iwata is such an idiot. he said the problem is the gamepad. which is one of the problems. and his reaction to that? so now we are going to force games to really make good use of the pad. instead of bringing out a padless wii-u for a lot less money. incredible incompetent idiot he is
I wouldn't buy a Wii U if it didn't have the gamepad. It would be a 360 clone with no games or online features. I already have a 360 and a PS3.
They need to keep the gamepad, push out more games, eat a price cut as it is, and preferably abandon this console hardware market for just a controller or handheld that works with software on all platforms.
See, but for the majority of people the gamepad just doesn't resonate as a "must have", or even a feature bonus. It's a thing that is there and, at best, they just don't give a crap about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Knuckle Duster
That's the biggest reason it needs to be axed because it would allow an instant ~$100 to be slashed from the unit without a single change to their underlying costs. If they have the ability to make it even cheaper in other ways and still turn a profit? Even better!
But right now they don't really want to eat the gamepad costs because a turnaround isn't going to be a fast proposition, if it even happens. I can all but guarantee such a drastic price drop will sell units in the short term, but that's not going to do much for them long term unless they can follow that up.... and their money is MUCH better spent making games and securing GOOD exclusives for the wii u rather than eating the cost on the gamepad per unit.
The system is still a nintendo system. It still has wii compatibility. Hell, as semmie even noted, there's very little technical reason why they can't have GC compatibility, so they could toss that back in as a feature with a new controller option with analog triggers and all that fun stuff (basically a pro 2.0 or some such).
Lower price + more secured games + more features = a better path forward than just a lower price.
iwata is a hack he has no clue what he is doingQuote:
Originally Posted by Barone
nintendo's two biggest succeses inr ecent history the DS and the wii were produced when yamamuchi was still partially in charge of nintendo and over seeing things
what are iwata's first new consoles ?
updates of both of themw ith confusing names and arsing gimmicks nobody wants
that didnt bode well
and his further incompetence is becoming a lodestone around nintendo's neck
he needs to be dumped fast
that will never happenQuote:
Originally Posted by EclecticGroove
it makes way too much sense and common sense isnt something big corporations do well
Quote:
Originally Posted by EclecticGroove
I wouldn't argue any of it and I hear half the complains crying to get rid of the gamepad online. I just see less value without that gamepad due to the competition's last gen, and it puts the onus on Nintendo selling the system itself with their games. Right now, there's not enough games to secure some momentum from that move and the gamepad is a life line to new features. I understand the economic reasons to ditch the gamepad, and I don't care either way. I do know I wouldn't buy a wannabe 360/PS3 just for Mario and bad ports, before I wouldn't buy a Wii U that's too expensive.
They need to cut costs, cut prices, and beg gamers to buy the Wii U, not remove things from the already featureless shit box.
Has there been a new Metroid released yet?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knuckle Duster
And that is why the delux bundle should still come with one, and they should still mandate a minimum feature set to be supported by it (off tv play for instance).
That way games can use it or mostly ignore it as developers see fit, or even require it if they want to do something explicitly with it. Which will mostly be some Nintendo games and maybe a few indie type games... which is pretty much no different than it is now.
That ensures there is a really cheap wii u bundle out there to hopefully pique more interest in the system. It also allows someone to pick up the tablet later if they eventually decide they want to give it a shot.
And it also ensures Nintendo themselves isn't bleeding money just on virtue of selling a console.
In a perfect world they would use that money instead to bolster their library of Nintendo AND 3rd party games as well as throw out a really good advertising campaign with what is essentially a re-launch of the brand.
I don't expect that to happen of course, but it's the only course of action that makes sense to me for them to pursue if they want the wii u to have a fighting chance at being more relevant this generation.
I agree with Knuckle Duster that ditching the game pad would take away the Wii U's only advantage to the PS360. So they would probably do well to keep it. I actually also agree with Iwata that they need to use it more. Otherwise what's the point of having it, right? And that's the problem. Their unique item is not being used, therefore not giving anyone incentive to buy the Wii U. If there were awesome games and uses for the thing, people would buy it.
I think Nintendo wasted a huge opportunity with the Pokemon Rumble U figures. They could have had a Skylanders killer there. How about NFC figures for Smash Bros? That would do well, I'd think. And had Nintendo gotten Battlefield 4, they could have use the game pad the way you can use a tablet to play that commander role.
I agree with what Yahtzee said about the Gamepad, it's a solution looking for a problem.
It makes the Wii U unique but then at the same time it doesn't really do anything.
It's expensive... no 3rd party really wants to put much effort into using it, and even nintendo has not really found a killer use for it yet. In fact, the VAST majority of people, even in this very thread, have only touted off screen play as the big reason they like it.Quote:
Originally Posted by grieverr
There's nothing about that which really makes the gamepad make sense as a MUST HAVE addition, especially when it's up against cheaper last gen systems with roughly the same specs and far larger libraries.
People keep mentioning it's nothing more than a ps360 without the gamepad... that's only true if Nintendo lets it be... because those 2 systems will be getting less support as MS and Sony continue to push their new systems as the platform of choice. The wii u "should" benefit from a lot more longevity of current titles... not just rehashed re-releases. That's where Nintendo's money should go.
The skylander-esque setup also has no real need for the gamepad either. They could certainly monetize the pokemon games or even Mario with that kind of setup... but it still isn't an idea that has any real use for the gamepad that isn't just as easily done on the TV.
I just don't see how you, or anyone, can think keeping the pad across the board makes sense given the (lack of) enthusiasm it has generated, the cost, and the performance of the overall system thus far. It's like arguing to keep the anchor tied to your foot because it's pretty when you're sinking to the bottom of the ocean.
Do you argue the same way about the kinect on the Xbone? I personally would like to see it succeed myself, but if interest in it wanes (or doesn't exist), and sales of the system tank, I would say the same thing. Ditch the peripheral and offer up a cheaper system with what people are asking for.
It's still a poor man's 360/PS3 with or without that stupid, useless controller.
but with a premium price because nintendo thinks they can still get away with that
Iwata is the best Sony employee ever.
Every time he talks both Nintendo and Wii U lose value.
maybe he should fuck back off to sony then
If you read the official slides that's not exactly what he said. That was a quick and poor translation that people have been running with. Basically he said what a lot of people have been saying all along, people think the Wii U game pad is just an add-on for the Wii and they need to do a better job making it known it's a new console and making the whole thing more appealing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lan Di
Ok, let's say they drop the gamepad right now and drop the system to $199. Why should I buy a Wii U instead of a 360 or PS3 for the same price?Quote:
Originally Posted by EclecticGroove
Super Mario 3D World? Can't, it requires the gamepad.
Wonderful 101? While it's playable there's a lot missing without the gamepad.
Nintendo Land? Nope, it needs the gamepad.
Lego City Undercover? Nope it needs the gamepad too.
Pikmin 3? While this is playable, without the game pad some of the nice features like having the map up at all times, and controlling other character movement are gone.
New Super Mario Bros. U? Playable, but lacks 5 player multiplayer.
Sonic and All-Stars Racing Transformed? Playable but lacks the gamepad features like a track map, and 5 player split screen.
Mass Effect 3? Without the gamepad it's just the 360/PS3/PC version without the last few DLCs.
Need for Speed Most Wanted U? Without the gamepad it's just the 360/PS3 version with better textures.
While you can argue those games are playable without the gamepad, they are not better without it. Many are gimped or lose the features that make them worth owning over the versions on competing platforms. And that's not even getting into the nice non-game specific features like Off-TV play, the OS, TV Remote functionality, the Internet Browser (Really, this is the best console browser I've ever used), MiiVerse, etc.
The argument you are making about it not being necessary is pretty silly. It would be like me saying "Games like Mario, Sonic, Ridge Racer, Outrun, Starfox, etc. got along fine for years with D-Pads and digital buttons, clearly analog sticks and analog triggers aren't needed. Drop them so we can get systems for cheaper!"
Patch most of them to make them 100% playable without it. It's not as if they can't do it. And they could make the padless version $199 or even less. Why get it over the ps3/360? They need to give that reason. What reason do people have right now to get it with the pad? They sure as hell don't feel the gamepad is a reason, and the price increase due to that just puts it even further from their desired reach.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
How many people out there have you seen say, "I reaallllly love that gamepad, and I'd get the system if it was just a bit cheaper"? Most don't give a crap about the gamepad AT ALL. It's a complete non factor for them one way or another. Then you have the 2 other groups, those who love it, and those who don't like it. Overall the gaming public has looked upon the wii u gamepad, shrugged their shoulders, and moved on. It is not some gaming thunder waiting to strike. It's a peripheral most just don't give a shit about, and that will never take off as a primary controller on a console.
I would in fact argue that any that are not exclusively made for it would play just the same if patched to work with the pro controller, and would, for many, be preferable. For those who want to use it? It would still remain an option.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Analog controls added something that was very much needed to those games that the D pad could not provide. Nothing about the gamepad is a solution for a problem anyone had. Do you honestly think all the next systems will have giant touch screen controllers? I don't. Things that are needed, and that consumers enjoy and find use for take off and become standard. Dual stick analog, analog triggers, rumble, even motion control to an extent. But huge touchscreen controllers have not exactly lit the world on fire. Look at the sixaxis when it dropped rumble, Sony got massive shit for it. Do you really think Nintendo would get more than a handful of people giving a damn if they dropped the gamepad?Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Off screen play is the one and only thing it does that I can see taking off and possibly becoming a standard... but you don't NEED to pack in a huge controller for that. Look at the vita, it does it. MS could do it with the smartglass app if they wanted, or release a special surface version meant just for it. It's a feature that is cool for people that want it, but it can be done in ways that defer the cost to only those who want it.
They don't NEED the gamepad, but since they already have it, why not use it? Skylanders uses the"portal of power" peripheral to put the figures on. Nintendo can just use NFC, like they did with Pokemon Rumble U. This will give people an incentive to use the gamepad.Quote:
Originally Posted by EclecticGroove
The lack of enthusiasm is there because there are no exciting ways of using it. There was tons of enthusiasm when people played Nintendoland and ZombieU. Since then, nothing worth mentioning has been done. If there will be no further and better use of the gamepad, I'd agree 100% in getting rid of it. But if there is a new focus on doing cool things with the gamepad, then that's the only difference Nintendo can offer. I'm sure enthusiasm would pick up if there were more things to do with the gamepad. If, and that's a big if, Nintendo actually does start doing creative things with it, would you then be interested?Quote:
Originally Posted by EclecticGroove
I would argue for the Kinect if it did things I found to be interesting. If Microsoft offered something more than exercise games and menu swiping, I might be interested. Granted, I don't have an Xbone (I went for a PS4), but I'd be able to admit it was cool.Quote:
Originally Posted by EclecticGroove
Now, don't get me wrong. I am in favor of firing Iwata. I am in favor of Nintendo becoming more of a "core" company. And I certainly would be in favor of them dropping the gamepad and adding a Pro controller if Nintendo said "hey guys, we're really tapped out and have no idea what to do with the gamepad". But those are wishes. The reality is Iwata is not going anywhere right now, and they just announced pushing for more gamepad support. I already have a Wii U, so I'd like this to come to fruition so that I can enjoy it more.
Adding DS games to the VC, and being able to store your profile in your account, as opposed to the hardware, are other things Nintendo announced that could possibly turn things around.
Nintendo has, at this point, failed me as a customer. I still love them for the potential I still think they have, I'm still buying their games and VC titles. But I have already decided that I will take a wait and see approach on their next console. They lost me as a guaranteed sale. But as a Wii U owner, I'm certainly hoping they turn things around, I do not want them to fail as a way to "teach them a lesson".
Oh so they should dump money and divert resources into patching games they have already finished just to satisfy your hatred of the gamepad? Diverting resources away from games currently in development to patch out the Gamepad is totally the right thing to do and will fix the #1 problem the system has right now, it's software drought. :roll:Quote:
Originally Posted by EclecticGroove
And what about games like Mass Effect 3 or Need For Speed Most Wanted? Do you really think EA cares enough to go back and patch the gamepad out?
If the only valid reason to drop it is price then they should focus on cost reducing the gamepad instead, or possibly just dropping the price of the system and eating the cost like they did with the 3DS.
So basically you're saying that ditching the gamepad still won't solve the main problem here.Quote:
Originally Posted by EclecticGroove
There are plenty of people who own a Wii U and love the gamepad. There's also a good amount of people who have said they would buy the system if it was in the $199 -$249 price range, and there's sales evidence to support this. Just about every time the system shows up somewhere in that price range or lower it sells out quickly:Quote:
Originally Posted by EclecticGroove
No, those people aren't crowding around for PS4's, they're there for Wii U's. Notice how they're throwing the PS3's and 360's around in disgust. And that was only a month or so ago. Look around the positive Wii U threads on places like NeoGAF, there's quite a few people saying they'd get one if it was cheaper and that they like the Gamepad.
Here's a few solutions to problems I can think of right off the top of my head:Quote:
Originally Posted by EclecticGroove
-If the TV my Wii U is hooked up to is in use, I don't have to move my Wii U, I can just play on the gamepad until the TV frees up.
-I don't need to go digging for TV remotes to turn on the TV and put it on the right imput or adjust volume, I can do that all from the gamepad.
-If the TV is too loud late at night I can hook up headphones to the gamepad and still hear everything as loud as I want.
-I don't need to pause the game to do menu functions, I can do them in real time from the gamepad.
-Maps no longer have to be non-interactive minimaps that only show a small portion of the map and clutter the screen. They can now be on the gamepad in full and I can interact with them in real time to do things like move troups, make landmarks, etc. (You know, one of the nice things so many DS games have).
-If the controller doesn't have enough buttons for a game, the game can make virtual buttons on the touch screen.
-I don't need to use a USB Keyboard or clunky virtual keyboards for games/features that needed text input. I can use the touch screen to type as I do on my phone.
-Arcade games that use touch screens or trackballs can now be ported rather easily without having to worry about needing an expensive accessory.
-The gamepad allows people to provide help and tips to each other through visual representations if necessary thanks to being able to draw things on the gamepad and post it on Miiverse.
And by not including it there's a much bigger chance that it's features will go unsupported due to there being no guarantee that everyone will have it. Just look at how well PS Move got supported if you need evidence of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by EclecticGroove
I already specifically addressed that. IF Nintendo (not you, not players, but the N themselves) wants off screen play supported, they specify it as something that must be supported to have a game licensed on the wii u. Easy, simple, no fuss, no controller needed for pack in.
And no one said those games WOULD be patched, only that they could be. Nintendo, and anyone else could just say "Sorry, need the pad for those" and be done with it, then only the new games going forward would default to having the gamepad as an optional accessory.
And no, the gamepad removal won't fix anything other than making the wii u much easier to lower the price of. Nintendo already specifically mentioned they won't eat the costs in their press release, so the only way the price is coming down is to ditch the game pad or make new revisions that save enough costs to markedly drop the system price.
That doesn't resolve the costs of existing stock however. They could easily repack a percentage of returned stock as gamepad free systems + separately packaged gamepads.
And those "lots of wii u owners" that love the gamepad are a drop in the bucket compared to people that have simply ignored the system.
That's the most retarded thing I've ever heard. That would send such a fucked up mixed signal it's not even funny. They'd be saying "You must support this feature if you want your game published, oh but where not going to easily give people the option to use it. No they need to pay $150 for the controller to use it, so really very few people will actually make use of it. BUT YOU MUST SUPPORT IT!" And I'm sure third party developers would just love that requirement considering they'd be wasting money on a feature no one will be using due to it being behind a $150 paywall.Quote:
Originally Posted by EclecticGroove
Every time you try to smooth this over to resolve an issue with it you create another.
And I'm sure consumers will just love going out and buying a $199 Wii U with Super Mario 3D World only to find out "whoops, you need a $150 accessory for this, our bad."Quote:
Originally Posted by EclecticGroove
And I'm saying there are better options than dropping the gamepad to drop the price such as cost reducing both the gamepad and the console, as well as just eating the cost. They also said in that press release that they are not dropping the gamepad, yet you have no problem demanding that over and over again.Quote:
Originally Posted by EclecticGroove
But it's still evidence that there is a desire for the gamepad. I thought the gamepad was pretty stupid when the Wii U was first released, but after trying it out and finally getting the system I really can't see how removing it would be a good thing. There is no evidence that a $199 Wii U without the gamepad will sell. In that situation it's basically a 360/PS3 with a significantly smaller library. In that case it can't compete. You say it's Nintendo's job to make sure this doesn't happen, but what do you expect them to do? Snap their fingers and have 1000 games suddenly appear out of thin air? Without the gamepad all that will do is perpetuate the notion of "Why can't Nintendo just go third party and put these games on my 360/PS3/PS4/Xbone?" ideology as there will be nothing unique to make them stand out as needing a Wii U to run.Quote:
Originally Posted by EclecticGroove
What we do have evidence of though is that the Wii U will sell with the gamepad at the $199-$249 price point. Nintendo should aim for that instead.
I'm sure the gamepad isn't going anywhere. The system software uses it to launch applications and interact with menus, Miiverse and the eshop. They also announced that they will be offering original DS games on the Wii U virtual console. I can't see how any of that would work without the touch pad interface provided on the gamepad.
^ cool so now nintendo can charge ridicilous prices for 10 year old games again
id rather buy a used DS and used games for LESS then a wii U costs thanks
even a brand new 3DS is cheaper
Yeah, the Wii U as a giant DS smacks of desperation.Quote:
Originally Posted by KitsuneNight
Nintendo gambled last generation on a novel, underpowered console and won big. They made a similar gamble again (perhaps not unreasonably, given their previous success) and lost big. Life in the console biz.
Unfortunately, Nintendo seems to make a killing when they charge ridiculous prices for 10 (or more) year old games. :( Remember Mario Advance?Quote:
Originally Posted by KitsuneNight
But I don't wanna be looking at the tablet screen while I'm playing a game. You're supposed to keep your eyes on the road!!!
Nintendo is notorious for keeping the prices of first party games sky high for years.Quote:
Originally Posted by j_factor
lol that's belgium. if you've ever been there you know what a country full of idiots(the flemish) that is. I can't even begin to start explaining.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Mixed signal? really? That's a bit desperate and obtuse. "This peripheral is still important to us, and we want these features supported as a minimum for those who want them". That is hardly a confusing message. Live for MS does the same thing. Want a game on the Xbox/360 after live was introduced, even if it's not a game that touches being online in the least? Tough, here is a minimum amount of features that MUST be in the game. Does it mean every Xbox/360 owner has a live gold account? Does it even mean they have it plugged into the internet in any way? No, but it means they have a minimum set of features that MUST be there that make use of the live service. We're not talking some arcane ritual performed on the midwinter solstice with the blood of virgins here, we're talking about a set of standard features Nintendo lays down as REQUIRED for games to be licensed on their system.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Why would they go do that when the game would either be patched (as a very important and recent title for Nintendo), or have a big ass "NEEDS GAMEPAD" sticker slapped on it. Either that gamepad would allow them access to some extra features and not be required, or it would be required and they didn't pay attention to the packaging.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
I don't demand, I simply state it is their BEST option. There isn't any better option than a miraculous "people start buying the wii u in droves" which isn't happening.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
Nintendo wants to keep the gamepad, they have yet to come up with a compelling reason or feature that the masses give a shit about to do so.
They are unwilling to eat costs on the system.
What that means is they have a ton of returned stock that there is no way to reduce costs on. They either slow production and slowly sell existing inventory... and hope to hell they can cost reduce the system very damned soon, then switch to that. But how much of a price reduction can they get at this point? $20, $30 per unit? Maybe $50-60 if lucky? And how much are they willing to trickle down to the consumer? A $50 price drop would be welcome, but when faced with their problems it pales in comparison to what an instant $100 drop (while they STILL make money off every sale) would do.
There is evidence that some people like the gamepad. Those are a subset of the people who have bought the system, and an even smaller number of those who have not. I dislike the gamepad, I've made that obvious. Not a single time I've ever used it has EVER changed my mind. I've played it for small sessions of a couple minutes at a time, and I've given it a run for much longer. In neither case have I sat there and said "wow, I can really see liking to use this!". It isn't as horrible as I thought it would be when I first saw pictures, as it's lighter than it looks. But "not horrible" is a far cry from being good.Quote:
Originally Posted by TrekkiesUnite118
And without a compelling reason from anyone, it's not going to matter if the masses would find it acceptable enough to use, if only they would buy the system, they need to BUY the system, and the gamepad is throwing up a cost barrier in the way of both Nintendo and the consumers.
That they are still talking about "finding better ways to use it" tells me they don't have a goddamn clue what to do with it. Wii mote had obvious uses, and it used them from day 1. It never deviated from the message it laid out from day one. "Get up and play, wave your arms around and have fun playing these games!"
The gamepad is a muddled mess that no one has come up with a really compelling and saleable reason for.
"you can game on a small screen instead of your tv" may certainly be a feature you personally enjoy, but how do you really market that? Show some guy sitting there playing while his family watches something on their awesome big screen tv? That doesn't catch your eye in the right way, and people who have a need for that WILL appreciate it, but did you buy the wii u to play on the gamepad? Or did you buy it to hook it up to a tv?
I still have an NES and SNES that I like to buy games for once in a while. There aren't many NES and SNES games that you can buy on ebay, amazon, or retro stores that are $5 or $8. A Link to the Past just came out on the eShop for $8. I'd love to buy a physical cart at that price.Quote:
Originally Posted by KitsuneNight
I understand that $5 is too much for Golf and Tennis, for example. But then you have NES Zelda and Mega Man 1 also at $5, which you won't get out "in the wild".
true but nintendo prices all games the sameQuote:
Originally Posted by grieverr
smb 1 golf tennis and so on are not worth $5 1 to $ 2,50 at most if that ( smb 1 is so unbiqutous its not worth that much anymore )
nintendo shoudl price games accoridngly but instead they just mark up everything and expect them to sell
especially their own titles at a grossly inflated price and the games arent even tied to your account but to your blood console so if the conole goes tits up you can say bye bye to your games
i remember nintendo flogging nes games on the gba for $ 20 a popQuote:
Originally Posted by j_factor
unaltered rom dumped ona carridge nes game with out extra special features or with out so much as 2 or 3 games on 1 cardridge wich woudl take the sting out of that ridicilous price tag
and all because japan has a hard on for the famicom
even more desperate ?Quote:
Originally Posted by sketch
you'd think nintendo learned something by now especially after the disasterous 3DS launch which was turned around with more games and ahefty price cut
but for the wii U nintendo keep sticking their heads in the sand
if there was no gamepad i wouldnt have bought the wii u
good for youQuote:
Originally Posted by Semmie
everybody knows you are a barely coherent badly trained monkey chained behind a laptop
i guess that is because that way peeps will realise they can buy the game if they like it and not because its cheap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lan Di
thats half BS what i said but not completely. ofcourse high price is more money. but how many of us wait untill a game is cheap? most of us do, unless its a limited edition that we really want. right?
and here we go again
another round of deranged lunacy
im starting to think semmie has been thrown against the wall as a baby instead of dropped on his head
"Even Wii U DLC Is Getting Cancelled"
http://kotaku.com/even-wii-u-dlc-is-...led-1512904313
R.I.P. Wii U.
EXCELLENT !
now its waiting for the fire sales so i can pick one up cheap
hope thats only for batman.i dont wanna miss out on mortal kombat when it comes outQuote:
Originally Posted by Barone
Who cares? Honestly. I'm asking that. If you personally didn't buy a wii u, who in the entire world would give even an ounce of shit about it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Semmie
I've never been arguing about an individual persons perceived like/dislike of the system. The problem with the wii u has nothing to do with, "well I bought it and like it", it's entirely an issue of how the market as a whole perceives it and has (not) accepted it.
You, personally, and others in this thread may think the system is awesome as is, and that it's really doing well. Meanwhile the gaming masses have, over the Christmas season, come a stones throw away from selling the same number of systems as Nintendo has sold in total over the last YEAR. Now... tell me which system of the 3 is not gaining wide spread attention? Short of one of the other two ceasing to sell much of anything at all, both will pass the wii's sales to date and leave it struggling in the dust before 6 months have passed.
And the cost argument... really?
Things have a cost, things have a value, and things have a perceived value.
When the cost is about the same, or lower, than the perceived value, people will go and buy it. When the cost is higher than the perceived value, they tend not to. Companies don't want to release a game, have it sit on shelves for months, and then have someone pick it up on a sale/price drop. They want to see sales right out of the gate.
Price drops are acts of desperation, or attempts to bolster some sales of already sold through software and gain a bit more revenue. Nintendo needs to price some games more aggressively than others, because their perceived value just isn't anywhere close to the cost. Save the $$$ games for things that actually have a high perceived value and people likely would not be all that annoyed at them about it.