• cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    I would never pay that much for a game. I just wait a couple of years and buy them when they go on sale for under $20. I’m not going to pay a premium just to be a beta tester.

    • tal@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      7 months ago

      For context, here’s what prices ran for NES games:

      https://www.33rdsquare.com/how-much-did-the-nintendo-entertainment-system-cost-in-1986/

      Here were some of the most popular titles and their prices in the mid-1980s:

      • Super Mario Bros – $40-50
      • The Legend of Zelda – $45 when new
      • Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles – $42 initial price
      • Metroid – $35 at launch
      • Kirby‘s Adventure – $39.99 original MSRP

      I’m going to adjust for inflation to 2024:

      https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

      • Super Mario Bros - $115.36-$144.20
      • The Legend of Zelda - $129.78
      • Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles - $121.13
      • Metroid - $100.94
      • Kirby’s Adventure - $115.33
      • usrtrv
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        7 months ago

        Comparing prices directly like this is almost irrelevant imo. And doesn’t really dictate what the price of games should be.

        Reasons old games should be pricier:

        • Hardware involved (cartridges/electronics).
        • Total number of customers were smaller, you have to subsidize development with less total sales.

        Reasons why new games should be pricier:

        • Development has inflated to hundreds of people and multiple years (instead of dozens of people and multiple months)

        But at the end of the day, business just price what the market will bear. It’s only indirectly related to the cost of production. The margins on some games are insanely high compared to others.

        • mister_newbie@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Don’t forget distribution. It costs money to make a nice cartridge. It costs money to stamp a CD and put it in a pretty box. And that cost applies for every. single. copy.

          Now compare that to digital distribution…

      • cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        A large portion of the cost of those games was the mask ROM that had to be manufactured for each release.

        There was no patches or updates. If there was an issue, then your very expensive mask is trash and a new one has to be made, which also significantly delays the release. The games had to be released in a finished and fully working state. A lot more work had to go into testing before release.

        Development for old consoles was also much harder. You had to write very well optimized code to get it to run on the limited hardware that was available.

      • woelkchen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        7 months ago

        For context, here’s what prices ran for NES games

        For another context: That was the time regular children got max 4 games per year and it was a momentous occasion. Games getting cheaper through CD-ROM (move away from cartriges) and inflation is the reason the customer base grew.

      • stardust@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Compared to the market for games back then to now. Was the game industry bigger than movies and music combined?

        Is gaming a niche now as it was back then?

      • Woozythebear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yeah and you could buy a house for 20k back then and that same house is 1.7 million now. So it’s almost like people had more disposable income back then. Half of all Americans make less than 35k a year so that $70 price would be like if games back then cost $600.

      • Supervivens@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yes when they actually had to sell real things and not just a digital download. They also had to actually publish fully finished games as game updates were basically impossible.