Not defending Dementia Donny and either way I’m not shelling out $80 for a game ever, just wondering if this is really a result of the tariffs. I understand the console price being high due to them but I don’t see how it would affect the price of games that are essentially going to be 100% digital
Not to be THAT GUY, but games haven’t kept up with inflation or increasing development costs. Someone in these convos usually point out that, adjusted for inflation, that 80’s Donkey Kong game actually costs more in today’s money than $60-80. So I guess that’s me today lol
Do I agree that they’re worth that much? Ehhhh
But have we gotten massive improvements, longer games, more physics, graphics, etc? Yeah.
Games like GTA take half a decade or more to be made. If you want that kind of game development to continue, consessions need to be made somewhere. Now, maybe there’s a better place to do it, but asking more for these games isn’t completely unreasonable.
Edit: That Guy is back with some facts for y’all. In the 80’s Nintendo charged $30-50 USD for a game. So let’s take the middle of both(1985 and $40) and plug it into an inflation calculator. I did a few(two government websites and a random other one) and I got $116.93, $118.09, and $120.44 for today’s dollar value.
That’s how much Donkey Kong(the OG) would cost TODAY. Not Cyberpunk, not GTA, not Stardew Valley, but OG 16 bit Donkey Kong.
You really think prices shouldn’t increase? Please explain then in a way that isn’t just “but I want it cheap!”. If that’s your only argument, just pirate ffs. No one’s stopping you.
Also, INDIE GAMES. THEY EXIST. THEYRE AWESOME. THEYRE CHEAP.
Honestly this discussion just feels like entitlement from a lot of people.
Edit again: Still waiting for someone to articulate why modern games should cost less than a 16-bit relic from the 80s when adjusting for inflation. Seeing a lot of downvotes poping in, but not much writing. Some actual facts would be nice instead of “but I can’t afford it!”. Should I do console prices next? Wanna see how much an NES should cost in today’s money?
Edit again: oh look, here’s console prices adjusted for inflation… An original NES launched for $199 in 1985. In today’s dollars… $581.57. Hmm… You could buy a Steam Deck for that price today… It’s almost like things have gotten really good for us compared to then. Woooooow. And that’s not even mentioning that consoles used to be sold at a loss. Nintendo stopped selling consoles at a loss around the time of the Wii. So modern consoles actually cost what they take to make. Previous consoles were subsidized by the games and should have been more expensive. Y’all are also probably too young to remember when having a game console was a HUGE DEAL. It meant you were well off. Now everyone has 2 or 3.
Another edit for shits and giggles: if you’re gonna bring up indie games, I’m gonna tell you to just go play them then. If you know you can play a better, cheaper game… then do it. What are you here bitching about? “Oh no, I have so many options but one of them is too expensive so I can’t have it and everything else too. Woe is me”
Like seriously “we have so many games now it’s hard to afford all of the ones I want to play”. Ummm yay? Videogames advanced as an art form so much that the choices are near endless and no one can really afford them all? GREAT!! WE DID IT! We made games so mainstream that everyone has access now!
I’m about done with this, but seriously, y’all need to chill a bit. I’m against the price increase too for the simple “I like having money” reason. But I don’t think Nintendo or anyone else are monsters for raising their prices. It’s been a long time coming and honestly surpising it didn’t happen soon. Talks of it have been rumbling for years. Anyone shocked is either too young to remember or had their head in the sand.
Calling it now, GTAVI will be EXPENSIVE. Willing to bet base $80 and at least one $200+ Shark Card/in game assets bundle. And when Rockstar does it, you bet your ass the rest will follow. If anything Nintendo is just prepping for that inevitably themselves.
I can’t help myself edit: someone said the 80s are a bad time to compare. Sure video game crash, electronics still being relatively new… Ok.
So the PS1 released in 1994 for US $299, equivalent to $621.53 today. I can get a PS5 today, depending on version, for $499-$699, with objectively better everything. So again, cheaper than it was.
Just to be clear: they’re asking for a $20 raise in prices. Inflation says it’s should be a $60 increase. How are they monsters?
You know what else hasn’t kept up with inflation? Wages.
So before you go espousing raising prices, let’s first make it so people can afford the higher costs.
Lmao that’s a completely seperate issue between you and your employer. Has nothing to do with the value of the dollar.
Has inflation kept up with wages? No. Have prices gone up anyways? Hell yes. Only thing you can find under $1 anymore is Arizona Tea, and even that isn’t a guarantee.
But yes, complain that a luxury item has gone up in cost. You know, something not necessary. So no one needs to make sure “everyone can afford it”. The ones who can buy, will buy, and the numbers show overwhelmingly that they do.
All you’re literally arguing is that wages should increase. Agreed. It should increase to match the new prices that are inflating as well. Wouldn’t change the fact that games cost the same “spending value” as before with the new pricetag.
I mean tbf complaining that less people can afford it now because prices have increased but wages haven’t is fair. Everything needs to be looked at relative to all the other values. If you wanna go even more in depth I guess you would need to add popularity of games, reputation of a brand or game series, value of the currency, and other factors.
I generally agree with you that prices for video games haven’t kept up that well, although I would also point out that due to multiple factors anchoring the video game price at 1980 might not be the best if you want a fitting picture. Games were much more rare baack then, the market was smaller, small production volume meant physical costs per unit increase, there’s things like way higher shipping costs to think about because globalization is a more modern phenomenon and a lot more stuff. Imo using the 2000s as an anchor to extrapolate from would be more fitting, as the market was well established at that point and thus prices would appear more stable.
I’m not doing that because I am literally a little gremlin who can’t be arsed to put the time in rn but these are my two cents of criticism against your methodology.
Yes, but you can make the wages claim about EVEYTHING. House, cars, food haven’t gone down. Everything else went up. So why is this one luxury exempt?
And yes, because of globalization, a Steam Deck is cheaper than a NES was. That’s great! So why are you complaining when prices are objectively better than 1980? Like yeah, we made things better! And even with inflation, they’re cheaper!
So why are you complaining about a $20-30 increase when the math says you should have a $60 increase? That’s what I’m calling entitlement. We have it objectively better by every metric in video games, including cost, and people are throwing a fit over an increase that’s still below inflation.
It sounds like you might have missed some parts of my comment.
Wages: yes you can claim everything is affected by the relatively low wages. That includes video games. But if you need to save up because of that, video games will be one of the things you need to skip, because it is a luxury good. And that’s sad. That’s why this sticks out.
Price dip from 1980: I made a case for why the costs for video games in 1980 were very high, and probably for a variety of reasons. now quite a lot of those reasons disappeared over the next centuries. So the price increases do not correlate with that, and that’s why using the prices from 1980 might not be a great comparison.
Complaining about a 20$ increase: because everyone has the absolute right to complain about everything. We are the consumer - judging prices is one of our ultimate rights, because we need to make sure it’s worth buying something. Now I don’t think it’s entitlement given all the things I listed before, but if you wanna call it that, go ahead, although I think trying to understand my perspective would decrease your presumptions about people like me.
We have it objectively better by every metric: and this is precisely where I disagree, respectfully. You do not have to understand why, but I feel like painting crowds of people in broad strokes is always unhelpful for perspective and learning. But I guess in the end you do you, I can’t force people to understand someone else and why they’re saying what they’re saying.
If indie devs can make a game and sell it for less than Nintendo games sold for in the 90s then maybe it isn’t actually more expensive to develop and distribute games that are somewhat comparable to games from the 80s. A lot of games sell for $40 or less and are making profits.
Nintendo games are more expensive partially because they are limited to Nintendo hardware. Like Apple, this requires more costs for software because their target audience is smaller than something through a digital platform like steam, and distribution is a pretty significant cost and physical distribution has a lot of risk and waste compared to digital if something doesn’t sell as many as expected.
Ummm Nintendo has a digital platform, so not sure what you’re on about that one.
And in regards to indie studios: then buy their games and stop complaining, duh. Like, if you know there’s all these amazing and cheap alternatives, why are you bitching about what Nintendo charges? No one’s forcing you. Go play something else. It’s really that easy.
Nintendo, love em or hate them, is like Disney. They want to curate a very specific image. Look up the invention of the Nintendo Seal of Approval and why that was such a big thing. Nintendo wants to be very specific thing and frankly doesn’t give a shit if you like it. If you dont, then you’re not their target audience. It’s really that simple. Their not catering to everyone, they’re catering to a specific group. If they want to charge a certain amount but you know it’ll be quality cus it’s Nintendo, then what’s the harm?
A digital platform limited to their hardware.
It is easy enough that I am doing that and not complaining about Nintendo’s pricing, just discussing why it is so high. Is discussion automatically complaining?
Again, what’s it matter? A PS store game is limited to their platform. An Xbox store game is limited to their platform. A Steam game is…
Seeing a pattern? It’s irrelevant. Console exclusivity has always been a thing until modern times. But now we have cross play, something that never existed. So again, objectively better. Are some games still stuck to certain consoles? Yeah. And that’s their prerogative and frankly is the norm. So what? What reason do you have that you deserve it? You don’t. You just want it.
Xbox game store is also on PC, and they share titles on steam. A lot of Playstation games are also released on steam. In fact, being exclusives to those consoles is becoming far less common than cross platform with PC. Nintendo is the only one that doesn’t do any cross platform releases and doesn’t do sales.
You clearly just want to be right and are projecting because not everyone agrees with you.
Yes but back then most people only bought maybe 2-3 games the entire generation and traded with their friends. There was also a lot of local coop games.
Now people would like to play dozens of games and it’s difficult to share, often you even need to buy two copies of a game to even play with your family in the same house.
Exactly, games back then were EXPENSIVE. Currently we live in luxury where you have hundreds of options. How does that not justify it costing more?
Be that guy. Games are too cheap.
I think Nintendo made a mistake pricing Mario Kart that way, since they’re selling it for half that price in a bundle anyway. Had it been 70 like DK with a bump of 10 for physical it’d be a different conversation.