• expired

Nintendo Classic Mini NES $68 Delivered @ Amazon AU

1170

Don't forget cashback.

The NES Classic Edition system is a miniaturized version of the NES, originally released in 1985. Just plug the NES Classic Edition into your TV, pick up that gray controller, and rediscover the joy of NES games.

Price History at C CamelCamelCamel.

Related Stores

Amazon AU
Amazon AU
Marketplace

closed Comments

  • Kids have it too easy these days, some of the games on NES mini are punishing.

    • The whole "all" games are hard scenario only happened because of coin operated arcade machines I think.

      I think it's good that kids have the choice to play hard or easy games.

      Most games have a competitive scene where people achieve very hard feats such as speed running even with the easiest games.

    • I was just thinking this the other day. I was playing Ninja Gaiden NES on my Switch, something that I was never able to finish as a kid, and after several save state reloads and rewinds, I finished it. That's how you got value from games in those days. You kept grinding until you were godlike at the game.

      • It was falsely perceived value.

        Games were small. Cartridges could not hold much data. They did things like implement lives just so that you didn't beat the game in a day due to the size limitations.

        Everyone pretends like these were the "glory days" of gaming whereas the reality is that the games were unfairly difficult a lot of the time so that you felt like you were getting your money's worth.

        • Why is it false, if you did get value from it if you played it?

          • @shiny1: I think Ninternet's point is that the value that people obtained from old games is of a lower quality than current games, because developers replaced content/variety with difficulty. I think that what made games like Super Mario World and its ilk so popular was the fact that it was, for the first time, a game that provided genuine a variety of content rather than simply making the game hard to play (requiring many repeated attempts before it could be finished).

            • @xyron: That's because of the limitations of the console at the time. We have hindsight now to compare with games of today. It's unfair to compare value in this sense because that is all people had at the time for consoles.

              • @shiny1: And all people had to play with before that was a stick and hoop.

                Value in of itself is subjective. I worded that slightly wrong. It just annoys me when people take those NES days as the glory days and pretend that the difficulty made those games good. Especially annoying when people think they're superior gamers somehow for having played those titles back when they were the only choice.

                • @Ninternet: I agree. I think it's wrong to gatekeep games like that. It really is the Rose tint talking. However, I still stand by my opinion that if you put in a lot of time in a game that was difficult, you got value from it.

                • @Ninternet:

                  It just annoys me when people take those NES days as the glory days and pretend that the difficulty made those games good.

                  Why does this annoy you? People have different tastes and the idea of liking something old or vintage is not uncommon. There are people who think that vinyl records, NES games, classic cars or whatever were the glory days. Don't think there's really an issue with that.

                  • @p1 ama: Again, I shall reword it.

                    It annoys me when people present these opinions as objective and therefore it accompanies a level of arrogance.

                    There's a lot of research on the effects of nostalgia with different art forms and how we, as people, generally place more importance on the things that we like during our adolescent years as these things help form our sense of identity and belonging. People often mistake these individual and subjective experiences as fact a lot of the time and generally serves no greater purpose than to divide people through elevating one's self.

                    That explain things in a thorough enough manner?

                    • @Ninternet:

                      It annoys me when people present these opinions as objective and therefore it accompanies a level of arrogance.

                      Opinions are, by definition, subjective so this statement doesn't make any sense.

                      By your logic, I cannot say "games used to be better back in the day" because somehow that is "presenting opinions as subjective" and somehow "arrogant"?

                      People often mistake these individual and subjective experiences as fact a lot of the time and generally serves no greater purpose than to divide people through elevating one's self.

                      This is absurd - people prefer different games, different genres, from different historical periods. People express their opinion because they like to discuss things or perhaps even encourage other people to like the same thing as them. How is this dividing others and elevating oneself? Again, so I'm not allowed to say that game XYZ is better than game ABC because it is "dividing others" and "elevating oneself"?

                      • @p1 ama: Your first argument doesn't correlate to anything. People often present their opinions as OBJECTIVE. There is no such thing as objective opinion as you've said, therefore saying "games used to be better back in the day" is, by definition, incorrect as it is subjective. "I like older games better than newer games" is not presenting your preferences as factual.

                        As for your second point, the same people who express things in the format of "X is better than Y" will often do so in order to seek validation of their own view rather than have a civil discussion which may lead to them having their minds changed as you suggest they would - not unlike your rebuttals to my points. I've never said people can't enjoy games from different time periods more than games from now, that is instead something you've assumed I've said and are attacking a straw man.

                        • @Ninternet:

                          People often present their opinions as OBJECTIVE. There is no such thing as objective opinion as you've said, therefore saying "games used to be better back in the day" is, by definition, incorrect as it is subjective. "I like older games better than newer games" is not presenting your preferences as factual.

                          Normal people interpret "X is better than Y" to mean "I think X is better than Y".

                          E.g. you say "the reality is that the games were unfairly difficult a lot of the time so that you felt like you were getting your money's worth", even though that may not be the reality that people perceive or some game developers intended. So you're allowed to have your opinions but others aren't allowed to have theirs. That's what you're saying.

                          As for your second point, the same people who express things in the format of "X is better than Y" will often do so in order to seek validation of their own view rather than have a civil discussion which may lead to them having their minds changed as you suggest they would - not unlike your rebuttals to my points.

                          Why do you care? If someone thinks or says "X is better than Y", then that's great, good on them for enjoying X and preferring X. When you like something, it's natural to try and seek validation and/or convince other people you're right. You're doing the same thing right now.

        • It was falsely perceived value.

          yeah I disagree. I never had a NES, SNES or Mega Drive, but I absolutely love the games on those systems today. Games that are a challenge and have depth, and don't hand hold the player are some of my favourites. Of course there's crap, but there's also really, really good games. Castlevania 1 and 3, Contra, Metroid, these games are hard, but fantastic and much better than a lot of the high budget shit you see today.

          • @Odin: I never said you weren't allowed to enjoy them, but would you pay $183 for one of those titles today? Due to inflation ($75 in 1987 according to the inflation calculator and based off an old Dick Smith ad I found), that's roughly what an NES would cost in today's money. Games were more of an investment back then and the lack of guides and walkthroughs that we have today all but ensured you weren't going to speed run these titles for a long time, therefore creating the aforementioned illusion of value.

            Also saying those games are "a lot better than most" of today's games is a vast, vast overstatement. The first Metroid was superceded in quality by the SNES entry and since then the formula has been evolved so much that titles such as Axiom Verge, Hollow Knight, etc have all eclipsed the first entry - or even multiple entries - in the Metroid/Castlevania franchises due to the passage of time and information becoming much more widely available and therefore, able to be improved upon.

            Assuming the first Metroid is the best of its genre to this day is an insult to the games I've mentioned.

            • @Ninternet: Honestly, for Castlevania III, Metroid, and Legend of Zelda, for brand new copies. Yeah, I'd pay inflation adjusted prices, absolutely.

            • @Ninternet:

              I never said you weren't allowed to enjoy them, but would you pay $183 for one of those titles today? Due to inflation ($75 in 1987 according to the inflation calculator and based off an old Dick Smith ad I found), that's roughly what an NES would cost in today's money. Games were more of an investment back then and the lack of guides and walkthroughs that we have today all but ensured you weren't going to speed run these titles for a long time, therefore creating the aforementioned illusion of value.

              This is ridiculous. People paid millions of dollars for a computer which are less powerful than your smartphone today. "Would you pay millions of dollars for one of those computers today?"

              Assuming the first Metroid is the best of its genre to this day is an insult to the games I've mentioned.

              Why can't he just prefer the original Metroid and you just prefer something else? What he views as the best and what you view as the best can be different. The world's not gonna end. What's wrong with you?

              Geez, for someone who's so "anti-division" this and "anti arrogant" that, you're attacking others for their preferences more than others are attacking you for your preferences.

              • @p1 ama: You're getting quite emotional regarding this rather trivial argument by coming at me with lines such as "what's wrong with you"

                • @Ninternet: I only say that because there's something wrong with you if you can't see your own hypocrisy. But honestly though, I really don't care - you like your games, he likes his games. I play all games - retro and modern.

                  • @p1 ama: I also play and enjoy all games. That was never an argument or point I opposed, but rather one you insinuated that I have upheld. You're arguing against a point you've created.

            • @Ninternet: Shovel Knight and Axiom Verge are newer versions of Zelda II and Metroid… I don't think any of them have shown or been illustrated to be improved versions. They're just MORE OF the same thing.

              Zelda II, for example, is longer, more achievably difficult, and just as satisfying to master and play as any of the new Metroidvania style games, and in my mind still the gold-standard of that style.

              • @CONUT: Nobody would agree with you about Zelda 2 being the top of any list. That sounds like Nostalgia

                It's like saying TOOL is just MORE Elvis Presley because they both use guitars in their music

                • @Ninternet: That's ridiculous, I've played Zelda II and Shovel Knight and Axion Verge. There is zero advancement in tech. Axiom is an homage to Metroid and Shovel Knight is an homage to Zelda II.

                  I wasn't asking you. I was telling you. What you said was wrong. Shovel Knight is a shorter less story driven version of Zelda II.

                  • @CONUT: You CLEARLY didn't watch the video I linked below this comment. You're objectively wrong. Shovel Knight takes good elements from multiple old games and adds a whole lot of QOL features to ensure a more modernised and enjoyable experience - including removing the bad elements from games like you're beloved Zelda II.

                    Take your emotional attachment out of this, watch the video and learn something about game design.

                    • @Ninternet: Of course I didn't watch the video.

                      I don't need to be told what I saw. Shovel Knight is a shorter, easier, less story-driven version of Zelda II. You didn't read my reply, I've played them both, I don't need a video from you to tell me my experiences and memories are wrong.

                      You're obviously used to coming on the internet and bullying people with your aggressive forms of commenting. Your original comment on this thread was from a superior viewpoint, as though you know that people were tricked into enjoying their own past.

                      Let people enjoy their past. It's not up to you to denigrate people's memories and experiences. Some games from the past were exactly how you described… others weren't. The limitations of the platforms allowed for concentrated artistic expression in many cases, creating pure, engrossing and dedicated gaming experiences.

                      As a sidenote, if you want to play the actual peak of the Zelda II / Shovel Knight format of gaming, Super Paper Mario on the Wii is a far superior example.

                      • @CONUT: Ugh… Okay so I'm summary, Shovel Knight borrowed many elements from many NES games:
                        Shovel Strike reminiscent of Ninja Haiden
                        Town Hubs and the "pogo" machanic from Zelda 2
                        Boss fights and enemy character design from Mega Man
                        Overworld view from SMB3.
                        Axe throw from Castlevania

                        The game removed the bad elements from those games such as unpredictable, one-hit deaths, undetectable enemy and projectile placement, the likelihood of getting "knocked back" and falling to your death (by giving control back to the user after a few "invincibility" frames), etc.

                        Modern hardware allowed for this game to be built in 3D (despite masquerading as a 2D pixel art game) to create a better depth of animation with backgrounds as well as run at 60fps and without sprite flicker that the NES was prone to as a result of the hardware of the time.

                        The other obvious advantage of being in widescreen allows the player to intelligently assess any upcoming hazards before committing to a platforming section and dying to an unfair death.

                        The game also has an intelligent checkpoint system for seasoned games such as yourself who may have found Shovel Knight "too easy" by giving you the option to destroy any checkpoints in the levels in exchange for treasure. It also adds the feature of being able to reclaim your lost gold after death in a risk/reward scenario borrowed from modern games like Dark Souls.

                        All of this is factual as per the principles of 2D level design having learnt and EVOLVED from the games of the NES.

                        Keep emotionally downvoting me all you want. I don't care to change your opinion. I just was explaining through fact why games have progressed and improved as time has moved forward.

                        • @Ninternet: Yeah, you just showed again that you haven't played Zelda II. All those things you listed from all those games are already IN Zelda II. Just because the video is wrong as well doesn't make you right. It just makes both of you wrong.

                          How about you go play Zelda II. And then YOU could learn something about game design.

                          Cheers. :)

                          • @CONUT: I understand that you like Zelda II. That's fine.
                            I also don't believe Zelda 2 has widescreen support, 60fps, destroyable checkpoints, recoverable loot, fair enemy placement, axe throwing or a SMB 3 overworld, but sure.

                            • @Ninternet: Widescreen support and 60fps aren't gameplay design elements.

                              You haven't played Zelda II. SMB3 took the overworld from Zelda II. Zelda II has recoverable loot, good enemy placement, throwable weapon, progressive experience points and upgradable options for your character.

                              Shovel Knight doesn't do any of these game design elements better. The game is smaller, and doesn't have a more compelling story.

                              I've played both. I liked both. Zelda II is the better game. Again, you haven't played both so you don't actually have an opinion, you're just copying other people's opinions. What's the point of me arguing with someone else using you as a proxy. How about you go away and finish Zelda II, if you're capable, and then see if you still disagree with me.

                              • @CONUT: "how about you go away and finish Zelda II, if you're capable"

                                Lmao, what a weird flex

                              • @CONUT: https://youtu.be/AkocZH4okGc

                                Doesn't help your case when even the designer of the game thinks it's bad

                                  • @CONUT: "Zelda II is the better game."

                                    • @Ninternet: No. My statement was that Shovel Knight borrowed almost exclusively from Zelda II. All of the main elements that are referenced from other games were also in Zelda II before they were in those other games.

                                      The statement is based on reality. When you say, "Zelda II didn't have an overworld map, Shovel Knight took the overworld map from SMB3." You're not realising that SMB3 took the overworld map concept from Zelda II.

                                      When you say, "Shovel Knight used the downward thrust from Ducktales." You're not realising, the downward thrust in Ducktales was taken from Zelda II.

                                      It all way. The entire game is a Zelda II clone. You haven't played it so you don't know. You don't have to play it. You can just watch someone else play it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Yf7zGjbfFQ

                                      Enjoy.

                                      • @CONUT: You're choosing to ignore facts that don't support your opinion and it's hilarious

                                        • @Ninternet: Which facts am I ignoring?

                                          My opinion is based on the facts. How can the facts ignore the facts?

                                          • @CONUT: You're yet to state any facts. Everything you've said has been backed up by nothing but your own personal experience with Zelda II that you're probably fondly recalling due to nostalgia and the fact you played the game when you were young.

                                            • @Ninternet: I just posted a video of someone completing the entire game in one sitting, which shows all the gameplay elements I discussed.

                                              I posted the facts. You ignored them.

                                              The reason Shovel Knight's developers didn't just say, "we made a Zelda II clone" is because it's much better marketing to say "we took inspiration from ALL of the games to create a Frankenstein Monster Masterpiece of video game nostalgia."

                                              The reality is, they just made a new, smaller, less interesting Zelda II. The combat isn't as deep, the tactics are less involved, the story is non-existent, the music is less memorable, and it's an easier game to finish.

                                            • @Ninternet: also, quote from Sean Velasco:

                                              "…we see our inspiration from Zelda [as] coming from the combat system and character progression," he said. "The heavy, intense, strategy based combat of Zelda II was really appealing to us, and their focus on the down thrust is where our idea for the gameplay originated…"

                                              so…? Where to now?

              • @CONUT: https://youtu.be/rHhX5GtWNr8

                Watch this and learn something about game design rather than arguing without substance

        • Interesting conversation. I agree with both of you.
          But my hardest game which I brute-forced through, was "mission impossible" on the N64.

          The only way to win that game was to keep trying and dying. There were random things which would kill you and no way of knowing until they had you. Time to restart the level.

          This was never in a coin arcade machine though, I hard games started this way, and everything else just copied.

          You know what annoys me the most playing old games from generation 5 and 6? Checkpoints! These were necessary in the past when you couldn't store so much state data, but once we had memory cards and particularly since the original xbox with its hard drive, why couldn't we just save any time?

          Even BioShock infinite had a checkpoint system! Generation 8 have really improved this.

    • To me it also seemed like the first versions of the games were the hardest ones, e.g. Mega Man, Double Dragon and TMNT. Sequels were much easier.

      • Due to developers learning the art of programming 2D games and the fact that a more accessible game = wider audience = more money.

  • I remember these being scalped on eBay for $300+

    • +3 votes

      Up to US$1000 right at the peak.

      I was in the US at the time and had a boxed one sitting there waiting to be given away as a present. It was so tempting to think about selling it, but I decided I’d never be able to live with the guilt of being a lowlife scalper.

    • I know a guy who bought 9, or it may have been the SNES.

  • Kinda redundant with the snes mini as you can load the same games on there.

    I suppose the same works in reverse but the snes controllers are better.

    •  

      I think the NES controllers are better for NES games. But I guess that’s just what I grew up with.

  • +2 votes

    Great if you want to mod it, but I would go for the SNES if you really want to take advantage of modding.

  • Yes we need SNES deals instead.

    • This deal has inspired me to open my miniSNES. To many small consoles at home - will make a nice display one day!

  • Super Mario Bros!!!!

  • Bought it last time, played for 5 minutes then sold on gumtree.

  • I'm in the process of replacing my nes mini on my tv rack to PlayStation classic mini. They both can be modded, PSC has more raw cpu power that makes mame, n64 or psx games run smoother, plus it uses USB so using your existing xbox/ps controller/arcade stick is a breeze (well after modding).

    Still a good buy for collection.

  • Can u jail break this and put roms?

  • if you wanna play retro games : Buy a simple good old Wii , play as many retro you want on it from multiple platforms (NES,SNES,SEGA,DS,PSX,GC……etc)

    If you wanna collect for no use , go for this and pay for it :)

  • Thanks OP. Any recommended controllers on Ebay, suitable for this?

  • Buy this but don't forget to get a controller cable extension and USB power supply if you don't have a spare. SNES Mini improved on the problem of short cable length and adding a second controller for multi-player gaming.

    You can also buy 8BItDo Retro Receiver for NES/SNES/SFC Classic Edition and use any of the following wireless controllers if you already own them.

    • Xbox Bluetooth® controller,
    • Sony DualShock 3, DualShock 4, DualShock 4 Pro
    • Nintendo Wiimote, Wii U Pro, Switch Joy-Cons, Switch Pro
  • The included titles are:
    · Balloon Fight
    · BUBBLE BOBBLE
    · Castlevania™
    · Castlevania II: Simon’s Quest™
    · Donkey Kong
    · Donkey Kong Jr.
    · DOUBLE DRAGON II: THE REVENGE
    · Dr. Mario
    · Excitebike
    · FINAL FANTASY®
    · Galaga™
    · GHOSTS‘N GOBLINS™
    · GRADIUS™
    · Ice Climber
    · Kid Icarus
    · Kirby’s Adventure
    · Mario Bros.
    · MEGA MAN™ 2
    · Metroid
    · NINJA GAIDEN®
    · PAC-MAN™
    · Punch-Out!! Featuring Mr. Dream
    · StarTropics
    · SUPER C™
    · Super Mario Bros.
    · Super Mario Bros. 2
    · Super Mario Bros. 3
    · Tecmo Bowl™
    · The Legend of Zelda
    · Zelda II: The Adventure of Link