It make sense for Sony and Microsoft as their game goes on sale a short period after release. For Nintendo it doesn't make sense as the price never goes down so you are already making big money keeping a consistent price. It is a shit move.
You'll die before it hits a good price, it's bloody Nintendo.
Yeah you really thought this through....
Buy it for 70 and resell it after a year for 60. Try to do that with a Sony or Microsoft game. Even if those were 50 on release you would lose more money.
Surely that came with a nice packaging, a color manual and a cartridge. Now they want you to pay that same ammount for a digital product.
I agree with this, digital should be 20% cheaper
It is the opposite here. As physical is cheaper even though retailers get their cut and a lot of logistics has to be done. While digital they cut the middle man and get all the profit. It doesn't make any sense to me.
I don't know about that man
Seems like a normal response.
Zelda Oot didnt cost $60 because of it being a technological marvel it cost $60 because it was on a cartridge medium, and cartridges were more expensive than CD-rom ,that is why N64 games were more expensive that Ps1 games and also Resident Evil 2 for N64 was more expensive than the Playstation version,
I convinced my parents to buy Super Mario RPG for $75 like 27 years ago, I can brush off $70 for a sequel to one of the greatest games ever made because I'm gonna go FULL NINTY SYCOPHANT
People bought brick dumb mobile phones for $3000 and now smart phones cost $600. Doesn't mean price have to go up just because.
Sure, but I think there are many valid reasons for price of games to go up. It's certainly not just because. Relatively speaking, pricing of games are fine, even at $70, in my opinion. Historically we are still in the cheapest era of gaming. Even at $70 a game.
Not Nintendo though. I know why Sony and Microsoft and other publishers do it as to capitalize on early sales then price go down. Nintendo games rarely get discounted and it is on the Switch and it is a sequel building on the same structure so obviously development cost on the safe side.
Nintendo is working in the same market as the others and has the same inflation pressure to adjust pricing. To stay at $60 is a price cut. Going to $70 now is roughly staying in line with recent pricing. Here is data to 2020, which excluded inflation from the past two years which is probably about the $10 delta.
79,99
Eh, let's give (negative) credit where it's due without being silly. Pokemon's always been an outlier because Gamefreak is a joke. Acting like it's representative of the rest of their output is extremely disingenuous.
No you are wrong. This is not about grahpics. Horizon is a good game but was not that great to me. I paid $30 for Horizon this year. Like i said i don't pay 60 or 70 for any game in this time. Ragnarok for me yeah i spent those 70 happy and i think it was woth it. Does it have the best graphics? No. Is Callisto Protocol worth 70 because of graphics? No. You guys are only thinking about graphics and is not only that. I would like to see how much money or what is the budget of the Switch games and see. Would you pay 70 for a indie game? Even if the game is good? Even if good is an indie game and paying 70 dosen't justify it. With the logic some have here. If Nintendo gamea are better than Sony or MS then Nintendo should ask 80 for their games because is worth it and still are good games.
