Pachter: Nintendo should charge $60 for Wii U games

Analyst Michael Pachter believes Nintendo should charge $60 for Wii U games, otherwise the console will appear to consumers as of "lower quality".

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
zeal0us2297d ago

If they charge lower than $60 you won't see me complaining.

Yi-Long2297d ago (Edited 2296d ago )

... gamers already see it as LOWER-QUALITY, considering it's not that much more powerful than current-gen and it's line-up of 3rd party is mostly ports of older games that are already out on 360/PS3.

It's much better for Nintendo to just offer VALUE FOR MONEY.

You want to sell your games at 60 bucks, and almost no-one picking up the console and games because of that greed!?

Or do you want to sell your games at 30 bucks, and see many people jump on it cause they'll now be able to play great games for a decent reasonable price, thus the end-result being MUCH more sales!?

It's a bit like the Rayman Origins discussion all over again: It's not about the actual quality of the product, which might be great, but it's about the perception of that product by the crowd!

Rayman Origins was a great game, probably worth a full-price release, but because people don't asociate 2D platformers with full priced retail releases anymore (unless it's Mario or Donkey Kong), they refused to pay 60 bucks for it.

If Ubisoft had been a bit less greedy and would have just released it at 15 bucks on XBLA/PSN, they would have sold AT LEAST 10 times as many copies in the first month, and it would have remained a must-have downloadable classic for years after that!

Nintendo can hope it can get away with selling another gimmick-based console and games at premium prices, or they can just make sure it's an appealing purchase for everyone, even those who don't see this as truly next-gen.

Puddlejumper752296d ago

Yi-Long + 28m ago
... Fanboys already see it as LOWER-QUALITY, considering it's not that much more powerful than current-gen and it's line-up of 3rd party is mostly ports of older games that are already out on 360/PS3.

Fixed that for you. Only fanboys are jumping to conclusions after all. Real gamers are waiting on REAL information before making a decision.

Every retail PS3/360 game is 60.00 so how exactly is Nintendo wrong for doing the same? Just seems like fanboy logic to me. Its okay for my company to do it but not the one I dont support. blah blah blah.

I'm Sure lots of PS3 games would sell 10million if they were only sold for 10 but that isnt going to happen and to act like it should shows a serious lack of understanding.

Of course its all just so you can hate. I'll never understand why some people want everyone to think they are complete morons in order to hate on something they will never support.

I'm sure when the PS4 launches with its tons of ports it wont be an issue for you. After all this happens every generation.

You talk about how Nintendo should do this or that and your example is a 3rd party game they have nothing to do with. Just sad. Keep trolling though.

Hisiru2296d ago (Edited 2296d ago )

"and it's line-up of 3rd party is mostly ports of older games that are already out on 360/PS3."

I don't know why people keep complaining about it when PS3 and x360 also had tons of PS2/xbox1/GC ports (like Call of Duty, Tony Hawk, Need for Speed and some other very old games). Basically, the WiiU is doing exactly what the x360/PS3 did at launch, but better, ports are actually some of the best games in this generation (Arkham City is by far a top 3 in my opinion, ME3 is one of the best series this gen) and some ports are the definitive version (just look at Ninja Gaiden 3).

Also, it's important to understand that we don't know the final list. Nintendo already confirmed they have secret features and launch games they will announce in the next conference (september), so it's still early to judge, but so far it looks pretty good. I think the problem is that Nintendo's E3 2012 was VERY bad (probably one of the worst E3 ever), but the lineup is good.

WiiU will even have more exclusives at launch than PS3. In comparison, the only good exclusive game on PS3 at launch was Resistance. As for exclusives WiiU will have:
-Pikmin 3
-New Super Mario Bros U
-Rayman Legends
-Scribblenauts Unlimited
-LEGO City: Undercover
-Game & Wario
-Nintendo Land (I know people want to complain about it but Luigi's Mansion minigame actually looks fun to play)
-Chasing Aurora

The list will be complete after the Nintendo's conference, but talking about the other third party games, in the launch window we already have:
-MULTIPLATFORMS- (Will launch almost at the same time)
-Assassins Creed 3
-Darksiders 2
-Tekken Tag Tournament 2
-Fifa 13
-Madden 13
-Aliens: Colonial Marines
-NBA 2K13
-Sonic & All-Stars Racing Transformed

-Batman Arkham City: Armored Edition
-Mass Effect 3
-Ninja Gaiden 3
-Trine 2: Director's Cut

So yeah, they aren't mostly ports as you said, it's just 4 games. And this lineup is probably better than what the Wii/x360/PS3 had at launch because the WiiU will have more exclusives (Mario, ZombiU, Rayman Legends and Pikmin is enough for me) and stronger third party games at launch.

"gamers already see it as LOWER-QUALITY, considering it's not that much more powerful than current-gen"

Well, everyone at neogaf is saying it's safe to say the WiiU will have 1.5~2GBs of ram (much better than 512MB on current gen consoles), Power 7 CPU is confirmed (much better architeture) and updated GPU. PS4 and x720 will be more powerful but there is no doubt the WiiU will be more powerful than current gen systems, I don't know if it will be noticiable, but I think we should wait and see, huh? The console isn't even out yet. Just because they didn't showed the WiiU's true graphics it doesn't mean we won't see improvements, it's just the launch games.

It seems people just want to be negative about the WiiU and the only reason for it is the AWFUL Nintendo's E3. There is no other true reason because the exclusives are there, the multiplatform games are coming and no, they aren't mostly ports, it's just 4 ports and one of those games is actually a digital title.

I seriously doubt I will have money to buy all the games I want in the list, really.

I just ask you to wait for Nintendo's september conference, and if it's not good then we will be able to judge. Then I will have to agree with you about some things you said, but I am actually confident (and excited) about the console just like I am for any other next gen console.

2296d ago
Yi-Long2296d ago

... My example was to showcase that sometimes it would pay off a lot more if a developer/publisher would be a little less greedy, taking into account PUBLIC OPINION.

I'm not SAYING the WiiU is not a worthy next-gen console.

Like you said, WE DON'T KNOW YET. We'll have to wait and see.

HOWEVER, MANY gamers are already seeing it as a slightly superiour console (specs-wise) to current-gen, but they don't think it will TRULY be 'next-gen'.

That's not my opinion. That's just a judgement of most of the responses the WiiU has gotten so far.

Now, if the WiiU has a line-up of games for launch that have already been released on other consoles a year ago, and can now be bought (in many cases) for 20-30 bucks, it would make no sense whatsoever if those games are 60 bucks when they come out for the WiiU.

Also, I'm not talking about the price of the console here, like you seem to imply with your comparison to the PS3.

I was clearly talking about a specific game like Rayman Origins, BECAUSE it was absolutely clear from the start that too many people never expected and accepted that game to be released as a full-priced game. And if Ubisoft had been a little less greedy and a little more aware of the market and how it was thinking about their product, they could have sold at least 10 times as many copies, if they had just released it as a downloadable game for PSN/XBLA for 15 bucks, and that way it would have made a whole lot more money for them.

Nintendo needs to be smart if it wants to survive.

Their console is NOT perceived as TRULY next-gen. Most mainstream and core games see it as yet again a gimmick-based console, and the 3rd party games they are interested in are mostly also coming out for PS3 and 360.

Those gamers don't have a good reason to switch over to the WiiU yet. Especially not if prices for games are exactly as high as on the console(s) they already own.

Obviously, Nintendo CAN charge 50-60 bucks for the AAA-stuff, like a brilliant exclusive like Mario, Zelda, Xenoblade, whatever....

...but they need to be a bit more flexible and dynamic in pricing when it comes to the stuff that's already been released over a year ago on PS3 and 360.

Hisiru2296d ago (Edited 2296d ago )

So youre going to ignore my entire post? May I assume you don't have a valid argument against what I said (and you probably gave me a disagree) or youre just giving arguments for posts which suits to your agenda and intentions?

"That's not my opinion. That's just a judgement of most of the responses the WiiU has gotten so far."
Also, public opinion? Most people complaining about the WiiU are fanboys/trolls/PS3 or x360 players who have no intention of buying the WiiU. Some people is even complaining about the lineup (like you, and look at my arguments above).

Those opinions doesn't reflect in the final sales (just look at how much hate is on the internet for games like Super Mario Bros Wii and in the end it sold 20 million copies or something like that).

Gamers saying that it's "slightly superior" doesn't have the final specs and are just being ignorant imo. How can you say something is sliglty superior if you don't even knows the final specs?

"Now, if the WiiU has a line-up of games for launch that have already been released on other consoles a year ago"
Can you read my first post again? It's just 4 ports and one is a digital release. x360 and PS3 also had tons of PS2/GC/xbox1 ports at launch.

Yi-Long2296d ago (Edited 2296d ago )

... first of all, you already missed the whole point of my post the first time round. I doubt you 'got' it when I explained it further in the 2nd.

The mere fact that you seem to put down everyone who has some criticism on some aspects of the WiiU as 'trolls', kinda means it's hardly worth the investment of getting into a proper conversation. Plus I already stated my opinion on the whole matter in my earlier 2 posts.

Now, you seem to believe I'm 'trolling' and 'hating' on the WiiU.

I'm not. I honestly and truly WANT this WiiU to be absolutely GREAT. I'm a gamer, which means I don't care what system a game is on, as long as the game is good.

I had and still have high hopes for the WiiU.

That said, as you also already mentioned, the E3 presentation from Nintendo was absolutely horrible, and I have some questionmarks with Nintendo's plan for online, and about how the hardware will hold up when Sony and MS go next-gen, and how the 3rd party support for the WiiU will be.

TBH, I feel those are legitimate concerns.

When you post the list, it seems like quite a decent line-up, but for me there doesn't seem any GREAT outstanding 1st party game announced yet (although I'm sure they will be announced soon enough), and we'll have to wait and so how those 3rd party titles will compare to the 360/ps3 version.

Like I said, I HOPE this console will succeed, but in some cases Nintendo also has to be a bit smart, and there's a big audience of gamers who already have a 360 and/or a PS3, and if those 3rd party games aren't significantly better for WiiU than they are for their already owned consoles, they won't bother switching over.

And those older games which are being brought over as ports, they need to be priced accordingly and fittingly. You can't sell Batman Arkham City for 60 bucks if the PS3 and 360 versions have the GOTY version out for only 20 bucks!

Hisiru2296d ago (Edited 2296d ago )

"The mere fact that you seem to put down everyone who has some criticism on some aspects of the WiiU as 'trolls'"

Not true at all. I said the only reason to bash the WiiU right now is:
1-The awful E3 (lacked info, games, etc).
Even Nintendo Direct was better than E3, I don't think Nintendo is taking E3 too seriously now and we should wait for the next conference before we judge.

2-Lack of next gen graphics
Same as above, but I understand why people is disappointed here, just think it's not the end. Maybe Nintendo has something to show next month. Also, if you look at the new Assassin's Creed 3, ZombiU (and some other games)'s new videos, you will clearly notice an improvement, which shows that we are judging unfinished titles... How can we say anything about the graphics using unfinished games or multiplatforms titles? Third parties won't take advantage of WiiU's power (Ubisoft already said they won't use the WiiU's power with games like Assassin's Creed 3 because they want to invest less money for now)

As for the gimmick complaints, I disagree. I think you should watch the new Fifa 13, Madden NFL 13 and Rayman Legends footage. Rayman Legends's multiplayer IS something new and an experience you can't have anywhere else, not a gimmick. ZombiU's gameplay also creates a lot of tense moments and it will be good for the atmosphere. I actually think the Wii Remote is more of a gimmick than the WiiU's gamepad. Also, you will have a standard controller + touch screen controls, it can't be worse than standard controllers because it already has all the inputs.

"Now, you seem to believe I'm 'trolling' and 'hating' on the WiiU."
I never said that, I just said your complaints about the lineup, graphics and ports are strange, because you don't know about the final specs (so we should just ignore everyone saying it's slightly more powerful because they don't have proof) and we don't know the final launch games list. Nintendo will only announce the other games at the next conference, so it's too early to judge.

"I'm a gamer, which means I don't care what system a game is on, as long as the game is good."
I believe in you, I am just saying that some of your arguments may not be true to everyone. I am not saying you are COMPLETELY wrong, just saying that it's a matter of taste/opinion.

"and I have some questionmarks with Nintendo's plan for online"
Nintendo discussed the Wii's online plans in the fall conference, I am sure the same will happen with the WiiU.

The biggest problem is third party support, not the hardware (because this time WiiU will use updated hardware). I am confident in the console itself but I am not confident yet when it comes to good sales for the launch third party games... If it sell well then we will see much more support than what we saw on the Wii, but will it have EVERY PS4/x720 game? I don't know, but at least I think it's not
possible to have another Wii situation again.

I agree with you about the prices. I am sure I won't buy it if it's a full price game.

"for me there doesn't seem any GREAT outstanding 1st party game announced yet (although I'm sure they will be announced soon enough)"

Nintendo announced a new IP and some other games at the Wii's fall conference (when it was about to be launched), I believe the same thing will happen with the WiiU, that's why I am asking you to wait until September.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2296d ago
LAZL0-Panaflex2296d ago

Yeah lets charge $60 for games people already played and beat on xbox and ps3. That makes sense. This pacter is a dork, and he is always wrong. Like the time he said the gears trilogy is coming to ps3.

Puddlejumper752296d ago

um Yeah... LOL When a game comes out late to PS3 or 360 they still charge full price. See Bioshock,MAss effect, etc. Not sure why it suddenly wrong of them to do this on Wii U. Also its not like every single game has been out on 360 and PS3 for a long time now.

LAZL0-Panaflex2296d ago

Actually,no bioshock was $30 at sams, walmart, and toys r us. Not all of us get hosed at gamestop. Nice try. Fail.

PopRocks3592297d ago

Super Mario Galaxy was sold at $49.99 while the likes of Two Worlds, Sonic '06 and Bomberman Act Zero were all sold for $59.99.

The value being charged has nothing to do with the quality of the game. Period.

wishingW3L2297d ago

That is not the point....

Kurylo3d2297d ago

point is if you see a $30 game.. your going to automatically assume its crap.. unless its a sale or the games been out for a while.

AAACE52296d ago

No... if i see a $30 game i assume im about to save some money! The only reason games cost $60 this gen is because they believed that us gamers would continue to buy games in masses like last gen. They promised us larger and longer games. But truthfully we have mostly got games like last gen except they have better graphics.

That extra $10 has hurt the industry and us gamers. People like me will only pay $60 for a game that gets good reviews and fits what im looking for. The other games have to sit until the price looks right. This has caused studios to close. But i cant be responsible for saving an industry that gets greedier every year and refuses to look at the real problem.

They were thinking in profits. They figured gamers bought tons of systems and games last gen, if we raise the prices on this stuff they will still buy as much or more!

Harsh reality is... they were wrong! And now the industry we love is in a flux. They are grasping at straws trying to find a way to keep the prices the same and get us to buy like crazy.

Maybe its just me, but i would rather sell a game at $40-$50 and sell like 3-5 million units so that i know gamers are playing my game and getting their friends to like it as well, so that when my next game comes out i have even more people buying it!

As opposed to the way it has been working, where they put a game out at $60 that sells to less than a million people and then they start dropping the price when other games come out and the games forgotten. This leads to many beloved studios getting shut down!

brish2296d ago (Edited 2296d ago )


"point is if you see a $30 game.. your going to automatically assume its crap.. unless its a sale or the games been out for a while."

I don't assume that.

Recently purchased games:
- The Walking Dead from Telltale ($20)
- Journey ($15)
- Quantum Conundrum ($15)

They are all great games. All the prices are their new release prices.

Puddlejumper752296d ago

@Brish, He is talking about full retail games not download titles and he has a valid point. If yousee a 30.00 retail box as a new release sitting next to 60.00 new releases you would question the quality.

Just like going to a car lot and its all 20k cars but they have one for 8k. Anyone with half a brain would question that.

You guys need to stop letting your blind hatred for anything Nintendo go because the only person you hurt is your own credibility. How is you guys looking stupid in any way a reflection of Nintendo?

vakarian752296d ago

So your saying that compared to ps3 and xbox 360 games Pc games are crap?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2296d ago
BrutallyBlunt2296d ago (Edited 2296d ago )

Nintendo has done that in the past too because 1st party tiles don't need to pay royalties.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that Wii U games will be $60 since Nintendo is trying to compete more with the PS3 and XBOX360 now. So why would a game like Darksiders 2 that is going to be $60 on the PS3 and XBOX360 be $50 on the Wii U? That's not going to happen. Maybe some 1st party titles might be $50 but that is entirely up to Nintendo. 3rd party publishers will charge $60 unless Nintendo waives the royalties which is unlikely to happen. Even if they did they would not want to cannibalize sales on other platforms.

ChickeyCantor2296d ago

Nintendo can't really charge themselves for publishing rights, or can they =P

PopRocks3592296d ago (Edited 2296d ago )

Okay, then why was Sonic Unleashed $50 on Wii and $60 on the 360/PS3?

ChickeyCantor2296d ago

All has to do with marketing. Many factors are involved. However Nintendo can lower their own games in price because they are also selling consoles. On top of that they publish the games themselves.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2296d ago
morkendo232297d ago (Edited 2297d ago )

A perfect wii-U launch game price should be 39.99-49.99 like back in the SNES days.
lower price will not make consumers think of lower Quality more like " HOT DANG" Im in.

with ps3 games i wait til they hit Amazon for 9.99 for 64.37 i can buy 6 games on Amazon at 10.00 a pop for the price of one.

wishingW3L2297d ago (Edited 2297d ago )

in the Snes days games were sold for like $80 man! This was one of the reasons why the PS1 kicked the N64's butt. $50 games on the PS1 vs $60-80 games on the N64, cartridge were simply too expensive.

ApolloAdams2296d ago

Did you even own a SNES? Those games were really expesive and if you add inflation then it is borderline roobbery. Game production has risen to the point where a $40 game would have to tell 2 Million to turn profit.

TheLyonKing2297d ago

In his context he is saying that a low price tag tells consumers it is of a lower quality than ps3/360 retail games.

While he has a point I think this one is just picking flaws. Its a good idea for Nintendo to do. More money and same sales cause its not like you can play mario anywhere else.

krazykombatant2297d ago

Right nothing to see here people move along another wannabe with an opinion.

Show all comments (43)
The story is too old to be commented.