IDK how to feel about rising video game prices. On the one hand, prices were stagnant for decades. On the other hand, companies can sell far more copies of games than they could back in the 1980s and 1990s. The cost of games is all in the development. The more you sell, the cheaper the price can be. They cost next to nothing to package and distribute (or are distributed digitally.)

On one hand, games are a lot more complex and expansive than they were back in the day. On the other, game devs now have tools the creators of old couldn't even dream of. No one is hand coding the next Mario game is assembly.

There's a lot of variables here. And it's really just hard to make a fair judgment about it.

[–] thermal_shock@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago

If they're turning billions of dollars in profit each year, there's no reason to raise the price. Fuck them

[–] mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 6 days ago

In many ways I think rising prices could be great, but in reality, they won't be. With the technology available today, we could have even cooler games than we do, and more games, and more great games. We could have more diverse and experimental games. It would be lovely if solo indie developers were able to make a living from making great games, rather than basically needing to chase a dream akin to getting drafted into the NBA. Game developers are seriously underpaid, it would be great if they got paid as much as other software developers, especially since their work is equally complex and usually more stressful.

In reality, rising game prices will not help with any of those things, and will just make the C-suite richer. The one silver lining is that this may allow small indies to start charging a more livable realistic price for their games.

[–] nuko147@lemm.ee 6 points 6 days ago

Yeah but BOTW has already made them rich. Development is finished and even the next game is 2 years old. I call it pure greed.

[–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

They cost next to nothing to package and distribute (or are distributed digitally.)

Steam takes 30% cut. This, of course, does not apply to nintendo, but still

[–] Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world 9 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Title is a bit misleading

There are a few scenarios here.

You own the game on switch and already have the dlc so pay nothing unless you want to pay $10 or have the switch online subscription for the switch 2 edition if you want the enhancements. For a total of $0-10 depending on your choice
You own the game but dont have the dlc so pay $20 for that and then $10 for the switch 2 version unless you have the subscription for a total of $20-30 depending on your choice.
You dont own the game so you buy the switch 2 version for $70 and the dlc for $20 for a total of $90.

This is not the same as the $90 game lie thats being told, but it is painted that way. To get clicks.

Paying $70 for a game and then paying more for an expansion is nothing even close to new. For example, Destiny 2 is free but if you want the DLC its gonna cost you between $150 and $270 depending on when you buy it as there are sometimes deals on.

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 31 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Breath of the Wild is 8 years old at this point. Asking $70 for that is pretty egregious in my opinion. Maybe for TotK that'd be more acceptable but for BotW I think it's a very steep price. Especially given that it's common that rereleases usually include dlcs by default.

I'd expected $60 for the full package, not $90, given that the amount of development work was likely pretty low (the game was finished years ago after all). So 50% higher than expected.

The SM64+Sunshine+Galaxy bundle game was $30, for comparison. That's three full games that they needed to put in effort for to run on the Switch.

[–] Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Absolutely fair. An 8 year old game should not cost $90 all in.

I dont dispute that. I just think the article is misleading as there is a lot of talk about $90 switch 2 games, which turned out not to be true, and it creates anger that is misplaced. Even if the reality isn't far from that lie.

I do, however, think it's an interesting thought experiment to come at it from another angle.

Imagine the article was "8 year old AAA game and DLC at a huge discount" and the article said things like:

breath of the wild was ahead of its time on release
the graphics still look great thanks to the cell shading and art style
unique gameplay elements and a modern feeling combat system
vast open world with expansive storyline
on par with modern games
currently only $50 on this deal, a bargain considering everything you get for that price

From this point of view i think you would agree that anyone would argue its worth more than $50 and that its a great deal despite being 8 years old.

Nintendo games should definitely come down in price over time, but the point is its just so easy to spin something however you want if you use the right words.

[–] demizerone@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (4 children)

Nintendo doesn't give AF about poor people.

[–] Critical_Thinker@lemm.ee 4 points 6 days ago

They aren't your friends, they don't care about you - they care about the money in your pocket.

They know they are too big to fail, so they are gonna raise prices 50% no problem.

[–] v4ld1z@lemmy.zip 3 points 6 days ago

I'd wager most video game companies don't

[–] accretion@lemm.ee 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Why would they? Not saying it's right, but there's literally zero motivation for them to focus on people who can't buy their products. They are a luxury good.

They are a company who exists to make money, not entertain us, despite that being what they say (in order to sell more). Them, and every other for profit company in the world.

[–] samus12345@lemm.ee 1 points 6 days ago

No for-profit company does as they don't get money from them. This is not caring about anyone who's not wealthy.

[–] TwinTitans@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

So sounds like a public library check out.

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

They have literally been doing this with every older game they've ever produced. New system? New larger price to play on the new system.

[–] Puzzlehead@reddthat.com 1 points 6 days ago

I already have the DLC and with Nintendo membership, you get the rest for free if you already have the game, DLC not included.

load more comments