Fair Prices to Virtual Console Downloads

[Kobayashi]

In my opinion, this would be the true fair price for downloads on VC:

NES and Master System and Commodore 64: US$ 2.00
TG-16 and Arcade: US$ 3.00
SNES and Genesis: US$ 4.00
N64 and Neo Geo: US$ 5.00

The current prices are very abusive


What´s yours ?

[LinkFanatic]

I agree with the price points being a little steep, but 10.00 for a high quality N64 game that can't be found anywhere else is a pretty good deal. A lot of the NES games should be around 3.00 with SNES around 5.00...maybe even go 8.00 on the N64

[slangman]

I always thought TG-16 VC prices were cheap. Have a look on Ebay and you can see the can cost far more. Espically for imports like Dracula X which can go up to £60-£100.

Also worth pointing out is that it can be worth paying a bit more for having all the games on one system and also having save-points, espically for NES games.

This is why I prefer the VC over actually buying the actual carts. Far less hassle.

[Jogurt the Yogurt]

I dunno, your prices seem a little idealistic. I think the prices are pretty decent considering Secret of Mana, Shining Force, and the Koei games on VC normally sell for $20+ in cart form. Ogre Battle was selling for $80+ before it appeared on VC. Even the DKC series were usually $20 apiece. The N64 Zelda games usually sold for $20-25. I'm happy to pay $8-10 for some of these.

[Betagam7]

I don't have a problem with the prices of any of the VC games with the exception of Megadrive releases in the PAL territory as

(a) I don't personally find the Megadrive games to be of similar quality to SNES games and

(b) unlike SNES games they havn't had the borders removed.

I know that other systems such as NEO GEO also have the PAL problem but they are so cheap in comparison to the originals that its hard to grumble too much although they are certainly a rip-off when priced against the various disk based compilations available.

I must be the only one who thinks C64 games are fairly priced. Sure they are the only game that sells for the same price as they did originally but I don't begrudge paying the price of a pint of beer for any game...maybe even Cybernoid!

[Afrancio]

I think Atari 2600 games would be a great fit for the 200 Wii point price range if Nintendo ever decided to add that system.

I for one would love to have Yar's Revenge, Haunted House, Seaquest, Enduro, and Pitfall on the VC.

Plus I have 200 Wii points left right now and it would be a great way to get rid of them.

[Nibbz]

i think the prices are pretty reasonable. I just think it's kind of stupid how the Sonic games are $8 on VC but $5 on XBLA. Those are the only Genesis games I like though so idrc about the prices for that console... except when Castlevania Bloodlines comes out.

I think the NES is priced quite fairly, the SNES I also think is fair. If anything I think some of the WiiWare titles are overpriced. I mean $10 for Castlevania The Adventure and Mega Man 9 and Mega Man 10 is kind of steep.

[Kobayashi]

The price comparison with real cartridges doesn´t work, because cartridges comes with manual and cover and it´s a durable physical good that can survive independent of the console. Same thought for games in CD, DVD or Blu-ray.

Compare the prices with PSone Classics (PSN Network) and Xbox Live Arcade. For example, Ikaruga (a game originally for Game Cube and Dreamcast and Naomi board) cost just US$ 8.00 on Xbox Live Arcade (the exact same price of the SNES or Genesis titles on VC).

I like the Virtual Console a lot, but I think the prices very high for old platforms.

[Jogurt the Yogurt]

I see where you're coming from about price comparisons, but, straight comparisons don't tell the whole story if we're talking about how fair a price scheme is. I routinely get brand new PS3 games for $20 (true story), but that doesn't mean that's the only fair price for new PS3 games or that $50 is an absurd price in general.

Originally Posted by Kobayashi

The price comparison with cartridges doesn´t work, because cartridges come with manual and cover and it´s a durable physical good that can survive independent of the console.

The prices I gave are actually for beat-up used cart-only copies. Used SNES carts survive as long as the original SNES console survives (they can't be played on a Wii, for example). The price comparison with cartridges does indeed work. Here's one very important way: it's generally a far, far better deal to pay $8 for a game than it is to pay $100, $50, or even $20. That's fair value.

Don't get me wrong, $8 is also a great deal compared to whatever a disc copy of Ikaruga would normally cost, but it's actually less useful to compare prices for games on different virtual systems across consoles if we're speaking in terms of a generalized fair price ideal (like we are in this thread). If you can get an arcade game for X360 for $8, that doesn't reduce the straight value or the fairness of the price of an N64 game on a completely different piece of hardware.

In terms of straight value, someone's not going to say "I'm a huge Zelda fan. I want to play Zelda. What's the most cost-efficient way for me to play Zelda? Zelda is $10 on VC. Ikaruga is $8 on XBLA. Ikaruga is the best way for me to play Zelda." They're going to say "I'm a huge Zelda fan. I want to play Zelda. What's the most cost-efficient way for me to play Zelda? Zelda is $10 on VC. Zelda is $25 for a durable cart without a manual or box that I can play on the dusty system in my closet. Fair price for the VC version, cheaper games on other systems be damned!"

Sure, it would be fantastic to get games really really cheap! That would be great! But our desire for cheap entertainment doesn't exactly mean the prices we're currently being charged are absurd.

Actually, when I think about it, I'm pretty damn happy we're not charged different prices for VC games depending on what they're worth / what they fetch in the used market.

[RetroNL]

> Nintendo isnt the only one who earns money out of this. Also dont forget that you buy a 'new' game from a store because it doesnt come from a consumer as 2nd user.
This means that the product you buy (even if it is virtual) is new.

[Kobayashi]

Originally Posted by Jogurt the Yogurt

The prices I gave are actually for beat-up used cart-only copies. Used SNES carts survive as long as the original SNES console survives (they can't be played on a Wii, for example). The price comparison with cartridges does indeed work. Here's one very important way: it's generally a far, far better deal to pay $8 for a game than it is to pay $100, $50, or even $20. That's fair value.

You forgot one thing: if you Wii brake, you´ll lose every single game that you download for Wii. The risk of the investment loss is huge, still more if you have many downloads.

With cartridges this problems doesn´t happen, once they´re physical media, then cartridges has a much larger value joined than a simple software download.

[RetroNL]

Originally Posted by Kobayashi

You forgot one thing: if you Wii brake, you´ll lose every single game that you download for Wii. The risk of the investment loss is huge, still more if you have many downloads.

With cartridges this problems doesn´t happen, once they´re physical media, then cartridges has a much larger value joined than a simple software download.

For the hardcore gamer its no prob. but most casual gamers which are mostly the basic consumers, dont want those old devices on their tv's. Also are they not too aware of the things we talk about here (Like the loss of all this precious data). They just want all the media on (if its old or new) on their 'new' device, without too many things lying around in the house.
(Though I can fully understand your concern).

[Kobayashi]

Originally Posted by RetroNL

For the hardcore gamer its no prob. but most casual gamers which are mostly the basic consumers, dont want those old devices on their tv's. Also are they not too aware of the things we talk about here. They just want all the media on (if its old or new) on their 'new' device, without too many things lying around in the house.
(Though I can fully understand your concern).

For the current technological patterns, the Wii is a very obsolete machine, because isn´t a HD console.

In the end of the bills, plug a Wii or a SNES with RCA cable on a TV doesn´t make much difference.

[RetroNL]

Originally Posted by Kobayashi

For the current technological patterns, the Wii is a very obsolete machine, because isn´t a HD console.

In the end of the bills, plug a Wii or a SNES with RCA cable on a TV doesn´t make much difference.

Yes we know that, still many basic consumers dont know that and just go for the Wii because its the newest console in the shops from Nintendo.

[Kobayashi]

We have to think also in the people that prefer to play this games free (ROMS) in emulators of PC with filters that improve the image for they consider the price that Nintendo collects for the service very loud.

It´s not my case: my morals doesn't allow me that, but sadly I know many people that proceed like this on my country.

[Tull]

US should pay more:

10 $ = 7.37 €
10 € = 13.56$

[RetroNL]

Originally Posted by Kobayashi

We have to think also in the people that prefer to play this games free (ROMS) in emulators of PC with filters that improve the image for they consider the price that Nintendo collects for the service very loud.

It´s not my case: my morals doesn't allow me that, but sadly I know many people that proceed like this on my country.

Yes, this may be. But this is not the genuine way of playing these games. Also many homes with decent money and your 1.2 children wont suffer from buying an old Mario Bros. game for 5 bucks virtually.
+ for the people who want to buy more games than like 5 - 10 is their case, you are still buying a new legal copy even if it is virtual.
(And yes I also think its a bit too expensive on the long road, but I also look at the facts)

[Kobayashi]

The fact is that Xbox Live Arcade and PSN services has a much better cost vs benefit relation than your fellow in the Virtual Console, without speaking that several of yours games (like Street Fighter II) has option of Multiplayer Online, thing that sadly doesn´t exist in the Virtual Console service. They cost less, offer better image (HD) and also has more options.

[Tull]

Originally Posted by Kobayashi

(like Street Fighter II)

Yay for lagged framebased game.
Hopefully Google fiber hits everyone tomorrow.

[Kobayashi]

Originally Posted by Tull

Yay for lagged framebased game.

Lag is better than nothing.

[digiki]

The prices are fair, although the other consoles do indeed provide much better deals on their content.

[Tull]

Originally Posted by Kobayashi

Lag is better than nothing.

If a broken feature is a turn on then yes : - )

[Jogurt the Yogurt]

Originally Posted by digiki

The prices are fair, although the other consoles do indeed provide much better deals on their content.

This exactly.

[Jogurt the Yogurt]

Originally Posted by Kobayashi

You forgot one thing: if you Wii brake, you´ll lose every single game that you download for Wii. The risk of the investment loss is huge, still more if you have many downloads.

Originally Posted by Kobayashi

The fact is that Xbox Live Arcade and PSN services has a much better cost vs benefit relation than your fellow in the Virtual Console, without speaking that several of yours games (like Street Fighter II) has option of Multiplayer Online, thing that sadly doesn´t exist in the Virtual Console service. They cost less, offer better image (HD) and also has more options.

And you forgot to read my post, apparently. The relative durability of carts and VC downloads and the prices and features of games on other systems don't impact the fairness of the price in a general way (cost for play).

If you have a Wii and another system and the game is available on both systems, and it's cheaper on one than the other, then by all means, get the cheaper one, get the better deal. But that's a very specific context. The price structure of a multibillion-dollar transnational corporation's big market isn't going to be dictated by extremely specific comparisons.

[Kobayashi]

Originally Posted by Jogurt the Yogurt

The price structure of a multibillion-dollar transnational corporation's big market isn't going to be dictated by extremely specific comparisons.

Ok. This is your opinion.

For me, the prices are expensive and unfair.

Nintendo is a multibillion-dollar corporation, yes and one of the reasons for that is the overpriced of your products.

[Sharecrow]

Originally Posted by Kobayashi

Ok. This is your opinion.

For me, the prices are expensive and unfair.

Nintendo is a multibillion-dollar corporation, yes and one of the reasons for that is the overpriced of your products.

I'm going to have to side with JoYo on this one. Prices are usually going to be based on what's best for the overall profitability of a company. It's only worth what a consumer is willing to pay. Their objective isn't (and shouldn't be) to entice every consumer. They have to get enough to keep the company healthy and to continue providing goods and services.

For games that seem too high, get them more cheaply on compilations or original carts if you can (or wait five years and there may be a cheaper legal download option). Or pass on it altogether. I think there are lots of games that are worth their Wii points but I'm a bit of a gluttonous downloader at times. What can I say? I like old games and I like the convenience of having them in one spot. That makes it worth the points to me usually...

[Jogurt the Yogurt]

Originally Posted by Kobayashi

Ok. This is your opinion.

That's right, one for which I've provided ample rational support. If I can get a game for $8 instead of $80, I'm not going to complain that I should get it for $6 instead.

I think you may simply need to define what you mean by "fair" a little bit more clearly if you want your opinion to stand up as well as mine. In the interests of sustained discussion (so the thread doesn't devolve into pages of "I think games should be cheap!").

Originally Posted by Kobayashi

Nintendo is a multibillion-dollar corporation, yes and one of the reasons for that is the overpriced of your products

1. I don't work for Nintendo.

2. I'm not sure what you mean by this, since Nintendo published games are generally as expensive as or less expensive than new PS3 and X360 games, the Wii is less expensive than the other consoles, and the DS is less expensive than the PSP. So either "overpriced" is the wrong word (objectively, not an opinion, since it has to be overpriced within a context, i.e. in comparison with some standard) and you meant something else, or else your point doesn't make sense.

3. Share already touched on this, but I hope you wouldn't try to imply that Nintendo's prices should arbitrarily be low simply because they have a lot of money.

4. The reason for Nintendo's success isn't because they jack up prices. The reason for their success is because lots of people buy their products.

[Kobayashi]

Originally Posted by Jogurt the Yogurt

I think you may simply need to define what you mean by "fair" a little bit more clearly if you want your opinion to stand up as well as mine.

First post. Check my list.

Where is your list of the prices that you consider fair ? (Forget Nintendo´s ambitions)

the Wii is less expensive than the other consoles, and the DS is less expensive than the PSP. So either "overpriced" is the wrong word (objectively, not an opinion, since it has to be overpriced within a context, i.e. in comparison with some standard) and you meant something else, or else your point doesn't make sense.

And I think Wii (a Game Cube 1.5) overpriced yes. I think that US$ 99.00 is the just price, above this is overpriced.

[Sharecrow]

Originally Posted by Kobayashi

First post. Check my list.

Where is your list of the prices that you consider fair ? (Forgot Nintendo´s ambitions)

Fairness is a qualitative term and varies from person to person (from consumer to consumer) for each game out there. For those who think a game they want has a fair price, they buy it. If they don't, they won't. You can't define it that rigidly. I'd pay 1,500 points for Dragon Warrior 2....maybe even more. And 2,000 for Warsong. But I wouldn't take a Street Fighter game for 100 (none of them).

[Jogurt the Yogurt]

Originally Posted by Kobayashi

First post. Check my list.

That is just an arbitrary list of prices. I think you may need to define what you mean by "fair" a little bit more clearly.

Originally Posted by Kobayashi

And I think Wii (A Game Cube 1.5) overpriced yes. I think that US$ 99.00 is the just price, above this is overpriced.

But pretty much every Nintendo product including the Wii is either the price as or cheaper than comparable products from its competitors, and thus objectively not overpriced. You've provided no alternative context or framework within which its products could be considered overpriced, other than an arbitrary number that appears to be based on nothing more than personal whim. Again, you need to define exactly what you mean by "just" in order to come out and claim that one price is just and another is not.

Originally Posted by Kobayashi

Where is your list of the prices that you consider fair?

A list of arbitrary numbers with no rationale serves no real purpose, so I won't post one. I will post a list of what I consider to be fair prices, though:

NES: $10 or less (cheaper than the original carts on the used market, but also taking into account the added convenience of playing on the Wii and the abundance of defects in original NES hardware).

SNES: $15 or less depending on the game (cheaper than the original carts on the used market, in some cases extremely cheaper).

Genesis: $12 or less depending on the game (cheaper than the original carts on the used market, slightly lower than the SNES carts due to lower demand and the fact that Genesis carts often are cheaper than SNES ones on the used market).

TG16: Probably about the same as they are right now. Normally they'd probably be worth more, but low demand among Wii users pushes the price down regardless of quality.

N64: $15 or less depending on the game (cheaper than the original carts on the used market, adjusted downward for lower popularity than SNES carts, because there's no good controller option on the Wii, and because of some emulation problems with peripherals and rumble).

I'll also define what I mean by "fair" so these numbers make sense. I think a "fair" price is one that allows gamers to purchase and experience a game on the Virtual Console at a smaller expense than through alternative methods of purchasing and experiencing that game. Thus, a fair price should generally be less than the average price of the game on the used market. It shouldn't just be a few bucks cheaper, though, because there's no rarity/appreciation that would be associated with a vintage used game, so the overall price should be adjusted downwards for this ease of location and distribution. Finally, I think think that if Nintendo wants to charge a uniform price for games on the same platform (which they're basically doing right now with a couple of rare exceptions), then the price for games across that platform should be low enough that the common/crappy games aren't ridiculously expensive compared to what they'd normally cost to play via other means, but not so low that rare/excellent games sell for a pittance or that Nintendo is in danger of making little to no profit for a particular game relative to its effort in publishing and hosting it.

Also important to note: the prices I consider "fair" are not the same as the prices I'd like to pay for each of these categories of games.

[Kobayashi]

Originally Posted by Sharecrow

Fairness is a qualitative term and varies from person to person (from consumer to consumer) for each game out there. For those who think a game they want has a fair price, they buy it. If they don't, they won't. You can't define it that rigidly. I'd pay 1,500 points for Dragon Warrior 2....maybe even more. And 2,000 for Warsong. But I wouldn't take a Street Fighter game for 100 (none of them).

Well, the downloads for Virtual Console are divided by fixed prices for each platform. In that case, doesn´t matter if a game like Earthbound should be worth more or less that any other SNES title, because the price for this class of service is unique.

For Nintendo, US$ 8.00 is a fair price for a SNES game download. I don´t agree. For you the fair price maybe be US$ 80.00 (I don´t know), then I ask about this in the beginning of this thread... and what´s your list ?

[SKTTR]

When it's asking you 1000, 800 and 500 points for the good and best games for each system, it's not overpriced.

1000 pts for Paper Mario (N64)? Worthy!
800 pts for A Link to the Past (SNES)? Worthy!
500 pts for Kirby's Adventure (NES)? Worthy!

The thing is, bad games from each system cost the same as the good ones.

800 pts for Super Thunder Blade (MD)? Unworthy!
500 pts for Baseball (NES)? Unworthy!

It's up to the consumer which games are worth the price tag.

Select your games with care (don't buy crap) and it won't seem overpriced anymore.

There's definately good value to find on the VC, even when compared to everything else out there.

[Kobayashi]

Originally Posted by Jogurt the Yogurt

That is just an arbitrary list of prices. I think you may need to define what you mean by "fair" a little bit more clearly.

I´ll try to expose what I think about this question using the NES library as example:

For me, a senior console like NES, with games relatively simple and largely known should cost much less that a actual game (much more sophisticated and unpublished).. I think US$ 5.00 is expensive for a very old game of the a very old console.

A good, even a software on general is depreciated in the course of time, as larger the passage of time then larger the depreciation. In my personal opinion, US$ 2.00 is the fair price for a NES game and it´s what I wold collect if I commanded Nintendo.

[brooks83]

This is why I compare prices between the VC and the used game market. If I can get it cheaper on the VC, I'll go with the VC version. If I can buy the actual game cheaper, then I'll get the actual game.

[wii-c-kid]

The biggest foreseeable potential threat to the VC is Microsoft and its new VC like arcade which is effectively offering any game at $3. Whether or not the idea sticks is questionable. I can see the price rising for certain games but in a sense that's a good thing. The VC - despite it's inherent quality - is heavily price fixed and that doesn't appeal to the casual purchaser, particularly with a secondary competitive service like Wiiware offering similarly priced content (not to mention DSiWare)

If Nintendo continue to use the fixed pricing scheme (particularly the base price of 500 points) they may well out-price the VC and Wiiware services out of the market when competing with both M$ and Apple who offer similar products at lower costs. As it stands, downloadable content is still largely a novelty and is far from being a proven means of large-scale income for Nintendo, Microsoft or Sony (Apple is a different matter) As such, it shouldn't be treated with any sort of high-end fixed pricing scheme and Nintendo certainly shouldn't be cutting the balls off of one service (Virtual ... cough ... Console) to give another a chance to thrive.

I understand why the DS gets lower priced games than the Wii (it is after all a portable that competes with Apple's mobile devices amongst others) but there's not reason why new Wiiware and VC prices can't drop. Nintendo have encouraged gamers to buy their portables and provide a DL service for that too, lessening still what's available in people's pockets. When there's potentially three different competing services targeting one person's pocket that's essentially two too many for many people.

it's a difficult problem to solve, but fleecing customers isn't going to help when they can see that competitors are offering considerably better deals financially. Personally I don't give a rats ass about the online or achievement benefits of XBLA but in an financially restricted economy, money is king and people will look anywhere to save pennies. Oh, and using the VC's save state feature as a reason to prefer the service is outright rediculous - not only does it lessen the value of some games by making them shorter but it also isn't persistent across the VC platforms.

[Yossarian]

Having a fixed price makes sense up to a point but I'd like to some more sales or multi-buy discounts. Sega managed a sale at Christmas and 500 points (£3.50)for a MD/Gen was a great price especially considering how much I spent on a secondhand copy of those games on eBay.

The VC as it is lacks flexibility and that is off putting. With the recent release of Sonic and Knuckles it would have been great if they had an offer to get Sonic 2 and 3 at the same time for a reduced price.

A sale on WiiWare would also be highly welcome and help encourage people to download some great titles that they may have dismissed as being too expensive. World of Goo and FFMLAAK are great but they have been out for moons so the price could drop to 1000 points.

[RetroNL]

If you (Kobayashi) stick to the terms that Nintendo isnt worth the money because its just a little better than the Cube in tech your are very wrong. All consoles on the day of today are too expensive when you look at hardware even the PS 3 would be a very outdated expensive PC.

Still you cant compare the exclusitivity of a console with hardware terms in general, you buy for instance a Nintendo mainly because you like the exclusive games that are released on it.
I dont mind that the console isnt full HD or something in that matter, I still like the games on the day of today.

I also like many older games that where released on older systems which still look good and play great in my perspective that are still worth their money (even without the extra graphics boost). What I do mind a bit is that its not possible to play these old retro games online with friends.
Still Im not going to buy a 360 or PS3 just for this feature.

[Betagam7]

I think that when people are saying that some games should be $2 they are missing the point that often those profits have to be split several ways, through Nintendo, the publisher and any other rights holders. It simply wouldn't be profitable or a worthwhile excercise to sell games so cheaply.

C64 game sales are probably only in the hundreds for the less popular titles so selling them at $2 wouldn't be worth the hassle of putting them up in the first place...in fact even at the current price it may have proved a waste of time, hence no new games in over a year. I think the C64 is probably the bottom rung of technology that people would be prepared to pay reasonable money for.

[Jogurt the Yogurt]

Originally Posted by wii-c-kid

The VC - despite it's inherent quality - is heavily price fixed and that doesn't appeal to the casual purchaser, particularly with a secondary competitive service like Wiiware offering similarly priced content (not to mention DSiWare)

Are there people out there who think that WiiWare is "competing" with the VC? I don't get that. That's like saying PSN's PSOne Classics are competing with PSN's new PSN content, or like saying that VC SNES games are competing with VC Genesis games. They're different products (variety) offered through the same service.

Do you mean they're "competing" strictly from the consumer-level perspective that one product gets favoured with a release at the expense of another?

Originally Posted by wii-c-kid

they may well out-price the VC and Wiiware services out of the market when competing with both M$ and Apple who offer similar products at lower costs.

Again, I'm not sure I understand this point. M$ and Apple offer similar products, sure, but not the same products. If I want to listen to lossless Beatles tunes, I'm not going to say "Wait a minute, there are cheaper Oasis songs on iTunes! I'll just listen to those instead!" Some people might! But Beatles CDs aren't going to disappear from store shelves. There will always be a market of people who want to play old Nintendo games, and the VC targets that market (WiiWare games tend to be priced the same as their PSN/XBLA counterparts).

[Kobayashi]

Originally Posted by Betagam7

I think that when people are saying that some games should be $2 they are missing the point that often those profits have to be split several ways, through Nintendo, the publisher and any other rights holders. It simply wouldn't be profitable or a worthwhile excercise to sell games so cheaply.

Then, why Sonic 2 (with filters that improve the image) cost scoundrel US$ 4.00 (400 microsoft points) on Xbox Live Arcade while the same game (but without filters) costs the double in VC ?

Even the profit being divided between Sega and Microsoft I think that is a very lucrative business due to great volume of downloads.

Same logic for the amazing R-Type Delta on PSN Network (costs just 5.99 with divided profit between Sony and Irem).

Sorry, man, but your argument doesn´t justify the abusive prices collected in Virtual Console service.

Originally Posted by RetroNL

If you (Kobayashi) stick to the terms that Nintendo isnt worth the money because its just a little better than the Cube in tech your are very wrong. All consoles on the day of today are too expensive when you look at hardware even the PS 3 would be a very outdated expensive PC.

Just analyzing of the a technological point of view (and prices) is much more deal to buy a Xbox 360 Arcade Version (without HD) than a Wii. Same price for both (US$ 199.00), but Xbox 360 has a very superior hardware and has HD image.