I get it, prices of games going up sucks but games rose to about $60 (cad) during the wii era. Put that into an inflation calculator and you end up with about $90 nowadays, it’s not really a price hike out of line with general inflation. The switch 2 pricing isn’t out of line with AAA PS5 games either ($80 for a digital copy has already been the case for a while there).
Games are not free to make and modern games have longer dev cycles and therefore cost more to make as well.
Consoles are also typically sold at a loss with the idea that software sales will make up for the loss. Were games to remain the same price the console would likely be significantly more expensive.
I get that consumer purchasing power is down due to wages not keeping up with inflation but sadly the reality is that if making a console and games for it are unprofitable then they’ll stop making them.
You must log in or register to comment.
-
Nintendo doesn’t sell at a loss.
-
This argument only takes inflation into account and the cost of making the games, while ignoring that games sell many more copies than in the past. Gaming is much more popular than in the N64 era.
Say you need to make $100 to break even. If you can assume a third of console owners will buy. Say 300 people own the console, you can sell for $1 and make the hundred.
Now say games are more expensive to make, you need $300 to break even. But now there’s 1000 people that own the console. With the same third buying your game at $1 you’re now making $333.
- Most games already cost more than $70 if you want the complete game. Ubisoft is typically $140 I think for the base game and expansions plus tons of micro transactions. Increasing the base price to $90 would be more accepted if we weren’t already being fucked over with the current pricing model which is just going to get worse.
Edit: why is my 3 showing as a 1? Is this a sync formatting issue or something with lists in lemmy?
-
Props for a legitimate unpopular opinion! I do disagree, but I guess that is the point lol
Yeah I posted it here cause I know it’s a bit of a contentious opinion. I think the outrage is really more about the consumer market as a whole and not really Nintendo themselves.
The Switch 2 just happened to be something a ton of people are looking forward to and many of those people are upset with the fact that all prices are going up while their wages are stagnant and honestly rightfully so. I think people should be using that energy to lobby for change on a huge scale to make life more affordable (UBI systems, rent controls, tax the rich, etc.) instead of blaming one company.
Definitely an unpopular opinion, though I don’t disagree with it.
For an additional point of comparison, a brand new N64 cartridge back in 1996 would have been anywhere from $60 to $80. Which based on an inflation calculator would be slightly over $120 to $160 today.
And games are more expensive than ever for studios to make and push to the market. Given that, I’m not surprised we have loot crates, micro transactions, and predatory dlc. A AAA game should have a baseline price closer to $200.
And games are more expensive than ever for studios to make and push to the market. Given that, I’m not surprised we have loot crates, micro transactions, and predatory dlc. A AAA game should have a baseline price closer to $200.
Yeah … then there are people the won’t buy games for more than $20 (not necessarily because they can’t afford it but because “it’s just a game”) … which is just kinda crazy to me (and disrespectful to the amount of work that went into the game).
Definitely an unpopular opinion, and not just a rant or rage bait either, so kudos!
I don’t agree, but this is a damn fine post for this C/
The reason I don’t agree is that consumer goods are priced out of scale. It they can’t price things at a realistic level, then they should stop making them. That goes for every single brand/platform out there
If they’re going to be sucking at the teat of capitalism and enjoying massive profits, but the rest of us are struggling as households, they can go fuck themselves, to be frank. They want the benefits of a “free” market, but don’t want to recognize that the market pressure of demand actually matters. If they’re making games that aren’t affordable to the median, then that’s the developers’ problem. They can scale back for a while, change pricing, produce fewer games, whatever. They have options.
Now, yes, it’s games. This isn’t insulin we’re talking about here, so it certainly isn’t something anyone needs to be up in arms over. But it also isn’t something where they need defending either. Fuck em if they can’t play fair.
While I agree in principle (I’m not a fan of unfettered capitalism either) the fact is that people need to vote with their wallets. As the business saying goes: “things are worth what people will pay for it”
People are going to buy the switch 2, I expect they won’t be able to supply enough to stock stores sufficiently on launch just like the last couple console launches. Games are going to sell and they are going to make a profit. If people want to make a statement that it’s unaffordable they need to organise a large boycott or potentially a general strike to enact change in the market as a whole; which I don’t see happening(sadly).
So again while I do agree that late stage capitalism and the fact that buying power is at a long time low is a huge issue. I do not think that Nintendo following the other big game consoles pricing is surprising nor on its own unethical. I find the huge uproar that they are joining PlayStation and Microsofts pricing range to be a bit much. Under our current economic structure Nintendo has a fiscal responsibility to be profitable to their shareholders, I’m sure there’s a ton of pressure on them to follow market pricing.
I definitely see your point, and appreciate you expressing it :)
I honestly agree and usually get downvoted to hell for it. I spent $60 on Halo 3 in 2007. Today that would be close to 90. Inflation is here, and as you said we know that Halo 3 took less manpower than most modern games. I think there needs to be a price adjustment.
Now that also means that I expect people will not buy just any game that comes out, we’ll start being more picky, and I say good. True masterpieces I’m happy to shell out 100 dollars for. I’m also happy to try that with their AAAA assassin’s creed games and watch sales fall. That’s the market.
People say it’s greed. 90 is not greed. That’s how much it costs to make games. Battlefront 2 with endless micro transactions are greed. Required dlc is greed. If its 90 bucks and I get 100 hours of entertainment from it, I’m doing pretty well.
After all, let’s remember that movies are like $16 now and you only get 2 hours of entertainment.
Exactly.
And like I get some backlash but I feel like I see memes and protest posts all over social media like this is some kind of huge betrayal by Nintendo. The general response just feels disproportionate.
You’re absolutely right, it makes sense that due to inflation games will start costing $90, and people will probably have to be more selective with buying things at that price point. But the Nintendo ceo makes $300 million a year so arguments regarding greed are definitely still valid. They could make the games cheaper but it would decrease profits.
