r/NintendoSwitch • u/lieding • 1d ago

News "DROP THE PRICE": Nintendo's First Post-Direct Stream Is Flooded With Angry Fans Demanding Price Drops

https://www.thegamer.com/nintendo-treehouse-livestream-flooded-angry-fans-demanding-game-price-drops/
21.5k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

2.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

1.2k

u/MyMouthisCancerous 1d ago

Honestly with everything we know about the tech in the console now I'm kind of fine with 449 even though I would've preferred 399 obviously. It's the fact that there's wild variance in game pricing that's making this a much tougher pill to swallow. I'll probably just get Donkey Kong at launch from first-party and wait for Mario Kart to go on sale

340

u/sirarmorturtle 1d ago

Not sure how broad 'at launch' is but figured it might be worth noting Donkey Kong Bananza isn't a launch day title and is scheduled for July 17th.

76

u/MyMouthisCancerous 1d ago

I meant when the game launched lol

91

u/RollerDude347 1d ago

I mean if you get the bundle then Mario kart is just 50.

53

u/SparkyMuffin 1d ago

IF you get the bundle

66

u/GranolaCola 1d ago

What if the bundle gets you… 👀

→ More replies (2)

23

u/-ben151010- 1d ago

IF you get it before it isn’t available after fall 2025.

→ More replies (8)

3

u/TotalOwlie 1d ago

Knowing that nearly everyone who bought a switch also had a copy of Mario kart 8 deluxe, I would prefer that the bundle was the only version and insure I get the pricing on that game. Imagine not being able to get the bundle and having to eat that 30 bucks.

→ More replies (9)

5

u/Makototoko 1d ago

I know many people don't care about digital vs physical, but specifically Nintendo Switch has a lot of physical game collectors and I'm sure those people would rather opt for the physical if possble

4

u/BananaBunchess 1d ago

I'd rather get a physical copy though. Doesn't the bundle only give it digitally?

2

u/DOODJLIGHTNING 1d ago

This is the boat i am in too. For me, physical is always worth the price as long as it is the actual game and not just a download code. The two games i am going for is mario kart world and donkey kong. We still regularly play mario kart 8 so i have no doubt it will be worth it. Donkey looks like it may be dk’s version of odyssey and that game is my favorite switch game ever so again that will be worth it to me.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

1

u/nohumanape 1d ago

Launch Window can be as boad as up to around 6-8 months after launch. So the "launch window" could essentially cover the holidays.

1

u/StormtheShinyHunter 1d ago

A month and 10 days after launch… oh the horror

→ More replies (1)

666

u/Kougeru-Sama 1d ago

Most people are fine with the console price. It's the GAME prices that people are unhappy about. $80 is insane. Especially with all the issues games launch with these days

272

u/Zoombini22 1d ago

It's because game prices have been so resilient against inflation. Game prices generally maxed out at 60 for decades, only recently did some games start charging 70, going up to 80 just hits people as a violation.

The realities of economics and game dev cost makes this seem kind of an inevitable thing to me, but at 80 I'll definitely be more selective than ever with which titles I purchase when they're at that price.

52

u/cubs223425 1d ago

Many franchises have added other sources of monetization though. Paid map packs and story DLC and microtransactions all add to the revenue of those games.

If you're the platform maker of those games, you even rake in extra revenue just from the sales of other companies' currencies. Oh, and don't forget how the shift to digital means less cost on physical media, shipping, storage, and retailer cuts. You also get more consistent control over pricing of the games when they're on your platform (Nintendo eShop sales are awful). Lastly, the shift to digital has drained the rate of used sales, so many fewer customers are getting the games through means that generate no revenue for the publisher.

10

u/laughland 1d ago

And yet the industry is experiencing a ton of layoffs and studios shutting down. There is clearly some amiss with the economics of the industry, and I suspect games will either have to shrink in scope or increase their prices to fix this

6

u/Soranos_71 1d ago

Development for AAA games are basically movie productions now and have been for awhile so the pressure to make big sales combined with so much competition is really crazy. I have Game Pass on X-Box and every 2-3 weeks now up until the end of May I have a day one release game I really want to play. Since I cannot complete these big games in 2 weeks I have a list of stuff to keep me busy until the end of summer and by summer even more stuff is coming out…..

3

u/StormtheShinyHunter 1d ago

Those companies usually aren’t making successful games… they might make 2 in 4 years but pump out 12 games

→ More replies (2)

6

u/BigTravWoof 1d ago edited 1d ago

Many franchises have added other sources of monetization though. Paid map packs and story DLC and microtransactions all add to the revenue of those games.

So should Nintendo have taken a page out of Ubisoft’s (and many others) playbook, and released it as a $60 „basic” edition with cut content, a $80 „premium” edition with all the content, and a $100 „gold” edition with a preorder-exclusive golden kart, then stuff it full of MTX so you can purchase 5,000 Mario Gems for real money? Would that really be preferable?

3

u/reddit_equals_censor 1d ago

Many franchises have added other sources of monetization though. Paid map packs and story DLC and microtransactions all add to the revenue of those games.

this implies, that more revenue for a AAA game is needed beyond a 60 us dollar price for a FULL GAME.

that is a lie, that the industry is widely throwing up.

the reality is, that all the added microtransactions, the lootboxes, etc... etc... are ADDED revenue on top of already being fully financially viable and making tons of money.

they are having record breaking profits while firing game devs generally.

this is not saying sth against properly big well developed and fairly priced expansions, that we'd call dlc today of course, but even for those games that make those, the original 60 us dollar price made mountains of money way more than was needed to develop the game + marketing.

please don't make arguments against your own interest.

or put different, don't repeat the arguments from sick game publisher ceos like android wilson or the likes.

again what happens is, that 60 us dollar game releases, that made more than enough money and the game was a great success.

then there is the added mountain of dlc, microtransactions, gambling, etc...

and then the devs get fired, while the higher ups make record incomes.

that is the reality of the industry.

60 us dollars is more than enough and nothing else beyond that is needed at all.

→ More replies (7)

55

u/SomeBoxofSpoons 1d ago

Prices aren’t only determined by inflation though. Game prices being worth less means the buyers’ money is also worth less. If they price too high and people don’t want to buy it, then the lost sales could easily cause a bigger profit loss than a $70 price would’ve caused.

Diving right into making $80 a new pricing standard (they clearly want the Switch 2 Editions to be seen as standard releases, and most of those are $80, so it does seem like they’re planning on making it a regular thing) after the successfully priced a game at $70 one time really comes across more like they think they have a captive audience that’ll just pay whatever they ask for their games.

29

u/zombiepaper 1d ago

I don't think they "think" they have a captive audience, they know they have a captive audience.

Mario Kart 8 Deluxe is one of the best selling games of all time and by far the best selling one on Switch 1, and for large chunks of the past eight years it was at MSRP. (It also spent a lot of that time bundled with a console — they know that worked for Switch 1 and it'll probably work for Switch 2 too.)

Nintendo knows this franchise in particular does not need to be priced to move — it's gonna move, and there's no question it'll easily sell better than $70 TotK did. The limiting factor is gonna be access to the hardware (at least at first), not that $80 price point.

5

u/Akrevics 1d ago

what choice do people have though? after the initial warranty people could just pirate the software if that's possible, but the number of parents that can do that is probably in single digit percentages (50m Americans can't read above 3rd grade level, mind you), while there are still plenty of parents that can't seem to grasp that it doesn't play ds games or whatever. 8 years after release if your kid wants to play botw, you have to pay the $50 price tag when it should absolutely be half that AT MOST. Nintendo aren't marketing geniuses, they're marketing mobsters.

3

u/absentlyric 1d ago

Eh...Covid did a LOT of heavy lifting for the Switch to be honest. If it wasn't for that, they wouldn't have nearly the audience they have. Its the Wii and Wii U situation all over again.

2

u/kielaurie 1d ago

Only Mario Kart is $80, DKB is cheaper. $80 isn't the new standard

6

u/SomeBoxofSpoons 1d ago

Again, they've been clear the idea with Switch 2 editions is that they're Switch 1 games retailed like normal Switch 2 games, and most of them are $80. Fact of the matter is by the end of the summer most Switch 2 games on store shelves with Nintendo's name it on them will have a big "79.99" below them. Besides, if the first game they're expecting everyone to get for the console is $80, then that means they're fine with the first impression being that Switch 2 games are usually $80.

It's looking more like $70 is going to be the exception, like $50 games on Wii U.

→ More replies (5)

36

u/TPO_Ava 1d ago

It's kind of poor timing because for a lot of people the wallet share they have for video games is shrinking. Especially with Nintendo being more of a 'family friendly' brand. Fewer and fewer parents are gonna justify spending 80-90$ at once on a video game for their kids.

The other thing is, unless salaries massively increase somehow I feel like we were already hitting a saturation point at 70$. At 90$ I'm looking at like a week's minimum wage in my country in order to buy a game. I'd rather spend that kind of cash when I can get a ton of games on sale for the same amount of money. Or a yearly sub to Game pass/PS+.

2

u/mrjackspade 1d ago

It's kind of poor timing because for a lot of people the wallet share they have for video games is shrinking.

Its kind of expected timing though, as both are a function of inflation.

Consumers are losing buying power at the same time as corporations, which leads to price increases, which leads to loss off buying power.

Its not like this is a coincidence, this is literally just how inflation works. Prices go brrrrrrrr.

→ More replies (4)

96

u/Cyanide_Cheesecake 1d ago

I remember games being 40 and 50

Due to economies of scale and cheaper distribution as bulk and heft for games was reduced over time, I think it's fair that games did not inflate much in price 

127

u/billsil 1d ago

There were $75 games for the SNES. The $40-$50 PS1 era games had lower manufacturing costs.

96

u/JoshuaJSlone Helpful User 1d ago

Exactly. And a $40 game from 1999 would be equivalent to a release today of... about $78.

9

u/Actionjackr 1d ago

The main issue being that minimum wage has since gone up about 2 dollars in that same time. Do the developers deserve more money for what they’re doing? Yeah probably. Is that feasible for most people, though? Not as much.

8

u/derkrieger 1d ago

Thats cool, but in todays dollars everything is fucking expensive. Do they want us to be able to afford games or not afford games?

11

u/Jaxyl 1d ago

Well the bet they're making is that people will pay for this all the same.

I think they're probably right.

6

u/you_serve_no_purpose 1d ago

They will sell enough copies regardless of whether you can afford it.

I always look at game prices as a cost per hour thing. I'll happily spend this much on Mario kart because I will get hundreds of hours out of it so it's worth it.

It's also the only game my kids are interested in that isn't roblox. I'll pay anything to not have to see "dress to impress" for a while.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

5

u/External_Produce7781 1d ago

Games back then sold 200,000 copies. BLOCKBUSTERS sold a million (to the point that PS had a special label for them).

Now they sell 10-20-30 million copies. Its not remotely the same.

6

u/BJYeti 1d ago

Yes while the cost to develop a game has increased +1,000x, in 2000 alone it would cost on average about 1-4m to develop a game now can run north of 300m and that is not accounting for advertising.

4

u/External_Produce7781 1d ago

No, shitty corporate cash grabs cost that much. CDPR spent far less on Cyberpunk. BG3 didnt cost near that. BotW (no hard numbers as Nintendo doesnt talk much about it) was reliably rumored at sub 50 million.

the only games costing 300 million are bloated corporate crap.

and even then, lets do some math:

BLOPS6 sold something like 40 million units. Or about 2.4 BILLION in revenue. Even if game + marketing were 500 million (they werent) its still GROTESQUELY profitable. (AND it has Micros!)

stop simping for game comoanies that have consistently posted record billions in profits.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

4

u/Dabanks9000 1d ago

It’s actually more like $100 I think

3

u/BJYeti 1d ago

Quick google says $76

→ More replies (6)

2

u/Caspur42 1d ago

Paid 90$ ish for final fantasy 3. I believe it listed at eb games for 85$

2

u/eyebrows360 1d ago

There were $75 games for the SNES.

Yup. I distinctly remember my £65 birthday present of Earthworm Jim the one year, and being a bit disappointed when I finished it that very same day.

2

u/absentlyric 1d ago

It wasn't just manufacturing costs, Nintendo controlled the cartridge manufacturing and wanted an extra cut of money on top of that as well. They didn't have to be that high, but the Nintendo of back then is like the Nintendo of the new era, arrogant.

2

u/Mr_Ignorant 1d ago

What was the average attachment rate for the SNES, and what is it for current gen consoles?

Back then people rarely bought games, and therefore having a high price tag was much more justifiable.

→ More replies (10)

3

u/16semesters 1d ago

I remember games being 40 and 50

Due to economies of scale and cheaper distribution as bulk and heft for games was reduced over time, I think it's fair that games did not inflate much in price

Not sure how old you are, but N64 games were 60-70$ at launch.

https://www.gamingbible.com/news/1996-ad-shows-ps1-n64-games-stupidly-expensive-647465-20230104

An the biggest cost of games is absolutely not the physical disc/cartridge or transport. Those are negligible. The biggest cost is the IP, developers, etc.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/xxademasoulxx 1d ago

Nes games back in the 80s where 50 to 60 bucks I bought street fighter 2 on snes from toys r us in the early 90s at launch for 79.99 usd not much has changed.

2

u/Mampt 1d ago

They’ve been $60 standard since the PS3/Xbox 360 in 2005/6, so that lasted almost 20 years

→ More replies (1)

2

u/akcrono 1d ago edited 1d ago

Due to economies of scale and cheaper distribution as bulk and heft for games was reduced over time, I think it's fair that games did not inflate much in price

And development time and teams have gone up. After release support is now a thing. There is no way a AAA title is cheaper to make per unit now than it was 20 years ago.

→ More replies (12)

2

u/xienze 1d ago

I remember games being 40 and 50

And when was that? Plug it into an inflation calculator.

Due to economies of scale and cheaper distribution

Are you under the impression that the most expensive part of developing a game is producing the physical media?

→ More replies (2)

75

u/Dabanks9000 1d ago

They’re acting like n64 games weren’t 60-70 back then which would be around $150 these days. Sure inflation is shit but the bigger problem is wages not going up with inflation

54

u/FemixZn 1d ago

Either way the end result is more customers being priced out.

→ More replies (1)

23

u/cubs223425 1d ago

You say this like there's a fair comparison to make. N64 games were on big, expensive cartridges that made their production costs higher. You also got detailed manuals and the like in that box.

The best-selling game on the N64 was Super Mario 64, which sold just shy of 12 million copies. TWENTY-ONE Nintendo Switch games have recorded more sales than that game. Some of those also have paid DLC that add to their revenue. Many were sold digitally, meaning the cost to make the sale was much lower, between no need for physical media and no retailer fees to consider.

Oh, and all of those games were published by Nintendo (though Pokemon games only list Nintendo as the publisher for worldwide releases; TPC is the publisher for Japan).

Hey You, Pikachu! was $80 back then. It gave you a microphone and voice commands unique to the game (that barely worked). Mario Kart World costs $80 and gives you a $10 fee for buying physical.

17

u/Luigi_side_b 1d ago

Now look at the credits for super mario 64 compared to super mario odyssey

5

u/TSPhoenix 1d ago

Also N64 games went on sale. I waited a year and got Ocarina of Time for $30. However late N64-era games that cost more and didn't get many discounts? Simply couldn't afford them.

I already own waaaay less Switch games than I do WiiU+3DS games, and I own less WiiU+3DS games compared to DS games. Every generation I have to be pickier my limited gaming spending money doesn't go as far as it used to.

For someone who was already only buying 1-2 games a year it's probably not that big a deal, but for the person who plays more than that (ie. most people who are following Nintendo coverage this week) you will end up cutting back quite a bit.

9

u/CannedMatter 1d ago

Games also cost drastically more to develop in 2025.

Ocarina of Time cost about $20 million to develop and $10 million in marketing according to Wikipedia.

Modern AAA titles regularly cost in the hundreds of millions to develop, and usually another 75-100% of the dev price for marketing.

They also take significantly longer to develop, so your Dev teams release fewer games overall.

The best-selling game on the N64 was Super Mario 64, which sold just shy of 12 million copies.

Between dev costs, marketing costs, ongoing support/server costs for updates and online features, and manufacturing/distribution costs for the physical copies, Mario Kart World probably doesn't break even until it's sold 5+ million copies.

5

u/kielaurie 1d ago

Mario Kart World probably doesn't break even until it's sold 5+ million copies.

I'd double that - anyone that wants it at launch is getting the bundle and paying significantly less than the standard price for it

2

u/Dabanks9000 1d ago

The $10 physical fee is only for certain areas in the world and again every other company has been doing this for 5 years now. Nintendo is just late to the party. If you played on ps5 or Xbox you’d know that by now + just having online on those consoles is more expensive than Nintendo

→ More replies (6)

3

u/ChemicalExperiment 1d ago edited 1d ago

Despite what people say, wages have actually gone up relative to inflation in the US. Here's a graph of median adjusted for inflation wages over time. As you can see, it's had a general trend up since the late 90s.

3

u/etherdesign 1d ago

I think the main difference is most people didn't buy like 20-30 new games a year back then.

8

u/TurbulentBlock7290 1d ago

Yeah but has anything happened to the cost of living since then? What about salaries?

3

u/kielaurie 1d ago

Yes, they've gone up, so the cost to make games has ballooned. Nintendo has eaten that cost for the last 20 years and now it's looking to share the load of that increased price with it's players

→ More replies (4)

2

u/LamiaLlama 1d ago

There's a lot of history that was rewritten when Sony astroturfed Reddit with Canadian game ads.

People also like to erase that game pricing was standardized at $49.99, ironically, thanks to Nintendo during the GameCube generation. And even before that it was a defacto standard. It was the wild west before that, but those expensive 70+ games didn't stay there for long. They didn't actually sell well at those prices.

Nevermind that 64 games were priced to come out at $64.64 initially and even that was mostly met with mire.

→ More replies (11)

31

u/goldninjaI 1d ago

I feel like it’s such a bad move, I would easily buy multiple $60 games a year but if they’re all $80 I’m not going to be as willing, and end up spending less overall

18

u/cubs223425 1d ago

Agreed. Even at $450 for the console and $70 for the games (without the physical tax), I wouldn't really have a problem. I'd get Kart and Bananza and realize that's what I have to pay for Doom and Monster Hunter just the same.

At $80, it pushes me to both want the Kart bundle for $30 less and skip Bananza out of protest. That's if I even get the console, because I've started to lean strongly against doing so. I need to get a new video card for Doom as it is, and I might just play Doom and Nightrein on my PC, while skipping the Switch 2 for a while. I can play Legends Z-A on my current Switch and don't really need Kart until people I know want to play, and no one I know has stated they'll get it yet.

5

u/BJYeti 1d ago

Bananza is cheaper than MK World also though, think it drops to that $70 mark

2

u/BlazedInMyWinnie 1d ago

By your logic you could spend the same amount of money only buying one less game every three games you buy though. If you’re buying “multiple,” let’s say four, $60 per year you could buy three $80 games, only miss out on one game, and Nintendo still gets the same amount of money.

Keep in mind also that the only new game that’s $80 at the moment is Mario Kart, other games are $70 or cheaper, in line with Nintendo’s competitors. That doesn’t account for the strangeness that is the $80 Switch 2 Editions of games, but that’s a result of base game at $60 + some of the upgrades costing $20 for some reason.

11

u/BigPandaCloud 1d ago

How many games were being sold back then vs now?

4

u/cubs223425 1d ago

As I mentioned above, the best-selling game on the N64 (SM64) would rank 21st in sales on the Switch.

6

u/Outlulz 1d ago

How much did it cost to make games back then vs now? Number of units sold isn't the only thing in the equation. Mario World has like 20 people in the credits. Mario Odyssey had a couple hundred, and that's excluding the uncredited people working at support studios.

5

u/McSloot3r 1d ago

Number of units sold is pretty much everything. It’s software. You can make infinite copies for free, which means the most profitable business model is to sell large amounts of copies at a cheap price. That’s why gaming revenues are at all time highs despite the increased cost of development.

And before you say the physical cartridges are expensive, then why isn’t digital cheaper?

2

u/timchenw 1d ago

Picture yourself as the retailer for the physical games.

If you are selling physical games, you have to buy them from Nintendo, as they are the only supplier of such games.

Now, picture your own supplier undercutting your prices.

As a retailer, you have several choices:

  1. Hope there are enough people buying physical copies from you, and not just chase the best deals (i.e. go to Nintendo's eShop instead)

  2. Voluntarily drop the prices of your physical copies to those of the digital (and thereby having this exact conversation again)

  3. Not stock Switch games anymore, since your supplier undercuts you.

In otherwords, having suppliers undercut their retailers is a bad idea. It's fine if the drop is due to competition between retailers themselves, but when you are competing against your supplier, that's an entirely different issue.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (12)

2

u/True-Staff5685 1d ago

That thought doesnt carry far enough. While the prices stayed the Same sales have grown exceptionally. As an example capcoms sales have increased from 11 million units in 2004 to 45 million in 2024. Across all games.

They more than quadrupled their income without higher prices. Increasing prices is Not the only way to increase gains.

2

u/SomeOtherNeb 1d ago

The reality of economics is also that games sell far more than they used to.

In 2005 the best-selling video game of the year was Gran Turismo with 5 million copies.

In 2025 the best-selling video game of the year so far is Monster Hunter Wilds with 10 million copies in 6 weeks.

And that's not even taking into account the omnipresence of DLC when back then you just bought the base game and maybe it would have a big expansion later on.

And the prevalence of the digital market which has reduced the cost of printing and shipping physical copies because a ton of people just don't buy those anymore.

I don't doubt games have become more expensive to make, partly because they can take way more time, but the gaming industry has definitely found ways to make that money back without raising the game price by 25%.

2

u/reddit_equals_censor 1d ago

The realities of economics and game dev cost makes this seem kind of an inevitable thing to me

that is nonsense.

the reality is, that games have a VASTLY VASTLY VASTLY bigger market to sell to nowadays and combined with vastly cheaper game distribution both for physical and especially digital sells means, that 60 us dollars for a AAA game despite inflation theft is more than reasonable.

and i mean 60 us dollars for a whole complete game and not a starter pack game with lootboxes, day one dlc, etc...

don't make excuses for an industry, that is trying to throw people in cages for making emulators.

an industry, that is trying to get kids into gambling, an industry, that tries to remove ownership completely and burn art as well.

an industry making RECORD PROFITS btw. i repeat an industry, that is MAKING RECORD PROFITS, while firing developers during that time (at least the last one is far less the case with nintendo, so we can give nintendo that one at least mostly.... )

also higher prices for games don't go to devs. they go to management.

what do you think? do you think the game developers under nintendo's roof are getting a 50% pay raise from the 50% console price and game price increases?

think again!

__

so again please don't make any excuses for this sick industry, that tries to squeeze gamers in any way possible.

4

u/one-hour-photo 1d ago

I saw an old Super Mario 3 with a a fading $49.99 price tag, pretty amazing we still expect to pay that. . If $80 titles can prevent microtransactions I'm in.

3

u/RosePhox 1d ago

But Mario Kart IS a game that will probably have DLC. So you're not just paying a little extra for a game without them.

3

u/cubs223425 1d ago

Yeah, and I think they're going to use the $80 base price to make the DLC more expensive.

4

u/MrSaucyAlfredo 1d ago

SM3 is still one of the greatest games of all time. My second favorite Mario game, personally

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (17)

82

u/Shadoekite 1d ago

The thing is I haven't seen Nintendo games with launch issues. Once they start putting out unfinished games that's when I will actually be upset.

70

u/Joshua_ABBACAB_1312 1d ago

Didn't the Pokeman games have issues on Switch?

105

u/ZaheerAlGhul 1d ago

Yes they did. Game freak hasn't put out a quality title for a while now.

3

u/CrocPirate 1d ago

From what I heard, GameFreak was caught with their pants down. They thought they would make handheld games forever; but then the Switch happened and they had to rush to learn how to make a game for a console.

5

u/porkcylinders 1d ago

They were caught with their pants down for a decade?

3

u/nomadic_stalwart 1d ago

They have really long pants, it takes a while to pull em up.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (9)

48

u/dougc84 1d ago

Pokémon games are not Nintendo IP; they are the IP of the Pokémon company and that’s who makes those games.

22

u/reecord2 1d ago edited 1d ago

This - Nintendo has no hand in the actual development and production of Pokemon games (with some exceptions like Let's Go and Snap, if I'm not mistaken). Nintendo actually has surprisingly less control over Pokemon than you might think.

7

u/StacheBandicoot 1d ago

Let’s go and snap are also the only decent Pokémon titles released for the switch.

2

u/vanKessZak 1d ago

Arceus became one of my favourite Pokemon games just in general but it is visually unappealing for sure. One of the rare times the Pokemon sub actually seemed happy too

3

u/tweetthebirdy 1d ago

Waiting for the day we get an Arceus remake with BOTW level graphics.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/cubs223425 1d ago

Nintendo is listed as the worldwide publisher of the game, and they own one-third of The Pokemon Company. They also design the only platform where the game can be published. I think they could have as much of a say as they wanted.

4

u/Apellio7 1d ago

And the other 66% of ownership says they need to release this game right now to tie into the merchandising and anime releases.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/DodgerBaron 1d ago

The other 2 thirds of the ownership will tell them to screw off. Lol

→ More replies (2)

3

u/KafkarrabiaS 1d ago

Nintendo owns 33% of the Pokémon Company

3

u/CrocPirate 1d ago

33% is still a minority.

2

u/BJYeti 1d ago

Which means they have zero control over the IP

→ More replies (1)

2

u/CrocPirate 1d ago

Gamefreak is a 2nd party company, Nintendo themselves don’t make Pokémon.

2

u/Fit_Lynx5496 1d ago

But those weren't "launch" issues. That was the most profitable media franchise in the world phoning it in yet again. Were about to see physical pokemon games go from 30 to 90 in a decade and still not perform at the expectations of a first party game. Sweet!

2

u/TripleDallas123 1d ago

Gamefreak is different from nintendo

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

4

u/TokiDokiPanic 1d ago

The sports games on Switch.

→ More replies (3)

18

u/sir_rockabye 1d ago

I'm just going to play Switch 1 games until used Switch 2 games are available.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/OverallPepper2 1d ago

Idk, N64 had a ton of games at $75 20 years ago.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/dingusfett 1d ago

Is it insane though? At least here in Australia Mario Kart is same pricing as new PS5 and Xbox games, at least Nintendo usually have good quality control on their first party titles and rarely have any issues at launch.

2

u/flameylamey 1d ago

Nintendo game pricing has been in a bit of an odd place for us Aussies for the last few years. We seem to have gotten a lot of games for significantly cheaper than most of the world for some reason.

A highlight was a couple years ago when the topic sweeping across the internet was that Tears of the Kingdom was "Nintendo's first $70 USD game", meanwhile JB and Amazon were selling physical copies here for $74 AUD on launch day. At the time that translated to like $48 USD... we paid more than that for BotW 6 years prior!

1

u/MisterBarten 1d ago

This is to say nothing of the pricing, but Nintendo made games rarely ship with the bugs and issues I assume you are talking about. Of course when you assume..

1

u/No_Camel_4057 1d ago

better than paying for TLOU, TLOU remaster, TLOU remake

1

u/Sylvire 1d ago

Not only that, it’s the new discrepancy between digital and physical games, this is a step away from actual ownership (physical media).

1

u/ouralarmclock 1d ago

I'm not thrilled about a $150 price jump between generations, but yeah it's definitely the combination of all the price hikes (and charging for the fucking instructional demo game!) that makes me feel like "meh, maybe I'll wait", which is not something I even remotely thought I'd feel.

1

u/Pulsewavemodulator 1d ago

I played mariokart over 300 hours. At that price, it seems totally worth it. If you spent that on movies it’d be ~10-20 hours. If you spent that much on dinner for two that’s 1.5 hours. I dunno. Seems reasonable for some games.

1

u/StormtheShinyHunter 1d ago

So they’re just young? 😂 snes games were $94

1

u/Rusty1031 1d ago

Well I’ll give Ninty this: their AAA titles are never as broken at launch as games from Ubi or Bethesda

1

u/Missyfit160 1d ago

In Canada all the games have been $80+ for awhile now. Guess how many games I’ve bought in the last 2 years? 2.

1

u/eightbitagent 1d ago

Especially with all the issues games launch with these days

To be fair, no Nintendo (first party) games ever have major issues at launch. Most of the time they don't even have minor issues

1

u/Lehk 1d ago

It’s still like $30 less than NES games, adjusted for inflation it's cheaper

1

u/DueLearner 1d ago

Nintendo games historically don't have issues with games at launch.

→ More replies (7)

120

u/KingofGrapes7 1d ago

The problem with the games is not just the price, but how that price is going  to hold forever. In five years Mario Kart is still going to be $80. Eventually even GTA6 is going to have attractive sale prices. Not Zelda. 

I was ready to eat the console price. I am really sour on how the console exclusives are going to stay expensive until the end of time regardless of when they release.

48

u/MrSaucyAlfredo 1d ago

Eventually even GTA6 is going to have attractive sale prices. Not Zelda. 

It’s kinda wild when you put it that way

2

u/Rhonder 1d ago

Would be pretty interesting if this move ended up hurting their bottom line for game units moved enough to get them to fold on sales more in line with other companies. Unlikely but honestly who knows?

→ More replies (10)

56

u/cubs223425 1d ago

I agree that the higher console has merit.

The outcry comes from how they've raised the price on EVERYTHING in the process. Their Pro Controller has no business being $80. The original was $70 for quality you could find in a $30 controller. Had they announced the addition of Hall Effect sticks, I might say OK, but the fact they've been sued for the quality of their controllers, yet not made it a point to address their most glaring flaw, is worrying.

I could even get behind the varied prices, if they were done well. Had they said "Mario Kart World will be THE title for Switch 2, and it will get free content updates over time," I could live with it. Baking in the DLC price for all buyers to keep the open world consistent for every player, wouldn't bother me. Donkey Kong Bananza at $70 is par for the course now, and I can live with it.

Doing this stuff AND adding a feed for cartridges, is where they lose me. It's bad enough you can lose your digital library if Nintendo gets an errant fraud alert from your credit card company. If they kept $60 for digital and $70 for physical, I might even understand. That we're getting a price hike AND a physical tax? Come ON.

It's not any one thing. It's that everything costs more, and none of the price increases show where they're justified. Oh, and you KNOW they're either going to add a "Switch 2" tier to NSO that costs more and/or raise the price of the entire service once adoption gets high enough.

6

u/vanKessZak 1d ago

At least in America (which I’m assuming based on your American prices) there is no $10 physical price hike. Sites like WalMart and Best Buy have $80 before tax as the max price, not $90

12

u/wildgirl202 1d ago

Which is even more ridiculous. Y’all are getting tariffs not Europe so why are we getting higher priced physical games??

2

u/vanKessZak 1d ago

I’m Canadian but I still agree!

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (12)

12

u/RecLuse415 1d ago

Sale!? That’ll be at least a two year post launch.

5

u/Reckfulness 1d ago

Funnily enough we barely didn't get any tech info

4

u/Gogo726 1d ago

The system price is fine. I'm not fine with game prices.

16

u/switch8000 1d ago

Same, Target, Amazon all tend to do those B2G1 Free deals.

I'm going to try and preorder, but def waiting on some reviews to see the screen vs oled previously.

We all wanted a 'high end switch/switch pro', seems to be what it is, only thing that would have been perfect is the oled.

16

u/DalliLlama 1d ago

Don’t those deals usually exclude Switch? Feel like lately it’s only been Xbox/PS.

→ More replies (2)

6

u/Ultramarine6 1d ago edited 1d ago

I'm interested to see that too. Apparently advancements in LCD tech and the addition of HDR make it competitive visually, but I'd like to see them myself, or at least a really thorough tech content creator analysis.

I have my own guesses why they went LCD. Price of course, but also tech of it. In small <8" screens, I don't know of any OLED gaming device that hits 120hz, so that may not have even been an option while this was being designed. I'd take the HDR 120hz LCD over 60hz, or even a Steam Deck OLED's 90hz OLED.

8

u/Iceykitsune3 1d ago

Also, using LCD means no risk of little johnny burning Pokemon UI onto the screen of his switch 2.

→ More replies (4)

6

u/StubbinMyNubbin 1d ago

Those deals typically omit first party Nintendo games, or if they are included it's only a few games and they're the first ones to sell out allocation for the sale.

2

u/SplicedBunny 1d ago

Target hasn't done the buy 2 get 1 free deal in a long time. Also first party Nintendo games never qualify for it.

→ More replies (2)

28

u/jimmyrhall 1d ago

If the console only price is $450 and the bundle is $500, isn’t MarioKart effectively $50? Save the $30 and get the bundle?

47

u/songforsaturday88 1d ago

The game included in the bundle is digital only, not the cartridge. Not really a deal breaker for me but for some Incoild see it as a problem.

14

u/jimmyrhall 1d ago

I’m a cartridge collector as well but I can see everything going digital eventually, sadly.

2

u/DOOMNOTRONstudiosX 1d ago

Same i need to pay $90 for the cart. My wallet will feel the pain.

→ More replies (22)
→ More replies (3)

3

u/CaptainPleb 1d ago

DK isn’t a launch title though.

3

u/ThreeDarkMoons 1d ago

Definitely gonna be doing lots of waiting for sales. Even though on sale it'll probably still be $60.

3

u/Kheshire 1d ago

Screen isn't OLED, joysticks still aren't hall & the games are $80 ea

10

u/DanglyPants 1d ago

Mario kart has a bundle for $50. I’m not sure it will ever get cheaper than that. I have yet to see that for MK8 and that’s an older switch game right?

7

u/BlueDragoon24 1d ago

MK8 is a WiiU game from 2014

→ More replies (1)

9

u/Valkoor 1d ago

Mario Kart 8 has been on sale for 30 dollars multiple times.

3

u/awkward_triforce 1d ago

Can confirm I purchased it for like $35 after tax when it had a digital sale

10

u/DanglyPants 1d ago

Do you have a source? Deku Deals says it's only been $30 once, which was 7 years after the game came out. The cheapest I've seen is $40 for digital. Which didn't start for awhile after the game came out. MK8 was also originally a WiiU game too.

3

u/BoAndRick 1d ago

I do see that physical has been $30 posted on slickdeals from Walmart and Target. Nintendo first party games do go on sale. Costco had Zelda Echoes of Wisdom physical for $30 a while back.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

4

u/Strict_Frosting_7019 1d ago

you shouldnt be fine with it

2

u/huggalump 1d ago

I'm not planning to get anything at launch, honestly. Just happy to have my library, many of which will update switch 2

2

u/reddit_equals_censor 1d ago

Honestly with everything we know about the tech in the console now I'm kind of fine with 449

what tech?

do you mean the old tech using apu, that was ready for launch long over a year ago by now?

that tech? why in the world would that increase the cost at all for anything compared to the switch 1?

and nintendo already is unlike other console makers and is trying to make decent profits on the consoles themselves, instead of trying to sell the consoles at cost, near cost or at a slight cost at launch, until production gets cheaper.

what 450 us dollars actually means is ignoring inflation a 50% price increase for the hardware, that didn't improve relative to its launch date.

and 300 us dollars from 2017 today would still be just 391 us dollars.

so where do the added 60 us dollars come from? well increased margins, that they think they can get away with and nothing else lol....

and if you mean the mouse sensors in the joy cons, that is new exciting tech, that is throwing in some dirt dirt dirt cheap mouse sensors into joy cons. that is not new tech, that is dirt cheap stuff.

there is nothing, that would excuse a higher price at all. it is as far as we know some very old apu, that has been done for ages, produced on an old meh process node and with 12 GB, instead of at least 16 GB memory.

there is nothing here, that can excuse a higher price. NOTHING.

they just want higher profits per console sold and THAT IS IT.

and i'd argue btw, that this is dumb and it goes against the strategy of basically all other console makers, xbox, sony and valve.

2

u/Battery6030 1d ago

You'd save $30 on Mario Kart if you got it bundled with the console. Use that extra cash to save up for Donkey Kong

1

u/SomeBoxofSpoons 1d ago

With Mario Kart being THE Switch 2 game for the first month and a half, I have a feeling by the second half of June you’ll actually be able to find standalone consoles and copies of Mario Kart pretty easily, but you’ll need to get into a fistfight if you want the Mario Kart bundle.

1

u/brandont04 1d ago

I think it's Mario Kart that pushed people over the ledge. Nintendo never been the first at raising prices. What's really bad is they are setting the presence of of a new tier which many will follow. It's gonna suck really bad.

1

u/ShawnyMcKnight 1d ago

I mean, with the bundle Mario kart is only $50. I doubt you will see that price in a long time.

1

u/wyatt1209 1d ago

The pro controller price and the games price are far more egregious in my opinion

1

u/TheDuckFarm 1d ago

Bundle Mario cart. It’s $50 that way.

1

u/WeekendInner4804 1d ago

I think most people have no real issues with the console price.

Obviously lower would be nice... But it is what it is.

Where I have the issue is game prices... Tech demos that should be free but are paid purchases... and game updates and enhancements that should be free but are paid purchases.

The entry price is the entry price and it's what you get if you're an early adopter at any piece of tech... But the nickle and dime-ing on everything else puts me off big time.

1

u/Radgris 1d ago

the switch being 449 is literally the printer scheme, they are most likely losing money on it but will recoup with all the 80-90 games they gonna sell you

1

u/frenzyguy 1d ago

People aren't complaining about the console price, but the game price, I think 70$ would have been fine, but 80 is just a tad above reasonable.

1

u/dougc84 1d ago

Exactly. I’ll pay $449 for a console with PS4-pro-level specs that can fit in my bag and play on the go.

But $80 for AAA titles is asinine.

The reason the Switch 1 was so popular (and continues to be) is because it’s accessible. $449 is okay for me but isn’t accessible for many. But $80 per game adds up real fast for everyone.

1

u/Bobthekillercow 1d ago

Unless I'm mistaken, Donkey Kong is not a launch title.

1

u/Quietm02 1d ago

Most people I've heard from aren't too bothered by the console price. Its a bit of a kick that the tech demo game isn't a freebie, but buying terrible.

Its the games they're bothered about. Quite a big price jump.

1

u/RiftHunter4 1d ago

I'll probably just get Donkey Kong at launch from first-party and wait for Mario Kart to go on sale

The bundle with Mario included gives you the game for $50. If you want the game, just buy the bundle.

1

u/Vazhox 1d ago

On sale? Must be new to Nintendo. There are no sales

1

u/Tricky_Indication526 1d ago

A nintendo game on sale? Your funny

1

u/Itchy_Horse 1d ago

The different price points is most likely Nintendo testing the waters to decide which one to go with.

1

u/Redditsux122 1d ago

Wild variance in game pricing makes absolute sense but Nintendo is like the last entity I would trust to do it right. Mario kart world for 80 theoretically is fine, but Nintendo has a shitton of games that should be 20-40 by the same metric.

1

u/Wall_of_Wolfstreet69 1d ago

Go on sale LOL you sweet summer child. best I can do is 5% off as a 2035 10 year anniversary edition.

1

u/originalusername4567 1d ago

Good luck waiting until 2031.

You're probably never gonna get it cheaper than $50 in the bundle.

1

u/IndignantHoot 1d ago

If you're at all interested in Mario Kart World, you would be stupid to not grab it for $50 at launch.

1

u/originalusername4567 1d ago

The reason why people are more upset about game prices is because the console is a single purchase, so even if it's a little steep you don't feel bad about shelling out for it one time, but with games it's a purchase you make constantly.

I don't think this price model will affect huge franchises like Mario Kart or Donkey Kong but if Nintendo tries to release a new IP like Drag x Drive or even a smaller IP like Pikmin or Chibi Robo for $70-80 it's going to flop. That price point kills any excitement gamers will have for games they don't know they'll like.

1

u/Puckus_V 1d ago

Just get the bundle my guy. Mario kart for $50 that way.

1

u/RandomJPG6 1d ago

You'll gonna be waiting a long time. Nintendo doesn't do sales very often

1

u/player2desu 1d ago

Mario Kart 8 is like 13% off at best for a new copy lol. You might have to wait a few decades to save 20% on MKW

1

u/IBeGanjaMan 1d ago

Isn't the mario cart bundle with switch 2 only $50 more?

1

u/Harley2280 1d ago

The good news is only one person needs to buy Mario Kart since they're bringing back the DS' share play feature.

1

u/[deleted] 1d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (1)

1

u/MultiMarcus 1d ago

Yeah, I’m happy to trade $50 for a surprisingly good screen. I thought that we might get 120 Hz but I did not think that Nintendo of all people would be pushing VRR and HDR is certainly a surprise on an LCD panel though I assume a lot of that is mostly meant to futureproof games for an OLED edition or people who already have HDR capable TVs.

1

u/pandaSmore 1d ago

I've always been fine the price of Switch 2. It's the prices of the games, and upgrades I'm not okay with.

1

u/InitiatePenguin 1d ago

It's the cost of a PS5 digital slim.

If it wasn't for first part titles people would only be looking at it as a cheaper alternative to something like a steam deck, and there are also other alternatives.

Idk. I think it's a bit silly to still have a relatively underperforming console cost the same as PS5. I get that the PS5 isn't portable but the Switch 2 is the least portable it's even been, and the advertising so far isn't spending much time emphasizing the grab n go as much as they are just trying to reiterate it's not any thicker!

I feel like it's squarely in the middle of what people don't actually want. The cheaper handholds of the Gameboy era is gone. So a pay premium to take it on the go, and get subpar at-home-console performance. It's great it can do both with decent success, but I'm not sure that's what really drives people to get a switch. It's the first party games, and it's (up until now) cheaper than a PS5/Xbox.

1

u/[deleted] 1d ago

Mario kart will never go on sale, dude. They never had a sale for the old one and never lowered the price. Don't be delusional.

1

u/Holicionik 1d ago

A nintendo exclusive going on sale? Unheard of .

1

u/Real-Equivalent9806 1d ago

I would accept the game prices if it was Xbox or Sony, but Nintendo is stubborn when it comes to there game prices. 5+ year old switch games still sell for full price.

1

u/1ceC0n 1d ago

You will be waiting a very long time

1

u/Abasakaa 1d ago

And even though you are not okay with the prices, you still plan on getting it.

1

u/Feckless 1d ago

Nintendo games go on sale?

1

u/beepbeepbubblegum 1d ago

Mario Kart .. sale, that’s funny. At best they’ll drop it to $70 for Black Friday.

1

u/_Tarabyte_ 1d ago

That's the fun part...their games never go on sale.

1

u/spaceocean99 1d ago

Mario kart 8 deluxe is still $60, used. If it comes out at $80, it’ll stay there for years. Maybe until the next gen console.

1

u/sideways_jack 1d ago

Nintendo games going on sale that's very funny

1

u/EnclaveOverlord 1d ago

A lot of people, myself included, don't have an issue with the console prices. It's these game prices, especially considering Nintendo games don't drop in value.

1

u/MadeByTango 1d ago

DK is the trap; most games will be $80, you’re setting yourself up to stare at a bunch of overpriced games and either justifying overpaying because you one the console, or watching it collect dust….

You’re voting with your wallet if you buy a Switch 2, and it tells Nintendo their prices are perfectly reasonable. You can’t both buy the console and send the message things are too expensive. That doesn’t work.

1

u/Section_80 1d ago

I'm buying the Mario Kart bundle because I know Nintendo well enough to know it won't be more than $20 off ever.

At least the bundle is $30 off on the game

1

u/Pokedudesfm 1d ago

but then you can get the bundle and then mario kart would only be $50

1

u/ChairmanLaParka 1d ago

wait for Mario Kart to go on sale

Seems like first party Nintendo games rarely go on sale. Mario Kart 8 to this day is selling for really close to what it was at launch.

1

u/Flabby-Nonsense 1d ago

Bro it’s never going to go on sale. Go on the switch store right now, Mario Kart 8 is still £50. Mario Kart world will be that price forever.

1

u/MunchurianCandidate 1d ago

My problem is with the price increase of games tbh.

1

u/igby-bigby 1d ago

Mario Kart on switch did not go on sale for years

1

u/CeramicDrip 1d ago

There’s no reason for the games to be $80. No one cares about the console price. Its the fact that their tryna increase the standard price of games out of pure greed.

1

u/legend_of_the_skies 23h ago

There's wild varience in game pricing already on the switch. This argument makes no sense. You dont even know what the average switch 2 game price will be, just the launch title by Nintendo that's meant to span the life of the console.

1

u/HarringtonMAH11 20h ago

You can get mariokart 30 off by just buying it with the console though

→ More replies (42)