Support NeoGAF

[Gambit2483]

Going open-world with a Mario Kart game doesn't suddenly mean charging more than anyone else's standard edition in the last decade.

It does when you have an open world game with HEAVY Emphasis on online interaction/gameplay and you want to make sure Every single player has access to future DLC content.

E.g. If Nintendo adds an Entirely new Continent to the World with 8 completely new tracks and 10 new characters, they don't want a situation where 60% of their player base has purchased the DLC and 40% haven't. They want EVERYONE to have access.

How do you do that? You bake te extra costs into the base price of the game and offer it to EVERYONE at no additional costs.

 

[GrandlyBodacious]

Sounds like Nintendo won't be budging with pricing. Oh well, variable pricing just means variable buying to me.

Yes, exactly.

But will this be the case with enough people for Nintendo to care?

 

[Gambit2483]

Yeah, that remains to be seen. I think they're trying make $80 a thing and see how it goes, and what better way to try and do that then with their flagship/ most popular series, Mario Kart, coming off 67+ million copies sold during just the Switch generation. I do imagine this game being something of a live-service, but note that none of the press or interviews even after the pricing backlash contained any comments or indication from anyone at Nintendo about this game getting future content down the road. I feel like if that was a key selling point they would've certainly been prepared to talk about it.

I think they are saving this for the direct. There's probably a shitton we don't know about this game as far as extra game modes, features etc (free roam may have missions or even a legit story mode) ...and the only sure way they can realistically reassure (and sell) everyone on the $80 price is to announce future DLC plans that are completely Free.

They eventually announced DLC plans the same way with SSBU (before launch) except with Smash it was optional mainly because they don't care if you didn't purchase the DLC because it wouldn't be a major issue to your overall enjoyment of the game (online or off)

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

Yes, exactly.

But will this be the case with people for Nintendo to care?

Nope. Just like I didn't buy most fp Sony games @ $70, but a lot of PS fans did, do they care? Why should they?

 

[amigastar]

There's a little Mr. Krabs in all of us.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

What you see right there is me purchasing a Steam Deck.

You're a PC gamer, you probably already have one

 

[Jubenhimer]

As critical as I've been about Nintendo's handling of the pricing details for Switch 2 and its games. Let's be honest. Many of the people bitching about $80 for Mario Kart are the same people who will gladly play up the rumored $90 for Gran Theft Auto VI. And will try and damage control saying "It's a bigger game so it must be worth it!" I guarantee you that will happen.

 

[Panajev2001a]

As critical as I've been about Nintendo's handling of the pricing details for Switch 2 and its games. Let's be honest. Many of the people bitching about $80 for Mario Kart are the same people who will gladly play up the rumored $90 for Gran Theft Auto VI. And will try and damage control saying "It's a bigger game so it must be worth it!" I guarantee you that will happen.

Do you realise the scope and R&D difference in getting GTA VI vs Mario Kart World out right?

 

[Danjin44]

Do you realise the scope and R&D difference in getting GTA VI vs Mario Kart World out right?

Are we judging game's worth based purely on graphics and tech?....I can only speak for myself but mine entirely based on my enjoyment of the game.

For my taste MK is more worth my money more than GTA because I just enjoy playing MK waaaay more.

 

[Jubenhimer]

Do you realise the scope and R&D difference in getting GTA VI vs Mario Kart World out right?

Doesn't matter. A lot of the people fearing that Nintendo will set some "big scary precedent" with MK of making AAA games more expensive, will happily rush to Rockstar's defense for GTA VI's rumored price.

 

[Dacvak]

As critical as I've been about Nintendo's handling of the pricing details for Switch 2 and its games. Let's be honest. Many of the people bitching about $80 for Mario Kart are the same people who will gladly play up the rumored $90 for Gran Theft Auto VI. And will try and damage control saying "It's a bigger game so it must be worth it!" I guarantee you that will happen.

I'll pay $90 for GTA6. I won't be happy about it, but I'll pay it.

I'd also pay $80 for Mario Kart World. (Thankfully I only have to pay $50 since it's part of the bundle.) I've put in well over 300 hours into Mario Kart 8 and 8 Deluxe, meaning I've paid about $120 for that experience.

I don't mind paying more for games that provide hundreds of hours of entertainment.

Contrarily, I enjoy CoD games, but I only ever want to play the short campaign once, which is usually just a few hours. So I wait until those games are like $20 or cheaper before I buy them. Otherwise, I just don't buy them.

I only paid $15 for Star of Providence, but given how much time I've sunk into it, that game is easily worth $30-$40 to me.

I don't really know what my point is anymore.

 

[Dr. Wilkinson]

Do you realise the scope and R&D difference in getting GTA VI vs Mario Kart World out right?

We couldn't possibly know what the budget is for either. And likely never will. All we know for sure is both are by far the largest scope and most expensive ever, in their respective series.

 

[Buggy Loop]

Remember, gentlemen. There's always another option.

So announcing to everyone you pirate. Not even legit emulation, as that would require you to buy games, which clearly you make this post in response to a thread about game prices so not likely the reason.

Since when is this acceptable on this forum?

 

[Warnen]

I bet his ring tone is

 

[iQuasarLV]

How is this any different from surge pricing Wendy's tried to pull last year?

 

[Hudo]

Do you realise the scope and R&D difference in getting GTA VI vs Mario Kart World out right?

That argument shouldn't matter. As a consumer, I don't give a fuck that R* are bad at project management. No game, not even GTA 6 (of which we don't even know whether it will be a good game or not), is worth $80 or even more. Especially when you start to factor in secondary revenue streams like DLC, Games-As-A-Service stuff and whatnot. I wouldn't be surprised if MK World also receives DLC packs down the line.

This is just Nintendo (and the rest of the industry) trying to normalize new price points, just like Nvidia have normalized paying >$1000 for consumer hardware.

 

[DeVeAn]

What your gonna see Bowser, is a big fuck you a la 3DS.

 

[CLW]

 

[Arachnid]

So announcing to everyone you pirate. Not even legit emulation, as that would require you to buy games, which clearly you make this post in response to a thread about game prices so not likely the reason.

Since when is this acceptable on this forum?

Terms of Service

I. Membership and Admissions A. NeoGAF operates under a closed membership policy. Membership is granted or refused based solely on the judgment of the administration and is not a right. Membership can be revoked at any time for any reason. Each accepted member is granted one, and only one...

www.neogaf.com

D. Emulation/Piracy

The topics of emulation and piracy in the context of the technical nature of emulators and ROM images, hardware modification technology, as well as their effect on the industry as a political topic are deemed to be generally acceptable.

Linking to pirate download sites, directions on how to get pirated software to work, reviews or impressions of pirated software, and livestreams of pirated software play are all strictly prohibited.

Glad I could help.

 

[Grizzled Ghost]

 

[Durin]

It does when you have an open world game with HEAVY Emphasis on online interaction/gameplay and you want to make sure Every single player has access to future DLC content.

E.g. If Nintendo adds an Entirely new Continent to the World with 8 completely new tracks and 10 new characters, they don't want a situation where 60% of their player base has purchased the DLC and 40% haven't. They want EVERYONE to have access.

How do you do that? You bake te extra costs into the base price of the game and offer it to EVERYONE at no additional costs.

No it doesn't, like the PS3-era where we saw so many linear cinematic games, the PS4-era was defined by a push for so many franchises going open world. Many of those games also featured online play, which was a way to push for getting people into buying additional content than bringing anyone together.

Nintendo is not the first company to make a racing game go open-world online (The Crew, Forza Horizon, Burnout Paradise, Test Drive Unlimited, etc.) , multiple other companies have done it at already higher fidelity/budget than they are. They're doing it because they think their audience will buy it, and if people wanna let them do it...then I hope those same people don't whine when things get worse.

 

[MaestroMike]

 

[IDKFA]

People were worried that Nintendo will set a standard for £75 games. I think it's worse than that. I think it'll attempt to set a standard for variable pricing where even third party publishers will decide how much a game costs based on various factors. He mentions in the video (they start talking about game pricing at the 05:20 mark if anybody wants to see it) that it's up to third party publishers how much they charge for games. I think it's something Nintendo would love to see as it means they can charge even more for Zelda, Pokemon etc.

 

[Hideous Snake]

Thankfully I buy everything Nintendo for Nintendo games only. Variable pricing is bollocks though

He just threw it out there to pipe down the backlash

 

[Perrott]

Alright, so that means the next 3D open-world mainline Zelda game could very well end up costing 120 dollars based on "the development that's gone into the game, the breadth and depth of the gameplay, the durability over time and the repeatability of gameplay experiences".

 

[Buggy Loop]

I mean yea, makes sense. No matter how much reasoning peoples are trying to downplay $80 on Mario Kart because of graphics or something, it's gonna sell >50M freaking units most likely and never drop in price. I have my eyes set on the Switch 2 + MKW bundle personally.

The MKW direct will also likely explode in amount of cool stuffs you can do in the open world.

 

[Gambit2483]

No it doesn't, like the PS3-era where we saw so many linear cinematic games, the PS4-era was defined by a push for so many franchises going open world. Many of those games also featured online play, which was a way to push for getting people into buying additional content than bringing anyone together.

Nintendo is not the first company to make a racing game go open-world online (The Crew, Forza Horizon, Burnout Paradise, Test Drive Unlimited, etc.) , multiple other companies have done it at already higher fidelity/budget than they are. They're doing it because they think their audience will buy it, and if people wanna let them do it...then I hope those same people don't whine when things get worse.

I don't think you understood what I was saying. I wasn't saying you can't do it, I said Nintendo doesn't want to do it.

Forza Horizon team doesn't give a shit if only 30% of their player base has the DLC. Nintendo does. They would want EVERY MKW player to have access to new DLC open world map areas in a persistent heavily focused online world like MK. The only way to insure that is to give it away "for free" by make everyone pay for it up front.

 

[IDKFA]

Thankfully I buy everything Nintendo for Nintendo games only. Variable pricing is bollocks though

He just threw it out there to pipe down the backlash

It is bollocks and a massive gamble.

Nintendo will always sell games to the hardcore Nintendo fans or gaming enthusiasts. However, a large percentage of their customers are families and people with young children. Groups of people are currently struggling in the current economic crisis. Even if the game is worth £75, perception matters more than reality in the market. And right now, many people don't want to hear about "variable pricing models" while they're cutting back just to pay for groceries, rent, water bills etc.

It's a gamble I don't see paying off in the long run.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

It does when you have an open world game with HEAVY Emphasis on online interaction/gameplay and you want to make sure Every single player has access to future DLC content.

E.g. If Nintendo adds an Entirely new Continent to the World with 8 completely new tracks and 10 new characters, they don't want a situation where 60% of their player base has purchased the DLC and 40% haven't. They want EVERYONE to have access.

How do you do that? You bake te extra costs into the base price of the game and offer it to EVERYONE at no additional costs.

I think you are 25% right.

This game is probably going to be the only game in the series for the SW2:
$80 without massive price cuts
vs
let´s say $300 across 3 or 4 games (split audience in the same platform).

You maximize/optimize dev cost, sales, and engagement (paid expansions/DLCs )

 

[DavJay]

What he meant to say is what you see there is greed.

 

[Gambit2483]

I think you are 25% right.

This game is probably going to be the only game in the series for the SW2:
$80 without massive price cuts
vs
let´s say $300 across 3 or 4 games (split audience in the same platform).

You maximize/optimize dev cost, sales, and engagement (paid expansions/DLCs )

Exactly and the best way to do that, while ensuring that little Billy and his friends don't have to worry about Billy not being able to afford the New Candy Island DLC, and being left behind is to bake the costs of future DLC/Expansions into the initial price.

 

[tkscz]

I miss Reggie, he'd at least convince me this was a good idea by being charismatic.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

Exactly and the best way to do that, while ensuring that little Billy and his friends don't have to worry about Billy not being able to afford the New Candy Island DLC,

I wouldn't frame it that way (consumer-friendly)

and being left behind is to bake the costs of future DLC/Expansions into the initial price.

There is no way future expansions/DLC are free

The reasoning is not to fracture the audience across several titles, you extract more engagement from users (money and time)

 

[Durin]

I don't think you understood what I was saying. I wasn't saying you can't do it, I said Nintendo doesn't want to do it.

Forza Horizon team doesn't give a shit if only 30% of their player base has the DLC. Nintendo does. They would want EVERY MKW player to have access to new DLC open world map areas in a persistent heavily focused online world like MK. The only way to insure that is to give it away "for free" by make everyone pay for it up front.

Just sounds like a problem they wrote themselves into though, and they're the company that sold 2 colored versions of a given Pokemon game locking content behind each. They could go the route of just having cosmetic DLC with a big expansion every so often like Monster Hunter that is in a segregated new open world area, and create reasons to go back to older races. If MMOs with bigger persistent areas can figure it out, I'm sure they could've without going to $80 day one price.

They can do what they want, but I just don't see a justification besides they want more to get more money...even though the last Mario Kart sold more than most video games ever will, and they rarely drop their prices on first-party games.

 

[Guerilla Munch]

I've been playing MK8 for a decade. If I get even half as much out of MKW then it's worth it imo

 

[EverydayBeast]

Big deal buy it used

 

[FeralEcho]

Even greed gets a new name now.

 

[Gambit2483]

I wouldn't frame it that way (consumer-friendly)

There is no way future expansions/DLC are free

The reasoning is not to fracture the audience across several titles, you extract more engagement from users (money and time)

The MKW direct is coming soon. I wouldn't be surprised if they announce future DLC plans and I can't see them asking even more for it. By making it "FREE" you absolutely ensuring there is no fractioning of the user base or loss of engagement.

Nintendo has actually been extremely fair about pricing and strategy throughout Switch's lifetime. Look at Smash Bros Ultimate and the value you got out of it and it's DLC. Or MK8 & MK8 Deluxe and the value of its DLC that you got out of it (hell it was FREE with NSO).

I can't see Nintendo suddenly turning super greedy with no reason. I'm guessing Free MKW DLC for an high entry rate but I guess we'll see on the 17th.

 

[StereoVsn]

Exactly and the best way to do that, while ensuring that little Billy and his friends don't have to worry about Billy not being able to afford the New Candy Island DLC, and being left behind is to bake the costs of future DLC/Expansions into the initial price.

Marion Kart World is likely to have a)DLCs b)Expansion Pass (or two) and possibly c)Cosmetics.

Nintendo has seemingly decided to go full on Wolf of Wall Street with Switch 2.

Somebody needs to insert Bowser in the gif below.

 

[Kataploom]

People is gonna bitch some days then gonna pay anyway, that's why the prices are justified, it's just the market. For those that swear that they won't buy the game, many will resist until they get FOMO for seeing others enjoy and take about the game and will pull the trigger as well.

That's it, literally that's how prices are justified, literally the market giving the message that the price is correct.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

The MKW direct is coming soon. I wouldn't be surprised if they announce future DLC plans and I can't see them asking even more for it. By making it "FREE" you absolutely ensuring there is no fractioning of the user base or loss of engagement.

Nintendo has actually been extremely fair about pricing and strategy throughout Switch's lifetime. Look at Smash Bros Ultimate and the value you got out of it and it's DLC. Or MK8 & MK8 Deluxe and the value of its DLC that you got out of it (hell it was FREE with NSO).

I can't see Nintendo suddenly turning super greedy with no reason. I'm guessing Free MKW DLC for an high entry rate but I guess we'll see on the 17th.

yep. They HAVE to announce it, be pretty explicit and clear about it. That's the expectation.

 

[Furball]

To be honest , if it is Nintendo first party game i dont think it will be problem because their game will be polish and good but the real problem are they open floodgate for the other 2nd & 3rd party game to follow .

 

[Utamaru1706]

As critical as I've been about Nintendo's handling of the pricing details for Switch 2 and its games. Let's be honest. Many of the people bitching about $80 for Mario Kart are the same people who will gladly play up the rumored $90 for Gran Theft Auto VI. And will try and damage control saying "It's a bigger game so it must be worth it!" I guarantee you that will happen.

Even if GTA VI were initially sold for $90, the price will eventually goes down throughout the time with sales, price cuts, etc, but can you say the same with Mario Kart?

Like, MK8 were released like 8 years ago, but Nintendo still sells is at full price, and they only discounted it to $40 max, which is laughable.

 

[Pimpbaa]

Shit like this is making the Switch 2 a big no for me. Nintendo games rarely go on sale that and I ain't paying that much for PS4 Pro graphics. Worst part if their shit still sells well, Sony and 3rd parties may follow with similar pricing of new games. But at least there, there are significant sales.

 

[darrylgorn]

 

[consoul]

You do realise the standalone Mario Kart World price is designed to convince everyone to buy the Switch 2 MKW bundle, right?

 

[dcx4610]

I mean to be fair, we've always had variable pricing even back to the NES games. Some games were $29, some $49. On the SNES, some games were $79 or $89. My problem is those prices factored in memory size. The bigger the game, the higher the price. That does play a factor with Switch games but something like Donkey Kong being $70 feels wrong. I mean I'm sure it'll be a fun game but I just don't know if I would get $70 of entertainment out of it. $49-59 for those kind of games feels more reasonable. $79 for Final Fantasy III on the SNES factoring in cart size and length of game? Sure...

 

[Tams]

I have no problem with the prices, as they are still very good value for money for entertainment.

Going to the cinema will cost me only £5, but such cinemas are very rare, most cost £15-£20. All for at most three hours.

A book is £5-10 for maybe 10 hours.

Streaming is much better value for moeny, but to watch all that I want legally is about £30 a month if several exclusives are on. It's around £10 at minimum.

To those saying they'll buy fewer games: try being more judicious.

 

[Danjin44]

Lot of people crying about price of MKWorld but I'm not seeing anyone complaining about Silent Hill f's price.

This better be the greatest Silent Hill ever created.

 

[Utamaru1706]

Lot of people crying about price of MKWorld but I'm not seeing anyone complaining about Silent Hill f's price.

This better be the greatest Silent Hill ever created.

lol, so we're now using placeholder price to justify MK World's debacle? Really?