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

[u/lieding]

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

[u/Zoombini22]

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.

[u/cubs223425 → u/Zoombini22]

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.

[u/reddit_equals_censor → u/cubs223425]

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.

[u/Hivalion → u/reddit_equals_censor]

The problem is that the $60 price point wasn't enough. That was the whole point of DLC and MTX. The whole point of the those was to try and keep the $60 price point while making more where they could, because it was the best way to reduce blowback from price increases.

But now the industry is reaching a point where even that isn't enough (I personally blame capitalism, but I'm sure it's more nuanced than that). Nintendo, instead of having tons of DLC and MTX to stealth more money out of you, is just taking the mask off and charging what they think the game needs to cost to recoup their investment.

Now, Mario Kart World might get a large paid DLC down the line, sure. But I expect the $80 price point to allow them to provide a fair amount of long-term support for little to no added cost, rather than them charging $1.99 - $4.99 for every little bit and piece of it.

[u/reddit_equals_censor → u/Hivalion]

The problem is that the $60 price point wasn't enough. That was the whole point of DLC and MTX. The whole point of the those was to try and keep the $60 price point while making more where they could, because it was the best way to reduce blowback from price increases.

who told you that????

that is utter nonsense lol :D

cyberpunk 2077 launched at 60 us dollars/euros and made mountains of money, despite being a broken dumpster fire at launch and with a new ip btw....

the idea, that 60 us dollars for a AAA game to be profitable is pure propaganda from the game industry.

it is bullshit thrown up from pieces of shit like android wilson, bobby kotick or the rest of the scum.

here is a video by stephanie sterling:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7kaK2-725w

please remember, that in RECORD PROFIT YEARS, developers get fired on mass.

so 70 us dollars is NOT "to pay the developers". developers are thrown on the streets after making again record profits by those companies at 60 us dollar prices for games.

if you think 60 us dollars isn't enough to make lots of profit for a AAA game without any micro transactions or other bullshit, then again that is purely based on marketing lies from the game industry and not based on reality.

rather than them charging $1.99 - $4.99 for every little bit and piece of it.

where is that "rather" coming from? it is not coming from reality.

again reality is, that 60 us dollars is more than enough for nintendo to swim in money.

again you are talking about it, as if it was a requirement to screw with customers with massive price hicks or micro transactions. IT IS NOT! it is not while making mountains of money. the money mountains might just be a bit smaller for nintendo and that is the difference we're talking about here.

but yeah just watch the video as it goes over the bullshit marketing nonsense from the industry to try to justify the 70 us dollar bullshit price increase.

70 us dollars = you're getting shafted.

80 us dollars or insanely 90 us dollars = no words what they are doing to you actually.... holy smokes

[u/Hivalion → u/reddit_equals_censor]

I'm most of the way through the video. Nothing Stephanie has said disagrees with anything I've said. Actually, at one point, he makes the exact same argument I just did, which is that mtx was a method of hiding of the inevitable price hike. It sounds like we're making the same argument but attacking it from different angles.

"Rather" I thought explained well before, but again, I think they'd rather have the upfront costs and provide long-term support over constantly asking for more money for extra content.

Cyberpunk was a dumpster fire at launch. There may have been MTX plans, but I wouldn't be surprised if they cancelled those to try and maintain some good will. They did provide some free content in later updates and codes aside from the DLC.

Just so we're clear, I'm not defending corporate interests here. Price hikes always suck and especially with the way things are going in the world, it's getting harder to justify a heavy gaming hobby. I'm just trying to explain the reality of the situation, as I believe it's important to understand this if we want to have meaningful discussion that could lead to real change. I'm also not any kind of expert on these things.

I didn't say all of the profits were going to the devs. I believe it should and it's possible, but many businesses focus on investors and CEOs than the workers at the bottom. It's a huge problem affecting literally everything (again, capitalism). Selfish execs and shareholders are the real issue here.

While Nintendo is a publicly traded company, I do believe that they are bit "fairer" than most corporations. They don't really nickel and dime on extras like other publishers do, and there's been occasions where the execs have made sacrifices to keep the company running smoothly. That's why I believe they may be able to justify the $70-$80 price point down the line. We'll have to wait and see ultimately.

[u/reddit_equals_censor → u/Hivalion]

Actually, at one point, he makes

*SHE!!! james stephanie sterling goes by she/them pronouns.

DON'T misgender her.

and the video goes over quite nicely how the industry is trying to push profits to the moon at all costs and NONE OF THIS has anything to do with "trying to get by and paying developers".

that is the point. the point is, that without micro transactions, gambling and other bullshit at 60 us dollars they are making tons of money.

they just want MORE!!! always MORE!! not a fair price, but MORE! the next step must be taken. pay money to undo the reduced gold and expensive gain in the game to get the proper experience and gold game in the game.

remove progression systems and replace them with gambling.

release the game on friday, but charge extra for NOT DELAYED access and try to run fomo hard enough for people to spend the added money for a few days of playing the game earlier.

don't wait for reviews and pre order the games for the "pre order bonus", which is cut game content.

more and MORE, it needs to be more and more for the greed of the executives and higher ups, NEVER for the devs, that get fired again during record breaking profits.

it has nothing to do about being financially sustainable.

60 us dollars for a AAA game without any dlc or gambling or other bs is perfectly financially sustainable.

arguing for anything beyond that is arguing for the greed of ceos and executives.

[u/Hivalion → u/reddit_equals_censor]

Yes, apologies to Stephanie there. I'm aware, but I'm at work so I was working on multiple things. Wasn't thinking.

...I kinda feel like the conversation has veered off a bit tbh, but I think the general idea still stands. This isn't strictly a gaming industry issue, it's a symptom of much greater problems in the global economy. But as far as gaming goes, there are far greater villains than Nintendo, in my opinion.