This is probably the only time Nintendo has come out of the gate with superior hardware and I actually don’t give a shit, why on earth would I want to buy a steam deck that is locked behind corporate control and price gouging?
I don’t give a shit how fast the scrreen refreshes or how fancy some of the features, I want a computer that can play games, I don’t want a toy that is purposefully broken so I can’t use it for things I want to use it for, ESPECIALLY if I drop hundreds and hundreds of dollars on it.
Nope.
I understand why you think this, but its kind of wrong. Because Nintendo has had the upper hand with hardware many times.
- SNES was arguably better than Genesis system
- N64 has much more raw power than my favorite system the PS1
- GameCube was stronger than PS2 and Dreamcast
And yes, I’ll just wait and use my steam deck until SD2, because I also just want a computer that I can play games on.
SNES was arguably better than Genesis system
The SNES and Genesis were comparable. You could argue one or the other, but it was a tighter race than the Playstation 3 curb-stomping the Wii.
N64 has much more raw power than my favorite system the PS1
Playstation had CD-ROM, and that’s all that needs to be said about that battle.
GameCube was stronger than PS2 and Dreamcast
Comparing the GameCube with the PS2, it had less VRAM, less RAM, a faster CPU, roughly equiv video processor. I would say they were about equal, and that’s with GameCube coming out two years later.
The PS2 was also the strongest console to ever fight in any sort of console war, with its ridiculously large library of games. PS2 punished Sega so hard they permanent removed themselves out of the race, and Nintendo had to completely change strategies to fill a different niche and audience, which worked with the Wii. However, that came with the dumbing down of hardware that everybody is talking about. They have been pushing shitty outdated hardware ever since.
I stand corrected, I guess I was comparing the gamecube to an xbox, but yeah agreed, I just bought a second steam deck OLED when I already had the LCD model because honestly I think the economy is going to crash hard and it is going to be a long road to affordably getting a gaming device in the US for the foreseeable future.
It is a shitty situation to be in, but I didn’t even hesitate because the current calculus is a no brainer. I have Blender on my Steam Deck and I am using it to create cool visualizations of Lidar data for Geology, Nintendo would respond to a statement like this with something like “yeah, that is cool but it sounds very niche, people don’t need that” and my response is “Fuck you, you haven’t even let people try”.
I heard of another Geologist bringing in their steam deck to present a talk off of it instead of a laptop too, these kinds of interesting unusual use cases aren’t trivial and hyper individual, they represent people developing the future of handheld computers in real time, and Nintendo has completely lost the plot here. The Steam Deck really isn’t a gaming device, it is a gaming device that Trojan Horses you into having an awesome handheld linux computer that can also play your favorite games.
If Nintendo thinks they can compete with the Steam Deck by just selling a better handheld gaming console, they are so fucked… or at the very least they are walking away from what will actually be the next big growth area in computers (that people were SURE AI and VR would be).
Nintendo execs are likely sitting there being like “damn we are going to make so much money selling the best handheld gaming console and completely dominate the handheld gaming console market so we can charge $100 a game” while missing the MUCH LARGER profit opportunity of evolving their handheld console into a handheld computer.
Think about it, Nintendo is in the perfect position to evolve their Switch into more and more of a computer, and it would give them a MASSIVE new horizon of growth opportunities especially since countless kids grow up playing on Switches and already know how to use them inside out… it would help Nintendo protect itself from encroachment by other big tech, and do any number of other longterm things for Nintendo’s growth and profit.
Instead the idiots want to gouge people for more money by squeezing ONLY the gaming potential out of the switch, it is pathetic and I wish legislation around the world didn’t allow massive corporations to behave this foolishly in trying to close down their systems so they don’t accidentally create the “wrong” kind of value or innovation.
This is exactly why I purchased a steam deck. My gaming PC died (RIP to a real one), and I needed something for general use more than I did for gaming.
I need to check the price of broken steam decks, there are so many fun project’s I could do if I had the motherboard or daughter boards in the steam deck, and no I need my current steam deck intact to play on
Ah yes, console released over 30 years ago.
why on earth would I want to buy a steam deck that is locked behind corporate control
from context I think you wanted to write nintendo
Yeah, I was trying to say the switch can be thought of as a steam deck that is locked behind corporate control.
oh! I understand it now, sorry
I have a Steam Deck definitely felt no need to get either the Switch 1 or 2.
I love how the price goes up every time someone complains.
It’s over 9000 by now.
That’s too high!
Nintendo isn’t getting another penny from me after what they did to the switch emulation projects.
You can still emulate everything. Newest version will work just fine for the indefinite future
Much to Nintendo’s dismay
… what they “momentarily” did to “that” em project, you mean.
I dunno what y’all are talking about, the Deck chip (Van Gogh, 7nm, Zen 2 but with Rembrandt-era SoC features, RDNA2) is “newer” than the Ampere chip (circa 2020) in the Switch 2.
On the one hand, with rising inflation and skyrocketing development costs, I can totally understand why game prices are getting dangerously close to the triple digits. Games rn are cheaper that they ever were
yeetyet development is not.However, that’s still a lot of money and I really wouldn’t wanna pay that.
Oh absolutely, my heart bleeds for the selfless video game CEOs bravely sacrificing their third yacht to keep game prices only $70. Imagine the hardship of cutting executive bonuses down to just eight figures, all so we can enjoy our digital horse armor without paying $99.99.
These modern saints really are holding the line for the little guy. If only we could all aspire to such noble self-denial.
I never said the CEOs are saints. They’re just not worse than they were 15 years ago. At least for devs/publishers that don’t put micro transactions in full price games.
The money isn’t going to developers, and these are billion dollar companies. It’s not about development, but unadulterated greed.
Doesn’t change that $60 in 2010 are almost $90 today. Devs/publishers aren’t any more greedy than they were 15 years ago.
Devs/publishers aren’t any more greedy than they were 15 years ago.
Looks at the dozens of live service games that have come out in the past decade, with their multiple currencies and premium battle passes
Touché. But that’s a different problem. They don’t even need to raise the base price though, many of them are free to play anyways. And those that both have microtransactions and are full price should be avoided anyways.
They are not more greedy, but they think they got an opportunity now. Games industry is bigger than Film industry. They earn an amazing amount of money due to how many more are playing games now than in 2010 did. Revenue of 2024 was 10 times higher than of 2010…
It’s absolutely incredible how big the gaming industry is now. Where 20 years ago it was extremely male, and mostly limited to 20-30 year olds now it’s everyone! Children and retirees, men and women and everything inbetween or further out to the fringes! And I’m not just talking phone games (which is a gigantic market on its own) at the MSP I work at we’ve had retired folks bring in gaming computers for service or just drop off older gaming computers for recycling
The do have an opportunity now. People will complain but they won’t stop buying games.
We will see. If they lose a big share of the Switch 1 owners without many new members buying the console, it is a loss for them.
Is that the same in Japan? I know Japan has a horrible work culture in general.
This is greed, pure and simple. At $60, the industry was more profitable than Hollywood, and they raised the base price of games to $70 just a few years ago before immediately talking about raising prices again.
Not solely. If you paid $60 for a game in 2010, that‘d be almost $88 today, simply due to inflation. It’s a wonder the prices haven’t skyrocketed any sooner.
Not that I want that, I‘d prefer games being affordable but it was kinda inevitable considering the way the economy is going…
Also, I‘d personally rather pay $90 once than have a cheap game with a shitload of micro transactions. Of course, developers/publishers that ask $90 for a game and still include a bunch of micro transactions can fuck right of.
Also, people seem to forget that we’ve been paying $60 for new games for like 40 years. NES games cost $60. That would be like $200 today.
“I rAtHeR pAy $420.69 once for an incomplete game then extra $69 for each DLC” - You. Seriously, go back to Nintendo you gooba
I don’t own a Nintendo console older than a Wii and I don’t plan on changing that.
I also don’t plan on playing games that try to make me pay for it tenfold by enticing me to buy various in-game currencies.
yeet development is not.
Yeah I would imagine yeeting the things you’re developing could get expensive.
Or do you mean developing new kinds of yeets? Probably still expensive.
Exactly.
I would be a lot more willing to accept the inflation argument if salaries at these companies were going up at inflation rates too.
In this case though we all know they are not and additionally digital releases not needing to be physically transported and the lack of printed manuals in physical games, for instance, also cuts down on what it costs to make and ship a game today.
I would be a lot more willing to accept the inflation argument if salaries at these companies were going up at inflation rates too.
Not unless you’re an executive, that is…
But the sale numbers are probably much higher nowadays, so it would be feasible to sell games for cheaper. But why would they? People are gonna buy them anyway. Those who won’t will get them on a sale later.
Those who won’t will get them on a sale later.
/C/patientgamers represent!
I’ll gladly wait 3-5 years to play a $90 retail game for $10-20. There are already too many games in my library to play, I don’t need to piss away $100 on a game I’ll be bored with in 2 months.
Except Nintendo first party titles never get close to that price.
You can’t even buy first party Switch 1 games from 2017 at that price.
Whenever there’s a multiplatform game I’m interested in I add it to my wishlist on the Switch, PS5 and Deck. I almost always end up buying it off Steam because it ends up being cheaper on it. So the Switch and PS5 have been reduced for exclusives only.
don’t forget mods, easy repair, easy piracy, and actually being a functional portable computer in a pinch if you have a docking station
I think the last Nintendo game I payed for was animal crossing new horizons. Yea, I’ll be alright with my back catalog and the occasional indie game that costs less than 20$. All I wanted was another punch-out but I played the “Big Boy Boxing” demo and it was pretty fun, so I will not be buying a switch 2 any time soon if at all.
I would just like to remind everyone that Nintendo was predatory when EA and Activision were the good(ish) guys.
Dont at me.
Is every console a PC nowadsys?
I mean I’m not against it per se, even it might be kind of good I guess.
They always have used hardware closely related to existing workstation or PC hardware, but the difference is now they try so much less hard to hide it, through crossplay, lack of platform exclusives, and just less trying to innovate on how the games are played. Part of it is that game inputs have largely been standardized, part of it is that the more similar to a bog standard PC the console is, the easier it is for developers to port their existing games, and part of it might just be that platforms aren’t feeling pushed to innovate as much
No, the Switch used ARM-based smartphone hardware.
They were always nerfed down PCs
Nah, they were specialized hardware. IIRC the Xbox was the first “PC console”.
Not sure if it’s enough to count but the Dreamcast had Windows CE
It sure did, I totally forgot about all that, nice catch!
The DirectX “box”
My initial response to this was “ehhh”, but a quick look at the consoles I grew up with shows you’re right. The only exception I saw was the PS3 thanks to it’s pretty bonkers CPU.
The Super Nintendo user a Ricoh 5A22, which was based on the W65C816S used in the Apple II.
The Sega Genesis used a Motorola 68000, which was popular for Unix computers. It also made it into a number of PCs like the Apple Lisa, Macintosh, and Amiga
The PS1 and PS2 both had a R3000A-compatible 32-bit RISC CPU that was used in a lot of workstations of the era, but none of those would be familiar to an x86 user.
The PS3’s processor was the stuff of hype and legends. It bore no resemblance to PCs of the time
Even the PS5, which is for the most part is just an x86 PC, still has a unique architecture that allows for loading and decompressing textures from disk into VRAM without putting any load on either the CPU or GPU.
It’s not like they aren’t trying to do new stuff, it’s just hard to find new avenues to innovate when so much has already been figured out.
I mean the military did buy up ps3s to make a supercomputer for this reason. Pretty cheap and performed well.
https://phys.org/news/2010-12-air-playstation-3s-supercomputer.html
deleted by creator
Well, between their incredibly abusive behaviour towards fans making content on YouTube even though that’s free advertising, the mess with the smash tournaments and them breaking agreements to side with some new band of assholes -
their previous efforts to destroy companies by patent trolling and their current efforts to undo Palworld that have pretty much only been prevented by them teaming up with Sony -
and their very heavy-handed protectionist approach to ROM preservation even though they keep taking away people’s access to their older catalogue, I certainly wouldn’t consider them ABOVE board.
Before sony’s completely ridiculous 2024 I would have firmly called them below-board, but enshittification really hit hard, jeez. (Dashes were for breathing pauses cus that was getting a little long. I was also going to mention an issue with them being a lot less transparent with whether or not they’d ethically sourced their rare earth metals vs the other big two, but I don’t remember quite when that was, just that it was discussed during the switch era).
Edit: tbc I still upvoted cus physical games ARE still important, but I forgot to mention that they don’t let you downpatch digital games so speed running, or even just wanting to play TotK with the dupe glitch, is forced to sometimes be way more expensive thanks to REQUIRING physical AND having to play offline forever cus I think it tries to force patches?
deleted by creator
Physical games with a huge asterisk. Some switch 2 “physical” games will just be a piece of plastic you insert into your switch that tells a server somewhere you can play it and won’t actually have the game itself installed. It’d be a digital only game with extra steps
deleted by creator
I guess certain games maybe only hard copies exist, but when you can just grab a copy off the internet and store it, I don’t see the need for a hard copy.
deleted by creator
Yeah, Nintendo is smoking unfiltered crack, lol. Who the hell has $80-90 to throw at every game in the midst of an unnecessary economic downturn and possible worldwide meltdown?
Oh no, just a USA meltdown. Trump isn’t great for other economies, but we still have the rest of the world to trade with. The only thing he is achieving is making the usa less relevant by the day.
Stocks are down all over the globe, not sure if you noticed.
It will still cause other countries economies to shrink, as most economies are interlinked in the modern age; but even with the loss in GDP, removing US trade/tech/military reliance is definitely for the better imo. The USA positioning themselves alongside Russia has woke up the rest of the world to the fact that America isn’t simply arrogant… It’s also dangerous.
I don’t see a way back for the US in all honesty. The problem isn’t the rogue state behaviour, it’s the virile support for such actions seen from many of their citizens. In the coming years we’ll no doubt see American military bases being shutdown across the globe, in retaliation to their animosity, and it will only continue further until the US is a pariah state.
I suppose it’s some solace that the democrats are able to somewhat slow the implosion of the US through the senate, but that won’t be enough to stop them falling out of favour with the rest of the world, and thus losing a huge part of their power. And I have to wonder, is this the exact outcome Putin wanted (America surviving, but struggling… Allowing them to exist as the bad guy, Rather than complete desolation), or just a happy accident after getting Krasnov elected?.
It’s because a significant portion of our population are complete dumbasses.
One third of the country are bigots believing every piece of propaganda.
One third of our country doesn’t think politics affects them.
10-15% (ballparking) have good political intentions, but don’t think voting will solve anything.
That leaves about 20-25% to actually contribute politically with critical thinking skills and understanding various social issues.
Yeah we’re fucked.
Based on some economic models I’ve read about, the only countries whose GDP will be hurt by this are America, Canada and Mexico. In that order.
Most of the world is expected to break even or benefit because countries will act in their best interest and route around Trump’s stupid.
I can’t speak for every country, but I know that the UK (where I’m based) is looking at a GDP shrink of around 1%; though given our ‘special relationship’ with the US, and our FAFO era with Brexit, we’re probably more dependant on American trade than your average long distance ally (or should I say former ally?), so I could definitely see other countries breaking even or even profiting from it.
I can’t speak definitively but it will probably hurt Australia to some extent. At least if they don’t want to get dragged into one of our really stupid wars that we undoubtedly have coming.
Not to mention, Nintendo games usually don’t go down in price over time as much.
As much? I don’t think ever. Breath of the Wild is still it’s release price despite it’s sequel, in the same world but with more content, being out and the same price. They’re insane.
And Pokemon games only increase in price over time.
In the Switch era, they don’t at all. Nintendo Selects isn’t a thing any more.
Yeah, the company has gone full greed mode since Iwata’s passing. I know the point of a business is to make money and all that but he at least kept things fair for the consumer.
This kinda feels like Sony’s PS3 announcement, but Nintendo can get away with more than Sony could then.
Hopefully this system isn’t the smashing success that the first Switch was and it humbles them a bit. Beyond the price gouging, the novelty of the concept has worn some and this system really doesn’t do anything all that exciting beyond improved visuals (which doesn’t excite me as somebody who already has a good PC).
I’m a really huge Nintendo fan who has owned every one of their systems besides the Virtual Boy and bought most of those at launch. I was almost certainly going to purchase a Switch 2 as soon as I could… yet yesterday’s lackluster software reveals followed up by the outrageous pricing has me saying the scalpers can have this one and Nintendo can go to hell.
It’s likely that you’re right and people are going to line up to reward them for this and it will lead to price increases across the entire industry unfortunately.
I even had a Virtual Boy! Although I bought it for like $25 after it had already failed.
I guess we’ll see just how much of Nintendo’s market is made up of fans with lots of expendable income vs. parents buying stuff for their kids.
Yeah, I think that’s another huge factor that made the Switch so successful! It was priced at a point that households had multiple units and multiple copies of games like Kart and Smash. Only people doing really well are going to be able to swing that at these prices.
How does one filter crack? I need to know for my pulmonary health.
They sell brillo used by crackheads as filters right next to the crack pipes at gas stations in the hood.
Gotta burn it before inhaleing to test it. Some of that shit is fake and just some steel wool with a coating. Remember to be safe while smoking crack!
I could be wrong, but doesn’t the process of cooking the cocaine into crack kind of “filter” it so to speak?
I think the filter is to stop shards of burning crack from going into your mouth/throat.
Cooking usually refers to removing salts necessary for mucous absorption to make smoked crack more palatable and injected crack not lethal. I haven’t done crack yet.
Not in the slightest. It only cuts it so you can increase your yield at the cost of needing to sell a fundamentally different product.
I’ve never been good at chemistry, so I’m probably misremembering…
My understanding was that the cocaine’s chemical structure is what reacts with the baking soda (and heat), leaving the adulterants to burn off. I guess unless they share the same property that binds the cocaine with the baking soda. The baking soda isn’t meant to increase weight, there is an actual chemistry-based reason that it’s used.
It’s why people stopped “free-basing” cocaine once crack came around. “Free-base” is a chemistry term, and the reaction with the baking soda is what makes it no longer “free-base.”
It weighs more because of the baking soda, but that’s just like a substrate to deliver the cocaine, not an adulterant meant to make it weigh more.
Again, could be wrong and don’t feel like looking it up because I don’t really care about crack or cocaine
I get your point, but I’ll probably end up paying that. The exclusives are pricey but I almost always end up playing them for 50-100+ hours each, so I can’t really complain 🤷♂️
This line of thinking is why we are being price gouged to begin with.
“it’s $20 for a skin… Eh I’ll buy it.” I have friends that do that. Meanwhile I almost never buy a game at launch because I’ll just wait for a sale and for the game to be fixed post launch.
The trouble is, Nintendo games don’t even go on sale, so you can’t do that. Nintendo used to be the affordable accessible console. Now they’re the opposite.
I haven’t had a desire to play their games luckily, but the emulators are good. I tried Pokémon Arceus with one and it ran flawlessly. The game was boring as hell from what I played, but I wanted to see how it functioned compared to the older games I know.
Yeah. I was providing context and a small joke in relation to the comment about how we got here. I mostly play Steam games anyway.
A few years ago my wife bought a switch, we occasionally play it, but yes I saw the games were basically never on sale.
At this point in the world I just want to reward one of the few companies that has yet to screw me over. Everything I’ve ever bought from Nintendo still works to this day, and I’m generally expecting it to work forever. No one else is making products like that, it’s all short-term shareholder profits-- who cares about the customer? If you want to pay what garbage is priced at, you’ll get garbage in the end.
Imagine simping for a soulless corporation who doesn’t give of fuck if you exist. How is anything nintendo doing consumer friendly? You’re definitely on that copium, champ.
I’m just speaking from personal experience, friend. I understand someone will probably have a list of like 10 links of counterexamples handy but I can say with fair confidence they probably haven’t affected me. Hell, my original joycons actually still work, though I did buy my Switch a couple years after release. And I’m not simping for anything, I will 100% change my stance the day Nintendo starts screwing me over 🤷♂️
You do realize that video game prices haven’t increased with inflation in years, right? A $60 game in 2008 would be $88 today just from inflation. This isn’t price gouging, it’s inflation correction.
And in addition to what Zangoose said, your argument ignores the basic principle of technological progress: as industries mature, costs typically decrease, not increase. Economies of scale, automation, and digital distribution should all lower the cost of making and selling a game over time.
A $60 game in 2008 had to be printed on physical discs, boxed, shipped to stores, and supported with traditional advertising. Today, most games are sold digitally, cutting out huge portions of that overhead. Studios also reuse engines, assets, and development pipelines now more than ever.
Sure, inflation is real—but so are productivity gains. If your costs are going up despite all these efficiencies, that’s not just inflation—it’s mismanagement or greed. Consumers don’t owe companies an inflation-adjusted price just because they want to maintain record-breaking profits and raise prices.
Uh, video games have VERY famously not been decreasing in cost to create- AAA games cost VASTLY more to create now than in 2008. The teams are much, much larger, for one.
It’s a trend I personally think is stupid and unnecessary, but productivity gains aren’t really happening that way in game dev.
CEO pay has also increased VASTLY, something isn’t quite adding up here. 🤔
Yeah, sales have also gone way up.
It doesn’t matter if a $60 game in 2008 is worth $88 now if wages haven’t gone up to match that. Did you know that (at least in the US) food prices usually aren’t included in inflation calculations because they fluctuate too much? People have other things to pay for with their wages that aren’t video games, and those costs aren’t going down either.
Literally nothing ever has stayed in lockstep with wages, that’s not even relevant to the discussion at hand. Not sure why you think video games would be special, especially video games by Nintendo, solijce they’re literally the last ones on the “raise video game prices” train.
Entertainment is not a necessity, it’s not like people need it to survive. When it doesn’t move with wages people find ways to make it affordable (e.g. piracy, 2nd hand markets, or sharing physical copies with friends), or they find something else (steam, indie games, etc.). Wages are directly responsible for game prices in a lot of ways, and there are pretty good Steam statistics on this as well (which is why a lot of Steam games aren’t priced with 1:1 conversions in different regions, because doing so would basically price entire regions out of buying games).
Pricing fans out of games is exactly how AAA studios go under. A big AAA game flopping is basically a death sentence for a studio in the current landscape, and if Microsoft isn’t immune to that then Nintendo definitely isn’t.
Worldwide? Trump is ruining the US economy only
Lol
So fun fact the world’s economies are interlinked and most countries have a ton of money in US banks and stocks.
Oh, my sweet summer child…
Lol another person that thinks he’s smart by being rude. No wonder Lemmy isn’t attracting more people
I’m just pointing out your naïveté. What happens in the US naturally affects the rest of the world. We’re all dependent on each other. No one will be isolated from this.
Like the recession of 2008/2009. It was America that cause it and the whole worked suffered.
Leave Lemmy out of this! It’s innocent!
Point at the doll where you were touched by Lemmy
Remember 2008/2009 recession? This was cause by the USA economy, but affected the entire world.
Even if you think it’s not worldwide, you do realise some countries and regions rely heavily upon trading with the US. And it will cause inflation, though how much depends on what will actually happen now.
As others pointed out, it’s not only the US economy that will be hit, but also everyone that trades with them.
To illustrate some examples, Canadian aluminum might end up with 25% tariffs. That means anything made within the USA that uses said aluminum will get a price increase. Canadian companies might end up with a surplus, since their main customers won’t be buying as much (instead of paying 100 dollars for a tonne, 'mericans will pay 125 dollars per tonne). That surplus will drive prices down if they can’t find someone else to buy the aluminum.
Since the tariffs aren’t only on Canadian aluminum, but a lot of stuff from a lot of countries, some of that stuff will end up with a significant surplus and no new buyers. For smaller countries that rely on USA exports, that’s going to hurt a lot.
I also saw one analysis that suggested the increased cost of buying could decrease trade and therefore shrink the economies the US usually buys from, depressing the shrunken economies dollar values and effectively cancelling out the cost of the tarrif
ROFL you really have no idea how things work huh
The world economy is dependent on countries like the USA.
Who the hell is paying 90EUR for switch games?
I know my work colleague is not. His Switch was cracked for I think 100+ eur which seems quite high, but since you can afterwards download pretty much any title from some pirate marketplace, that investment has been covered at least tenfold.
Nintendo fanboys, they would jump off a cliff if asked.
I consider myself a Nintendo fanboy. I’ve owned every console.
Would not jump off a bridge.
However, these game prices are too high. I don’t think third party games will be that price but first party games will be there.
Something tells me all new AAA games are going to be touching that price. I mean, they already do if you factor in the stupid elite wtf editions and deluxe pro plus editions. Hell, they’re more like $130-$150 after DLC is all said and done.
Same, owned every console since the NES. This one’s a pass for me. Maybe Nintendo will be humbled and bring their pricing back down to Earth in the future, but I doubt it.
Too young to have owned every console and don’t care enough, but I am a fan of many games and the community. Nintendo the company hates its fans, that is widely known.
I’m not gonna buy it for that price. Especially not as a student. Especially not while ☠️ isn’t a thing yet.
They have gotten greedy. There needs to be a Wii-U era again.
There needs to be a Wii-U era again.
I agree, they need to be humbled, but I have no idea whether they will or not. While the economy is working against them, a LOT of people liked the Switch, and this is a more powerful one rather than a hard-to-understand mess like the Wii U. Genuinely curious to see how the Switch 2 does. My best guess is “modest success.”
I crave for the earlier days of the 3DS to happen again, please Nintendo fan base, I have a bit of faith.
Let’s not pretend every publisher isn’t planning on doing this. Nintendo just happens to be the first here.
I genuinely thought GTA6 was gonna beat them to the punch.
The other publishers were all eagerly waiting for gta6 to take the blame for the price increase. Nintendo just doesn’t care about that and weren’t gonna wait for a third party before announcing their new prices.
All it takes is for a major corporation to pull the trigger. Since Nintendo is willing to take that step, other companies are going to be observing to see if it’s worth the temporary backlash.
I get the MSRP outrage, but I mean it’s not an unusual cost for launch day titles, especially for physical media.
I don’t think I’ve ever paid full retail for any game or console I’ve ever owned though. And I do like to own my games by buying physical media (or at least the installer files).
Which game has been launched at 90 bucks before?
Thing is that they even do this shady thing now where retails is 10 bucks more than the digital version.
Well no one is paying that for PC games either so
The funniest part is that the best selling video game of all time (Minecraft) currently has an MSRP of less than $30, which technically gets you 2 games because Microsoft/Mojang maintain 2 completely separate codebases for Minecraft (Java edition and bedrock edition) and has to design, program, test and debug everything twice, once for each codebase
Me and millions of others. If you account for inflation, there has been higher prices in the past.
I mean I own a switch, and I’ve never paid anything close to that for games… I’ve gone to maybe £45-50 for launch titles but what games cost £70?
But if you account for average wages, the prices are higher now.
Removed by mod
Being rude for no reason is a bad look
My question was genuine, and not rude at all, absolute majority of people can’t afford to buy $90 game every month, nor should they.
Your question was a good one, but still rude. You’re more likely to get a satisfying answer if you don’t pose the premise that the person you’re replying to must be dumb if they’re not rich.
Because inflation applies to all products equally and there aren’t ever relative adjustments /s
What games currently cost that much though, is my question really, I guess. The last expensive titles I can see right now for standard editions of games is like, 70Eur equivalent for AAA type titles.
Nice to see an adult reaction in this thread. You have a good point and I’m very curious why Nintendo made these choices. Maybe it could have to do with the current value of the Japanese yen? I’m not an economist though, so I’m just guessing right now.
Wild. Possibly market rates are different - don’t know if the EUR is particularly weak right now? I don’t follow the conversion rates…
$90?
Shit.
Metroid Prime 4 and The Duskbloods don’t sound perfect after all
At least a regular Switch version of Metroid Prime 4 will also be available. Other options for playing those.
$80 for physical $70 for digital.
Oh wow, I didn’t realize physical manufacturing, storage, transport and sale was only $10!
It might be even less than that, but it’s there so just so they can say we still accept physical though we discourage it!
Gamedev here:
For a digital copy, the devs may get between 50 and 90% of the game’s retail price, depending on several conditions like what country they are from and what treaties they have with the country of who bought it. Less than that if they have a publisher to share the profits with.
For a physical copy, between packaging, shipping, storing and the margins of all the other companies involved in this process, the devs may end up with as little as 5% of the game’s retail price.
Of course these numbers are higher for Nintendo as they are the platform owners as well.
Other way, I think. 80 for digital, 90 for physical. In USD anyways.
Jesus Christ, it’s around $60 in Japan, so old prices
Don’t forget tariffs if that’s not factored in yet…
Pretty sure tariffs are part of the reason for the $80/90 price points
Oh wow! I can buy a digital game worth the same price as a physical game! What a deal! /s
I’ll be waiting for the Tinfoil discount.
“The future is Here!!!”
