just pull support.
Last edited:
Still waiting for proper sales on Doom, Diablo, and Skyrim.
Not gonna pay $60 to experience those games when they're regularly $20 or less on other platforms.
User Warned: Platform Warring
Would call them nitpicky instead honestly. Most complaining and whining happens by nintendo fans compared to other fanbases.
3DS AAT did launch higher but the MSRP was lowered to $19.99 years ago. PS360 remasters ported again to PS4One didn't have their prices raised (RE4, Okami HD, DMC Collection, etc) but this one did.
And again, Onimusha is overpriced on all platforms. People aren't paying enough attention here, the price creep is really happening for new releases in general.
They (and by "they" I mean Bamco & Virtuos) will do individual releases. DS2 on Switch later this FY or early next but DS3 might wait for the Switch+ or Switch2.
Doom and Skyrim have been half off as recently as last week IIRC. Not quite to $20 but still a fairly substantial discount.
Yeah, I'm aware of those eShop sales, but if a game is available on a cartridge, I'd much rather purchase it physically.
Is there a source for this? The Switch port of Dark Souls was 5 months later than the PS4/XOne. It's highly, highly doubtful it sold "really" well.
i have no source on hand, but i believe i remember reading it sold bets on Switch but sold poorly across the board.
Actually i think the remaster didnt do well on any platform. I wonder why tho
That theory about the two having a feud seems like it may be on to something. Still, why would Resident Evil get this huge ass section in the E3 Direct to advertise already released ports and announce some more ports of the companies are mad at each other?
I think they just saw that Nintendo has been pricing their old games for the same price or HIGHER than they used to sell (hello, Tropical Freeze for $60) and still selling like CRAZY. They probably wanted to see what they could get away with starting with the Resi ports and now this.
Makes me wonder how the RE ports at $30 sold though if DMC is at $20 now.
I think they just saw that Nintendo has been pricing their old games for the same price or HIGHER than they used to sell (hello, Tropical Freeze for $60) and still selling like CRAZY. They probably wanted to see what they could get away with starting with the Resi ports and now this.
Makes me wonder how the RE ports at $30 sold though if DMC is at $20 now.
Which would be fine if the ports were really good...but not even that, lol
It is nothing like that at all.
To answer OP's question: Capcom is just greedy. Their $40 SFII port sold well and they've been overcharging for Switch ports ever since.
Not really, their RE Revelations, Okami and Dragon's Dogma ports were all priced in line with those releases on other platforms. They only recently started overcharging with the RE0, 1 and 4 ports and now DMC.
I'm sure it probably had to with the it being delayed, changes to the lighting system and generally being a pretty poor attempt at a remaster.
I'm thinking that this probably has to do with the perception of low availability of games on Nintendo consoles. And the fact that Nintendo platforms house Nintendo games (which tend to lose value very slowly). Publishers don't feel like they have to price competitively.
Also, I'm thinking that it is impossible to greenlight these ports without unrealistic pricing / sales projections (which probably makes matters worse).
Also, I'm thinking that it is impossible to greenlight these ports without unrealistic pricing / sales projections (which probably makes matters worse).
Extra processing power makes ports easier, and any ports always require some work. For ME3 on Wii U and DMC on Switch, putting that single game on those platforms already requires work. Putting three whole games on a platform that doesn't offer a notable processing power advantage isn't the easy job that some people think it is. It also increases the risk for the whole release. Which is more likely to sell, a single port at $20 or a collection of ports at $60, for games already available on other platforms? Blaming Capcom or others for being "bad publishers" in this situation isn't sensible at all.
These are PS2 games we're talking about here. Not high-end PS4 games. Expecting a complete trilogy at the same launch price as the other systems is far from unreasonable, especially when Capcom's previous ports were reasonably priced and even came with some extra features. What is more likely to sell is a $30 collection like how it launched elsewhere as opposed to an overpriced literally just ripped straight from the collection port at $20
At some point hopefully Capcom will start to invest 2-3 more cents in Switch games maybe, until then you can ignore them.
Last edited:
Because they are hoping they can gouge Switch owners who see the portability of previously console only games as a big enough benefit or novelty.
Mega Man, Mega Man X, Ace Attorney - theres 3 examples alone of just Capcom doing collection on Switch same as they did on other platforms. What they're doing with DMC is dumb but I see it as a move many publishers are gonna be making. Its almost certainly more profitable ta sell games seperately than in collection form. We've already seen "remaster collections" go up in price and drop in content compared to last generation (and the one before that where, while not remasters, many games got bundled together re-releases late in the game).
While not speaking of remasters but of cross-gen titles, I still see PS3/360 versions of games going for $10 less than PS4/Xbone versions even though they're the same darn games. So theres certainly been upselling going on across most platforms.
Except every publisher, including Nintendo, engage in this practice on the Switch.
Even digital distro indie games follow the trend.
The real reason is simply because consumers continue to pay it.
Nintendo sets the tone as they almost never discount their software significantly, unlike Sony or MS. That removes a market driver that forces 3rd parties to price competitively.
Nintendo also isn't particularly interested in pushing 3rd parties or digital distro titles into having the kinds of store promoting sales that Microsoft and Sony are known for.
Add that there is no PS+/GwG or Game Pass analog on the platform and you have even less pressure to price aggressively.
Think of it like this: if you were a third party publisher and you could either A. sell a port to 100,000 people at $60 per unit or 200,000 people at $30 per unit you'd, wisely, choose the former as the distribution costs, whether physical or digital, go away and you reap a higher profit margin. Now add in the fact that to sell twice as many units as the $60 version a years old port on Switch likely needs to be priced far closer to at parity with PC/XBO/PS4 where its probably selling for $15 to $20. So pay twice the distro cost for 1/3rd the per unit sales? Not going to happen.
I just wish post-release there was a more aggressive price "catch up" strategy, especially on indie games. That is where I think consumers are being hurt while profitable sales are being lost. People willing to pay full MSRP will do so in the first month 90% or better of the time. Better to rapidly catch up to cross platform pricing norms after that initial window while there is still positive word of mouth and buzz going on than slowly bringing the price down but not until the positive sentiment for a Switch release has completely dissipated.
While this is just Capcom being shitty, the Nintendo tax is real.
I was gonna pick up Puyo Puyo Tetris on Switch but it's $30. The PS4 version is $20 despite coming out like two years later.
I was gonna pick up Puyo Puyo Tetris on Switch but it's $30. The PS4 version is $20 despite coming out like two years later.
Why are certain mobile games cheaper on Android than iOS or have cheaper in-app purchases on Android than iOS?
Because iOS users are conditioned to spend more and therefore developers charge more on the platform.
The Switch basically offers the iOS of gaming- a premium unique experience (hybrid) at a premium price.
Because iOS users are conditioned to spend more and therefore developers charge more on the platform.
The Switch basically offers the iOS of gaming- a premium unique experience (hybrid) at a premium price.
That's right, it started more recently. I forgot about those (although Revelations was still... iffy).
I was singing out Capcom because of the examples in the OP. There's a variety of factors involved, including keeping retailers happy but there's no excuse with digital-only releases. I won't pay extra for a game being sold considerably cheaper elsewhere, so I wait for sales. But seeing as the trend isn't dying, there must be plenty of people paying full price anyway.
You can't just flip a "switch" and make a PS2 game run in HD on a completely different system. These things take actual work, and none of the process is free. But having more processing power to work with makes it easier.
That's the process that would be involved on any system, regardless of power, and, in the case of DMC, it's not some high end game that needs absurd amounts of power to make the process easier, especially when the Switch is ridiculously strong compared to the PS2. This has nothing to do with the cost of porting the game, as I'm not sure why it'd be cheap and effortless to bring to the PS4/XB1 but difficult and expensive to bring to the Switch, not that that impacted the prices of ports on other systems anyways, and more to do with Capcom gouging Switch owners, same with the recent Resident Evil ports and USFII. I mean, why not make Okami, Onimusha, or Mega Man 11 more expensive on the Switch as well, while we're at it?
Last edited:
DMC1 to Switch isn't a taxing port. That doesn't explain the 100% equivalent price hike.
Its a business and people will buy it. I dont know why people expect newly released ports at the time like Doom, Skyrim, Diablo and soon to be Witcher 3 to release at discounted prices though. You think year long porting processes are free?
