Exhuminator wrote:
I'm not sure how this equates to hand powered crank consoles or whatever the argument originally was.
The original (and still) point is overall market size. Broadband internet is supposed to be at what, about 80% penetration in the U.S. by now? Of probably around 320 million people. The current consoles have sold maybe around 5-10 million units here, meaning they've still got a lot of potential customers that have a strong internet connection. Same with any future device.
The vast majority of mobile games are far smaller than that though. The ones you cited are outliers.
So are big RPGs with full voiceovers. Just looking at new/bestsellers, Codename STEAM is 1.1GB, Majora's Mask 3D is 660MB, Fantasy Life is 856MB, etc. Wii U games aren't even necessarily that big. Captain Toad clocks in under 2GB, Mario Party 10 is about 3, as is Kirby and the Rainbow Curse. Lotta the stuff that Nintendo makes is relatively small.
That is true in the modern era. But it's also true that the PS4 and Xbox One and Wii U continue to support physical media and receive continued releases in that format. That means that PC gaming and console gaming are not direct analogs and don't make for the best contrasting example in that regard.
Still, they push for it a lot, and anything on the market could discontinue discs tomorrow and probably still do decent business. You might buy a disc, but patches are practically a given, they push DLC that you won't get if you're not connected, and so on.
I mention it in large part, again, to illustrate how download/internet oriented the consumer electronics market is. It's no longer some cutting edge fringe market that has the connection and inclination to do that, it's the mainstream option.
When Microsoft and Sony begin to release 40-50 GB console games exclusively digitally, then that argument will mean something.
I think Sony has a few F2P MMOs that'd fall under that, but then again, they're MMOs so a connection is a fair assumption.
Have you read any official statements from Nintendo that lead you to believe they have a vested interest in abandoning physical media? Or do you just wish they would out of personal bias?
Neither? I'm just accounting for general trends from Nintendo, which make me feel like they're more likely to be the first to go all digital, not the last. Personally, I don't tend to buy digital if physical is a reasonable option. I'm not basing my speculation on personal preference.
There's still one huge reason for physical copies though. It allows the product to be sold to demographics living in regions without reliable broadband internet. And as long as those demographics exist and are willing to shell out money for a physical game, why in the world would Nintendo turn that incentive down? The answer so far is Nintendo has not. I see no reason why they would change their mind on this matter any time soon.
Because including the option for physical media costs them money. The console has to include a drive/card slot to read it. Downloaded games need storage, sure, but local storage is a given at this point either way. I think the CNN cost breakdown of the Wii U put the optical drive at $17, but I mean, that's $170 million or so saved so far if they didn't need to include it.
Then there's the matter of manufacture, distribution, and other retail stuff. That's...actually a decent chunk of a game's price on the shelf (older breakdown
here).
If Nintendo charges retail pricing via the eShop, they're making a -lot- more per unit, on copies that can't be resold (no retailer margin, no cost to manufacture/ship, though there's hosting costs). Maybe that doesn't
translate into 50% more sales exactly, but they could see more per-unit sales as a result.
At some point, the cost of catering to the folks who can't/won't go digital will be greater than the potential profit from selling to them (if it isn't already). It stops being an incentive, and turns into a poor business decision.
