Zelda's new $70 base price could set precedent for more expensive Switch games

[Shawn Knight]

In brief: It only takes one good game to set a pricing precedent, and for Nintendo that title appears to be The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom. We already know that Nintendo's next Zelda adventure will drop for the Switch on May 12 and thanks to the recent Nintendo Direct presentation, we now have pricing data to go along with it.

The sequel to The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild is billed as an epic adventure across the land and skies of Hyrule. In it, you'll chart your own path across the vast landscapes of Hyrule and explore the mysterious floating islands high above. Will you be able to tame Link's new abilities to ward off harmful forces threatening the kingdom?

The standard version of the game will carry a suggested retail price of $69.99. The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom Collector's Edition – also dropping on launch day – will set you back $129.99. The latter includes a Steelbook case, a physical copy of the game, an art book loaded with concept art from the development phase, an Iconart steel poster and four pin badges.

Nintendo will also have a separate amiibo figure for Link that'll unlock access to in-game weapons and materials, including a special fabric for Link's paraglider.

At $69.99 for the base game, it appears Nintendo is setting a new barrier of entry with its premium IP. A quick check of Nintendo's online store reveals it's not the most expensive game on offer, but it is the highest-priced base game. Everything price equally or above the $69.99 mark is either a special / deluxe edition or comes bundled with DLC.

That begs the question – is $69.99 too high for a premium game from an established player that's based on fan-favorite intellectual property? I feel like I remember new release NES and SNES games going for anywhere between $50 to $60, and that was back in the late 80s and 90s. Adjusted for inflation, $69.99 doesn't feel like highway robbery to me. What do you think?

Interested parties can pre-order the digital edition from today and learn more about the physical copies and collector's edition over on Nintendo's website.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/97555-zelda-6999-base-price-could-set-precedent-more.html

 

[NintPlayBox]

Is $70 too much for a premium game?

Nintendo will soon find out once they compare sales of the figures on Breath of the Wild vs its sequel.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

Gamers are the ultimate Consoomers, so no, it'll be fine.

It's too much for me tho. Gaming has slowly turned into a hobby for the rich and financially irresponsible. I'll grab it in 2 years when its $25 or so.

 

[Jerry in WA]

I don't know, but, to be fair, Nintendo was selling brand new SNES games for $70+ in the early 90s on a regular basis. Not saying I like it, just saying this isn't really unprecedented in any meaningful way. In fact, comparing the value of the dollar back then to now, those old SNES prices are even more alarmingly high than a $70 game is now.

 

[psycros]

I don't know, but, to be fair, Nintendo was selling brand new SNES games for $70+ in the early 90s on a regular basis. Not saying I like it, just saying this isn't really unprecedented in any meaningful way. In fact, comparing the value of the dollar back then to now, those old SNES prices are even more alarmingly high than a $70 game is now.

I don't remember this being the case except for special editions.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

I don't remember this being the case except for special editions.

SNES? Nope, those were $60. Now N64? Those were regularly $70, sometimes $80 depending on the game.

I don't know, but, to be fair, Nintendo was selling brand new SNES games for $70+ in the early 90s on a regular basis. Not saying I like it, just saying this isn't really unprecedented in any meaningful way. In fact, comparing the value of the dollar back then to now, those old SNES prices are even more alarmingly high than a $70 game is now.

Flip side: those games were nigh indestructible from normal use, and still work 30 year later, unlike modern digital downloads that can be yoinked whenever pleased. Also they were expensive for a reason: ROMs were pricy as hell, still are compared to the likes of NAND. You were also making 300-500k copies at most, instead of spreading the cost to multiple millions in sales via digital systems that cost pennies to manage and dont cost more if you sell another million. The gaming industry today has FAR larger margins then it did in the 90s.

Also the console was not $600. Or $400. Or $300. $199 was the launch price, and $150 could be commonly found on sale price by 1993. 97 the price was only $99. the N64 was a $199 unit, and by 98 this had fallen to $185.

 

[Bl00dyMinded]

For a base game it's expensive.. But Nintendo knows what it's doing here. They know this will sell millions of copies and the price will stay between $60-70 for years to come. Look how long Breath of the wild lasted with an average price of $50ish. I think currently it's still at $40 and its 6 years old.

 

[EdmondRC]

I don't have an issue with Nintendo charging what Sony and MS charge, TOTK should be a huge game with ample content to justify. What does bother me is that Nintendo will never lower that price. Most of the time if you wait a year, you can get games at half or even less than the launch price. BOTW is still $60 and it's been what? 6 years? Nintendo used to have $20 Nintendo select games, they don't even do that anymore.

 

[dangh]

This is not bad price, problem is, this game is made for legacy hardware and that will be an issue. Thankfully, it is easy to emulate, so it will be possible to play it without stutters, in better resolution and possibly with some graphic mods.

 

[human7]

My backlog is so large that by the time I get to games which are routinely released at the $100 price point when first released, they'll be on sale for $10. Now if only I could convince myself I don't need the latest generation of hardware...

 

[ZackL04]

I dont have a problem with it.

If games cost me $60 back in SNES and N64 days frankly Im shocked they haven't budged in the meantime

This game is likely to be one of the best to release for the next year or two as well.

 

[m4a4]

I dont have a problem with it.

If games cost me $60 back in SNES and N64 days frankly Im shocked they haven't budged in the meantime

This game is likely to be one of the best to release for the next year or two as well.

Remember that publishers don't have to pay for the bulk of copies being physical anymore (and shipping costs).
Digital gives them a much bigger cut than back then (justifying why games should've costed less during that transition).

 

[EdmondRC]

SNES? Nope, those were $60. Now N64? Those were regularly $70, sometimes $80 depending on the game.

Flip side: those games were nigh indestructible from normal use, and still work 30 year later, unlike modern digital downloads that can be yoinked whenever pleased. Also they were expensive for a reason: ROMs were pricy as hell, still are compared to the likes of NAND. You were also making 300-500k copies at most, instead of spreading the cost to multiple millions in sales via digital systems that cost pennies to manage and dont cost more if you sell another million. The gaming industry today has FAR larger margins then it did in the 90s.

Also the console was not $600. Or $400. Or $300. $199 was the launch price, and $150 could be commonly found on sale price by 1993. 97 the price was only $99. the N64 was a $199 unit, and by 98 this had fallen to $185.

Gaming has become much more mainstream since then. Also people buy way more games for the most part. So things have changed in the market as a whole. $70.00 a game will bring a lot more than it did back then even adjusted for inflation. Some of these Nintendo games top 20M in sales.

 

[amghwk]

It's time to hack the Switch like how the 3DS can now be fully exploited to download from the various ROMS sites, install and play 3DS/2DS games and can still use the Nintendo Store fully. And show the middle finger to Nintendo.

 

[Eldritch]

Is $70 too much for a premium game?

Yes.
Earlier Nintendo games had cartridges with memory and even batteries inbuilt.
They had shipping costs, rental costs and profit margins for physical stores.
They had significantly less volume of sales.

Now, these are just a digital download.
Selling copies in 10s of millions.
Did I mention massive revenue from expansions, DLCs etc?

 

[James Ryan]

It was only a matter of time.
Once a few games sold for 70, every single game release will match the price.
It's already happening.

Publishers could put $100 on any of their new releases people would still buy them.
Sure people would whinge but it wouldn't affect sales in the slightest.

 

[Jerry in WA]

I don't remember this being the case except for special editions.

For anyone who either doesn't remember $70 releases or thinks I made this up. google "toys r us ad 1993" or something similar. I just found SNES games for $109 and more. And as to the notion that the cartridges made games cost this much back then? They sold new carts for $20 all the time.

 

[y6Tq2RGXEejb]

Oop. Nope, I'm not paying 70 dollars for a DLC.

 

[brucek]

I remember being happy to pay $60 for games I was excited about two decades ago. The difference being that was the all-in price for the best game the developer could make, with nothing held back for micro-transactions, "DLC" that is just an outfit or two, etc. etc.

For that same deal I'd be OK with $70 today, factoring in both two decades of inflation but even more importantly that the size and scope of games and their art & voice assets are much bigger now than they were.

What I won't do is pay $70 (or $60) for a game that feels mostly like an advertisement and store to keep selling me more microtransactions and content and isn't fun to play without them.

 

[rsmith222]

I don't know, but, to be fair, Nintendo was selling brand new SNES games for $70+ in the early 90s on a regular basis. Not saying I like it, just saying this isn't really unprecedented in any meaningful way. In fact, comparing the value of the dollar back then to now, those old SNES prices are even more alarmingly high than a $70 game is now.

Phantasy Star for the Sega Master System sold from $70 to $80 in 1988 money, the equivalent of $202 according to usinflationcalculator.com

ROM cost was significant but games also cost far less to develop. Look, for instance, at the development cost of 1997's Final Fantasy VII and compare it with Phantasy Star.

Cartridge-based games also could easily be rented by video stores.