I don't know the solution
Public ownership of the means of production?
Tabletop, DnD, board games, and minecraft. Also Animal Crossing.
3rd International Volunteer Brigade (Hexbear gaming discord)
Rules
I don't know the solution
Public ownership of the means of production?
many people are saying it (collectively instead of begging)
Yeah. How come all these guys come out of the woodwork defending company's "right" to keep up with inflation (games 60=>90) but get real fuggen quiet when ya point out those same companies don't raise pay and collude with other companies and the govt to suppress wage increases?
It's such a stupid argument on it's face i can only imagine it comes from people who
The problem with communism is you eventually run out of your turn on the Nintendo
Inflation is just an acceptable way to say "price gouging".
Inflation without a corresponding increase in wages definitely needs a more appropriate name. It's messed up because if wages kept up with inflation, inflation would be a great thing: your real debts would get smaller, and the capitalists' fortunes would get smaller (as long as stock prices don't grow more than they otherwise would as a function of inflation).
All of my hobbies and interests are getting priced out of my reach: video games, tabletop games, fursuits, 3D printing, photography, etc. The only thing I can do is get up, go to work, and try to survive.
Game dev pay is especially shitty too (comparatively) and we all know they won't see a cent of the increased prices.
The funny thing about this take is making and distributing a game has never been cheaper, just cos the cost of games hadn't gone up in price doesn't mean companies were doing this out of charity... Also games have gone up in price indirectly with dlc, season passes, battle passes, cosmetics, lootboxes.
Damb the game companies are so kind and nice to us that must be why they're raking in more cash than ever before!
By the looks of things nobody except ultimate goobers hold this take anymore fortunately
Subscription games like rs, suddenly jumped in price so much
Folk need to stop pretending like people have as much money as they did in the 90s. Rent costs, house prices are astronomical.
While searching through family records my partner found a lease renewal of her dad’s for his apt in like 93 for like 3-400 dollars a month and he was making 20 bucks an hour fresh out of college
When I left college in the early 10s I was paying like 900 for a small apt making 20 bucks an hour.
Today I can’t find a single bedroom apt for under 1400-1500 and I know people still making like 15-20 dollars (my partner makes like 17 I think)
I don't know the solution
Is this a reddit post?
Yeah, it's what anti-marxist and anti-intellectual society does. The most energy someone will put into an internet argument is repeating a fake stat they saw someone else say on social media. And the $90USD price people kept repeating incorrectly.
Also, you can see people empathize a lot more with Nintendo than they do the people buying and playing the games. They enjoy putting themselves into Mr. Nintendo's shoes and how they'd price games and make profit in the company. They do not enjoy thinking about if they were poor and couldn't afford it at all.
This is also an effect of proprietary capture of video games. If you work outside of the established industry and publishers you have far lesser support. People do not even own their games, you're simply just purchasing the right to run a compiled copy of a program and not guaranteed anything else.
Video games are such a disposable medium of entertainment in capitalism and it's such a waste of human talent.
Not even, you're purchasing revocable licenses to download copies of software, which increasingly are nonfunctional if the home server is shut down
Speaking of game prices, something that absolutely, desperately needs to change is the ludicrous 30% cut that Steam takes on every sale. Every single sale.
This might have been reasonable back in 2009 when the selection of games was limited to a few hundred AAA titles, but today the overwhelming market share of all PC game sales, Indie or otherwise, all goes over Steam.
Valve would still be making gigantic profits at just 15%. They can put the platform in maintenance mode and it would continue generating money indefinitely.
The rate has been grandfathered in from retailers. Today, with the absence of physical distribution and high degree of automation, there is zero legitimate reason for it to still be at this rate.
I don't know why it's a problem consumers should care about. Games are the same price for me on steam as other places so it is worth the price for those companies who choose to host them there.
It's not like if valve took 0% cut we the consumers would see a single dollar of that discount, feel me? So no offense but i disagree that it's something we consumers should spend a single second of thought on.
It's not like if valve took 0% cut we the consumers would see a single dollar of that discount, f
This is not really true. The steam price is what sets the market price and the developer just pockets a bit more money if you buy it elsewhere. They do not drop the price on other stores due to agreements with steam similar to the Amazon "most favored nation" clause.
Steam's high cut is inflating the price of games right now but is at least delivering a good service in return. Once Gabe kicks the bucket though you'll be longing for GFWL over what steam will have become.
Sorry, but i don't buy this at all. Steam sets market price? Nah, fam. Show me a link, cuz im too old for vibepinions.
N I'm s'posed to think it follows that if steam went 0% cut the prices of games would drop?
Gimme a damn break. When have you seen this happen?
I know I'm comin hot, but you're whole comment is just bad.
Though you are respectfully speaking, you're also talking out your ass which angers me to no fucking end.
While I agree that Steam's 30% cut is unreasonable, games are not generally cheaper outside of Steam, especially AAA titles. Even on platforms with a lower store cut, such as Epic Games or direct publisher stores, AAA games being priced lower is very rare. So i don't think steam reducing their cut would have an impact on game price.
Also it's fucking Mario Kart. That should be like $50. Shovelware can produce ripoff of it for almost free.
$20
Seriously, when has Nintendo produced a game that was worth more than like $15? They make stagnant, bland slop that rides brand recognition to stay afloat in otherwise niche genres where there's next to no competition. Most aren't even worth pirating to use on an emulator. They're not even worth free and they want to be leading the charge of rising prices?
The company defenders are dumb yeah. I don't really understand though why this is whats making people freak out. Like i wasnt gonna be able to afford a switch 2 regardless lol. Housing prices, food prices, etc are insane. Even if it was 300$ i wouldn't be buying one until maybe 3 years after it came out. I never bought a switch and got a switch lite for like 150$ a couple years ago.
I guess maybe im just used to not having many treats and pirating tons of stuff? Like i pirate all my media and never understood why people pay for streaming services. The few times ive used one the experience sucks. Like it doesnt have most shows. My pirate sites have all the shows easily searchable lol.
Edit: I made a bit of an effort post on lemmygrad about adblocking and being a pirate after posting this. If you want a how to on that stuff then check it out.
I feel like readily available treats are one of the few remaining parts of the social contract of USian society that was being upheld. Housing, gone, social mobility, gone, affordable food, gone, american exceptionalism, gone. And now treats.
Counterarguments:
Piracy is easier than ever. You really shouldn't be paying for games in 2015, let alone 2025.
Most games that are resistant to piracy are AAA slop that's not worth playing in 2015, let alone 2025.
For almost everything else, I agree, people should be pissed that they're being priced out of their hobbies. But for games, all I can muster at this point is "you still pay for games?"
And there's another point to consider: games used to improve leaps and bounds relative to their predecessors. When you bought SM64 in 1996, you're not just buying a generic game, but you're buying one of the first 3d platformers, a paradigm-shattering game. It's $60 (or however it costs in 1996) to go from SMW to SM64. Can you name a single contemporary game that has the same leap in progress from SMW to SM64? You absolutely can't. You could make the same argument for the old classics like Doom 1 or Starcraft. Going from Warcraft II to Starcraft is worth the 60 bucks while another iteration of a long-running series where barely anything changed isn't. I would argue if you try to value games using genre-defining classics of the past as a guide, the vast majority of games aren't worth $5 since the vast majority of games aren't era-defining or genre-defining or even that good, which is why piracy is the way to go.
While I agree that Mario 64 is genre defining, I could probably name 20 indie games that I find more fun, ( subjective I know) without much difficulty. I would even go as far as to say that Hollow Knight or Celeste easily rival Mario 64 in terms of enjoyment, even if they arent as historically significant.
thing is, economics of scale should reduce the price of digital games (which are essentially unlimited supply) and even the physical games which are at least manufactured using ubiquitous SD card technologies (a 256GB card, more than any game on the NS2 will be, costs like £30 at retail). Of course, software incurs a labour cost that is factored into software prices.
The only part of the commodity in question that could conceivably increase in price across a generation is the console, due to new/modified factory lines, retraining of staff etc. and the R&D that went into it.
We know from experience that software for these consoles does not need to increase in price over generations. Development costs are independent of the target platform beyond the cost of purchasing devkits and licenses (which is zero for a first party studio).
Perhaps a new system means your assets can be higher quality so you spend more time making them or something, but even then most assets are compressed and simplified, so in that sense a new platform would save some effort since optimisation is less necessary.
Point being, I might know jack shit about LTV and economics in general but the choice of inflating software prices is exactly that: a choice. It's a simple accounting decision to try and exhaust extra revenue streams by inflating every aspect of your platform's costs until they impact your profits.
It sucks for many of us, but Nintendo is just doing what Zynga and EA and Ubisoft did long ago: they're sacrificing their reputation and overall sales numbers for the suckers who will dedicate their entire existences to funnelling money into these companies who have discovered the rent-seeking phase of capitalism.
im nearly convinced all these people saying that shit are bots meant to condition people into being okay with being screwed.
all the justifications are bs. like you pointed out, how pay hasnt kept up
in addition, im not sure how companies feeling the need to spend 300 million dollars on a video game somehow makes it our problem that we have to pay for. the top people at these companies are making bank. clearly they aren’t hurting for funds. why should we all have to pay for their lifestyle and then be gaslit with this “modern games are just so expensive to make” shit
Some people have bought in the chud cultural war and in mindless contrarianism defend multi million dollar companies. Like babe you aren’t owning anyone but yourself.
my hot take is gaming is not a hobby and never was... its a past-time. its semantics but whatever.
a hobby is something like painting, or fixing up an old car, or doing some amateur music production with a friend... something creative or something that develops a creative skill. sports also dont count as a hobby. past-times can be pretty cheap or free, like hiking.
This is an absurd take. Even by this pointlessly reductive definition of a hobby, plenty of video games and sports still count. Do you honestly think there's more creativity involved in fixing a car than creating an entire city in City Skylines, or figuring out new tricks on a skateboard? Watch a video of Danny MacAskill on his bike and ask yourself if that's honestly less creative than fixing a car.
I mean, not to get "they targeted gamers" on anyone here but some games do fit that definition. Especially in the era of games like Minecraft which became mediums for creativity and skill.
It might be less tangible than a physical painting but people make art and express creativity in videogames, even games where those expressions aren't intentional.
I'm not too fussed about whether it is or isn't a hobby (either way it's enjoyed enough to piss people off) but I wouldnt want you to assume that videogames cannot be used to develop or express creativity either.
come on, this is a bit curmudgeonly. ridiculous to say sports don't count lol
That is certainly a hot take. I guess you also dont consider reading books a hobby since that is basically the same as watching tv ? Or working out also isnt a hobby since its not creative ? And gaming also isnt a hobby. So I guess I dont have hobbies :^)