My apologies to Ubisoft, Sony, Activision, EA, MS etc. for making a big deal out of $70 games

mayham2199 said:
That link is great and all but Sony themselves have already said it is their most profitable.



This was information that was provided just after the earnings call. They aren't goin to lie about it.
Click to expand...

You're not actually paying attention to the numbers.

The absolute number (not accounting for inflation) is higher than ever. Profit margins are substantially lower this gen than last. So much so that Totoki was brought in specifically to address that problem.

Yes, it's more profitable in terms of the number of dollars coming in (although alarmingly, not when it actually comes to selling games) which is a nice stockbait headline for very normie investors. But in the long run, it does need to be addressed.
 
In Canada, it's been like this since PS4. Expensive ass games $80 games. They are $90 now, $103 after tax. Thats every single new game. And people wonder why im hard on visuals

Mario Kart will be $126 and the console itself $724 LOL.

I dont have time to play games often, so when I do get the time, it's a choice between 2 consoles. Switch 2 or PS5. For me the one with the more capable hardware that gets the most out of my TV (and can play GTA6) is gonna win
 
Last edited:
[h3][/h3]
Ubisoft Sony, Activision, EA, Microsoft, etc. are all predatory soulless corpos whose toxic monetization of the industry has ruined video games. Nintendo game pricing is just another talking point in the greater discussion of the industry's financial direction. "Apologizing" to them even in this context is pointless and misguided.
 
Represent. said:
In Canada, it's been like this since PS4. Expensive ass games $80 games. They are $90 now, $103 after tax. Thats every single new game. And people wonder why im hard on visuals

Mario Kart will be $126 and the console itself $724 LOL.

I dont have time to play games often, so when I do get the time, it's a choice between 2 consoles. Switch 2 or PS5. For me the one with the more capable hardware that gets the most out of my TV is gonna win
Click to expand...
Well to be fair the Canadian dollar is basically Monopoly™ money and your general cost of living is even worse than the States.
 
Last edited:
Mr Moose said:
Unlike Nintendo games, Xbox/PS physical games go down in price. They can try to charge whatever they want.
Click to expand...

Not if the retailers adjust their supply. The main way to get good deals on physical these days is to wait until the retailer tries to unload the remaining inventory at a loss. That's not exactly great for the retailer though.
 
ProtoByte said:
You're not actually paying attention to the numbers.

The absolute number (not accounting for inflation) is higher than ever. Profit margins are substantially lower this gen than last. So much so that Totoki was brought in specifically to address that problem.

Yes, it's more profitable in terms of the number of dollars coming in (although alarmingly, not when it actually comes to selling games) which is a nice stockbait headline for very normie investors. But in the long run, it does need to be addressed.
Click to expand...
So what were the profit margins for last gen?
 
90 dollars for nintendo games that feature 0 voice acting essentially, limited animations, mediocre graphics, and almost little to no stories/writing in most of them. Just insane.
 
Last edited:
Why don't you go play that other sorry bullshit and let us play Mario Kart. Why do you have to publicly loudly complain about it? That's what I don't get. If you think it is gens behind, why do you even care?

We all know why, and it is conveniently left out of your OP. Nobody wants to play that bullshit you posted. Every man woman and child on earth wants to play the new Mario kart unless they are a hipster or an angsty edgy teen.

You aren't fooling ANYBODY with that bullshit. If the games you posted were a wart on Mario Kart's ass you would have a point, but they aren't.

Your opinion doesn't matter in this case, use metrics. Use sales, use reviews. Use any metric. Everyone in the world that isn't a gamer hears "Forza" and they are like:
Animated GIF

Say I'm wrong. Life ain't fair.
 
Last edited:
Zacfoldor said:
Why don't you go play that other sorry bullshit and let us play Mario Kart. Why do you have to publicly loudly complain about it? That's what I don't get. If you think it is gens behind, why do you even care?

We all know why, and it is conveniently left out of your OP. Nobody wants to play that bullshit you posted. Every man woman and child on earth wants to play the new Mario kart unless they are a hipster or an angsty edgy teen.

You aren't fooling ANYBODY with that bullshit. If the games you posted were a wart on Mario Kart's ass you would have a point, but they aren't.

Your opinion doesn't matter in this case, use metrics. Use sales, use reviews. Use any metric. Everyone in the world that isn't a gamer hears "Forza" and they are like:
Animated GIF

Say I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
Who let Doug Bowser in here?
 
Zacfoldor said:
Why don't you go play that other sorry bullshit and let us play Mario Kart. Why do you have to publicly loudly complain about it? That's what I don't get. If you think it is gens behind, why do you even care?

We all know why, and it is conveniently left out of your OP. Nobody wants to play that bullshit you posted. Every man woman and child on earth wants to play the new Mario kart unless they are a hipster or an angsty edgy teen.

You aren't fooling ANYBODY with that bullshit. If the games you posted were a wart on Mario Kart's ass you would have a point, but they aren't.

Your opinion doesn't matter in this case, use metrics. Use sales, use reviews. Use any metric. Everyone in the world that isn't a gamer hears "Forza" and they are like:
Animated GIF

Say I'm wrong. Life ain't fair.
Click to expand...
Puddles aren't good enough. No LGBT voice actors.
 
I still rather pay for Mario Kart over any Ubisoft or Activation games ANY DAY.

For me game's worth is all about my enjoyment not fucking graphics.
 
Wait until start releasing DLC for it. Combined with no price drops or sales it will mean that in a couple of years the complete version of MK World will probably be $200.
 
https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

Mario 64, 1996: $60
Mario 64, Price Adjusted for Inflation in 2025: $122.02

No matter how anyone "feels" about prices of anything, you can't argue with inflation. It's a real thing and not some imaginary concept. And you realistically need to account for it before you go down the path of complaining about anything else.
When you paid $60 in 1996 for Mario 64, you were paying the equivalent value of $122 today. That's a fact.

Conversely, when Nintendo sells a game for $60 in 2025, they're getting the equivalent value of selling a game in 1996 for $30.

Anyone who thinks any business is sustainable by locking prices in the same range for 30+ years is insane.
 
Zacfoldor said:
Why don't you go play that other sorry bullshit and let us play Mario Kart. Why do you have to publicly loudly complain about it? That's what I don't get. If you think it is gens behind, why do you even care?

We all know why, and it is conveniently left out of your OP. Nobody wants to play that bullshit you posted. Every man woman and child on earth wants to play the new Mario kart unless they are a hipster or an angsty edgy teen.

You aren't fooling ANYBODY with that bullshit. If the games you posted were a wart on Mario Kart's ass you would have a point, but they aren't.

Your opinion doesn't matter in this case, use metrics. Use sales, use reviews. Use any metric. Everyone in the world that isn't a gamer hears "Forza" and they are like:
Animated GIF

Say I'm wrong. Life ain't fair.
Click to expand...

You can't be serious, but please, please be.
 
BackBackPunch said:
https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

Mario 64, 1996: $60
Mario 64, Price Adjusted for Inflation in 2025: $122.02

No matter how anyone "feels" about prices of anything, you can't argue with inflation. It's a real thing and not some imaginary concept. And you realistically need to account for it before you go down the path of complaining about anything else.
When you paid $60 in 1996 for Mario 64, you were paying the equivalent value of $122 today. That's a fact.

Conversely, when Nintendo sells a game for $60 in 2025, they're getting the equivalent value of selling a game in 1996 for $30.

Anyone who thinks any business is sustainable by locking prices in the same range for 30+ years is insane.
Click to expand...

Comparing prices like this doesn't work in this context because when you're going that far back games we're far more niche.

Niche products always tend to be priced higher because they can't rely on volume of sales in order to generate revenue.
 
BackBackPunch said:
https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

Mario 64, 1996: $60
Mario 64, Price Adjusted for Inflation in 2025: $122.02

No matter how anyone "feels" about prices of anything, you can't argue with inflation. It's a real thing and not some imaginary concept. And you realistically need to account for it before you go down the path of complaining about anything else.
When you paid $60 in 1996 for Mario 64, you were paying the equivalent value of $122 today. That's a fact.

Conversely, when Nintendo sells a game for $60 in 2025, they're getting the equivalent value of selling a game in 1996 for $30.

Anyone who thinks any business is sustainable by locking prices in the same range for 30+ years is insane.
Click to expand...
This is such a tired argument I wonder how people are still unironically making it.

These games were a lot more expensive to manufacture, came in a costly cartridge with a colorful manual and a big box. The installation base was also a lot smaller than it is today.

These games were pretty much perfect, no patches needed, since there was no way to distribute them effectively.

Games today are also almost never complete and try to sell you DLC, expansion passes, microtransactions and much more. A feature complete game is very close to these 100+$ prices.

All of this is also easily proven by the fact that the industry is making record profit yearly. Inflation is real, but no, games simply don't cost just 60$ today, and what they sold you almost 30 years ago was a lot more than just a code in a box. Stop continuing making this argument, it's simply wrong.
 
Zacfoldor said:
Why don't you go play that other sorry bullshit and let us play Mario Kart. Why do you have to publicly loudly complain about it? That's what I don't get. If you think it is gens behind, why do you even care?

We all know why, and it is conveniently left out of your OP. Nobody wants to play that bullshit you posted. Every man woman and child on earth wants to play the new Mario kart unless they are a hipster or an angsty edgy teen.

You aren't fooling ANYBODY with that bullshit. If the games you posted were a wart on Mario Kart's ass you would have a point, but they aren't.

Your opinion doesn't matter in this case, use metrics. Use sales, use reviews. Use any metric. Everyone in the world that isn't a gamer hears "Forza" and they are like:
Animated GIF

Say I'm wrong. Life ain't fair.
Click to expand...

Sylvester Stallone Facepalm GIF
 
Zacfoldor said:
Why don't you go play that other sorry bullshit and let us play Mario Kart. Why do you have to publicly loudly complain about it? That's what I don't get. If you think it is gens behind, why do you even care?

We all know why, and it is conveniently left out of your OP. Nobody wants to play that bullshit you posted. Every man woman and child on earth wants to play the new Mario kart unless they are a hipster or an angsty edgy teen.

You aren't fooling ANYBODY with that bullshit. If the games you posted were a wart on Mario Kart's ass you would have a point, but they aren't.

Your opinion doesn't matter in this case, use metrics. Use sales, use reviews. Use any metric. Everyone in the world that isn't a gamer hears "Forza" and they are like:
Animated GIF

Say I'm wrong. Life ain't fair.
Click to expand...
d48.jpg
 
Game prices don't matter much to me because I never buy a game until it's patched to completion at least a year after release. I see no reason to spend more than 20 on anything because that's the max how much games cost on a sale in the end. But you don't get sales with Nintendo. They are charging 10 more for Zelda botw now than they did in 2017.
 
Last edited:
SlimySnake said:
Obviously this is about Nintendo charging $90 for Mario Kart World while it looks two generations behind Forza Horizon, The Crew, NFS and other open world racers from these so called Evil/Greedy publishers.

EA was literally voted the worst company in the world during the gen when they were charging $60 for games that looked like this:

0.gif


Sony Take2 started off the $70 price tag this gen followed quickly by Activision, and later Sony. Thanks to latest leaks and court filings, we now know that their games cost $200-300 million, and COD actually costs $500 million last gen. Again, they kept the prices at $60 until the start of this gen, and released $60 versions of their cross gen games with no upgrade fees.

They understood that not every game costs $200 million to make, and released Astrobot for $60, and Miles for $50.

Even MS released Hellblade for $50 and Remedy released Alan Wake 2 for $50. $40 on PC.

MS did 4k 60 fps remasters of all their games for free. Sony only charged $10 for them. Most other publishers like Ubisoft and EA did them for free. Nintendo is charging $80 for them. For a remaster.

Either it's time to vote for Nintendo as the worst company in America, or go on our knees and beg forgiveness from these other publishers for giving us these graphically impressive 100 hour games for just $70. I'd rather do the former, but doing the latter for now. So Jimbo, Philbo, Bobby, and Monsuier Guillemot , I'm sorry, but we have a new greedy CEO in town and its no surprise his name is Doug Bowser.
Click to expand...
Ok. I'll take it. Now apologise for liking Unreal Engine 5!
 
BackBackPunch said:
https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

Mario 64, 1996: $60
Mario 64, Price Adjusted for Inflation in 2025: $122.02

No matter how anyone "feels" about prices of anything, you can't argue with inflation. It's a real thing and not some imaginary concept. And you realistically need to account for it before you go down the path of complaining about anything else.
When you paid $60 in 1996 for Mario 64, you were paying the equivalent value of $122 today. That's a fact.

Conversely, when Nintendo sells a game for $60 in 2025, they're getting the equivalent value of selling a game in 1996 for $30.

Anyone who thinks any business is sustainable by locking prices in the same range for 30+ years is insane.
Click to expand...
If inflation was real then why are my coins made back in 1996 still worth the same today?
 
$70 games that come down in price versus $70-$90 games that at best get a 20% discount for BF week after being several years without a real cut.
 
Whose asshole did these $100 GTA6 rumors come from? Tom Henderson? The fat guy who sucks off Microsoft on the daily?

Shit's annoying fam. It won't be $100 :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
Last edited:
BackBackPunch said:
https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

Mario 64, 1996: $60
Mario 64, Price Adjusted for Inflation in 2025: $122.02

No matter how anyone "feels" about prices of anything, you can't argue with inflation. It's a real thing and not some imaginary concept. And you realistically need to account for it before you go down the path of complaining about anything else.
When you paid $60 in 1996 for Mario 64, you were paying the equivalent value of $122 today. That's a fact.

Conversely, when Nintendo sells a game for $60 in 2025, they're getting the equivalent value of selling a game in 1996 for $30.

Anyone who thinks any business is sustainable by locking prices in the same range for 30+ years is insane.
Click to expand...
Iron Man Eye Roll GIF
 
Second sentence .. " it looks .. ". Please it looks better than most of sub 30 fps pos games you guys drool over.
 
I already only bother buying $70 if it's something I'm ridiculously hyped for and am confident in it's quality. And even with that I'm going to search around for a cheaper key.

I'm not buying a fucking $80 game regardless of how good it is. Nintendo can eat a bag of dicks and then share with anybody else that follows suit.
 
Represent. said:
In Canada, it's been like this since PS4. Expensive ass games $80 games. They are $90 now, $103 after tax. Thats every single new game. And people wonder why im hard on visuals

Mario Kart will be $126 and the console itself $724 LOL.

I dont have time to play games often, so when I do get the time, it's a choice between 2 consoles. Switch 2 or PS5. For me the one with the more capable hardware that gets the most out of my TV (and can play GTA6) is gonna win
Click to expand...
Where are you getting these cdn prices? The console is 629.99 cdn and 699.99 with Mario kart. Not seeing any prices on games yet?
 
$70 was a totally justified hike, as is $80.

Nintendo should charge what it costs to keep their business healthy, and keep delivering masterpiece level games year after year. If that's $80, so be it. Happy to pay a little more to get games at quality.
 
Nintendo's pricing is a dick move, especially in context, but that doesn't retroactively make the jumps to $60 and $70 (in ages where games are more profitable and had more monetization avenues than ever before) any less of a dick move.
 
BackBackPunch said:
https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

Mario 64, 1996: $60
Mario 64, Price Adjusted for Inflation in 2025: $122.02

No matter how anyone "feels" about prices of anything, you can't argue with inflation. It's a real thing and not some imaginary concept. And you realistically need to account for it before you go down the path of complaining about anything else.
When you paid $60 in 1996 for Mario 64, you were paying the equivalent value of $122 today. That's a fact.

Conversely, when Nintendo sells a game for $60 in 2025, they're getting the equivalent value of selling a game in 1996 for $30.

Anyone who thinks any business is sustainable by locking prices in the same range for 30+ years is insane.
Click to expand...
Sure, specially when they can't make ends meet because they have the highest production costs in the whole industry and barely make any money from sales to stay profitable.

/s
 
Last edited:
Represent. said:
I dont have time to play games often, so when I do get the time, it's a choice between 2 consoles. Switch 2 or PS5. For me the one with the more capable hardware that gets the most out of my TV (and can play GTA6) is gonna win
Click to expand...
Why even buy a Switch 2 with that logic? It's a handheld. It's will always lose if that's your only measuring stick.

That's the tradeoff - better TV performance or the ability to play both off and on the TV.

That's, of course, for multi-platform games. Exclusives speak for themselves.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Is Ubisoft the new EA?
35
1K
I Love Rock 'n' Roll replied
  • Poll
Should Microsoft and Sony compete directly with Nintendo instead of just making a handheld for their games?
32
946
LavitzSlambert replied
Ubisoft Carves Out Top Games Unit - Valuation of €4 bln, Tencent to get 25% stake, manages 3 big IPs (Assassin's Creed, Far Cry and Rainbow Six)
News Business  2 3 4 5 6
281
16K
Felessan replied
[Insider Gaming] Investors Demand Ubisoft to Renegotiate Tencent Subsidiary Deal and Initiate Legal Proceedings
20
1K
clappedcheeks replied
Microsoft wins FTC appeal challenging $69 billion Activision Blizzard deal
News Business  2
82
178
StueyDuck replied
Top Bottom