My main issue is it smacks of Nintendo eyeing the trend of Sony, MS, Ubisoft, EA etc starting to sell their big releases at this price point. However, they are doing so, based on price disparities with cross-gen titles, by pivoting "next Gen" as requiring more development cost. Some studios (such as EA, shocker) have started moving to this price on PC, while others you can get games $10 cheaper by buying there.
As an example, Hogwarts Legacy releases today. I know that game has baggage, I'm just using it for a high profile and brand new example of current market pricing. It is $70 on PS5 and Xbox Series X/S. It is $60 on PS4, Xbox One, and Steam/Epic. This is the direction things have been moving for a few years now. So this move from Nintendo feels kind of like the same logic as why they almost never adjust their digital titles to adjust to the market. Like how MK 8 (a Wii U port) and Breath of the Wild (a Wii U game, essentially) are still at $60 WITHOUT their dlc content. In comparison, Sony hits of the era like God of War, Horizon Zero Dawn, and Marvel's Spider-Man can be had for $20-40 on the PS Store, including DLC.
Tldr, Nintendo uses logic of "value is inherent and eternal with our products, regardless of distribution model or age of the title." And this is now seemingly leading them to emulate next-gen pricing for games they are still delivering to us on a 6 yr old customized Nvidia tablet. Honestly, if they also announced a Switch Pro or 2 or whatever, I don't think most of us would require it to have parity with the PS5 - we'd probably at least accept that the price hike would coincide with new hardware.
Others in the thread covered the article tone and why the inflation argument leaves out a lot of relevant context on the industry, components, development, etc. So I'll stop this long comment here lol
Comments 1
Re: Upset By Zelda Being $70? We've Arguably Never Had It So Good
My main issue is it smacks of Nintendo eyeing the trend of Sony, MS, Ubisoft, EA etc starting to sell their big releases at this price point. However, they are doing so, based on price disparities with cross-gen titles, by pivoting "next Gen" as requiring more development cost. Some studios (such as EA, shocker) have started moving to this price on PC, while others you can get games $10 cheaper by buying there.
As an example, Hogwarts Legacy releases today. I know that game has baggage, I'm just using it for a high profile and brand new example of current market pricing. It is $70 on PS5 and Xbox Series X/S. It is $60 on PS4, Xbox One, and Steam/Epic. This is the direction things have been moving for a few years now. So this move from Nintendo feels kind of like the same logic as why they almost never adjust their digital titles to adjust to the market. Like how MK 8 (a Wii U port) and Breath of the Wild (a Wii U game, essentially) are still at $60 WITHOUT their dlc content. In comparison, Sony hits of the era like God of War, Horizon Zero Dawn, and Marvel's Spider-Man can be had for $20-40 on the PS Store, including DLC.
Tldr, Nintendo uses logic of "value is inherent and eternal with our products, regardless of distribution model or age of the title." And this is now seemingly leading them to emulate next-gen pricing for games they are still delivering to us on a 6 yr old customized Nvidia tablet. Honestly, if they also announced a Switch Pro or 2 or whatever, I don't think most of us would require it to have parity with the PS5 - we'd probably at least accept that the price hike would coincide with new hardware.
Others in the thread covered the article tone and why the inflation argument leaves out a lot of relevant context on the industry, components, development, etc. So I'll stop this long comment here lol