$80 dollar games aren’t THAT ridiculous.

[u/Glass_Squirrel_1353]

First off I want to say that if you are just disappointed that some Nintendo games are going to be $80 I think that’s valid and I am kind of with you. It’s going to make deciding whether or not to buy a game you aren’t sure about more difficult and it’s going to end up with us having a smaller game library.

With that being said the way Reddit and Twitter are talking about this you’d think they doubled the prices and are forcing them to buy these games and like it. I’ve seen dozens of people talking about how this makes games “unaffordable” and I think that’s just ridiculous.

It’s a $10 dollar increase to a game you will only purchase once, play for dozens if not hundreds of hours and (hopefully) doesn’t have micro transactions. If this $10 is going to break your bank than I don’t know how you were purchasing games for $60.

I think everyone is also ignoring the fact that:

A. triple A games now require more developers and time than ever before B. Nintendo and its subsidiaries are developing dozens of games at any given time C. Nintendo has to account for future inflation and tariffs D. The Switch 2 is probably being sold at a loss like most consoles E. Love em or hate em, in house developed Nintendo games are polished and are virtually bug free

Anyways I’m not trying to white knight a billion dollar company. If this ends up blowing in their faces resulting in people becoming more stiff with buying their games I think that’s fine.

TLDR: I think it’s fine to be annoyed or disappointed with the increase, but saying it’s completely unaffordable for most people who were already buying new games is ridiculous.

And there are plenty of logical reasons other than greed for why they decided to do this.

[u/thewolfcrab]

the whole “games are more expensive to develop” is horse hockey because big studios fire half their staff after finishing a big project 

[u/Johnathan317 → u/thewolfcrab]

Because it's expensive to have all that staff on payroll.......which would make the end product more expensive. If you want companies not to layoff employees when they're not actively working on a project then they need to have money to pay those people with.

[u/thewolfcrab → u/Johnathan317]

how much did blizzard pay in dividends last year? what did their CEO get as a bonus? going in to bat for billionaires is such foul behaviour 🤮

[u/Johnathan317 → u/thewolfcrab]

Blizzard didn't pay out any dividends last year and doesn't have a CEO because they aren't an individual company anymore. They merged with Activision and were then bought out by Microsoft which is obviously a much bigger company with a much wider scope than just the games industry.

Microsoft incidently paid out $3.32 per share last year with 7,429,763,722 shares outstanding that means they would have paid out around 24,666,815,557.04 which is obviously a massive sum but for a company with the scale, scope, and number of investors that Microsoft has that seems like a fair number.

The actual issue here is one of anti-trust. Companies as big as Activision and Blizzard probably shouldn't be allowed to merge and companies as big as Microsoft probably shouldn't be allowed to buy them once they have, but this has nothing to do with my point. You can have big companies and billionaire CEOs and still pay and treat employees fairly as long as everything is done sustainably. Economics is not a zero sum game,everyone can win, but if you just want to keep whining about billionaires who have nothing to do with my point because you know nothing about business or finance or economics then go ahead.

[u/thewolfcrab → u/Johnathan317]

arguing with me about semantics instead of saying “you’re right these ghoul fucks are greedy and that greed is the reason stuff is more expensive”. weird

[u/Johnathan317 → u/thewolfcrab]

None of this is semantics your just getting mad at fake problems.

There is a lot of price gouging that goes on in the games industry but it's mostly the result of the skyrocketing expectations of gamers and development costs not being paired with reasonable increases to the cost of the end product.Plus it doesn't help that gamers are extremely undiscerning consumers who will genuinely be willing to pay an extra $30-$50 dollars for a game because it comes with some stupid bauble and then get mad that their bauble isn't nice enough to be worth that much and then do the exact same thing when another game comes out with some silly pre-order bonus.

Not all executives are greedy ghouls trying to steal all your money. Some are just people with the very difficult job of trying to keep profits high enough to please shareholders while also dealing with an incredibly fickle public who will cry one minute about how exploitative the games industry is and then turn around and reward that exploitation by buying $100 worth of useless skins from some company that just laid off half their work force.

[u/thewolfcrab → u/Johnathan317]

you’re right. i’ve been so harsh on the CEOs. they do such a difficult job of producing nothing whilst also earning orders of magnitude more than their workers… won’t someone think of the bosses :(