this post was submitted on 13 Apr 2025
330 points (95.1% liked)

Games

37659 readers
1572 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here and here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 day ago (4 children)

IDK how to feel about rising video game prices. On the one hand, prices were stagnant for decades. On the other hand, companies can sell far more copies of games than they could back in the 1980s and 1990s. The cost of games is all in the development. The more you sell, the cheaper the price can be. They cost next to nothing to package and distribute (or are distributed digitally.)

On one hand, games are a lot more complex and expansive than they were back in the day. On the other, game devs now have tools the creators of old couldn't even dream of. No one is hand coding the next Mario game is assembly.

There's a lot of variables here. And it's really just hard to make a fair judgment about it.

[–] mfed1122@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 1 day ago

In many ways I think rising prices could be great, but in reality, they won't be. With the technology available today, we could have even cooler games than we do, and more games, and more great games. We could have more diverse and experimental games. It would be lovely if solo indie developers were able to make a living from making great games, rather than basically needing to chase a dream akin to getting drafted into the NBA. Game developers are seriously underpaid, it would be great if they got paid as much as other software developers, especially since their work is equally complex and usually more stressful.

In reality, rising game prices will not help with any of those things, and will just make the C-suite richer. The one silver lining is that this may allow small indies to start charging a more livable realistic price for their games.

[–] thermal_shock@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

If they're turning billions of dollars in profit each year, there's no reason to raise the price. Fuck them

[–] nuko147@lemm.ee 5 points 1 day ago

Yeah but BOTW has already made them rich. Development is finished and even the next game is 2 years old. I call it pure greed.

[–] REDACTED@infosec.pub 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

They cost next to nothing to package and distribute (or are distributed digitally.)

Steam takes 30% cut. This, of course, does not apply to nintendo, but still

[–] hildegarde@lemmy.blahaj.zone 179 points 2 days ago (10 children)

$90 to replay a 8 year old wiiu game. Why would anyone?

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 19 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Nintendo fanboys are notorious suckers

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I played it six years ago, but with a better experience than switch 2… thank you, cemu

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] subignition@fedia.io 16 points 2 days ago (4 children)

$10 to replay it, replay meaning you already have the switch version. Or free if you have switch online expansion pack. It's only going to set you back 90 (instead of 80) if you've never owned it and you want it on switch 2

[–] delirium@sh.itjust.works 45 points 2 days ago (6 children)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago

$90 is still an insane ask for an almost decade old game but at least they're not completely screwing over the people who already own it for once.

[–] PanArab@lemm.ee 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Not if you bought it on the WiiU like I did.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] SaltySalamander@fedia.io 86 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Nintendo is still justifying my choice to never give another penny to Nintendo.

[–] heavydust@sh.itjust.works 51 points 2 days ago (10 children)

Same. I loved the Switch. My next gaming console will be the Steam Deck. Fuck Nintendo, it's over.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 22 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Steamdeck already has this experience for free 🙈

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] FunnyUsername@lemmy.world 60 points 2 days ago (1 children)

that's gunna be a lot of sad kids on Christmas when the great depression 2 has settled in

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 52 points 2 days ago

better framerates, higher resolutions, and HDR support

Interestingly you can get all that for free now. Yarr

[–] Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Title is a bit misleading

There are a few scenarios here.

  1. You own the game on switch and already have the dlc so pay nothing unless you want to pay $10 or have the switch online subscription for the switch 2 edition if you want the enhancements. For a total of $0-10 depending on your choice

  2. You own the game but dont have the dlc so pay $20 for that and then $10 for the switch 2 version unless you have the subscription for a total of $20-30 depending on your choice.

  3. You dont own the game so you buy the switch 2 version for $70 and the dlc for $20 for a total of $90.

This is not the same as the $90 game lie thats being told, but it is painted that way. To get clicks.

Paying $70 for a game and then paying more for an expansion is nothing even close to new. For example, Destiny 2 is free but if you want the DLC its gonna cost you between $150 and $270 depending on when you buy it as there are sometimes deals on.

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 30 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Breath of the Wild is 8 years old at this point. Asking $70 for that is pretty egregious in my opinion. Maybe for TotK that'd be more acceptable but for BotW I think it's a very steep price. Especially given that it's common that rereleases usually include dlcs by default.

I'd expected $60 for the full package, not $90, given that the amount of development work was likely pretty low (the game was finished years ago after all). So 50% higher than expected.

The SM64+Sunshine+Galaxy bundle game was $30, for comparison. That's three full games that they needed to put in effort for to run on the Switch.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lordnikon@lemmy.world 34 points 2 days ago (8 children)

Kinda expected when you pull an CEO from EA

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago

Yeah, you can really see the AAA cooperate enshitification taking hold.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] CallateCoyote@lemmy.world 22 points 2 days ago (5 children)

One of the issues I have with the new open-world style Zelda games is that they don’t have replay value. After finishing each once (which takes a lot of time), I can’t actually imagine wanting to go back and play them again. So yeah, Nintendo can charge what they want and it isn’t very appealing regardless. Increased resolution isn’t going to change the experience.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] vonbaronhans@midwest.social 28 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Existing owners can upgrade to the Switch 2 version for $10, gaining better framerates, higher resolutions, and HDR support.

I didn't realize they had this option. As far as legal routes go, that's not terrible (assuming there's no weird downside, like no longer being able to play the original on the switch 1). Free would be better, of course, but $10 certainly beats paying $90 just to play the improved version on switch 2.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] kandoh@reddthat.com 13 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

They'd make a lot more money if they priced it at the 20 - 40 range

[–] shinratdr@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 days ago (6 children)

They really wouldn’t. They would have to triple or quadruple sales to take that sort of a hit. As it stands it’s one of the best selling games of all time already, basically everyone interested in it already owns it.

Financially, they made the right decision. As annoying as it is from the consumer side.

[–] cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

If I were to buy a switch 2, I might consider a rebuy at 20-40, but I've already beaten it and I ain't pain 90$ lmao

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mlg@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

That assumes people actually buy it though. Everyone already has this game, so I would expect most of the sales to come from the upgrade pack and not the $90 switch 2 edition. Nintendo usually makes bank by selling old games at full price with a generational console gap.

Tons of the full price successful "remasters" on Switch were Wii games which people no longer used, and Wii U games which no one originally bought.

On the other hand, the last time I didn't see Nintendo make bank on literally zero effort was never, so I'm not that hopeful that people won't just shill out for this scam too.

load more comments (4 replies)

Honestly... Piss off with that Nintendo.

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

They have literally been doing this with every older game they've ever produced. New system? New larger price to play on the new system.

[–] demizerone@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Nintendo doesn't give AF about poor people.

[–] Critical_Thinker@lemm.ee 4 points 1 day ago

They aren't your friends, they don't care about you - they care about the money in your pocket.

They know they are too big to fail, so they are gonna raise prices 50% no problem.

[–] v4ld1z@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago

I'd wager most video game companies don't

[–] accretion@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Why would they? Not saying it's right, but there's literally zero motivation for them to focus on people who can't buy their products. They are a luxury good.

They are a company who exists to make money, not entertain us, despite that being what they say (in order to sell more). Them, and every other for profit company in the world.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›