VGCollect Forum
General and Gaming => Modern Video Games => Topic started by: gf78 on January 21, 2019, 02:27:09 pm
-
When discussing games we would like to see ported from the Wii U to Switch, a few people brought up they didn't want any and felt that the ones that have been released were just repackaged. I feel that porting these games is a good thing as many people didnt give the Wii U the time of day. So Nintendo is sitting on some truly fantastic games that deserve to be played by a larger audience.
With that in mind, I decided to do comparisons between the original Wii U versions and the Switch versions, starting with Mario Kart 8 Deluxe. Here are the changes/additions to the Switch version.
New characters: King Boo, Dry Bones, Bowser Jr., Inkling Boy & Inkling Girl and Gold Mario.
Character Variations: Link from Breath of the Wild, 8 colors for Yoshi and 8 colors for Shy Guy.
New Karts: Splat Buggy, Ink Striker, Koopa Clown, Super Glider
New Features: Dual Items, Super Drift Boost, Quick Turn, Smart Steering, Auto Acceleration, Boo & Fearher Items, 8-player Local Multiplayer, LAN Mode, All tracks & characters unlocked from the start.
Performance Enhancements: Faster load times, boost to 1080p resolution
DLC: Includes all previous DLC cups: Egg Cup, Triforce Cup, Bell Cup and Crossing Cup (16 tracks)
Includes all previous DLC characters: Link, Tanooki Mario, Cat Peach, Villager Boy & Girl, Isabelle and Dry Bowser.
Includes all previous DLC karts: Streetle, City Tripper, P-Wing, Bone Rattler, Blu Falcon, B-Dasher, Master Cycle and Tanooki Kart.
New Battle Modes: Bob-Omb Blast, Renegade Roundup, Coin Runners and Shine Thief.
So comparing the retail packaged Wii U and Switch versions they have added:
13 new characters + variations for Link, Yoshi and Shy Guy
12 new karts
4 cups with 4 tracks each for a total of 16 new tracks
4 new battle modes
Those are pretty significant changes & additions. Nintendo did more work on this game than most other develops put in between sequels of their titles.
-
Those are pretty significant changes & additions. Nintendo did more work on this game than most other develops put in between sequels of their titles.
???
-
Those are pretty significant changes & additions. Nintendo did more work on this game than most other develops put in between sequels of their titles.
???
You dont agree that it's a pretty good amount of added content? Or that Nintendo put more effort into a port than other developers do in their sequels?
Activision reskins Call of Doody every year and charges an extra $50 after the base $60 for maps. They even did away with the campaign entirely this round.
Capcom just adds more words and numbers to Street Fighter. $60, a couple new characters & a turbo mode with a ridiculously long game title. Or making you pay for characters already programmed in and locked on the disc.
Sony, porting a huge batch of their games to the PS3 and now PS4 with a slightly higher framerates and upscale to 1080p.
Fallout 76. Take all the interesting NPC's out. Undoubtedly lower quality with less effort put in than Fallout 4 with multiplayer tacked on that nobody wanted.
Dynasty Warriors 4000. Same game, different name.
Just Dance games that just reused the last ten iterations graphics with different songs.
Those are just a few examples. Tony Hawk? Guitar Hero? I could go on and on. Or how about Destiny, actually REGRESSING from the 1st game to the 2nd?
-
Those are pretty significant changes & additions. Nintendo did more work on this game than most other develops put in between sequels of their titles.
???
You dont agree that it's a pretty good amount of added content? Or that Nintendo put more effort into a port than other developers do in their sequels?
Activision reskins Call of Doody every year and charges an extra $50 after the base $60 for maps. They even did away with the campaign entirely this round.
Capcom just adds more words and numbers to Street Fighter. $60, a couple new characters & a turbo mode with a ridiculously long game title. Or making you pay for characters already programmed in and locked on the disc.
Sony, porting a huge batch of their games to the PS3 and now PS4 with a slightly higher framerates and upscale to 1080p.
Fallout 76. Take all the interesting NPC's out. Undoubtedly lower quality with less effort put in than Fallout 4 with multiplayer tacked on that nobody wanted.
Dynasty Warriors 4000. Same game, different name.
Just Dance games that just reused the last ten iterations graphics with different songs.
Those are just a few examples. Tony Hawk? Guitar Hero? I could go on and on. Or how about Destiny, actually REGRESSING from the 1st game to the 2nd?
Personally, as someone who supported the Wii U from day one, each port to Switch sort of makes me roll my eyes. I'll admit, I liked Mario Kart 8 Deluxe enough to purchase, but in hindsight, as someone who bought the Wii U title + the DLC, the new content in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe was not satiable for me and that's why I've steered clear of buying ports for the Switch since then.
Those examples you gave are excellent for the most part, but with each port Nintendo creates, it feels more and more like they are becoming Activision or EA. Their new Switch exclusives are great, but like I said, I already have a lot of their remakes for Wii U. I guess if you compare the retail packages for the two, you're right, but as someone who bought Mario Kart 8 Deluxe after having all of the Wii U's dlc, I've put like ten hours into Deluxe in almost two years, and I regret the purchase. To me, it wasn't much of an advancement.
-
Personally, as someone who supported the Wii U from day one, each port to Switch sort of makes me roll my eyes. I'll admit, I liked Mario Kart 8 Deluxe enough to purchase, but in hindsight, as someone who bought the Wii U title + the DLC, the new content in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe was not satiable for me and that's why I've steered clear of buying ports for the Switch since then.
Those examples you gave are excellent for the most part, but with each port Nintendo creates, it feels more and more like they are becoming Activision or EA. Their new Switch exclusives are great, but like I said, I already have a lot of their remakes for Wii U. I guess if you compare the retail packages for the two, you're right, but as someone who bought Mario Kart 8 Deluxe after having all of the Wii U's dlc, I've put like ten hours into Deluxe in almost two years, and I regret the purchase. To me, it wasn't much of an advancement.
The Wii U ports were necessary as Nintendo clearly hasn't had the games ready yet for the Switch. That first year of release was good, but it dropped off hard in the second year outside of Smash and Pokemon Lets Go at the end of the year. It also gave those Wii U games a second chance to go big. I'm in the same place in that I played most of it on the Wii U, so I've only picked up Hyrule Warriors and Mario Kart 8 ports, but I don't fault them for releasing them again on Switch. Not that I don't feel slightly disappointed when another port shows up over getting something new lol
That said, I hope this year brings more games as I'm worried it'll be just like last year where it wasn't a whole lot till the end of the year. Not much confirmation for this year beyond Pokemon and Animal Crossing, which aren't big ones for me, I just don't want my Switch to go unused most of the year like in 2018.
As for the Deluxe edition of Mario Kart 8, it's a nice port with some good additions, but it's not on a "sequel" level at all. Comparing "retail packages" is kinda unfair and sorta overstates what Deluxe brought to to the Switch. It's mostly just a few new characters, karts, some nice features and tweaks, and Battle Mode. Really, it's only above the level of one of the DLC packs they had for the Wii U version. Definitely the best version of the game, no doubt about that though.
-
I think if Mario Kart 8 hadn't gotten DLC then the re-release would be a much, much weaker product. And most of these games that are being turned into Switch ports don't have DLC.
The "New Super Mario Bros U" port is a great example of that :P
-
Personally, as someone who supported the Wii U from day one, each port to Switch sort of makes me roll my eyes. I'll admit, I liked Mario Kart 8 Deluxe enough to purchase, but in hindsight, as someone who bought the Wii U title + the DLC, the new content in Mario Kart 8 Deluxe was not satiable for me and that's why I've steered clear of buying ports for the Switch since then.
Those examples you gave are excellent for the most part, but with each port Nintendo creates, it feels more and more like they are becoming Activision or EA. Their new Switch exclusives are great, but like I said, I already have a lot of their remakes for Wii U. I guess if you compare the retail packages for the two, you're right, but as someone who bought Mario Kart 8 Deluxe after having all of the Wii U's dlc, I've put like ten hours into Deluxe in almost two years, and I regret the purchase. To me, it wasn't much of an advancement.
I see your side, especially coming from somebody that supported Wii U and bought & played all those games. I think it makes good business sense for Nintendo, and it gives people who didnt play the Wii U a chance to enjoy these games.
In a perfect world, we would have gotten sequels to Mario Kart 8, New Super Mario Bros. U, Donkey Kong Tropical Freeze, Hyrule Warriors, etc. But regardless of your outlook on the matter, Nintendo doesnt release their games until they are ready. Me, I prefer that rather than the new industry standard: Ship it now & patch it later.
We have gotten some really great Switch exclusives like Zelda Breath of the Wild (I'm counting it since it was a simultaneous release), Super Mario Odyssey, 1-2 Switch (should a been a pack-in), Fire Emblem Warriors, Splatoon 2, Xenoblade Chronicles 2, Kirby Star Allies, Mario Tennis Aces, the Labo stuff, Octopath Traveller, Pokemon Let's Go Pikachu & Let's Go Evee, Super Mario Party, Super Smash Bros Ultimate and Xenoblade Chronicles 2 - Zorna the Golden Country. That's fifteen new, original games - not ports - released in the first 21 months on market. That's a record for Nintendo probably! To me, that's more than enough 1st party software in that time frame.
There were also about ten Nintendo-made Switch eShop titles so far, and eight or so ports for those that want them. So about 33 Nintendo games in less than two years.
I'm really looking forward to 2019. So far, we know we are getting Yoshi's Crafted World, a new Pokemon game, Luigi's Mansion 3, Metroid Prime 4 (date has been leaked apparently) and Marvel Ultimate Alliance 3.
Nintendo combined their handheld and console divisions which should start yielding a steady stream of exclusive games. With the supposedly unearthed code pointing to a SNES online app like the current NES one, the upcoming exclusives and a ton of indies for those who like them, N
The Switch may become my favorite Nintendo system ever.
Now Nintendo just needs to release N64 and Gamecube classic consoles and for Bloodstained to come out and it will be offical: I'm not leaving the house! LOL.
-
Dynasty Warriors 4000. Same game, different name.
I disagree heavily here. While the Warriors games do have the same core gameplay, each one does handle differently from the rest and have their own unique touches to the formula.
-
Just curious since I don’t own the switch version, but does it include the Mercedes Benz DLC too?
-
Just curious since I don’t own the switch version, but does it include the Mercedes Benz DLC too?
According to this, yes
https://nintendoeverything.com/how-to-unlock-the-mercedes-benz-dlc-in-mario-kart-8-deluxe-plus-footage/
-
The Wii-U was a great system, but the admission price was too high and games were technologically neutered. I don't mind re-ports so long as there is effort put into them other than "hey look here's the same game again but in better quality". Example being Lego City Undercover on the Wii-U - great game, and its implementation of the gamepad was cool, but the game looked like an Xbox 360 game. When it was re-released to the PS4, they gave it a total overhaul and changed a lot of the names of the cars, added more cars, removed the draw distance haze, upscaled all the graphics, changed all the missions to adapt to a PS4 controller without the gamepad. It had a huge amount of work done, but it's what I like to call a "secret remaster". Only fans who played through the original alot would notice the changes, and the changes were not publicly announced or made news like for example when updates to Minecraft are made and there's entire huge list of changes made public.
-
The wii u was a failed console it's only logical to create ports from the wii u on the switch. They invested allot of time into the wii u game while allot of people just ignored the console
At least on the switch even if it's a port many people have not played the game yet.
I mean seriously mario kart 8 deluxe sold more copies in a year than the wii u game not to mention that mario kart 8 was the best sold game on the wii u It's kinda pathetic
It's not a good argument that wii u owners should be mad since many people did not give the game a shot in the first place.
even if the port was exactly the same but with better visuals it would still be good enough since the wii u just failed as a console.
As far as sales goes I mean smash bros on switch sold 5 million copies in a single week. smash 4 on wii u sold 5 million copies in the entire life time of the wii u.
Deluxe was a nice improvement but they still messed up the battle mode a bit unfortunately since the god damm wii era
Still no last man standing baloon battles like in them golden days, that's 50% of the fun just gone as far as battle mode goes.
-
Porting games so the previous gen entires can shine on new software, and so fans and new comers alike can enjoy games they may not have played is a brilliant idea if it's kept with that intent at heart.
But charging 60 dollars for a 6 year old port that isn't even really a remaster 90 percent of the time soley because it includes the DLC that should have came for free anyway is a diverse and ellaborate scam and the consumer shouldn't stand of it. I don't buy a 2014 Camry for 2019 Camry price. Real devs are making real new games like rockstar and they deserve that money. Not copy and pastes. Just to repurpose a game and using the term "deluxe" or "Definitive Edition" as a means of copping out of making new franchise entries and essentially diluting a pretty good chunk of your console's library with your failed console library making people pay for the same game twice at full retail all because you couldn't market last time and are hedging on people double dipping their cookie so you double your profits and not take a loss - Disgraceful.
I don't agree with DLC meaning it deserves a full 60 dollar retail price because most games from reputable companies including Xbox and PS4 third party games which are typically much larger in scope release GOTY or deluxe editions for 20-40 dollars 2 years later than Include all DLC. With Nintendo I don't think they deserve a pass. I think this generation has seen great things from Nintendo but I own a Wii U so much of it has been lost on me. I just don't appreciate how they did this entire scheme to double down on all their money from old games. It's unacceptable to me.
-
Porting games so the previous gen entires can shine on new software, and so fans and new comers alike can enjoy games they may not have played is a brilliant idea if it's kept with that intent at heart.
But charging 60 dollars for a 6 year old port that isn't even really a remaster 90 percent of the time soley because it includes the DLC that should have came for free anyway is a diverse and ellaborate scam and the consumer shouldn't stand of it. I don't buy a 2014 Camry for 2019 Camry price. Real devs are making real new games like rockstar and they deserve that money. Not copy and pastes. Just to repurpose a game and using the term "deluxe" or "Definitive Edition" as a means of copping out of making new franchise entries and essentially diluting a pretty good chunk of your console's library with your failed console library making people pay for the same game twice at full retail all because you couldn't market last time and are hedging on people double dipping their cookie so you double your profits and not take a loss - Disgraceful.
I don't agree with DLC meaning it deserves a full 60 dollar retail price because most games from reputable companies including Xbox and PS4 third party games which are typically much larger in scope release GOTY or deluxe editions for 20-40 dollars 2 years later than Include all DLC. With Nintendo I don't think they deserve a pass. I think this generation has seen great things from Nintendo but I own a Wii U so much of it has been lost on me. I just don't appreciate how they did this entire scheme to double down on all their money from old games. It's unacceptable to me.
mario kart 8 was 3 years old when the switch port was released furthermore since the wii u failed so bad many people have not even bought mario kart 8 to begin with. Switch sales surpassed the wii u sales in a single year by 1.5 times not to mention probably many more sales to come.
In my opinion it deserves the 60$ retail value since not many people have bought the game. for many people it's a brand new game. also the dlc was 20$ if i am not mistaken on the wii u version. considering the sales of 13 million for mario kart deluxe in a single year there where plenty of people who did not buy the game not to mention that many people who have the wii u version might not buy the deluxe version and even than the sales are 13 million at this moment compared to the 8 million on the wii u.
-
Porting games so the previous gen entires can shine on new software, and so fans and new comers alike can enjoy games they may not have played is a brilliant idea if it's kept with that intent at heart.
But charging 60 dollars for a 6 year old port that isn't even really a remaster 90 percent of the time soley because it includes the DLC that should have came for free anyway is a diverse and ellaborate scam and the consumer shouldn't stand of it. I don't buy a 2014 Camry for 2019 Camry price. Real devs are making real new games like rockstar and they deserve that money. Not copy and pastes. Just to repurpose a game and using the term "deluxe" or "Definitive Edition" as a means of copping out of making new franchise entries and essentially diluting a pretty good chunk of your console's library with your failed console library making people pay for the same game twice at full retail all because you couldn't market last time and are hedging on people double dipping their cookie so you double your profits and not take a loss - Disgraceful.
I don't agree with DLC meaning it deserves a full 60 dollar retail price because most games from reputable companies including Xbox and PS4 third party games which are typically much larger in scope release GOTY or deluxe editions for 20-40 dollars 2 years later than Include all DLC. With Nintendo I don't think they deserve a pass. I think this generation has seen great things from Nintendo but I own a Wii U so much of it has been lost on me. I just don't appreciate how they did this entire scheme to double down on all their money from old games. It's unacceptable to me.
mario kart 8 was 3 years old when the switch port was released furthermore since the wii u failed so bad many people have not even bought mario kart 8 to begin with. Switch sales surpassed the wii u sales in a single year by 1.5 times not to mention probably many more sales to come.
In my opinion it deserves the 60$ retail value since not many people have bought the game. for many people it's a brand new game. also the dlc was 20$ if i am not mistaken on the wii u version. considering the sales of 13 million for mario kart deluxe in a single year there where plenty of people who did not buy the game not to mention that many people who have the wii u version might not buy the deluxe version and even than the sales are 13 million at this moment compared to the 8 million on the wii u.
I think this is exactly right. Mario Kart 8 Deluxe has sold more units on Switch than total Wii U consoles were sold. It is essentially one of those big "GotY" compilation discs that includes ALL the released content (and more) for a typical MSRP price point.
That said, I do think Mario Kart is the only one of these titles that should be getting sold at that full $60 price point. Most of the other titles have too few changes to warrant asking that price again, especially since they had gotten really cheap on the Wii U (Tropical Freeze is the big offender here).
-
Porting games so the previous gen entires can shine on new software, and so fans and new comers alike can enjoy games they may not have played is a brilliant idea if it's kept with that intent at heart.
But charging 60 dollars for a 6 year old port that isn't even really a remaster 90 percent of the time soley because it includes the DLC that should have came for free anyway is a diverse and ellaborate scam and the consumer shouldn't stand of it. I don't buy a 2014 Camry for 2019 Camry price. Real devs are making real new games like rockstar and they deserve that money. Not copy and pastes. Just to repurpose a game and using the term "deluxe" or "Definitive Edition" as a means of copping out of making new franchise entries and essentially diluting a pretty good chunk of your console's library with your failed console library making people pay for the same game twice at full retail all because you couldn't market last time and are hedging on people double dipping their cookie so you double your profits and not take a loss - Disgraceful.
I don't agree with DLC meaning it deserves a full 60 dollar retail price because most games from reputable companies including Xbox and PS4 third party games which are typically much larger in scope release GOTY or deluxe editions for 20-40 dollars 2 years later than Include all DLC. With Nintendo I don't think they deserve a pass. I think this generation has seen great things from Nintendo but I own a Wii U so much of it has been lost on me. I just don't appreciate how they did this entire scheme to double down on all their money from old games. It's unacceptable to me.
mario kart 8 was 3 years old when the switch port was released furthermore since the wii u failed so bad many people have not even bought mario kart 8 to begin with. Switch sales surpassed the wii u sales in a single year by 1.5 times not to mention probably many more sales to come.
In my opinion it deserves the 60$ retail value since not many people have bought the game. for many people it's a brand new game. also the dlc was 20$ if i am not mistaken on the wii u version. considering the sales of 13 million for mario kart deluxe in a single year there where plenty of people who did not buy the game not to mention that many people who have the wii u version might not buy the deluxe version and even than the sales are 13 million at this moment compared to the 8 million on the wii u.
I think this is exactly right. Mario Kart 8 Deluxe has sold more units on Switch than total Wii U consoles were sold. It is essentially one of those big "GotY" compilation discs that includes ALL the released content (and more) for a typical MSRP price point.
That said, I do think Mario Kart is the only one of these titles that should be getting sold at that full $60 price point. Most of the other titles have too few changes to warrant asking that price again, especially since they had gotten really cheap on the Wii U (Tropical Freeze is the big offender here).
it really depends how many people bought the game on the wii u. If not many where sold for many people in the case of donkey kong tropical freeze it's a brand new game for 50 60$ brand new. I'm pretty sure their main focus is the audience that has not played the game yet since many did not buy donkey kong on switch for that reason. Besides to be fair allot of nintendo games wich do not have heavy hit sales usually drop to around the 40 msrp or lower in a couple of months so it's only in the beginning unless the game sells really well.
-
Well in the case of TF, it was down to $20 on the Wii U shop, but once it was about a month out from the Switch release they either completely removed it or bumped it back to a full $60 which is a real dick move for people with a Wii U who didn't have TF yet.
-
Well in the case of TF, it was down to $20 on the Wii U shop, but once it was about a month out from the Switch release they either completely removed it or bumped it back to a full $60 which is a real dick move for people with a Wii U who didn't have TF yet.
considering that tropical freeze on switch was released in 2018 and that the wii u console was pretty much dead at that time I'm pretty sure there where very few people who legitimately wanted to buy the game on wii u anyways not to mention that people always feel a bit salty when something is gone even if they at first never had the intention to buy it anyways. I get that wii u owners who had the game feel a bit salty but as far as other people go who want the game on switch and never played it nor do they have the intention to get a wii u console it will not make a difference.
Also as a wii u owner you can get a physical copy of tropical freeze for less than 20$ cib wich is arguably better than an eshop download anyways so there is not to much to complain about as a wii u owner.
-
Porting games so the previous gen entires can shine on new software, and so fans and new comers alike can enjoy games they may not have played is a brilliant idea if it's kept with that intent at heart.
But charging 60 dollars for a 6 year old port that isn't even really a remaster 90 percent of the time soley because it includes the DLC that should have came for free anyway is a diverse and ellaborate scam and the consumer shouldn't stand of it. I don't buy a 2014 Camry for 2019 Camry price. Real devs are making real new games like rockstar and they deserve that money. Not copy and pastes. Just to repurpose a game and using the term "deluxe" or "Definitive Edition" as a means of copping out of making new franchise entries and essentially diluting a pretty good chunk of your console's library with your failed console library making people pay for the same game twice at full retail all because you couldn't market last time and are hedging on people double dipping their cookie so you double your profits and not take a loss - Disgraceful.
I don't agree with DLC meaning it deserves a full 60 dollar retail price because most games from reputable companies including Xbox and PS4 third party games which are typically much larger in scope release GOTY or deluxe editions for 20-40 dollars 2 years later than Include all DLC. With Nintendo I don't think they deserve a pass. I think this generation has seen great things from Nintendo but I own a Wii U so much of it has been lost on me. I just don't appreciate how they did this entire scheme to double down on all their money from old games. It's unacceptable to me.
mario kart 8 was 3 years old when the switch port was released furthermore since the wii u failed so bad many people have not even bought mario kart 8 to begin with. Switch sales surpassed the wii u sales in a single year by 1.5 times not to mention probably many more sales to come.
In my opinion it deserves the 60$ retail value since not many people have bought the game. for many people it's a brand new game. also the dlc was 20$ if i am not mistaken on the wii u version. considering the sales of 13 million for mario kart deluxe in a single year there where plenty of people who did not buy the game not to mention that many people who have the wii u version might not buy the deluxe version and even than the sales are 13 million at this moment compared to the 8 million on the wii u.
I don't agree because not many people buying it doesn't change that it's still an old game and the reason people didn't buy it was because Nintendo's mess up in marketing. If they want to repurpose the old game they should for the people who missed out but why should the people who miss out pay Red Dead Redemption 2 prices (even more) for something that came out years ago that had minimal dev costs on the switch because it was a premade game already. Not like Nintendo games are typically as large in scope as red dead anyway aside from Zelda. They aren't even graphical remasters. The DLCs cost nothing to make and are a scam on their own. It sounds like they are punishing you for them messing up. Like "We'll let you try the games you missed, but you're still paying 60 so we don't take a loss from Wii U". No other company does that. When other companies ask 60 it's for a remaster and even most remeasters are 40 now. But sorry if i'm misinterpreting what you mean :)
I just think it should be 40 for all these Wii U ports, some don't even include DLC and some are even older. The Smash is a whole different game so it warrants 60 but DK Tropical Freeze for example is the same exact game. Even if someone didn't buy it, that doesn't mean he should have to pay current gen price for a previous gen game imo. It's more so the price and the way of doing it that i'm upset about, not so much the idea.
-
Porting games so the previous gen entires can shine on new software, and so fans and new comers alike can enjoy games they may not have played is a brilliant idea if it's kept with that intent at heart.
But charging 60 dollars for a 6 year old port that isn't even really a remaster 90 percent of the time soley because it includes the DLC that should have came for free anyway is a diverse and ellaborate scam and the consumer shouldn't stand of it. I don't buy a 2014 Camry for 2019 Camry price. Real devs are making real new games like rockstar and they deserve that money. Not copy and pastes. Just to repurpose a game and using the term "deluxe" or "Definitive Edition" as a means of copping out of making new franchise entries and essentially diluting a pretty good chunk of your console's library with your failed console library making people pay for the same game twice at full retail all because you couldn't market last time and are hedging on people double dipping their cookie so you double your profits and not take a loss - Disgraceful.
I don't agree with DLC meaning it deserves a full 60 dollar retail price because most games from reputable companies including Xbox and PS4 third party games which are typically much larger in scope release GOTY or deluxe editions for 20-40 dollars 2 years later than Include all DLC. With Nintendo I don't think they deserve a pass. I think this generation has seen great things from Nintendo but I own a Wii U so much of it has been lost on me. I just don't appreciate how they did this entire scheme to double down on all their money from old games. It's unacceptable to me.
mario kart 8 was 3 years old when the switch port was released furthermore since the wii u failed so bad many people have not even bought mario kart 8 to begin with. Switch sales surpassed the wii u sales in a single year by 1.5 times not to mention probably many more sales to come.
In my opinion it deserves the 60$ retail value since not many people have bought the game. for many people it's a brand new game. also the dlc was 20$ if i am not mistaken on the wii u version. considering the sales of 13 million for mario kart deluxe in a single year there where plenty of people who did not buy the game not to mention that many people who have the wii u version might not buy the deluxe version and even than the sales are 13 million at this moment compared to the 8 million on the wii u.
I don't agree because not many people buying it doesn't change that it's still an old game and the reason people didn't buy it was because Nintendo's mess up in marketing. If they want to repurpose the old game they should for the people who missed out but why should the people who miss out pay Red Dead Redemption 2 prices (even more) for something that came out years ago that had minimal dev costs on the switch because it was a premade game already. Not like Nintendo games are typically as large in scope as red dead anyway aside from Zelda. They aren't even graphical remasters. The DLCs cost nothing to make and are a scam on their own. It sounds like they are punishing you for them messing up. Like "We'll let you try the games you missed, but you're still paying 60 so we don't take a loss from Wii U". No other company does that. When other companies ask 60 it's for a remaster and even most remeasters are 40 now. But sorry if i'm misinterpreting what you mean :)
I just think it should be 40 for all these Wii U ports, some don't even include DLC and some are even older. The Smash is a whole different game so it warrants 60 but DK Tropical Freeze for example is the same exact game. Even if someone didn't buy it, that doesn't mean he should have to pay current gen price for a previous gen game imo. It's more so the price and the way of doing it that i'm upset about, not so much the idea.
I can see where your coming from since you have allot of the wii u games wich are switch ports now but if you don't understand my reasons than that's your opinion nothing that I will tell will chance the minds of the wii u game owners of said switch ports.
In my opinion in the switch era it is fair for the reasons wich I have mentioned.
-
I don't agree because not many people buying it doesn't change that it's still an old game and the reason people didn't buy it was because Nintendo's mess up in marketing. If they want to repurpose the old game they should for the people who missed out but why should the people who miss out pay Red Dead Redemption 2 prices (even more) for something that came out years ago that had minimal dev costs on the switch because it was a premade game already. Not like Nintendo games are typically as large in scope as red dead anyway aside from Zelda. They aren't even graphical remasters. The DLCs cost nothing to make and are a scam on their own. It sounds like they are punishing you for them messing up. Like "We'll let you try the games you missed, but you're still paying 60 so we don't take a loss from Wii U". No other company does that. When other companies ask 60 it's for a remaster and even most remeasters are 40 now. But sorry if i'm misinterpreting what you mean :)
I just think it should be 40 for all these Wii U ports, some don't even include DLC and some are even older. The Smash is a whole different game so it warrants 60 but DK Tropical Freeze for example is the same exact game. Even if someone didn't buy it, that doesn't mean he should have to pay current gen price for a previous gen game imo. It's more so the price and the way of doing it that i'm upset about, not so much the idea.
I agree that a price break would be nice on Nintendo's part and $40 is a reasonable sum to ask for the ports. Nintendo did make their money on those games during the Wii U's lifespan. Most of those games sold millions of copies each, recouping the costs of development. That being said, Nintendo knows that they are tapping into a huge new audience on Switch who never played these games.
My own take is that a game thats lasts only 6 hours is worth $60. Where else can you get that kind of entertainment value? Going to the theater costs $20 a ticket or so now, unless you go to a matinee or an older theater. But to get the good, IMAX HD picture and sound (kinda like Switch games with HD graphics & sound), you are going to pay that $20. That's for a 2-hour movie. So a game with a relatively short play-time of 6 hours is pretty much on-par with the cost of seeing a movie in the theater. The difference is you get to keep the game and you will probably not be as swollen staying home playing it as you would be eating that salty-ass popcorn and a jumbo drink...that cost enough that you could have bought a Switch game! LOL.
A similar comparison relating to paying $60 for a Switch port would be going to the theater to see a movie that is re-released. Such as Star Wars or any Disney film like Lion King. You are going to watch an old movie for the same ticket price as a brand-new release. Sometimes you pay extra if it's a big film because hey, they know they can nail you for those extra bucks! Most of the time, these films aren't even touched up (resolution bump on Switch), have remixed sound (HD sound on Switch) or have any extra features (new characters, previous DLC now included, etc. on Switch).
And I also look at the cost of a game versus the cost of doing other things. To me, I would rather spend that $60 on a game and buy a McDouble than go out and spend $30 or more on a meal that I'm just going to crap out the next morning. But that's just my personal "value proposition."
-
I don't agree because not many people buying it doesn't change that it's still an old game and the reason people didn't buy it was because Nintendo's mess up in marketing. If they want to repurpose the old game they should for the people who missed out but why should the people who miss out pay Red Dead Redemption 2 prices (even more) for something that came out years ago that had minimal dev costs on the switch because it was a premade game already. Not like Nintendo games are typically as large in scope as red dead anyway aside from Zelda. They aren't even graphical remasters. The DLCs cost nothing to make and are a scam on their own. It sounds like they are punishing you for them messing up. Like "We'll let you try the games you missed, but you're still paying 60 so we don't take a loss from Wii U". No other company does that. When other companies ask 60 it's for a remaster and even most remeasters are 40 now. But sorry if i'm misinterpreting what you mean :)
I just think it should be 40 for all these Wii U ports, some don't even include DLC and some are even older. The Smash is a whole different game so it warrants 60 but DK Tropical Freeze for example is the same exact game. Even if someone didn't buy it, that doesn't mean he should have to pay current gen price for a previous gen game imo. It's more so the price and the way of doing it that i'm upset about, not so much the idea.
I agree that a price break would be nice on Nintendo's part and $40 is a reasonable sum to ask for the ports. Nintendo did make their money on those games during the Wii U's lifespan. Most of those games sold millions of copies each, recouping the costs of development. That being said, Nintendo knows that they are tapping into a huge new audience on Switch who never played these games.
The Nintendo wii u gave Nintendo huge losses even in the end with the profits from the wii u games amiibo and even the profits from the 3ds console and game sales wich was actually pretty succesfull they suffered a loss thanks to the wii u the games did most definitely not give them a nice profit. The biggest cushion where most definitely the amiibo and 3ds sales as far as profits go not the wii u games.
Also don't forget that games also have development costs in the millions as far as most first party titles go and seeing that most succesfull games only sold a few million it did not help that much I'm pretty sure of that. i can see why they charge full price for the ports since allot of people just ignored the wii u and did not buy the game not to mention that the grapics are pretty comparable and could have been games that where exclusively released for the switch if they would have skipped the wii u and never created it.
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/189706-nintendo-switch/74877473
I quote
They lost money.
Let's look at their income since the Wii U launched. Below is their reported operating income in each fiscal year. Profits are in bold, losses are in italics. All figures are in millions of Japanese Yen.
Fiscal year ending March 2013: ¥36410
Fiscal year ending March 2014: ¥46425
Fiscal year ending March 2015: ¥24770
Fiscal year ending March 2016: ¥32881
Six months ending September 2016: ¥5947
Overall total: ¥31131 (loss).
That's for Nintendo as a whole. We don't have any easy way to split that between the Wii U and the 3DS and Nintendo's other operations. However, I think it is totally safe to say that the 3DS was profitable. Therefore, Wii U must not only have made an overall loss, but an overall loss greater than the overall profit made by the 3DS.
also I quote
They lost a lot of money. In 2012 their infamous "cash reserve" was around 10 billion dollars. In 2016 it was 4.6 billion.
-
Lol. I know you like to argue stuff sworddude, but regardless of Nintendo's operating losses, it doesn't change the fact that their games recouped their development costs. So while the Wii U lost them money, games and 3DS did not.
If you figure Nintendo sells their first party titles to retailers for $48 each on a $60 title. Even taking away a further $18 for production & shipping costs (which is probably 10 times the real amount since discs literally cost pennies to make in bulk), you are talking $30 profit per $60 game.
Now look at the top-selling Wii U games.
Mario Kart 8 - 7.5 million / $225 million profit
New Super Mario Bros. U - 5.19 million / $155.7 million profit
Nintendoland - 5.07 million / $150.2 million profit
Super Mario 3D World - 4.82 million / $144.6 million profit
Super Smash Bros. Wii U - 4.8 million / $144 million profit
Again, production & shipping cost per game are more than likely $2 per game. That alone would make Mario Kart 8's profits around $345 million.
We dont know how much each game cost Nintendo to make and every game is different. However during an investor meeting in 2016, Shigeru Miyamoto stated they aim to sell 2 million units of their core titles to make a profit.
Again, regardless of the Wii U losing money, many of their popular games that they are re-releasing on Switch made them money on the Wii U. The company as a whole lost money, these games did not.
-
Lol. I know you like to argue stuff sworddude, but regardless of Nintendo's operating losses, it doesn't change the fact that their games recouped their development costs. So while the Wii U lost them money, games and 3DS did not.
If you figure Nintendo sells their first party titles to retailers for $48 each on a $60 title. Even taking away a further $18 for production & shipping costs (which is probably 10 times the real amount since discs literally cost pennies to make in bulk), you are talking $30 profit per $60 game.
Now look at the top-selling Wii U games.
Mario Kart 8 - 7.5 million / $225 million profit
New Super Mario Bros. U - 5.19 million / $155.7 million profit
Nintendoland - 5.07 million / $150.2 million profit
Super Mario 3D World - 4.82 million / $144.6 million profit
Super Smash Bros. Wii U - 4.8 million / $144 million profit
Again, production & shipping cost per game are more than likely $2 per game. That alone would make Mario Kart 8's profits around $345 million.
We dont know how much each game cost Nintendo to make and every game is different. However during an investor meeting in 2016, Shigeru Miyamoto stated they aim to sell 2 million units of their core titles to make a profit.
Again, regardless of the Wii U losing money, many of their popular games that they are re-releasing on Switch made them money on the Wii U. The company as a whole lost money, these games did not.
not saying that the games themselves did not make some degree of profit recouping the game devlopment costs but if only a few million copies are sold the profits are okaish a bust especially in this day and age where just a few million copies sold isn't that great on the bigger titles.
That being said yes sure phycial copies in materials and production are very cheap but we all know that most of the costs are in game development and especially advertising those are the huge money sinks here. your paying for the digital stuff the game itself the experience not the pieces of plastic etc that a game is made off.
5 - 8 million copies are alright for the profits but to also recoup console costs you need heavy hitters 10 million + sales multiple times these should just be appetizers in the console library if you want to make a profit as far as the big hit titles go.
Look at the ds, 3ds and the wii multiple titles selling over 10 million even a few above 20 million than your making money and recouping console costs. 5 million+ sales is okay but for the heavy hitters and only very few of them to have those sales numbers is just not enough to stay in the green
The wii u biggest hit was mario kart 8 with just 8 million sales while some others are only around 5 million and not to many to top that off those are not great to make a profit. overall pretty sad sales.
You could argue that N64 and gamecube sales are pretty bad aswell however costs where cheaper at the time so those sales where pretty okay. not to mention still greater sales than the wii u when devlopment and advertisement costs where allot cheaper wich means still making a profit overall.
-
I hated Mario Kart 8 when it first launched on Wii U before any patches or DLC. It's what stopped me from buying a Wii U. I really enjoyed Mario Kart 7 and still do and playing a kiosk demo of 8 I was not impressed at all. Playing the full version weeks later I was still not impressed. Remember when the first option after a race was View Highlight Reel? Who thought that was a good idea?
The Switch port finally made the game great for me. All the paid DLC, fixing battle mode, and two items made a game I initially hated way better.
-
At first I was pretty upset with the sheer number of Wii U games ported to the Switch. But after I realized how much a commercial failure the Wii U was, it makes perfect sense to port over some of its games so they can have a fresh start.
Now many more people can experience Mario Kart 8, or Hyrule Warriors, al et. Some of these games absolutely need to be played by as many people as possible (they're that good), but that wasn't going to happen on the Wii U.
I enjoyed (and still enjoy) the Wii U, but the major migration of games from Wii U to Switch was an undeniable reality.
-
At first I was pretty upset with the sheer number of Wii U games ported to the Switch. But after I realized how much a commercial failure the Wii U was, it makes perfect sense to port over some of its games so they can have a fresh start.
Now many more people can experience Mario Kart 8, or Hyrule Warriors, al et. Some of these games absolutely need to be played by as many people as possible (they're that good), but that wasn't going to happen on the Wii U.
I enjoyed (and still enjoy) the Wii U, but the major migration of games from Wii U to Switch was an undeniable reality.
Hopefully they finish the job! Still need Super Mario 3D World at least.
-
i have both consoles and am loving the ports, since i prefer handheld consoles over set-top ones and always have. i haven't pulled the switch dock out of the box once, and have rebought some games i already had on PS4 for the switch. i'm all for ports of all kinds of things to the switch, definitely in the 'port every game in existence ever to switch' camp.
that said, i definitely still feel 'punished' for buying into the wii u, and in part, it's that these ports are $60 all over again. and i'd love to box my wii u forever and forget i even made that $300 mistake, but these prices sting.
it's a shame because i feel like there's a good marketing scheme they could have done releasing the ports for $50 or even $40 MSRP. (let's agree that smash ultimate doesn't apply here and is fine at $60.) there is definitely a way to market some of these games as lower price for new console owners, or 'new to nintendo' switch owners, or a 'we missed you, welcome back to the nintendo family' tongue-in-cheek acknowledgement that the wii u was disappointing as hell to consumers and most of them didn't buy it. so there's a family of cheaper games for your nintendo 'fix' that are ports and/or definitive editions of the wii u games, and then the $60 'switch exclusive' experiences. this also would allow people to get used to the jump from paying $40 to paying $60 for handheld games. (the switch can be converted to a telly but let's be real, most people play handheld mode plenty enough to consider it their handheld gaming device.) it would also be a clever hint that another switch exclusive new experience is coming, but HD development takes time, and ports are a nice way to disguise how much time has been taken.
$50 for a version with all DLC and maybe some additional content included or whatever, and $40 for ports with no or very few additions. this is still a bit pricey in a world where the entire spyro trilogy is remade from the ground up and sold for $40 MSRP, but it's at least something.
and the price tiering would be much more palatable to those who got burned by the wii u fiasco, esp after a while when the price finally shaves $10 off MSRP in most retail outlets. instead of being $50 after that, it'd be $30 or $40, and that is way more acceptable.
that said, i am normally one of those 'games are actually pretty cheap when dev cost and hours of entertainment are considered' types. i'm mainly whining cause wii u sucked and ninty games never seem to drop MSRP like other games so 'getting it cheaper in a year or two' doesn't apply. the MSRP applies more to these ports than ports on other consoles. i'm still all for the ports coming over, and definitive editions are always good imo, both to consumers who waited or don't have the money for a base game + all DLC, and as a method to archive, since servers aren't needed for all the content and patches.
-
i have both consoles and am loving the ports, since i prefer handheld consoles over set-top ones and always have. i haven't pulled the switch dock out of the box once, and have rebought some games i already had on PS4 for the switch. i'm all for ports of all kinds of things to the switch, definitely in the 'port every game in existence ever to switch' camp.
that said, i definitely still feel 'punished' for buying into the wii u, and in part, it's that these ports are $60 all over again. and i'd love to box my wii u forever and forget i even made that $300 mistake, but these prices sting.
it's a shame because i feel like there's a good marketing scheme they could have done releasing the ports for $50 or even $40 MSRP. (let's agree that smash ultimate doesn't apply here and is fine at $60.) there is definitely a way to market some of these games as lower price for new console owners, or 'new to nintendo' switch owners, or a 'we missed you, welcome back to the nintendo family' tongue-in-cheek acknowledgement that the wii u was disappointing as hell to consumers and most of them didn't buy it. so there's a family of cheaper games for your nintendo 'fix' that are ports and/or definitive editions of the wii u games, and then the $60 'switch exclusive' experiences. this also would allow people to get used to the jump from paying $40 to paying $60 for handheld games. (the switch can be converted to a telly but let's be real, most people play handheld mode plenty enough to consider it their handheld gaming device.) it would also be a clever hint that another switch exclusive new experience is coming, but HD development takes time, and ports are a nice way to disguise how much time has been taken.
$50 for a version with all DLC and maybe some additional content included or whatever, and $40 for ports with no or very few additions. this is still a bit pricey in a world where the entire spyro trilogy is remade from the ground up and sold for $40 MSRP, but it's at least something.
and the price tiering would be much more palatable to those who got burned by the wii u fiasco, esp after a while when the price finally shaves $10 off MSRP in most retail outlets. instead of being $50 after that, it'd be $30 or $40, and that is way more acceptable.
that said, i am normally one of those 'games are actually pretty cheap when dev cost and hours of entertainment are considered' types. i'm mainly whining cause wii u sucked and ninty games never seem to drop MSRP like other games so 'getting it cheaper in a year or two' doesn't apply. the MSRP applies more to these ports than ports on other consoles. i'm still all for the ports coming over, and definitive editions are always good imo, both to consumers who waited or don't have the money for a base game + all DLC, and as a method to archive, since servers aren't needed for all the content and patches.
That sounds like a great marketing plan. You should be working for Nintendo!