Yeah, prices will only go down if sales go down massively. And since video games are likely being used as an emotional coping mechanism, that seems unlikely.
The thing about demand/supply ratios is there’s also cost.
AAA games aren’t coming down in sticker price without actual deflation. That’s just not how it works. That they were selling at $60 for so long is a function of cost reductions in an industry where the only thing left to cut is employee costs or the widespread adoption of AI dreck.
If you want a game for less than $80 you’re going to have to buy games with smaller development scopes.
Just wait 3 months after switch 2 releases. If you already have a gaming computer, I can almost guarantee that you’ll be able to play launch titles at 10-20fps on an emulator, so long as sintendo do such a piss-poor job of antipiract measures in their consoles (like they’ve always done).
In my local currency (Aussie Dollars) AAA games cost $120. Like, man, I’m not spending $120 on a game. I can’t remember the last time I bought a game at that price.
It’s more run away/chain reaction type events you want to avoid I think rather than a low % inflation or deflation that remains relatively stable, swing too far in either direction and you’ll have problems.
Conventional economic theory holds that a small, consistent level of inflation is the most beneficial. In short, you don’t want hoarding cash to be a smart long term economic decision, you want more of that money invested/moving in the economy. I recommend reading about the Japanese deflation in the 90s if you’re curious what the effects of even relatively moderate deflation can be.
I just wish we’d have neither inflation nor deflation.
Candy bars used to be $0.50 when I was a kid. That would probably equal the buying power of $1.25 today. But candy bars are like $2, and about half the size.
I just want it to be still $0.50, and not get smaller.
As you said, it had the buying power of $1.25. Therefore, at the same size and at the price of $1.25, it would be perfectly alright.
Don’t blame inflation, blame greedy companies increasing prices above inflation AND also shrinking portions.
Central banks can adjust the inputs to the formula that result in inflation or deflation, but not the result. It can be a difficult target to hit, as you can see if you followed the news in the past 3-4 years.
If wages rise in conjunction, I don’t see any issue. The theory is that slight inflation encourages putting money to use, either by consuming it or saving in a bank account (where the bank can lend it out) or investing it etc. That’s why some inflation is generally considered desirable.
For that you would have to completely change how currency is issued and managed. Money is created by being borrowed directly or indirectly from the central bank, and the reason it is possible for those loans to later be repaid is because even more money is loaned out later, so it’s not going to be a game of musical chairs where there isn’t enough money going around to pay them all back, they keep bringing in more chairs. There is always an increasing amount of money in the system, and they make it that way on purpose to keep things running the way they want them to.
Personally what I hate about this setup is, a person who meets the requirements to obtain a business loan can now take this money that was created out of thin air, use it to coerce labor out of people who have no way to get money other than working, and keep the profits. What if our lives would all be better off working a bit less? Too bad, that decision isn’t up to us, how much we must work is indirectly decided by monetary policy, which the average person realistically has zero influence over, and the goal is a high level of “economic activity”, ie. as many people as possible subject to financial coercion.
Tell people to stop having more than 2.1 kids, then. As long as the population increases, without making changes to the currency supply, money is going to become more scarce. Keeping it exactly in line is impossible, so it’s better to keep a small amount of inflation.
The US population in 1980 was around 226 million, and in 2020 it was around 330 million. That’s an increase of about 50%. By comparison, the GDP in 1980 was about $2.75 trillion; in 2020 it was over $20 trillion, an increase of more than 600%.
The problem isn’t that we’re spreading out the same amount of money over too many people. It’s that we’re making much, much more money, but concentrating it in the hands of a tiny number of people and letting everyone else scramble for scraps.
Alright, how about the fact that the TFR in the US has been below replacement since the 1970’s, then. (It got close to 2.1 during the 2010s and then dropped again, and is currently around 1.6-1.7.) Is that relevant enough for you? Antinatalism is just as toxic as pronatalism these days. I swear, neither side is willing to actually look at facts.
I never said that any birth rate was good or bad. I only said that if population increases, and currency supply does not increase, you will experience deflation (and that slight inflation is easier to achieve than aiming for balance and ending up too low).
I doubt that $0.50 was only $1.25 today, if you actually do the math, I think you’ll find it’s $2 or more.
I don’t know when this fabled $0.50 candybar was, but here are some inflation numbers given different start dates (source):
1970 - $0.50 -> $4.14
1980 - $0.50 -> $1.94
1990 -> $0.50 -> $1.22
2000 -> $0.50 -> $0.93
FWIW, I remember the big candy bars (king size or whatever) being $1 in the late 90s/early 2000s, so that absolutely tracks with current prices at $2 or whatever (just checked Walmart and that’s about accurate).
Candy bars were 30p in Ireland in 1990s and that equates to about $0.50. I went on a trip to the USA around then and most things, especially junk food, was cheaper.
Exactly. And the trend is downward, and that includes this $80 price point. Prices will likely stay flat for the Switch 2 generation, so by the end it’ll be below the current $70 price point in inflation adjusted dollars.
Yeah, it sucks, and I get that. I wish games were cheaper too. But that doesn’t mean $80 is unreasonable.
It lowers the threshold of how many copies need to sell before a given game breaks even on its budget. It also lowers the number of copies it will sell, because some percentage of people who would have bought a game at the lower price no longer find it to be worth what they’re charging for it.
Or if you’re like me and don’t care about the latest big studio games. I play games by development teams with less than 10 people, tending towards just one person. I have no desire to play any of Nintendo’s newest games.
That’s the best model. Nintendo games used to get cheaper over time too. Idk how that stopped so easily. I guess you can’t find them used without game stop in most places though so they are happy to keep it high
Buying new games is decreasing in value sharply. They are releasing broken games, overpriced and with invasive DRM.
Play games 2+ years delayed. They are completely fixed and in a playable state, reasonably priced with frequent sales and some games get their shit DRM removed for better performance.
And no. Games as a service and fomo are NOT enough to buy games on day one.
Doesn’t work on Nintendo, for some reason. Mario Tax expanded to anything first or second party, so the best you’ll see is $20 off new price on Mar10 for the games that came out 5 years ago. It’s like every retailer came to the agreement that Nintendo games don’t depreciate.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Rules
1. Submissions have to be related to games
Video games, tabletop, or otherwise. Posts not related to games will be deleted.
This community is focused on games, of all kinds. Any news item or discussion should be related to gaming in some way.
2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No bigotry, hardline stance. Try not to get too heated when entering into a discussion or debate.
We are here to talk and discuss about one of our passions, not fight or be exposed to hate. Posts or responses that are hateful will be deleted to keep the atmosphere good. If repeatedly violated, not only will the comment be deleted but a ban will be handed out as well. We judge each case individually.
3. No excessive self-promotion
Try to keep it to 10% self-promotion / 90% other stuff in your post history.
This is to prevent people from posting for the sole purpose of promoting their own website or social media account.
4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
This community is mostly for discussion and news. Remember to search for the thing you’re submitting before posting to see if it’s already been posted.
We want to keep the quality of posts high. Therefore, memes, funny videos, low-effort posts and reposts are not allowed. We prohibit giveaways because we cannot be sure that the person holding the giveaway will actually do what they promise.
5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW
Make sure to mark your stuff or it may be removed.
No one wants to be spoiled. Therefore, always mark spoilers. Similarly mark NSFW, in case anyone is browsing in a public space or at work.
6. No linking to piracy
Don’t share it here, there are other places to find it. Discussion of piracy is fine.
We don’t want us moderators or the admins of lemmy.world to get in trouble for linking to piracy. Therefore, any link to piracy will be removed. Discussion of it is of course allowed.
Yeah, prices will only go down if sales go down massively. And since video games are likely being used as an emotional coping mechanism, that seems unlikely.
The thing about demand/supply ratios is there’s also cost.
AAA games aren’t coming down in sticker price without actual deflation. That’s just not how it works. That they were selling at $60 for so long is a function of cost reductions in an industry where the only thing left to cut is employee costs or the widespread adoption of AI dreck.
If you want a game for less than $80 you’re going to have to buy games with smaller development scopes.
True. This may actually be a boon to smaller devoplers who can sell games for less money because there development costs are less ambitious.
Just wait 3 months after switch 2 releases. If you already have a gaming computer, I can almost guarantee that you’ll be able to play launch titles at 10-20fps on an emulator, so long as sintendo do such a piss-poor job of antipiract measures in their consoles (like they’ve always done).
Those games are so expensive because people will pay those prices. There are plenty of cheap games to be had.
deleted by creator
Sony started the $70 game increase. Nintendo is just following Sony, really.
deleted by creator
In my local currency (Aussie Dollars) AAA games cost $120. Like, man, I’m not spending $120 on a game. I can’t remember the last time I bought a game at that price.
maybe just don’t buy it? life goes on, you can play something else
Inflation decreasing just means that prices aren’t rising as fast anymore.
That’s thinking like a corporation. The rest of us just stop buying games.
Also, if you’re rooting for deflation: more often than not, when deflation happens, things are not going great in terms of economics.
LOL, yeah… Cause shit is going great in America right now.
Deflation bad, fascism good.
It’s more run away/chain reaction type events you want to avoid I think rather than a low % inflation or deflation that remains relatively stable, swing too far in either direction and you’ll have problems.
Conventional economic theory holds that a small, consistent level of inflation is the most beneficial. In short, you don’t want hoarding cash to be a smart long term economic decision, you want more of that money invested/moving in the economy. I recommend reading about the Japanese deflation in the 90s if you’re curious what the effects of even relatively moderate deflation can be.
I’m otherwise not super deep into economics so thanks for the correction. TIL.
I just wish we’d have neither inflation nor deflation.
Candy bars used to be $0.50 when I was a kid. That would probably equal the buying power of $1.25 today. But candy bars are like $2, and about half the size.
I just want it to be still $0.50, and not get smaller.
As you said, it had the buying power of $1.25. Therefore, at the same size and at the price of $1.25, it would be perfectly alright. Don’t blame inflation, blame greedy companies increasing prices above inflation AND also shrinking portions.
Central banks can adjust the inputs to the formula that result in inflation or deflation, but not the result. It can be a difficult target to hit, as you can see if you followed the news in the past 3-4 years.
If wages rise in conjunction, I don’t see any issue. The theory is that slight inflation encourages putting money to use, either by consuming it or saving in a bank account (where the bank can lend it out) or investing it etc. That’s why some inflation is generally considered desirable.
Soooooo…you see the issue, right?
For that you would have to completely change how currency is issued and managed. Money is created by being borrowed directly or indirectly from the central bank, and the reason it is possible for those loans to later be repaid is because even more money is loaned out later, so it’s not going to be a game of musical chairs where there isn’t enough money going around to pay them all back, they keep bringing in more chairs. There is always an increasing amount of money in the system, and they make it that way on purpose to keep things running the way they want them to.
Personally what I hate about this setup is, a person who meets the requirements to obtain a business loan can now take this money that was created out of thin air, use it to coerce labor out of people who have no way to get money other than working, and keep the profits. What if our lives would all be better off working a bit less? Too bad, that decision isn’t up to us, how much we must work is indirectly decided by monetary policy, which the average person realistically has zero influence over, and the goal is a high level of “economic activity”, ie. as many people as possible subject to financial coercion.
Tell people to stop having more than 2.1 kids, then. As long as the population increases, without making changes to the currency supply, money is going to become more scarce. Keeping it exactly in line is impossible, so it’s better to keep a small amount of inflation.
Fuck off. The richest 1% own over half the world’s wealth. That’s where the money is going, not Mrs. Johnson down the street having 3 kids.
The US population in 1980 was around 226 million, and in 2020 it was around 330 million. That’s an increase of about 50%. By comparison, the GDP in 1980 was about $2.75 trillion; in 2020 it was over $20 trillion, an increase of more than 600%.
The problem isn’t that we’re spreading out the same amount of money over too many people. It’s that we’re making much, much more money, but concentrating it in the hands of a tiny number of people and letting everyone else scramble for scraps.
That’s a separate problem.
Alright, how about the fact that the TFR in the US has been below replacement since the 1970’s, then. (It got close to 2.1 during the 2010s and then dropped again, and is currently around 1.6-1.7.) Is that relevant enough for you? Antinatalism is just as toxic as pronatalism these days. I swear, neither side is willing to actually look at facts.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/SPDYNTFRTINUSA
I never said that any birth rate was good or bad. I only said that if population increases, and currency supply does not increase, you will experience deflation (and that slight inflation is easier to achieve than aiming for balance and ending up too low).
I doubt that $0.50 was only $1.25 today, if you actually do the math, I think you’ll find it’s $2 or more.
I don’t know when this fabled $0.50 candybar was, but here are some inflation numbers given different start dates (source):
FWIW, I remember the big candy bars (king size or whatever) being $1 in the late 90s/early 2000s, so that absolutely tracks with current prices at $2 or whatever (just checked Walmart and that’s about accurate).
Here’s a decent article about inflation-adjusted game prices that shows a general downward trend. Here’s the most revealing chart, which shows nominal (sticker price; blue) vs real (inflation adjusted; orange) game prices:
As a couple examples, here’s the purchasing power today of game prices for various consoles:
At $80 per game, games are a little more expensive than the current gen, but only by a little, and that’s because prices are sticky in a given gen.
You doubt they were a kid in 1990?
I doubt candy bars were $0.50 in 1990.
Candy bars were 30p in Ireland in 1990s and that equates to about $0.50. I went on a trip to the USA around then and most things, especially junk food, was cheaper.
Finally I’m seeing someone giving proof that games were more expensive back in the days.
Of course the gaming market was smaller, but I remember my parents buying me shitty games for a really high price.
I’m not asking for a price increase, but clearly games were more expensive in the 80-90-00s.
Exactly. And the trend is downward, and that includes this $80 price point. Prices will likely stay flat for the Switch 2 generation, so by the end it’ll be below the current $70 price point in inflation adjusted dollars.
Yeah, it sucks, and I get that. I wish games were cheaper too. But that doesn’t mean $80 is unreasonable.
If we don’t buy $80 games, they WILL put them on sale. I haven’t paid full price for a game since Horizon FW came out and it’s worked out pretty well.
EDIT: maybe not Nintendo…
Taking the most naive view here, but is there any chance, increasing the price will in any way prevent more layoffs in the video game industry?
It lowers the threshold of how many copies need to sell before a given game breaks even on its budget. It also lowers the number of copies it will sell, because some percentage of people who would have bought a game at the lower price no longer find it to be worth what they’re charging for it.
no, if anything it will increase them because prices going up is almost always tied to mass layoffs. austerity package and all that.
deleted by creator
Prices never go down for things like that, they only go up.
That’s… not how inflation works.
Inflation is a measure of price increase. If inflation goes down prices keep going up, just slower.
If prices go down that’s deflation and its own whole separate problem.
That’s really not how inflation works. We’d somehow need negative inflation, which probably only exists in the nightmares of economists.
I’ve heard deflation is the end of the world!
Steam: Games are $5 if you’re willing to wait.
Probably closer to $10 going forward. $5 just isn’t what it used to be.
Or they’re free if your library has video games.
Or they’re free if you’re willing to sail the high seas
I wish Factorio would go on sale but the makers said that’ll never happen
Or if you’re like me and don’t care about the latest big studio games. I play games by development teams with less than 10 people, tending towards just one person. I have no desire to play any of Nintendo’s newest games.
That’s the best model. Nintendo games used to get cheaper over time too. Idk how that stopped so easily. I guess you can’t find them used without game stop in most places though so they are happy to keep it high
Buying new games is decreasing in value sharply. They are releasing broken games, overpriced and with invasive DRM.
Play games 2+ years delayed. They are completely fixed and in a playable state, reasonably priced with frequent sales and some games get their shit DRM removed for better performance.
And no. Games as a service and fomo are NOT enough to buy games on day one.
Doesn’t work on Nintendo, for some reason. Mario Tax expanded to anything first or second party, so the best you’ll see is $20 off new price on Mar10 for the games that came out 5 years ago. It’s like every retailer came to the agreement that Nintendo games don’t depreciate.
You have to emulate Nintendo.
I’d rather not. Not a fan of their business decisions.
Best way to get 20$ off is to buy the game 2nd hand.