Wii Pricing Revealed?

[captain_nintendo]

Didn't i post this and Rick said "your trusting a forum source?"

I called the price.
I roxxor.

It might be right, but this still is not confirmed

[djbeatmongrel]

If that's the final pricing, the Wii's stock just dropped significantly in my book.  

$0.99 a game or a single "subscription" price seemed the only two logical ways to go as far as I see it.

i think you need to step outside of the view of a collector/avid gamer. many people who will buy the wii dont keep, havent kept, or never owned a lot of the systems availible on the virtual console. these will be the people mostlikely buying the downloads. working at gamestop i've heard a good number of the informed people psyched about the downloadable games.

i am sure many parents are going to love this becuase they wont have to go out of the house and pay another $50 for a new game that thier kid isn't going to play for more than like an hour. the downloadable games wil allow parents to only spend a ffew dollars to keep their kid occupied.

hell i know i'll atleast use the vc to try tg-16 games since i dont own the system yet and have never played one. really theres a market for this.

[Antimind]

Look at how well Xbox Live Arcade games sell. Damn near everyone on my friends list bought Gauntlet if nothign else for online play. We own every game cept Hardwood Hearts. It gives us more options when looking to play with buds and sick of the same old.

If the games aren't online multiplayer capable I probably won't buy many. Prolly just pick up stuff like Super Mario RPG and such. Sure I own the carts but I'm lazy. If I can get em on my "current" console there's at least a few I'd purchase out of sheer laziness. If they're online multiplayer then you can be damn sure I'll buy Mario Party series, Super Mario Bros. series, and at least a handful of others.

[TraderJake]

I'd say there are definitely a few SNES games I'd buy, and fortunately, Nintendo scored an ace with the Wii classic controller. I only wish that the Wii's classic controller was the design picked for the GameCube controller, but the SNES A,B,X,Y arrangement would have been smart.

[chrisbid]

it would be outstanding if the older VC games could also be played on the DS.  there is little keeping nintendo from going that route, even if it isnt ready at launch.

[The Metamorphosing Leon]

It's gonna suck and flop and be too weird.

Besides, you can have my Wii for free.

[TraderJake]

It's gonna suck and flop and be too weird.

Besides, you can have my Wii for free.

Thanks to that country named Japan, I forsee you being wrong, and if the Wii goes for 199 here, I really really forsee you being wrong.

PS: Good luck warding off all the gay emails you are surely soon to recieve.

[The Metamorphosing Leon]

Thanks to that country named Japan, I forsee you being wrong, and if the Wii goes for 199 here, I really really forsee you being wrong.

PS: Good luck warding off all the gay emails you are surely soon to recieve.

Wii just seems like a stupid gimmick to me. You can see it in the name change. It's trying to be too different for it's own good and it's not going to sell to the general public. It's just not on the same level as the other consoles will be.

P.S. Already got several.

[Chris_Collects]

I'd def. buy a Wii for $250. Sorry Sony, you're the only one I won't be buying this round.

[captain_nintendo]

Wii just seems like a stupid gimmick to me. You can see it in the name change. It's trying to be too different for it's own good and it's not going to sell to the general public. It's just not on the same level as the other consoles will be.

P.S. Already got several.

I think you are wrong. Parents are going to see the price tag come Christmas time and buy them. Not only that, I am sure any gamer out there should be getting one.

[Izret101]

Me, Dan, 2 friends in chicopee, 3 in springfield are the only people i hang out with alot who have readily confirmed they are really interested in getting one.
And will get one.

Out of the 7 of them i only really believe 4 or 5 will get it.
Since for the most part they are always together.

On the other hand out of EVERYONE i know i only know a 5 or so who have expressed interest in PS3 and only for MGS4.

[yap]

It's one thing to re-port Super Mario World onto the GBA (with enhanced graphics and a two player mode) and sell it for 29.99, it's a whole other thing to have Super Play Action Football or Pilotwings available to download for $4.99.  Just look at how well the NES Classics series on GBA did.  Outside of a couple of titles (Zelda and Super Mario Bros.), they can't move those games on clearance for $4.99 - $7.99.  And you actually physically GET something for that price.

Now if they do offer repackaged classics with online play, leaderboards, and essentially all the things Xbox Live offers, $4.99 is a reasonable price to pay for some of the quality titles in Nintendo's catalog.  But Nintendo hasn't offered anything to show that this is the case (they're on record saying none of the games will have graphical improvements).

Will people pay $4.99 for Super Mario World straight up on the VC?  Probably.  Will people pay $9.99 for Mario 64?  Maybe.  Will people pay $9.99 for Wave Race 64?  Highly unlikely.

But the difference is, even if these games don't have a leaderboard or multiplayer (it'd suck, but whatever) there's still something going for these games when compared to the Xbox Live games, and that's quantity.

If you're talking about the big developers having big portions of their library (if early reports are to belive) at launch available that's a gigantic selling point over the 20 or so XBL games available now.  At least to me it is.  And once that's available, it doesn't matter if lots and lots of people buy Wave Race 64 at $9.99 or however much it costs.  You'd think that porting the game to the VC is going to take very little effort, every sale is going to be profit.  

XBL and the Wii VC are just going to offer two different experiences.  If I had to choose one or the other, I'd rather a library of hundreds of games than leaderboard and internet multiplay.  Although that would be a tough decision.  I really like XBL's implementation of the leaderboards.

XBL really shines, and without it I think the 360 would be in trouble.  From what I've heard the Wii is going to continue on with the painful excersize of those long friend-codes for each game nonsense.  Anyway it will be interesting to see what happens, and what Sony's online experience offers.  

Although I think it will be really hard for Sony and Nintendo especially to compete with XBox Live.  Nintendo has this restriction where they want their network to be safe at the expense of everything else, so that really limits them quite a bit.

[yap]

There's no reason at all to think that people will pay.  Basing your statement on ports to the GBA and downloadable versions on a console is like comparing Apples to Orangutans.  One nets you a physical cartridge that you can play on your portable system from now until they break or rot.  The other exists exclusively on your Wii, is only available to those with a broadband connection and a credit card, and contains no enhancements over the original.

One thing I forgot to mention, and I'm not arguing with you I just thought I'd bring it up:

The success of iTunes contradicts your argument. Consumers are more than comfortable making purchases where they do not own the physical media.  Of course that doesn't mean that VC titles will sell, who knows - but iTunes does show us that consumers will pay for the same type of content.  That is to say, they'll pay for DRM'd data that only exists on their hard drives/backups.

[blissfulnoise]

One thing I forgot to mention, and I'm not arguing with you I just thought I'd bring it up:

The success of iTunes contradicts your argument. Consumers are more than comfortable making purchases where they do not own the physical media.  Of course that doesn't mean that VC titles will sell, who knows - but iTunes does show us that consumers will pay for the same type of content.  That is to say, they'll pay for DRM'd data that only exists on their hard drives/backups.

You bring up some good points.

Let me tackle the iTunes one first Yap:

The reason why iTunes is so successful is two fold:

1) Most people who buy / had bought CDs on a regular basis own a computer that is capable of "ripping" their CDs.  As a result, most would eventually copy their music to their computers MP3/WMA/AAC/Whatever library.  So, by buying the song online and getting the MP3, they're cutting out the middle man.

2) Users do not have to purchase the entire CD online, but can simply "mix-tape" their downloads for $0.99 a pop which happens to be relatively inexpensive.  I'd argue that iTunes would be substantially less successful if users were required to purchase whole CDs at $0.99 a track, or even $9.99 a CD.

Of course, there are a host of other reasons as to why iTunes is so successful.  The popularity of the iPod and its proprietary usage, successful marketing by Apple, elegant interface, etc, etc.

In a general sense, consumers are indeed more comfortable making digital purchases then they were even two years ago.  But, outside of Xbox Live, digital delivery of games for a fee isn't seeing much success.  Companies like Direct2Drive and Gametap are not doing very well due to the prohibitive cost of the product, limited usage, and the bandwidth requirements.  And I'd argue the nature of the medium dictates said success.

Regarding the primary two reasons why iTunes has enjoyed so much success, neither apply to video games.  People do not “rip” their games to another platform to enjoy them (emulation comments aside, just like music piracy, they're not relevant to this discussion).  They use the games as is on the platforms they are intended for.  Xbox Live Arcade is unique in that the games offered there are available on no other medium, buying them is buying original content.  The Virtual Console, for the most part, doesn't offer this feature.

Now I'm fully aware that 80% of the Virtual Consoles targeted audience would be more inclined to download a copy of Super Mario World in order to play it than they'd be to go out and purchase a Super Nintendo with the cartridge.  My argument isn't about the “must play” games like that.  The argument is regarding Nintendo's less esteemed back catalog and how to best take advantage of their IP (intellectual property).

I simply feel that $4.99 - $9.99 is simply too much to ask for games that most gamers are only vaguely familiar with or possibly never even heard of.  With Xbox Live you can clearly see what you're getting into and can assume you'll at least get a bevy of features with the game.  If nothing else, you can expect a high definition experience with decent graphics and sound and online features.  The same cannot be said for the VC.  Sure, there are methods Nintendo can use to mitigate this deficiency.  Trial downloads for one.  But, ultimately, Nintendo, based off their own words will be delivering less bang for the buck.

That's why I feel that a more aggressive pricing strategy is mandatory for the VC to see any real degree of success.  Sure, Nintendo doesn't lose a whole lot by porting over their games.  After all, the delivery system for Super Mario Bros. will be the same for Ken Griffey Jr.'s Winning Run, but you don't lose a whole lot by trying to sell your 1982 Gremlin for $15,000 grand either.  Other than opportunity that is.

I can imagine people just filling their “carts” with games to download for a disposable $0.99 a pop.  But as posted above, by selecting just 5 N64 titles, it equates to going out and purchasing a brand new game.  One that you can feasibly trade in later to save money on a different game down the road.  Comparatively, I fail to see the value in the VC at that price point.

In any case, I may be beating a dead horse if I keep going on.

Don't get me wrong, I absolutely LOVE the idea of the VC and I will use it, even with the current pricing stratagem, at least for a few specific games.  What I'd hate to see is the grand experiment crash if Nintendo prices themselves out of the market.  Aggressively pricing your goods means you can aggressively push your product.  This would eventually equate to better sales, better market saturation, and, eventually, further expansion.  I'd hate to have Nintendo look and see that people are only buying Zelda and Mario and ultimately abandon new ports out of fear no one would buy the games.

[yap]

I'll agree with that.  I know Nintendo has said things like you will be able to download games for free with purchases of Wii games.

If that actually happens, it will probably be a good thing when compared to Microsoft's strategy of nickel and diming the consumer every step of the way whether it's through forum avatars, or COD2 maps, or horse armor.

Also, expensive Xbox arcade games aren't out of the realm of possibility.  Bankshot Billiards is 8 or 9 or whatever, I don't feel like checking it out.  8 or 9 dollars sounds like a rip off for Wave Racer, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who believes that Bankshot Billiards is a better game.

The ability to get some free VCS games with the purchase of a brand new game is a decent bonus.

I wonder if the VCS target audience ultimately isn't the "everyman" that the Wii itself is after, or even the hardcore gamer who maybe already has emulation and maybe still has these old games anyway - but probably people who once played these games, remembers them fondly, and for whatever reason doesn't play them anymore.

If that assumption is correct, then a library of multiple hundreds of games that do not have leaderboards may be more enticing (to that demographic) than a library of multiple tens of games with awesome leaderboards, given similar price between them.

That's not to say that I agree with that pricing scheme either, if it ends up being true, but I can see some value existing there.