$70 Games Too Expensive? Let Me Tell You About the 90s

DS: “How would you feel about paying $150 for Turok: Dinosaur Hunter for the N64?

Obviously, no one likes a price hike, but is this price hike really as drastic as some of us are making it out to be? Is this really such an expensive time to be a gamer? Well, as someone who was around during the glory days of cartridge-based consoles and physical-only distribution, let me tell you that the answer to both questions is a resounding ‘no,’ and I’ve done some inflation calculations to prove it.”

[anast]

The complete versions of most games are around $120, which is comparable to the prices in this article.

[EvertonFC]

"The complete versions of most games are around $120"
Lay off the drugs 😂🤣

[mandf]

Neo geo games were 129.99 back in the day

[dumahim]

@mandf
They were more than that. I remember them being $250. Wiki says $200 and up.

[anast]

With those emojis, I'm not sure if you are being ironic or purposely slow.

[mandf]

Dumahim
Gamepro magazine had used ones in the back for 130 I never seen them In stores internet wasn't around so you could be right.

[EvertonFC]

I wasn't on about Neo Geo games, I took the comment as $120 for complete games today whoops.

[Neonridr]

I mean deluxe editions can be that high easily.

[anast]

It's called VAT just encase you need to know. Complete versions of games are $99. In my country there is a %16 VAT charge which comes out to about 114.84. I am not even including the first round of DLCs (not expansions) that have been cut out of the game and resold to us. This would obviously drive the price even higher than $120. In other countries complete games, not the base games are even more.

[Ashunderfire86]

I remember when Mission Impossible for N64 cost $80 bucks!!! And it had the worst rating on IGN at the time! 6.0 out of 10 dang!!!! $80 bucks for that??? Both my brother and I gave it a rental at Blockbuster and beat it in a weekend! Save us from paying $80 bucks 😁

[mudakoshaka]

I bought it!

[Necr0philiac]

I thought Mission Impossible was a lot of fun for its time era

[mudakoshaka]

@CorpseF*cker It was a great experience! :D

[TallDarknWavy]

For those who don't understand economics, which is most of you, the reason the prices were higher back then when adjusted for inflation is the gaming market was a niche market. Nowhere near as many games and systems were sold, so with expected fewer sales you needed to charge more money.
Now that the market has expanded exponentially, you can charge less money for each game and still make more because your target market is so much greater.
This is what happens when niche markets become mainstream.
Today, gaming is 2.5 times bigger in cashflow than the entire music and movie industry combined. This has been in large part due to massive market expansion but also microtransactions that suck people's money away.

[lukasmain]

But how many people worked on and developed a game back then compared to how many work on them now? And how long did it take to develop back then compared to now? What were the total development budgets when compared properly? There are other variables at play to decide whether $70 now is too much when compared to back then. Don't you think?

[Imalwaysright]

potatoseal

Not really. For example Sony's gaming division was more profitable in 2018 alone than it was with the entirety of the PS2 generation when games were supposedly far less expensive to make and this before Sony raising the price of their games. Last year MTs alone generated more revenue for Activision than the company generated in 2013. Seeing publishers crying about development costs when they are breaking revenue and profit records is one of the funniest things I ever came across in regards to this industry and I don't understand why gamers believe in what these companies have to say because these are the same exact companies that keep on throwing underhanded crapola in our direction the most recent case being Redfall wich was just another broken mess of a game to add to the ever increasing pile of broken games at launch.

[Strange99]

You realize when you start a comment off with a middle finger statement, not many people are going to care at all what you have to say because you are clearly an a-hole, and we are all ok with that. DR

[Melankolis]

Game developments are longer now and more people involved, more money needed. They used to release Final Fantasy and Ratchet every year and Tekken every two year at most.

[nitus10]

Back in the 1980's through to the early 2000's cartridges were the go-to media for games and basically they were much more expensive to produce than CD's, DVD's and Blue-ray's (yes there were other DVD ish media as well - example "GameCube") which actually replaced them.

As we progress futher into the 2000's digital downloads are becoming more popular although disk (ie. DVD and Blu-ray) is still used (Yes I am aware of the "Switch"). We also have to take into account inflation (which you did) so that even though a game on a cartridge was say USD$150 and a modern game of similar genre today is also the say USD$150, overall games have actually got cheaper. Of course this is very subjective but a game produced back in the 1990's would not have the same quality (eg. graphics and possibly gameplay) as a modern game. Note: I did use the word "subjective".

I actually do agree that microtransactions do suck peoples money away but then again it is upto the buyer if they wish to purchase these. Unfortunately too many people get sucked in (I actually liken this to a form of gambling).

[EvertonFC]

PS1 and PS2 sold more than PS3 and PS4 so your section on consoles Not selling as many is void pmsl.
Also today's games cost 100m upwards with Dev teams 300 plus so YES £70 for a game is perfectly fine.
Back in the day a PS2 game took a year to make with 20 people ffs.
I'll let that sink in.

[Strange99]

Complete? Wtf are you talking about? The single player game is complete. What you mean is the complete game with all dlc and who gaf about dlc except those who have nothing else to play.

[nitus10]

Personally I don't really have an issue with DLC which "of course" depends on the game, but I definately don't like microtransactions.

[seanpitt23]

I can remember my mum was paying £50 for games back in 1989 to 1996 for Nintendo that was a lot of money back then..

[Gaming4Life1981]

I have never payed that much for any of these games and I owned them all. $70 is too expensive but I GameShare on Xbox and Playstation so it doesn't really affect me.

It was no reason to raise the price of games to $70 except for greed.

[EvertonFC]

Clearly never read the article, gaming never been so cheap imo.
£70 for games i spend lots of time in, what's a pi** take is taking the wife and kids to the cinema and spending £100 on tickets, popcorn, drinks etc for a 2hr film.

[andy85]

I always use this argument. Even as a single person, once you've got a drink, some food you're spending £25 for 2 hours. You can buy a game for £70 (under 60 physical day one) get 30+ hours out of it then sell it for most of what you paid afterwards.

[Gaming4Life1981]

The movie argument is irrelevant to what I said. If you spend 100 bucks at the movies that's on you and your choice.

Gaming was cheaper back in the day and that's a fact. I get that in your opinion it wasn't but that's not true.

[Nineball2112]

Bullbutter

[senorfartcushion]

Mate, it was 25 quid for a ps2 game, 35 quid for a 360 game and now that’s doubled over two generations. The 90s argument doesn’t work because the writer hasn’t factored in stagnant wages and the economic heft of things like The Pandemic, 2008’s financial crash and our lack of migrant workers.

I get the film argument, but games are also cheaper to make than the films you see once. Nothing will ever justify the cost of a family day out to the pictures, but gaming CAN be cheaper - and should be. It’s just greed. Too many nobs from the top taking the workers’ rightfully-earned wage.

[andy85]

...no it wasn't £25 for a PS2 game. Nowhere near.

[Tapani]

I'd rather invest in a home-theater, cook some good food and bake something sweet using a sour dough base, drink home-made juice made from berries with some sodastreamed bubble water in it, chill back at a big sofa with a lot of space and quiet environment, and look at an amazing 4K picture quality at 85" Mini-led/OLED, and enjoy extremely crisp and balanced high-end audio at more reasonable volume, and watch a superb movie or two while having the ability to take breaks!

[Imalwaysright]

I remember paying €50 for brand new PS2 games.

[CrimsonWing69]

N64 games were $79.99 a pop, whereas PS1 were between $39 to $49 for the same game.

You're right though, the price hike is due to no clear regulation on standard game prices. The industry can dictate what they feel is an acceptable MSRP.

Anyone arguing that this is due to development cost increase is absolutely full of sh*t. The tools used to make games hasn't increased in price, in fact most devs are contractors that get fully paid to develop a game by the publisher. The sales of a game do not impact the devs, they impact the publisher.

Since the devs are already paid to do a job before the release of the game, this money is going straight to the publisher. I want to know the exact cost of producing a game now vs producing a game last-gen. I also want to know why PC games are $10 cheaper, hell sometimes $20.

I want to know why Alan Wake 2 is $10 cheaper being digital only when other digital games can be $70.

This is 100% testing the market. If people didn't buy games when the price hike happened, you can bet your balls they'd lower the price back down.

I also find it hypocritical people support the price hike, but don't support the other ways to "support development costs" like micro transactions, DLC, season passes, etc. Again, those aren't going to the developers at all, they already got paid to do a job.

[shinoff2183]

I'd rather pay 10 dollars extra for a physical release if it means a physical release happens. Alan wake 2 went from a early release buy to a wait till its 15 is bucks. I will not pay more then 20 dollars for a digital game.

[CrimsonWing69]

@shinoff2183

I’m glad I don’t have that stubbornness towards digital releases. I’d hate waiting even longer after a game releases to play it all because I just can’t stand not to have the physical game.

I mean at some point games are going all digital. Not sure what you’ll do then.

[TiredGamer]

So how big were the development teams back in the 80s? 90s? 2000s even? You do know that the cost of people (salaries, benefits, etc) is the largest expense by far in most industries, right? Game developers and publishers have been taking a much smaller cut of the profits every generation, made up in some part by volume (if the game sells well), or DLC/MTC (if applicable).

Why do you think Konami bowed out of Kojima Production titles after MGS V? Because they didn't like making money from guaranteed meghits from Kojima-san? Or maybe it's because the every-increasing cost of development left them with a shrinking profit margin every year, and they didn't see the value in that versus a higher margin Pachinko market. Maybe, just maybe.

[TiredGamer]

PC games don't have to pay the MS, Sony, and Nintendo licensing fees.

And of course they are testing that market. Any businessman worth their salt will test things before taking the full plunge. It doesn't mean that there won't come a day when prices need to rise to keep up with rising costs and falling dollar/currency values.

[CrimsonWing69]

@TiredGamer

Konami bowed out of Kojima Production because the guy continuously went over-budget and did not commit to a deadline.

https://www.gamezone.com/ne...

You ever seen the old MGS trailers that kept changing the release dates for a game? That costs money, when you build marketing around a release date and you change a release date that costs a lot.

Here's the quote:

"The main reason for the falling out, at least in her opinion, is that Kojima gets paid a salary, and doesn't make any profit share on the game. He gets paid a certain amount no matter what, and he was spending so much money and delaying the project, and adding all these features and making sure the game was the biggest and best thing it could be, and Konami was unhappy with that because [delaying] has no effect on him. He was spending the budget on this and that and upgrading the Fox Engine and then delaying further because the engine wasn't ready, and Konami wasn't happy with that because he gets his salary and he takes a more traditional "Japanese man" approach by not taking a profit share. So in doing that, he gets a little more than a game creator would but doesn't take bonuses from the game selling well."

He's paid a salary, doesn't make ANY money off the game. That's how this works...

They got fed up with him pulling a BioWare Anthem on MGS 5. They even forced him to push out something like that Grounds Zeroes game... which was essentially a demo to make up for costs. I love Kojima, but he went through resources and never respected a budget. As a business, having someone like that is a headache and not good.

All that aside and getting back on topic, please show me the development cost of games now and games when they're $60. Also, please show me how much the devs make off a game and how much the publisher does.

Then please show me how the profits stack to cost of development.

I'm sorry, but this is publishers making a decision in order to gain even more profits. Who was it that started this whole $70 price hike? 2K. And how funny was it that not the entire industry was onboard? It wasn't till they saw consumers are willing to pay $70 before they made the change and wowee whoowee it's still not consistent.

Hell, Sega said this:

https://comicbook.com/gamin...

"In the global marketplace, AAA game titles for console have been sold at $59.99 for many years, but titles sold at $69.99 have appeared in the last year. We would like to review the prices of titles that we believe are commensurate with price increases, while also keeping an eye on market conditions. Also, for titles that are planned to be offered via subscription services, revenue made via contract deals are also included in sales figures, so we would like you to be aware that when these figures are divided by the number of units, there is an apparent impact on the increase in unit price,"

Devs get paid to make the game regardless of sales. It's publishers benefiting from this and you can't tell me they don't make enough to profit without a $10 increase to games. Please link me to info that shows publishers and devs are making less. Don't take this as me being aggressive, I just want to see the info and learn.

[TiredGamer]

Reference Konami and Kojima - exactly... he kept going overbudget and the cost of AAA games continued to skyrocket. There was more nuance to the situation, but the cost and overbudget part was starting to squeeze Konami's financials.

It's not rocket science to understand that if you have more staff on your team, the cost will rise linearly. Salaries = the largest cost driver of development.

PS1 and earlier titles could have a dozen developers or fewer. PS2 era could be 10-30, depending on the caliber of title. PS3 and beyond, at least with AAA titles, pushed that number past 100 developers. PS4 and beyond are likely even more. So we're talking 5 to 10x higher development cost just in people alone over the course of two generations.

Halo Infinite's budget was somewhere around $500 million.... compare that to the budgets for early PS1 games like Twisted Metal that were somewhere around $1 million (quoted from a David Jaffe interview). And yet Twisted Metal sold for $50 back in 1995, which is equivalent to $99 in today's dollars. So let's analyze that for a second.... a game with a $1M budget sold for $99 in today's dollars.... and a game costing 500x more is selling for $70..... If anything, you could make the argument publishers were actually ripping you off back in the day and that the cost to the consumer has gradually decreased.

It's no wonder that publishers are shying away from experimental and innovative genres today. It's just too dang expensive to take a risk with a game that won't recoup its cost. A dissenting opinion could argue that we need higher prices for games to ensure a greater breadth and depth and that variety remains viable for developers/publishers.

I'm not that person shouting for increased pricing - I love a good game deal just like anyone else. But I'm not close-minded to think that it's just publishers being greedy. Sure, there's some greed... but the business model has to make sense if you want to have a healthy gaming industry. If it becomes too risky, you're only going to get sure-thing titles that will make everything look the same.

[Strange99]

I’m really not sure where you all shopped for games, because my N64 games were $59.99. The most expensive game I remember was getting Mega Man for $55, and that was a hard sell to my parents.

[Gaming4Life1981]

I agree with most of what you said but n64 games were not 80 bucks. I think alot of you are getting confused with companies upping the price of games due to limited availability. For example in the JC Penny Christmas catalog they were selling some games for 69.99 like sf2 hyper fighting.

I'm not saying I don't believe that some of you overpaid for some of these games but I didn't.

Gaming was cheaper back in the day and I don't know how this is an debate.

[sadraiden]

N64 games were $80 a pop. in 90s dollars. meaning they would be for sale at like $120 or more at today's prices. gaming has never been so cheap.

[DigitallyAfflicted]

You can buy games for half of the price or less if you are patient, it’s that simple. If you choose to pay full price on day one or preorder then that is your choice and you can’t blame anyone else. It's your money and you are the one in control...

[Rebel_Scum]

Games during the 8 & 16 bit era were more expensive. Anything from $120-240NZD. On average Megadrive games were $160-180.

Today new releases are no more than $110NZD. Thats a fact brother.

[Gaming4Life1981]

That is not true and if you were getting suckered like that then damn. Why would someone pay $130 for a Sega genesis system that comes with a game then turn around and pay $120 for one game?

[Rebel_Scum]

Note I put in the currency code in my price ranges as well. You mentioned Genesis so I guess you're a yank so if that's how much Genesis consoles were for you....cool.

I don't remember how much Megadrive's were exactly but I think they were close to $300-450NZD. Most expensive game I bought for the system was Sonic & Knuckles, that was $240NZD. Master System games were $80-120NZD.

None of what I've said is made up here. That's how much games cost back in the 90's in New Zealand & Australia. Much cheaper now.

In the US Genesis games were what $50-$60? So a 2D Sonic in the 90's was around that. Sonic Mania was released at $20 no? Pretty big difference there mate.

[TheEnigma313]

Well in the 90's, not many people bought new games like they do now. I stayed at funcoland buying cheap games.

[EvertonFC]

Lots of gamers bought games in the 90s as well as going to blockbusters.

[TheEnigma313]

Not new where I grew up. Blockbuster and lesser places, for sure.

[FIELDMARSHALL_P]

The local video store took all my allowance as a kid. It was a five min walk.

[FinalFantasyFanatic]

I remember my parents would hire out a few movies and I'd often get a game to play over the weekend, good times.

[dumahim]

True, but a factor in that was there just wasn't as many games made compared to today either.

[MIDGETonSTILTS17]

Once the prices got fixed to $60 for xbox360/ps3 era, the DLC era began…

This isn’t a coincidence.

[EvertonFC]

£40 in the UK, you sure 360/ps3 games in the US not $50?
Either way games have never been so cheap.

[Father__Merrin]

I bought street fighter 2 on Megadrive £69.99 also with 6 button pad £29.99

[Chevalier]

Yeah. I remember NES games being more expensive than they are now. Add on inflation and its even higher than now.

[Knushwood Butt]

Back in the day, in the UK, I had a US SNES that was 60Hz and I connected it to my Trinitron with a scart cable. I got my buddy to drive me out to an industrial estate at Trafford Park (this is before the Trafford Centre shopping mall existed), and I bought a copy of SFII SNES direct from an importer. They didn't normally deal direct with customers and didn't even have a till. I handed over cash. Pretty sure it was 50 quid. Certainly no less. I HAD to get that game, and played it to bits!

[EvertonFC]

Cool story bro, many memories myself of going down the dodgy "arcade shambles" in Coventry to buy my Amiga games 😄 £24.99 for Amiga games back in the 80s so fast FWD 40 years and it's definitely cheaper today than it was back then.
Games have basically gone up £10 every decade which is about right at the end of the day.

My mum had to get 2 jobs around Xmas just to get me the games I wanted for xmas day in the 80s definitely harder times back then imo.

[Knushwood Butt]

Thanks!
Wow, I hope you expressed your gratitude to your Mum for that.
My brother had an Amiga. Seem to remember most of his games were copied.

[Father__Merrin]

I always maintained the Megadrive version was better but secretly knew the snes version was better lol the audio and size of sprites on Megadrive was awful

[Abnor_Mal]

I’ve been saying the same thing to people who complain about todays prices. Back in the 90s it was normal to see game prices being set by the store that was selling the game and prices would be close to if not a hundred dollars.

[Yui_Suzumiya]

Yeah, I got Mortal Kombat II for SNES at launch for $75

[ApocalypseShadow]

It wasn't every game but I did buy new Genesis games like Phantasy Star for $80 and Virtual Racing for $100. Felt expensive but I sure enjoyed them. I also did game trade ins then. So there was that.

Now I'm selective. I wait for a sale on many games that don't seem worth the high price. Very few games I would buy at full price. Only did that 4 times last Gen. I don't think I'll ever buy a $70 game. Because games always come down eventually.

[senorfartcushion]

No, how about you read a book on economics?

Stagnant wages make the 90s an irrelevant comparison.

[TiredGamer]

Inflation makes it relevant. Wages may have stagnated relative to inflation, but that's the consequence of increasing wage rates.... the cost of goods increases relative to the increased "buying power" of wages.

Hence, $70 in 1993 is $146 today.

On the other hand, $70 today was $33 in 1993.

[Chevalier]

I agree with TiredGamer

I really don't get how anyone thinks gaming now is more expensive? Back when I had my NES not only were prices higher there was no other way to get games really except in stores. Now with online stores, digital sales and 2nd hand in store or on Ebay is way cheaper.

[shinoff2183]

I wouldn't say it's irrelevant. Do you remember pay back in the 90s. My grandmother worked at a department store early 90s and made 3 something dollars an hour. There's alot that needs to be taking into account when comparing. I'm simply not doing it I'm just saying the 90s weren't all glorious

[TiredGamer]

https://www.cnn.com/interac...

Gross wages have grown, but game prices have remained, at, or less than they were before. Buying power is virtually unchanged in the last 30 years. By and large, we are paying far less for games, like for like, than we did in the 90s... or 2000s, or 2010s...

[EvertonFC]

My 1st job was early 90s £7.50 an hour here in the UK for a factory job, I'm pretty sure your grandmother earned more than $3, that's 60s era rates.
I never had a problem buying a game when I got my 1st job or thought dam that was expensive nor do I know either.
At the end of the day, a game today costs about half a day's wages which is nothing.
If gamers are moaning at half a day pay (4 hours) for a game there in the wrong hobby.

[dumahim]

@EvertonFC

The minimum wage was bumped up to $3.80 April 1990 and went up to $4.25 a year later. In the 60s it was $1.60 by the end of the decade.

[EvertonFC]

I think you need to read the book pmsl.
I can't fathom how uneducated people are today, it's literally NOT rocket science to understand games are cheaper today.

[Seafort]

What happened to digital games being cheaper than boxed copies from stores?

As soon as digital started that is when the price gouging started and games became more expensive not less.

We were all conned by the publishers.

$70/£60 for any game is too expensive. This is why I will not pay £60 for any game.

I will be passing on Diablo 4 and many other games if I can't find a good price for them. £35-40 is more than enough for the broken AAA games we get nowadays.

If publishers want to charge a premium price their products better be premium products..

[dumahim]

Remember when people blew up over $2.50 horse armor? We were on the winning side. Now $20-30 for a cosmetic set? People lap it up. The prices are what they are because people let it happen.

[shinoff2183]

I won't buy diablo until they release the 4th re release on disc with the dlc anyway. See ya in 5 years diablo 4

[TiredGamer]

Technically they're probably still cheaper than 2010s.... see post above.

[Abnor_Mal]

Before this gen started I said I would wait until two years into the gen before I get a system. That way when I go to purchase all the console release games they should all be dirt cheap within the twenty dollar range hopefully.

I also said that I’ll only invest in first party games thst I like day one, but all other third party games I will wait for a price drop to twenty or less or if it comes to PlusExtra.

I just got my system in august, and so far I haven’t really bought any games besides God of War Ragnarok. I’ve been buying more games for the PSVR2 which is how for this gen I prefer to play most games.

[EvertonFC]

Agree with digital release prices but digital does get a price drop after a month and there always on sale on the stores 90% of the time.

[Yui_Suzumiya]

I spent $250 on a used copy of the Collector's Edition of Clannad for Switch last month and $150 on the limited edition of World End Syndrome for Switch last year so $70 is a steal for me since visual novels are quite pricey.

[rlow1]

Though there were some games that hit that price range. It was a few, not the majority of games. Plus, with inflation pushing up the costs of everything and wages not keeping pace. It’s definitely, not comparable.

[shinoff2183]

The 90s were rough as hell. Guess you just had to live it

[rlow1]

Well considering I was very much alive in the 90s. I also lived in an expensive state. It still wasn’t as bad as it is today.

[jznrpg]

When I was a kid during the 1980’s games were $49.99 for NES. Some games were more. That’s all I ever asked for on birthdays and Christmas though I didn’t always get it. 50$ for games . That’s around 133$ now.

[SICKINDIVIDUAL]

Lmao these virgins today have no idea what a Neo Geo AES cartridge cost in the early '90s.

Lmaoooooo 🤣

[ChasterMies]

This is how GameStop developed such a lucrative used game business. But let’s be real. Almost every store had some kind of deal even on launch day. Even in the 2000s, I was picking up Halo 2 and Halo 3 at launch for $40. MSRP was for suckers.

[isarai]

Difference between using highly specialized proprietary carts, and a universal format like discs

[TiredGamer]

Cost of Materials Sold is minimal compared to the enormous development costs today. Games of old were made by teams of 5-10 people..... today we're talking hundreds.

[shinoff2183]

Great point. Don't think that's been talked about.

[isarai]

Not so much when you needed world class talent to do literally anything. Basically inventing a new way to use programming languages that were never meant for gaming. You'd be hard pressed to find talent at that level in today's industry

[Magic_Spatula]

I remember when Super Street Fighter 2 came out. My brother went to like 5 different store trying to find the game as it was extremely popular game at the time. He finally found a copy and he paid $80 for it which was the standard pricing in the 90s.

[TiredGamer]

And according to the inflation calculator, that $80 in 1993 is worth $167 in today's dollars.

Imagine the conversation today on this board if games cost $150 at retail!!!

[Locutus_of_borg]

Back in the days of the SNES I paid £50 for Football game, can’t remember the name … and that was about 35 years ago …

[dumahim]

There was a Breath of Fire game and I think RC Pro Am 2 cart I saw that were $90 back in the day. Pretty sure Neo Geo games were $250.

[Abnor_Mal]

I also remember hearing that Neo-Geo games were super expensive, and possibly also the Atari Jaguar. I never had either so can’t say definitely.

[Crows90]

How was the cost of living back then smart ass?
It was expensive then and it is expensive now. Let's not pretend a price hike was even necessary. Also how much has the industry grown? Massive audience now compared to before. Imagine having to sell tickets for a movie nowadays if the audience was no more than 5million people. Those tickets be expensive to cover the cost of production.

[MrNinosan]

I paid $70 for every single SNES and N64 game back in the days.
Often for a 10-15 hour experience with no way of getting extra content or updates to fix bugs.
Those $70 back then equals around $130 which I never pay for a game.

Among that, we have plenty of cheaper games that range from $10 yo $50 with way more content and quality than we had back in the 90s.

Also every free to play game, lile Fortnite, Warzone, Genshin Impact and many many more.

We who have played videogames for almost 40 years thinks gaming are extremely cheap today.

[shinoff2183]

I agree I feel it's alot cheaper these days. I've brought up wages in the 90s they were straight disrespectful. Idk where most of you are from but my shop just lost an operator who made 13 an hour to a corner store that is now paying him 18.50 an hour. The wages back then were like 3 4 dollars for minimum wage.

I think its cheaper by a Longshot.

[Ashunderfire86]

Wow 😮 wait a minute??? Turok was $150 dollars??? Oh hell nawww!!!!

[shinoff2183]

It wasn't 150 everywhere. It varied so much back in the day. Now it's not like that unless it's country to country.

[shinoff2183]

Also keep in mind back in the 90s minumun wage was under 5 dollars in alot of the u.s.

[1nsomniac]

Bullshit! Games tried to be expensive, looking at you Turok.. that tried to attempt to sell at £70. But it failed. I soon after bought it for £25.

This narrative is stupid. It lasted 5 minutes and continues to last 5 minutes every time it’s attempted. Until it fails and prices return to normal. Trying to claim this price was normal in the 90’s is beyond stupid considering a lot of us are gamers from the 90’s and know fine we’ll it’s not true!! I e never in my life paid over £50 for a game and I’ve been gaming for about 30 years! Kids running with stories they actually know nothing about other than myths and stories passed down to make you believe it’s acceptable.

[Eidolon]

Who's comparing used prices and sales? This is more of an MSRP/At-launch comparison.

[1nsomniac]

I never mentioned used prices or sales.

Same way I seen someone on this site the other day saying “I remember buying the original Duke Nukem on day 1 for £50”

The original duke nukem rrp was never £50. I bought it from GAME, day 1, for £29.99. £30-35 was the going rate for nearly every game. I still have the box with the sticker on it.

The odd console game would try and push it but pc games were always around that price or cheaper. The pc versions were always the far superior versions too.

[Exvalos]

Only 2 kinds of gamers whining about 70.00 people that are broke and Xbox guys who want all their games free on gamepass

[DoubleYourDose]

This is why I own so few games from that era; I rented almost every game I wanted to play.

[mudakoshaka]

Get ready for the Great Reset! Fewer buyers but at a higher price. The profits will increase for these companies. Just look at Apple who went with the same business model a few years back. We can manage and even increase our profits with fewer customers if we sell the product at a much higher price.

[gold_drake]

let me tell you about Euro prices. you'd be shocked how many years we've had the 70 price tag.

dont get me started on Australian and Canada prices.

[zachyBROosevelt]

I always try to explain this to people and it’s never understood I feel like… At least we have some sort of uniformity to pricing now

[adamwparker]

Street Fighter 2 on SNES cost retail $74.99 in 1992.

[Popsicle]

It definitely did at Toys R Us. I paid that exact amount.

[WelkinCole]

And this is why i dont complain about the price for sp focused aaa games. I have been gaming since the atari days and i know the cost of games.

I buy games to keep. I only have time for games i reallly really want to play. So every gen at most i have 60 to 100 games in my collection depending on thr gen.

[D0nkeyBoi]

This is stvp!d. Cartridges HAD to be expensive due to cost of parts. Once discs were used for games, prices dropped. What excuse does a company have for the cost of soemthing that will primarily be sold digitally? Discs are about as rare now as special editions used to be when discs were common.

Plus the cost of AAA games has gone up, YES, but they all use Unity and UE4/5 so it saves them a lot of time and money to offset that part of things (making an engine is usually the most time consuming and expensive and risky endeavor of all). Protest with your wallet. Indie games are actually starting to be better than industry ones, which are too concerned with being safe, rather than innovation.

[aws04]

Creating 3D assets is far more expensive than engine itself

[Zodiac]

The actual price of a single item or hobby is not always what determines if it is too "expensive." If I have 7 other financial responsibilities that have gone up in price, while my wage has not, then games becoming "less expensive" can still not be enough. It's still "too expensive" as a non-life necessity.

[Tedakin]

Oh yeah I remember buying N64 games and they were 80 or 90. I don't remember getting upset about the price.

[Abear21]

Trade in prices were so much better though. We had a great used spot in my town that I’d buy Genesis games from, they were $20-$30 used. I don’t feel like prices have changed all that much through the years, people are only willing to pay so much for entertainment. That said the next gta could be $125 and people would pay it, yet free to play is the model. Yup, gaming is just F’d these days especially post Covid.

[masterfox]

you dont tell me nothing , because I was there. :D

[HeliosHex]

Yeah it was always expensive. Neo geo was considered a luxury console only rich people had. 250-350 depending on the megs. Nes averaged 49.99 snes all the way to today games were 59.99. Imports were about 10 to 20 dollars more for snes games.
It's an expensive hobby. Always will be.

[REDDURT]

The lengths people go to defend corporate narratives.

[Dreadnort]

In 1992 Street Fighter 2 on the SNES in the UK retailed for £65 brand new. That's about £135 today.

[Einhander1971]

I live in the UK, remember paying £80 for an import copy of Street fighter Super Famicom. Starfox was also very similar in price. Most of the best stuff through the 16bit era was on import. So you paid the price. Megadrive, Neo, Snes, PC Engine. All top dollar then. And games now on these systems are desirable and costly.

[Yui_Suzumiya]

I spent $250 on a used copy of the Collector's Edition of Clannad for Switch last month and $150 on the limited edition of World End Syndrome for Switch last year so $70 is a steal for me since visual novels are quite pricey.

[MadLad]

Also a lot more chances for profit now. A flop, back then, was selling 5k copies. Not 50k.
Carts were also more expensive due to pure production cost of the carts.

[Cernunnos]

Games came finished in the 90s and didn't have a bunch of paid DLC

[Neonridr]

I remember some games launching on the N64 at $99.99 here in Canada.

[helicoptergirl]

I can't imagine what that would have been like. Games beings over 100 dollars.