This is inspired by the Skyward Sword announcement and that infamous "Nintendo Policies" thread.
The one thing that doesn't make sense to me is the amount of complaints that people have made in regards to Skyward Sword being 60 dollars, as well as Nintendo games in general, not really going down in price until you see retailer sales and Selects (which has yet to be revealed for the Switch). Now having said that, I do agree that 60 dollars is too much for Skyward Sword, especially as I'm not even that motivated to play it given how slow I felt it was and the lack of improvements.
The difference is I can just choose to not buy the game and go on with my life. People who complain about the pricing come off as entitled to me, especially as the market dictates the perceived value of the game. So if people are going to spend 60 dollars on SS, then it justifies Nintendo's pricing. But if not enough people bought it, then that's when you would see retailers slash the prices since they are under pressure to make space for new products. The common argument I hear is that "Sony/MS games always are lower!!!" But the reality is that different businesses have different models for how they value their products.
I'm not saying that Nintendo's value means that you have to buy the game, because you have the freedom as a consumer to choose not to buy the game. However, complaining about it, isn't going to result in changed prices. If you want to make a statement then choose to not buy the game. Too often, gamers have no spine and choose to buy a game that they clearly aren't fans of and then choose to complain (see: Pokemon).
The one thing that doesn't make sense to me is the amount of complaints that people have made in regards to Skyward Sword being 60 dollars, as well as Nintendo games in general, not really going down in price until you see retailer sales and Selects (which has yet to be revealed for the Switch). Now having said that, I do agree that 60 dollars is too much for Skyward Sword, especially as I'm not even that motivated to play it given how slow I felt it was and the lack of improvements.
The difference is I can just choose to not buy the game and go on with my life. People who complain about the pricing come off as entitled to me, especially as the market dictates the perceived value of the game. So if people are going to spend 60 dollars on SS, then it justifies Nintendo's pricing. But if not enough people bought it, then that's when you would see retailers slash the prices since they are under pressure to make space for new products. The common argument I hear is that "Sony/MS games always are lower!!!" But the reality is that different businesses have different models for how they value their products.
I'm not saying that Nintendo's value means that you have to buy the game, because you have the freedom as a consumer to choose not to buy the game. However, complaining about it, isn't going to result in changed prices. If you want to make a statement then choose to not buy the game. Too often, gamers have no spine and choose to buy a game that they clearly aren't fans of and then choose to complain (see: Pokemon).
