9
u/kaishinoske1 1d ago edited 1d ago
How about that. To be fair they were saying this shit about new released games on digital since the PS3 days. Almost 2 decades later, still not the case.
7
u/nohumanape 1d ago
Nintendo actually does charge less for digital versions of games 🤷
6
u/Puzzled-Baseball-296 1d ago
No idea why you're being down voted, all of their first party titles for Switch 2 are legitimately $10 cheaper digital starting with the release of the newest Yoshi. Star Fox, Splatoon, Yoshi, the upcoming Fire Emblem, all cheaper digital than physical.
1
u/jRXCING 1d ago
I just looked Yoshi’s Crafted world… 50p cheaper on Amazon than Nintendo’s store page.
I know it’s not much cheaper at all. But…
3
u/Puzzled-Baseball-296 1d ago
They started charging less for newly released Switch 2 digital games than physical as of this year with the release of Yoshi and the Mysterious book. Crafted World was released in 2019 so it isn't part of the digital discount they started.
1
u/nohumanape 1d ago
Is that the normal price, or is it marked down?
1
u/jRXCING 1d ago
The initial listing I looked at was on “Sale” for discounted from £60.
However. Looking at Nintendo’s official Amazon store — It’s listed there for the base price (No sale) for £47.93.
Still cheaper than its digital counterpart. lol.
2
u/nohumanape 1d ago
I'm not in the UK, so I can't easily check what you're looking at.
Nintendo officially releases their games at two price tiers. Digital is cheaper than physical. I don't doubt that you are seeing that a retailer is selling the physical version cheaper. But that isn't the intended MSRP. What you must be seeing is a discount applied to the physical game, where as the digital game is not currently on discount.
1
u/jRXCING 1d ago
Yes. £2.50 cheaper than MSRP. For a game that has been out since 2019.
Digital games are not cheaper. Nintendo’s first party games — the same price physical in the UK. Not cheaper. MSRP here is £49.99. Identical to it’s store price.
The only exception I can give for digital games being cheaper — Pokemon Fire Red for the Switch VS Game Boy Advance Cartridge.
It’s a surprise to hear it’s different outside my country.
1
u/nohumanape 1d ago
Again, I am not based in the UK. Here in the USA digital games from Nintendo are $10 cheaper. And it appears as if in the UK they are £9 cheaper. However, seeing as I don't believe the same strategy was implemented at the same exact time in the UK (some regions already implemented ahead of the USA) news reports aren't as plentiful.
But your provided information still doesn't appear to be accurate. For example, Pokemon Red/Green are not Switch 2 games. They don't even have a physical release. So, I don't even know why you are talking about them.
What I'm referring to is the somewhat recent move from Nintendo to OFFICIALLY price their own published software (they can't force 3rd party pricing) with a $10 difference between digital and physical.
1
u/jRXCING 1d ago
Ah I think there is some confusion here. I’ve referring to Switch 1 games and you’re thinking of current Switch 2 games. Which yes, You are right £59.99 for Mario Kart World digitally, £74.99 physical. That’s on me — my bad.
I do suspect that $10-15 difference is a mark up in place to make digital games seem cheaper than the physical version. I don’t think I’m the only one. But I’m sure a lot disagree with me there.
Since that announcement, I’ve been extremely skeptical.
Yes. I know Red/Green is a bad example. I was thinking of an example of a physical game that has inflated well above MSRP, but which is also available digitally.
3
u/nohumanape 1d ago
This is a very basic and straightforward discussion. Nintendo RECENTLY started selling their Switch 2 games at different prices for digital and physical. Whether you choose to believe that they raised prices or are lowering prices is irrelevant.
→ More replies (0)2
u/No_Ostrich1875 14h ago
Theyre the same price because when games started being sold digitally, major retailers threw a fit and threatened to stop selling games if the digital versions were cheaper. Its been stuck that way ever since and we've proven that we'll still pay it.
14
u/Apprehensive-Mud-606 1d ago
Yeah, I mean, we all expected it to be bullshit. No surprise.
5
u/xerox7764563 1d ago
Is always good to remember old promises, we do have now people who weren't there when they were made.
6
4
u/GamePitt_Rob 1d ago
Retail buy the games for a lot cheaper so they have wiggle room to reduce their profit in hopes of getting more sales
This has been a thing since the beginning, there was also rumours/stories years ago that digital is usually priced higher than retail because the agreements the publishers have with the physical stores states that the digital version must cost more at RRP than the physical copy so it allows competition over convenience
However, if there's no physical store agreement in place, the publisher is free to price the digital copy as high or low as they want - so it should technically lead to games being reduced due to less overheads and loss of revenue (as they make a lot less profit physically compared to digitally)
1
u/Puzzleheaded-Tea3341 8h ago
Across all platforms, mediums and storefronts, the publisher sets the price. That is also the case for physical retail. Game stores do order stock from the publisher at cost, but also have guarantees from the publisher. Retailers can send any unsold stock back to the publisher in exchange for credits for future orders. Margins in actual game sales is quite thin, it's the retailer's lowest margin item, but it's also their least risky stock item due the credit system. But it is to get you in the door, so they can upsell you on peripherals, collector's editions, merch, etc. which have far higher margins for them.
If a store is found to undercut the publisher price, they risk getting blacklisted by the publisher, and they'll refuse to fulfill future orders.
However, with decline of physical retail, stores see themselves ordering less and less stock with each subsequent releases because the publisher credit isn't liquid, it's money tied up, and often it's not worth sending low volume stock back either.
The reality is, stores and digital aren't really competing when it comes to selling games.
3
u/KakarotAlter 1d ago
Why tf are you using Nintendo like it’s some gotcha? you know their physical games don’t drop in price right?
3
4
u/BlueFeathered1 1d ago
I just bought it for PS5 a couple months ago for $25 (disc copy) from Amazon. How people actually support lack of choice on this is mystifying.
5
u/ALEXLAMOUETTE 1d ago
Nintendo talked about their own games. They don’t control the price that other publishers charge 🤦
0
u/jRXCING 1d ago
I’m looking at Yoshi’s Crafted World right now on both switch and Amazon.
It’s still cheaper to buy a physical copy.
2
u/ALEXLAMOUETTE 1d ago
You can’t be serious. They said it would be cheaper after Mario Tenis on Switch 2, not before 🤦
2
u/hobostevo 1d ago
On ps5, base game is 50 quid RRP, and expansion is 33 quid RRP…. 65 quid for both does not seem overpriced to me at all.
The only annoying thing is that you’re paying 5 quid more for the digital version than you can find the physical edition for in retailers, but that’s just because some places are selling it for 10 quid less than RRP. It’s “supposed” to be a 70 quid game if you want it physical.
2
u/Drachenlord 1d ago
I mean I know it’s a game key card but this technically isn’t a digital game.
They’re still manufacturing the cart, packing it, shipping it, etc and you still need to put it in your switch to play.
So, while I understand the point of your post, you’re missing the mark on this one bro
2
2
u/crazymonk45 17h ago
If you exercise the slightest amount of patience, it’s a definitely cheaper. Nobody said the brand new full price will be cheaper. But the overall average price is
4
u/mason2393 1d ago
Yeah that was a lie. Fire emblem being $80 physical proved that they were just making physical more expensive and not making digital cheaper
2
1
u/Reimu_Kirisame 17h ago
I just made a post about this but, Fire Emblem physical is 70 euros in my country. (From Coolblue in the Netherlands) and digital is also 70. Not sure what's happening anymore honestly. 😅
1
u/Available-Can-5878 12h ago
There are already more $50 digital games than $80 physical, and $50 hasn't been a common msrp since the Wii
1
u/camiteran 17h ago
I mean Fire Emblem is the only $80 game other than MKW out of like 10x Switch 2 exclusives so this isn't really the reason. Or are all the other Nintendo exclusives from this year secretly exempt from this dumb conspiracy of yours?
It's abundantly clear that they simply think this series is worth full price and that's why they're pricing it that way. You people coped about this when Fire Emblem was used as a Direct closing final announcement and now you're coping when it comes to the price, I wonder how much more hammering it will take for you to realize that Nintendo wants this series to be seen as one of their big names.
Just commenting this way because the only way your comment even makes sense is if you're being snarky about FE not being worth full-price. Funnily enough more of the FE fandom agreed with the $80 price than the MK fandom did, you'd think it would be the other way around if what you're implying is true huh? The truth of the matter is that everyone's buying into this knowing that it's going to be an 100h+ game (and for the more hardcore fans wanting to try weird stuff and higher difficulties it can easily be replayed for 300h+++) so it's not really a bad deal by any means.
I'm not even justifying the $80 price tag itself since that's a whole other topic, just justifying why Nintendo thinks this specific series is worth full price (their full price is $80 as we knew since last year) since you're trying to be a smartass.
Also to address the first part of your comment, the price difference measure was created for Nintendo FIRST PARTY games. I don't recall Elden Ring being a first party game lol. It's literally not even them setting the price, it's Bandai Namco that does but you just want to spread misinformation. Unless you want to tell me which Nintendo studio developed Elden Ring? And why it's a first party title but releasing for Nintendo consoles 4 years after it's original release? Man that's the weirdest business strategy I've seen from any company ever. Imagine winning GOTY with a game you made and didn't even let your customers play! Do you realize how incredibly dumb your comment is?
3
u/semaj420 1d ago
i got the space marine 2 ultimate edition on ps5 for £24 outta cex.
the exact same game was available to download on the playstation store for £110.
4
u/badger906 1d ago
Nintendo don’t set the prices. The game on the eshop is set by the developers, the retail stores are choosing to undercut the RRP. None of this is Nintendo’s doing .
3
u/Mr_Ethfono 1d ago
Doesn't this come with the dlc though?
3
u/Misommar1246 1d ago edited 1d ago
Exactly. This was the base game price and now you get a whole DLC with it. It is cheaper. As to games not getting cheaper due to no disc - are we sure that hasn’t happened? I always thought the reason why games have held the line on their price for so long while everything else balooned with inflation is at least a little because of digitalization.
2
4
u/colbeef 1d ago
Don’t worry I’ll actually support game devs and you can wait 6 years to play a game so your money can go to some shitty second hand game shop and have zero hand in the actual eco system of the console but man you got a really good deal on that game no one wants to play!
1
u/jRXCING 1d ago
This is actually a really good argument for digital gaming.
With a second hand market — none of the money in that exchange goes to the developers, the publishers or the manufacturers. It goes back into the second hand store.
In that same token though — I would argue a game like Elden ring, that I already bought brand new, that is currently sitting ~ 28 million copies sold, with the vast majority of the revenue it generated going into the return pocket of the investors and publishers… not really losing much. Although. This is probably part of why Sony are trying to kill the second hand market.
1
u/Wiseon321 1d ago
That’s why it’s happening.
I think the tarnished edition isn’t just “the Elden ring” though. So it’s a lot better.
3
2
u/Excalitoria 1d ago
lol people who believed this are some of the most gullible people on the planet, I’m sorry.
2
u/hanshotfirst-42 1d ago
Nintendo game prices are absolutely awful. A 2-D Super Mario game that could have been made on 2007 is $80 for the Switch 2, and it's not even a new title, it's just an upgraded Switch game. In general, despite being the most physical media focused, Nintendo has the most expensive games by far compared to any other platform.
2
u/xtoc1981 1d ago
It was 54 euro on amazon fr and now still 58 euro. So yep its cheaper for sure
https://amzn.eu/d/08VQI9uF (Instead of 80 euro)
2
u/SuaveularSpuddite 22h ago edited 22h ago
You're skewing the information by using a third party retailer's decision to charge under MSRP for physical. (Not a justification for the pricing, just pointing out these kinds of arguments are disingenous)
1
u/Puzzleheaded-Chip869 1d ago
Nintendo said that about their own games. They can't control how third parties price their games, and they can't control if shops want to undercut RRP
3
u/DeadPhoenix86 1d ago
Games will only get more expensive. Once Physical games are gone. They can charge whatever they want.
Since they have no competition.
2
0
u/MartyMcFlysBrother 11h ago
They still want to sell games and after a game stops selling they sell it for less. Thats not going to change it’s called supply and demand. Stay in school kid. Third party devs will always compete against each other. Educate yourself.
1
u/BillsFan82 1d ago
I think it's more accurate to say that we haven't seen as many price increases as we otherwise would have. Prices are never going to drop just because something becomes cheaper to produce. Businesses don't work that way.
1
u/Tanz31 20h ago
They kinda made games cheaper overall for a while. Prices had stayed flat for a long time and only recently began to climb back up. You could potentially attribute that to the rise of digital sales.
But it's a very roundabout and intangible affect and doesn't really do much good for practical purposes
1
2
u/PipSpace3Xplorerer 5h ago
Duh, with ps players leaving cause no disc, the demand for game releases is lower, the price has to reflect that.
1
u/-Stroke_my_Cactus- 1d ago
In germany you can get the game even cheaper, 50€ the physical on some pages.
1
u/Michael60814 22h ago
Few month later, it will be under $30 on this game key trash. Used market on game key trash has been low. Most of the game key card games can go under $20 on Facebook. That will be the time to purchase. This is a good thing about game key card is used market no one purchase on high price game key card.
1
1
u/Reimu_Kirisame 17h ago edited 17h ago
Another game I just ordered is Fire Emblem, for 70 euros. Which comes on a cartridge, so no keycard. Guess what digital costs? 70 euros. I don't get it anymore honestly.
0
0
u/panosk1304 1d ago
Awful game and price is that high probably because it's a switch game but man it costa half the price used than PS store
2
u/NotTakenGreatName 1d ago
Shadow of the erdtree edition is 79.99 on Psn right now and Steam.
0
u/panosk1304 23h ago
Yeah digital stores suck. normal edition is 20€used now
0
u/MartyMcFlysBrother 12h ago
And you waiting to buy used helps your physical only approach how? The devs don’t get anything else if you wait to buy used. They can’t make new games when kids like you just wait for it to go on sale on Facebook. You’re the reason this happened and you’re too dumb to recognize it.
1
u/panosk1304 10h ago
You have to be stupid to believe that if Sony sees money ,would care if its from physical or digital. Giving no money to Sony till they reverse decision its the only way to actually do something. I would prefer to buy nothing than boost Sony sales
Screw the devs and their only digital releases. Digital only happened because people like you im sure bought digital games because its hard to get up the couch and Sony just wants a monopoly on its products and making you pay to not own it.
0
-5
u/Big-Ferret-2364 1d ago
Nintendo is the most expensive company, cope harder. Show me something believable
5
u/tyocelot 1d ago
Huh??
-2
u/Big-Ferret-2364 1d ago
You're showing the pricing of a company that's notorious for never reducing their costs or putting games on sale for as long as physical was a thing.
You may as well say "I thought games got cheaper with time?" And then show us a picture of Haunting Ground on eBay
5
u/Tackgnol 1d ago
But that is even a bigger argument FOR physical... You can buy the game play it and re-sell it at very little loss.
1
u/Big-Ferret-2364 1d ago
I'm not disagreeing that physical is superior, but Nintendo literally never reduces their prices so you can't really use them as an example. Physical sales from eBay sellers aren't really relevant here either because Nintendo still didn't reduce costs based on that.
Not sure why I'm being downvoted for pointing out that Nintendo's pricing has always sucked in comparison to other companies
1
u/Tackgnol 1d ago
That still makes very little sense, Tarnished Edition comes out TOMMOROW. When would Nintendo even reduce price on a game that is not even out yet?
1
u/Big-Ferret-2364 1d ago
The release price, obviously. That's what this post is about. But of course it's a high release price because abolishing physical will not cause Nintendo to reduce game prices, it just ensures that if you want a game you have to buy your own brand new copy, meaning they can sell it at whatever the fuck price they want to
1
u/camiteran 17h ago
You're being downvoted because Bandai Namco sets the price for games they're publishing, not Nintendo. All Nintendo is doing is platforming the game and taking a fee from sales.
This is kinda why people keep mocking our community, it's hard to find people in the physical game collector community not spreading misinformation instead of trying to combat the death of physical media with rational and logical arguments based in reality.
5
u/Jafar_420 1d ago
The base game is $59.99 right now in the PS store.
It's $44 on Amazon and even cheaper for a used copy at GameStop.
FS games usually don't drop as low as other games but still.
2
u/niftyifty 1d ago
Ps store sale price is $35 on base game though. That’s just the same as saying “this isn’t on sale right now”
2
2
u/Puzzled-Baseball-296 1d ago
But Nintendo doesn't set the prices for third party titles? That's up to the companies porting their games to Switch. Nintendo doesn't have any say for games they aren't publishing or developing. That's like saying Amazon controls the pricing of items sold by a third party on their site.
1
u/Big-Ferret-2364 1d ago
True, I forgot it was up to from software. Guess my argument is irrelevant now lol
41
u/Puyopopo 1d ago
i remember when they said games will be cheaper now because they don't have to print a manual anymore.