Unpopular Opinion

7130 readers

447 users here now

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!

How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.

If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.

Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)

If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].

Rules:

1. NO POLITICS

Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.

2. Be civil.

Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...

Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.

5. No trolling.

This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.

Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

admiralpatrick@lemmy.world

302

Game price isn't the problem, wages are (sopuli.xyz)

submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by overload@sopuli.xyz to c/unpopularopinion@lemmy.world

92 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Game prices for the past 30 years haven't kept pace with inflation.

I recognise the argument that publishers are shifting larger volumes of units now, which has been a factor that has allowed the industry to keep price increases below inflation for the last 30 years.

Wages not being even close to keeping up with inflation (especially housing inflation) is the real issue here, not the $70/$80 video game.

You should be angry at your reduced purchasing power in all of society, not just with the price of Nintendo games.

(Secondary less unpopular opinion, the best games out these days are multiplatform and released at least 5 years ago, buy them for << $80 and wait for sale the new releases, when they too are 5 years old)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] tiddy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Honestly looking at the most popular games, I dont think graphics matter to even 1% of gamers. Minecraft, Terraria, lethal company, baltro, among us, all have the graphical quality of a 2 year old drawing.

Publishers are just spending a million to underpay artists solely because 'graphics' worked back in the ps2-ps3 era, so theyre still hitting that slot machine hoping for the same returns.

Edit to add: tunic, factorio (technically) Tetris, temple run, hill climb racing, Wii sports (arguably nindendos entire style until recently), human fall flat all have incredibly cheap graphics

[–] missingno@fedia.io 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Stylized graphics can look great for cheap, but they aren't a shortcut to instant success. For every successful indie, there are a thousand more that never sell more than a handful of copies.

[–] Nikelui@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Yes, the point was that having real-time raytracing and realistic ultra-resolution rendering is not worth the cost either, when games with cheaper graphics are doing better (and also require less expensive hardware)

[–] tiddy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So?

Doesnt mean expensive ones are an instant success either, if anything I'm agreeing with you that graphics are irrelevant to sales

[–] missingno@fedia.io 1 points 1 week ago

if anything I'm agreeing with you that graphics are irrelevant to sales

I didn't say this.