Nintendo Switch Discussion

Discuss and discover all the great games of yesteryear!

Moderators: NickThorpe, Darran@Retro Gamer

User avatar
Sephiroth81
Posts: 4568
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 12:35 pm

Re: Nintendo Switch Discussion

Post by Sephiroth81 » Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:52 pm

Matt_B wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 11:46 am
The Laird wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 11:22 am
The GTA V argument is a really poor and very misguided one when you not only factor in the massive improvements to the actual game but also the huge amount of DLC they have released completely for free off the back of it.
Well, sure, but it's a deliberately extreme example to counter the argument that re-releases should automatically be cheap. You might additionally point out that it was only a year old and probably the most expensive game ever made, although they'd already covered its costs by the time the later console ports came out.

At the opposite end of the scale you might consider Majora's Mask on the 3DS, which was fifteen years old at the time, or even Cave Story on the same system which was originally a free game. Both were eagerly snapped up at full price by many, because they're genuine evergreen classics. Is Captain Toad in that league? Probably not, but it's still pretty good fun in my book and worth a look for those who missed it first time around.
These are almost glorified ROM/ISO dumps compared with the effort that went into porting Majoras Mask to 3DS and GTA V to the modern generation consoles.

pratty
Posts: 5293
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 7:13 pm

Re: Nintendo Switch Discussion

Post by pratty » Mon Sep 17, 2018 7:55 pm

Sephiroth81 wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:43 pm
So its frustrating more than anything, as Nintendo are capable of enhancing their older games.
But they do, the ports have added content, modes and control schemes.
Sephiroth81 wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:43 pm
These Wii U ports are at the disappointing end of this remastering scale.
If it ain't broke...
Sephiroth81 wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:43 pm
You're basically paying full price for last gen games (as the Wii U is essentially 360/PS3) standard, and often years old.
Didn't last gen's games cost full price aswell? Was it not cheeky to ask this price in the first instance? If not why is it cheeky to do so now? You've still not explained the relevence of time outside of it's role in market forces.

If you except it's fine for a dev to sell a game at 'full price' in a quanity beyond what is necessary to cover the costs of the game, then what has changed if they port the game to continue to do this?

This discussion stems from the idea that a port is, by it's very existance as a port, a substandard game, regardeless of any extra dev work and improvements. Any lack of appeal is firstly subjective, and largely due to a lack of hype and excitement because it's not new, but this does not mean that the devs aren't entitled to seek a price that refelcts the quality of the game. Obviously any seller of anything wants as much as they can get, it is market forces that stops them charging infinity pounds for their product.
Pratty's trade list, updated (May 2019)!
viewtopic.php?f=19&t=54823

User avatar
Sephiroth81
Posts: 4568
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 12:35 pm

Re: Nintendo Switch Discussion

Post by Sephiroth81 » Mon Sep 17, 2018 8:04 pm

pratty wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 7:55 pm
Sephiroth81 wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:43 pm
So its frustrating more than anything, as Nintendo are capable of enhancing their older games.
But they do, the ports have added content, modes and control schemes.
To adapt to the Switch, yea. But its hardly revolutionary or an overhaul. Again, not warranting full price IMO.
pratty wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 7:55 pm
Sephiroth81 wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:43 pm
These Wii U ports are at the disappointing end of this remastering scale.
If it ain't broke...
Sure, but don't charge full price for it. Plenty of Virtual Console and re-released games on previous systems were never full price, including by Nintendo themselves.
pratty wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 7:55 pm

Didn't last gen's games cost full price aswell? Was it not cheeky to ask this price in the first instance? If not why is it cheeky to do so now? You've still not explained the relevence of time outside of it's role in market forces.

If you except it's fine for a dev to sell a game at 'full price' in a quanity beyond what is necessary to cover the costs of the game, then what has changed if they port the game to continue to do this?

This discussion stems from the idea that a port is, by it's very existance as a port, a substandard game, regardeless of any extra dev work and improvements. Any lack of appeal is firstly subjective, and largely due to a lack of hype and excitement because it's not new, but this does not mean that the devs aren't entitled to seek a price that refelcts the quality of the game. Obviously any seller of anything wants as much as they can get, it is market forces that stops them charging infinity pounds for their product.
As I said above, no, they weren't full price (re-released). Wii games on the Wii U were under 20 quid.

My point is that Nintendo are perfectly entitled to sell their games at whatever price they wish. I just won't indulge them, because it feels like a con. At some point, Nintendo thought this gen that they could get away with charging full price for ported old games, fair play to them. They didn't do it before, but now they do and can. Some other games companies choose not to do that, maybe guilt could be involved, and not wanting to rip off their loyal customers.

User avatar
Matt_B
Posts: 5168
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 9:30 am
Location: 5 minutes from the beach, 30 seconds from the pub

Re: Nintendo Switch Discussion

Post by Matt_B » Mon Sep 17, 2018 9:13 pm

Sephiroth81 wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:52 pm
These are almost glorified ROM/ISO dumps compared with the effort that went into porting Majoras Mask to 3DS and GTA V to the modern generation consoles.
I'd say that the ports I've seen have had at least as much enhancement as Majora's Mask got. To use Captain Toad as an example once more, it's got four new levels based on SMO, new camera modes, a 2-player option and various tweaks to the gameplay to allow single-screen play. You wouldn't get that with a ROM dump even were it possible for the Switch to emulate the Wii U hardware.

Also, all ports to the Switch come with a massive enhancement in that you can undock it and take them anywhere. That's got to be worth something regardless of the development effort required to achieve it.
As I said above, no, they weren't full price (re-released). Wii games on the Wii U were under 20 quid.
They were literal ROM dumps though.

The ones that weren't, e.g. Twilight Princess HD and Wii Sports Club, sold at full price.

User avatar
Sephiroth81
Posts: 4568
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 12:35 pm

Re: Nintendo Switch Discussion

Post by Sephiroth81 » Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:11 pm

Matt_B wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 9:13 pm

They were literal ROM dumps though.

The ones that weren't, e.g. Twilight Princess HD and Wii Sports Club, sold at full price.
Which were justifiable at that price point (or at least more so), because they were significant upgrades, not relatively straightforward ports with a tiny splattering of DLC content on top. I bought both Twilight Princess HD and Wii Sports Club (although I can't remember paying over £25 for the latter). I also got Wind Waker HD as well (but paid barely anything for it). If Nintendo put that much effort into upgrading their Wii U ports, we wouldn't be having this discussion. I'd prefer original Wii HD ports to the Switch than Wii U 1080p (over 720p) mild enhancements that you'd need to squint to notice a difference.

pratty
Posts: 5293
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 7:13 pm

Re: Nintendo Switch Discussion

Post by pratty » Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:34 pm

Sephiroth81 wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 8:04 pm
pratty wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 7:55 pm

Didn't last gen's games cost full price aswell? Was it not cheeky to ask this price in the first instance? If not why is it cheeky to do so now? You've still not explained the relevence of time outside of it's role in market forces.

If you except it's fine for a dev to sell a game at 'full price' in a quanity beyond what is necessary to cover the costs of the game, then what has changed if they port the game to continue to do this?

This discussion stems from the idea that a port is, by it's very existance as a port, a substandard game, regardeless of any extra dev work and improvements. Any lack of appeal is firstly subjective, and largely due to a lack of hype and excitement because it's not new, but this does not mean that the devs aren't entitled to seek a price that refelcts the quality of the game. Obviously any seller of anything wants as much as they can get, it is market forces that stops them charging infinity pounds for their product.
As I said above, no, they weren't full price (re-released). Wii games on the Wii U were under 20 quid.

My point is that Nintendo are perfectly entitled to sell their games at whatever price they wish. I just won't indulge them, because it feels like a con. At some point, Nintendo thought this gen that they could get away with charging full price for ported old games, fair play to them. They didn't do it before, but now they do and can. Some other games companies choose not to do that, maybe guilt could be involved, and not wanting to rip off their loyal customers.
You've missed my point. I meant last gen games, on any of last gen's systems, were sold at what was considered 'full price', and it was accepted as fair that devs could aim to sell as many copies at full price as they could. Why would this stop being ok when the game becomes available on new hardware? Market forces control a change in price, not that the above principle is suddenly wrong. A port might only be 10% new content to you because you played the original release, but it would 100% new to a gamer that hasn't played it before.
Pratty's trade list, updated (May 2019)!
viewtopic.php?f=19&t=54823

User avatar
Sephiroth81
Posts: 4568
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 12:35 pm

Re: Nintendo Switch Discussion

Post by Sephiroth81 » Mon Sep 17, 2018 11:02 pm

pratty wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:34 pm

You've missed my point. I meant last gen games, on any of last gen's systems, were sold at what was considered 'full price', and it was accepted as fair that devs could aim to sell as many copies at full price as they could. Why would this stop being ok when the game becomes available on new hardware? Market forces control a change in price, not that the above principle is suddenly wrong. A port might only be 10% new content to you because you played the original release, but it would 100% new to a gamer that hasn't played it before.
It doesn't stop anything - some people like you think its reasonable practice, I happen to think its a bit of a con. You lap it up, I don't.
Nintendo haven't really been doing this before (at least regularly), and generally offered older games at budget rates, so perhaps thats why i'm thinking it seems a touch unreasonable to re-issue games at full price a few years later when they've had in some cases, no enhancements of any note.

You can talk market forces all day, I'm not disagreeing with the obvious (some companies will price stuff at whatever they can get away with). I just think Nintendo could be better than that, and I thought that in the past. At least previous re-issues had significant enhancements (as mentioned multiple times already, which are objectively superior and more worthy of the full price tag). Although their Wii release of "Super Mario All Stars" (rom in a box with a book) was about as big a con as they've done here, possibly more so, but hey, market forces said its ok as enough people lap it up. Principles do count for something, I happen to think they've got it wrong in this case, even if they might make, perhaps, more money in the short term.

Now, if they re-made Super Mario Sunshine on Gamecube in 1080p, and 60fps with enhanced textures.....THAT would be worth full price imo. Far more than yet another Wii U port with marginal gains.

User avatar
Matt_B
Posts: 5168
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 9:30 am
Location: 5 minutes from the beach, 30 seconds from the pub

Re: Nintendo Switch Discussion

Post by Matt_B » Tue Sep 18, 2018 1:17 am

Sephiroth81 wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:11 pm
Matt_B wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 9:13 pm

They were literal ROM dumps though.

The ones that weren't, e.g. Twilight Princess HD and Wii Sports Club, sold at full price.
Which were justifiable at that price point (or at least more so), because they were significant upgrades, not relatively straightforward ports with a tiny splattering of DLC content on top. I bought both Twilight Princess HD and Wii Sports Club (although I can't remember paying over £25 for the latter). I also got Wind Waker HD as well (but paid barely anything for it). If Nintendo put that much effort into upgrading their Wii U ports, we wouldn't be having this discussion. I'd prefer original Wii HD ports to the Switch than Wii U 1080p (over 720p) mild enhancements that you'd need to squint to notice a difference.
I guess it just comes down to what you think makes for a significant upgrade. At the end of the day, there's not that much in the way of added gameplay to either Wii Sports Club or the HD Zeldas beyond a few new modes and tweaks. There was much more scope for graphical improvement with the move from the Cube/Wii to the Wii U though, because they're in a totally different league when it comes to processing power, while there's a lot less of that that can happen with Wii U to Switch ports. The latter is only a little bit more capable especially when running in handheld mode, but it's still going to take a similar amount of effort even if all you're seeing is a move from 720 to 1080p when docked and/or a more consistent frame rate.

Also, don't underestimate the amount of work ports take in general. The Switch architecture is a radical departure from Nintendo's last three consoles and they generally tend to write games for the bare metal rather than cross platform engines, which takes further work.

User avatar
Antiriad2097
Posts: 26543
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 7:48 pm
Location: http://s11.zetaboards.com/RetroLeague/
Contact:

Re: Nintendo Switch Discussion

Post by Antiriad2097 » Tue Sep 18, 2018 10:49 am

Can I deviate from the current topic briefly with a question?

I have a 64GB SD card in my Switch right now which is full.

128GB sticks are a decent price right now imo, so I was going to upgrade.

Can I just copy all my stuff from the old card to the new card without any problems or redownloading, or does the Switch ID the cards in some way to prevent that?

(NB: Not sure why cartridge costs became a big thing in the last discussion, when so much of the Switch library is download only, or at the very least an option that should be cheaper than carts).
The Retro League - Where skill isn't an obstacle
Retrocanteen, home of the unfairly banned
Tom_Baker wrote:I just finished watching a film about Stockholm syndrome. It started out terrible but by the end I really liked it.

pratty
Posts: 5293
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 7:13 pm

Re: Nintendo Switch Discussion

Post by pratty » Tue Sep 18, 2018 11:45 am

Sephiroth81 wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 11:02 pm
pratty wrote:
Mon Sep 17, 2018 10:34 pm

You've missed my point. I meant last gen games, on any of last gen's systems, were sold at what was considered 'full price', and it was accepted as fair that devs could aim to sell as many copies at full price as they could. Why would this stop being ok when the game becomes available on new hardware? Market forces control a change in price, not that the above principle is suddenly wrong. A port might only be 10% new content to you because you played the original release, but it would 100% new to a gamer that hasn't played it before.
It doesn't stop anything - some people like you think its reasonable practice, I happen to think its a bit of a con. You lap it up, I don't.
Nintendo haven't really been doing this before (at least regularly), and generally offered older games at budget rates, so perhaps thats why i'm thinking it seems a touch unreasonable to re-issue games at full price a few years later when they've had in some cases, no enhancements of any note.

You can talk market forces all day, I'm not disagreeing with the obvious (some companies will price stuff at whatever they can get away with). I just think Nintendo could be better than that, and I thought that in the past. At least previous re-issues had significant enhancements (as mentioned multiple times already, which are objectively superior and more worthy of the full price tag). Although their Wii release of "Super Mario All Stars" (rom in a box with a book) was about as big a con as they've done here, possibly more so, but hey, market forces said its ok as enough people lap it up. Principles do count for something, I happen to think they've got it wrong in this case, even if they might make, perhaps, more money in the short term.

Now, if they re-made Super Mario Sunshine on Gamecube in 1080p, and 60fps with enhanced textures.....THAT would be worth full price imo. Far more than yet another Wii U port with marginal gains.
I don't lap it up though. I haven't bought any of the Wii U ports, yet. But just because I don't think it's worth me re-buying the ports at this point, doesn't mean I think it's unethical to charge full price for some refined ports of quality Wii U games that are still fairly comparable to new Switch games, and are still percieved to be in sufficient demand.

I don't think the passing of an arbitrary amount of time is in itself something that devalues a game. That would be like expecting a new Ferrarri to be half price X number of years after the model's intiail release, regardless of the refinements made over the years.
Pratty's trade list, updated (May 2019)!
viewtopic.php?f=19&t=54823

User avatar
RetroBob
Posts: 3122
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 9:48 pm

Re: Nintendo Switch Discussion

Post by RetroBob » Tue Sep 18, 2018 12:59 pm

Antiriad2097 wrote:
Tue Sep 18, 2018 10:49 am
Can I deviate from the current topic briefly with a question?

I have a 64GB SD card in my Switch right now which is full.

128GB sticks are a decent price right now imo, so I was going to upgrade.

Can I just copy all my stuff from the old card to the new card without any problems or redownloading, or does the Switch ID the cards in some way to prevent that?

(NB: Not sure why cartridge costs became a big thing in the last discussion, when so much of the Switch library is download only, or at the very least an option that should be cheaper than carts).
Yes you can...

https://en-americas-support.nintendo.co ... ndo-switch
Xbox Live: RetroBob

User avatar
Matt_B
Posts: 5168
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 9:30 am
Location: 5 minutes from the beach, 30 seconds from the pub

Re: Nintendo Switch Discussion

Post by Matt_B » Tue Sep 18, 2018 1:15 pm

Antiriad2097 wrote:
Tue Sep 18, 2018 10:49 am
Can I deviate from the current topic briefly with a question?

I have a 64GB SD card in my Switch right now which is full.

128GB sticks are a decent price right now imo, so I was going to upgrade.

Can I just copy all my stuff from the old card to the new card without any problems or redownloading, or does the Switch ID the cards in some way to prevent that?
Yes. You can just copy the contents of your SD card onto a larger one, and everything will still work.

What you can't do is use the card in another Switch without reformatting it and losing all the data.
(NB: Not sure why cartridge costs became a big thing in the last discussion, when so much of the Switch library is download only, or at the very least an option that should be cheaper than carts).
That's a whole other can of worms, but basically the console business is predominantly driven by over-the-counter sales of both hardware and physical media and publishers are loathe to upset that applecart by pricing the downloadable versions of games lower than the physical ones.

They can, and indeed do, price download-only games much lower though.

ALK
Posts: 2873
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 2:01 pm

Re: Nintendo Switch Discussion

Post by ALK » Tue Sep 18, 2018 10:39 pm

That SEGA Mega Drive Collection that was released on XBONE and PS4 is coming to the Switch.

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2018/0 ... e_features

So that'll be 2 options for Mega Drive games on Switch. The single releases with extra features, or a collection of normal ROMs. At least maybe the SEGA Ages series will focus on more uncommon rereleased MD games, as well as the other SEGA consoles promised.
3DS FC= 0301-9774-9044

PM me if you add me.

HdE
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 4:28 am

Re: Nintendo Switch Discussion

Post by HdE » Wed Sep 19, 2018 1:19 am

As much as I'm RAPIDLY losing patience with the Nintendo Switch (overpriced games because they're on cartridges yet the games are still incomplete, dodgy ports, general Nintendo idiocy, etc) that Megadrive collection does sound interesting. I'd much rather have something like that on the Switch than PS4 or Xbox One. It just seems like a good fit.

User avatar
silvergunner
Posts: 1913
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2011 10:09 pm
Location: Stockton

Re: Nintendo Switch Discussion

Post by silvergunner » Wed Sep 19, 2018 6:39 am

Regardless of if you think it’s right to be charging full price or not. You have got to remember you cannot buy Nintendo’s games for any other format unlike day GTA.

Their first party games will always be ever green in price as they always sell. It’s what makes the company money to keep them around.

They are not going to drop prices for that extra bit of market share when the money made is more important.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests