The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
That's right. Apparently, during the period 1991 to 1998, Nintendo kept prices artifically high, and have now been fined £92.1m. That's the Eternal Darkness marketing budget gone. See the full story at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/ business/2375967.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/ business/2375967.stm
Page:
God forbid any attempt by Nintendo to try and profit from the thousands of man hours they put into making a product for millions of people to own and enjoy for a total of billions of hours more.
Price fixing indeed. Nintendo have always charged a little more, but then, their products have always been of greater quality.
The greatest price abuse comes from certain SNES titles retailing at £70 on launch, like Super Street Fighter II Turbo, thanks mostly to Capcom.
Price fixing indeed. Nintendo have always charged a little more, but then, their products have always been of greater quality.
The greatest price abuse comes from certain SNES titles retailing at £70 on launch, like Super Street Fighter II Turbo, thanks mostly to Capcom.
Most interestingly, they are not billing them this silly amount because of prices in this country, but saying that in Germany and the Netherlands, prices are 3 times more expensive than here in the UK.
Stop whining about £60 and think of the germans paying £180.
Stop whining about £60 and think of the germans paying £180.
This even made it onto National News. That could really damage Nentendo's image. Nintendo do (did) have a more friendly image than Sony PS2 and MS XBox - so this could really put a dent in that.
well they shouldn't of charged so much in the first place...
*starts laughing*
*starts laughing*
you can say goodbye to gaming for a while then!
VenomByte wrote:
> Nintendo won't get more than £15 for a game they have produced
> being sold at £40 anyway. The rest will go to the distributors
> and retailers. If you want prices cut, whos profits do you want to
> cut?
They should all take a fair deduction. The most N64 games should've ever been is £40, which in itself is ironic, considering we see PS2 games at the ridiculous price of £44.99. The most I'd ever pay for a game is £30.
> Nintendo won't get more than £15 for a game they have produced
> being sold at £40 anyway. The rest will go to the distributors
> and retailers. If you want prices cut, whos profits do you want to
> cut?
They should all take a fair deduction. The most N64 games should've ever been is £40, which in itself is ironic, considering we see PS2 games at the ridiculous price of £44.99. The most I'd ever pay for a game is £30.
Mwa ha ha, suckers. :D
Nintendo won't get more than £15 for a game they have produced being sold at £40 anyway. The rest will go to the distributors and retailers. If you want prices cut, whos profits do you want to cut?
DeltaJava wrote:
£92.1m.
Bloody hell! A bit steep!? But then they DID have the nerve to charge £60 a game...
Deserves em bloody right too! :D
£92.1m.
Bloody hell! A bit steep!? But then they DID have the nerve to charge £60 a game...
Deserves em bloody right too! :D
Will_MÅÐmÃñ wrote:
> did you know? that it cost £60 to make the first copy of games
> like VC and the rest cost £3 JUST £3 why dont they put
> people out there misery and charge £20 or even £15 it only
> arvragely cost £4 for each copy that is skank why cant they be
> fair o be fair.
Because - believe it or not - they have to make the game aswell.
> did you know? that it cost £60 to make the first copy of games
> like VC and the rest cost £3 JUST £3 why dont they put
> people out there misery and charge £20 or even £15 it only
> arvragely cost £4 for each copy that is skank why cant they be
> fair o be fair.
Because - believe it or not - they have to make the game aswell.
Page: