By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Comparison of 1996 game and console prices to today.

You include the 1996 price for the Super Nintendo, but if you were to give it's original price, adjusted for inflation, you'd end up with something in the $400 price range, even higher than the PS4.



Around the Network
Tamron said:
irstupid said:
I hate when people bring up inflation.

If I was making $10 an hour back when I bought an N64 and am still making $10 an hour today. The N64 was cheaper. Inflation means nothing. It's all relative to the individuals income.

If you were making $10 in 1996 and are still making $10 an hour at the same job in 2014, you've got bigger issues than how much you're paying for consoles, namely legal ones.

I'm not, heck back in N64 days i was too young to even have a job legally I think.  Pretty sure I was only like 12 or so when it released.

I'm just saying.  There are PLENTY of peope making around $10/hr in this day an age, and there were tons of people making $10/hr back then too.

To those $10/hr people $300 is more expensive than $200.  Inflation means NOTHING.

What someone with their pay grade could afford in 20 hours now takes 30 hours.  (excluding tax takin out of paycheck and tax included in cost of system)



HylianSwordsman said:
You include the 1996 price for the Super Nintendo, but if you were to give it's original price, adjusted for inflation, you'd end up with something in the $400 price range, even higher than the PS4.

The SNES launched in 1991 in the US at $199, inflation from 1991 to 2014 puts it at $335.36 today, but i included it to show the 'last gen' console prices, which are indeed higher than the current last-gen console prices (wii, 360, ps3) too.



Dark_Lord_2008 said:
Third party developers flocked to the cheaper CD based PS1 over expensive cartridges on the N64. PS1 went on to sell over 100 million consoles, N64 struggled towards 34 million console sales. Using cartridges was a huge mistake for Nintendo instead of adopting CDs. CDs are much cheaper and have better load and memory storage capacities over the now defunct cartridges. Cartridges main benefits over CDs are: they are impossible to pirate and cartridges are more durable than easy to break/scratch CDs.

PS1 CD drive was what? 1x or 2x? mario 64 would never have run off CD during that era, the drives were just too slow.It was a transitionary era.



irstupid said:
Tamron said:
irstupid said:
I hate when people bring up inflation.

If I was making $10 an hour back when I bought an N64 and am still making $10 an hour today. The N64 was cheaper. Inflation means nothing. It's all relative to the individuals income.

If you were making $10 in 1996 and are still making $10 an hour at the same job in 2014, you've got bigger issues than how much you're paying for consoles, namely legal ones.

I'm not, heck back in N64 days i was too young to even have a job legally I think.  Pretty sure I was only like 12 or so when it released.

I'm just saying.  There are PLENTY of peope making around $10/hr in this day an age, and there were tons of people making $10/hr back then too.

To those $10/hr people $300 is more expensive than $200.  Inflation means NOTHING.

What someone with their pay grade could afford in 20 hours now takes 30 hours.  (excluding tax takin out of paycheck and tax included in cost of system)

There being $10 an hour jobs now doesnt make a difference to the value of an item, You could argue that in 100 years some people may still be working $10 jobs, but in 100 years the $10 an hour jobs of today would no longer be $10 an hour.

Look at kids on minimum wage, for an accurate example, a kid in 1996 paying for consoles/games on their paper round minimum wage job would be on $4.75 an hour, the average minimum wage for the US at the time.
A kid doing the exact same job, right now in the US would be earning $7.25, with some states increasing that since the federal adjustment in 2009. Kids in Washington, for example, would be on $9.32 minimum wage for the same job.

The reason for this adjustment?, Inflation and tax increases.

BECAUSE OF INFLATION, $10 now, is not worth as much as $10 in 1996, so even if you're earning $10 and were earning $10 in 1996, you are not spending the same amount, you are spending less, and being paid substantially less than you were in 1996 for the same job.



Around the Network
Tamron said:
HylianSwordsman said:
You include the 1996 price for the Super Nintendo, but if you were to give it's original price, adjusted for inflation, you'd end up with something in the $400 price range, even higher than the PS4.

The SNES launched in 1991 in the US at $199, inflation from 1991 to 2014 puts it at $335.36 today, but i included it to show the 'last gen' console prices, which are indeed higher than the current last-gen console prices (wii, 360, ps3) too.


Strange, I saw a similar comparison like this a few months back that said SNES was the most expensive console Nintendo ever released, when adjusted for inflation, and that it was in the $400 range. Either way, your point still stands, consoles aren't that much more today than they were then when adjusted for inflation. In some cases, they're cheaper. As for games, you have games with insanely higher production values being released for essentially the same price.



platformmaster918 said:
so game prices haven't gone up since then yet production costs have sky rocketed. I see why so many devs are closing


Games also sell FAR, FAR more today



Tamron said:
irstupid said:
Tamron said:
irstupid said:
I hate when people bring up inflation.

If I was making $10 an hour back when I bought an N64 and am still making $10 an hour today. The N64 was cheaper. Inflation means nothing. It's all relative to the individuals income.

If you were making $10 in 1996 and are still making $10 an hour at the same job in 2014, you've got bigger issues than how much you're paying for consoles, namely legal ones.

I'm not, heck back in N64 days i was too young to even have a job legally I think.  Pretty sure I was only like 12 or so when it released.

I'm just saying.  There are PLENTY of peope making around $10/hr in this day an age, and there were tons of people making $10/hr back then too.

To those $10/hr people $300 is more expensive than $200.  Inflation means NOTHING.

What someone with their pay grade could afford in 20 hours now takes 30 hours.  (excluding tax takin out of paycheck and tax included in cost of system)

There being $10 an hour jobs now doesnt make a difference to the value of an item, You could argue that in 100 years some people may still be working $10 jobs, but in 100 years the $10 an hour jobs of today would no longer be $10 an hour.

Look at kids on minimum wage, for an accurate example, a kid in 1996 paying for consoles/games on their paper round minimum wage job would be on $4.75 an hour, the average minimum wage for the US at the time.
A kid doing the exact same job, right now in the US would be earning $7.25, with some states increasing that since the federal adjustment in 2009. Kids in Washington, for example, would be on $9.32 minimum wage for the same job.

The reason for this adjustment?, Inflation.

BECAUSE OF INFLATION, $10 now, is not worth as much as $10 in 1996, so even if you're earning $10 and were earning $10 in 1996, you are not spending the same amount, you are spending less, and being paid substantially less than you were in 1996 for the same job.

One of my first jobs was LIfeguarding.  My max pay was like $10/hr.  Could go no higher.

I have younger cousins that lifeguard now at same pool I did 10 years ago.  The most they can make is also $10/hr.  The only thing that changed was that the starting salary was raised cause of the minimum wage increase.  So it took them less years to reach $10/hr.

But that same job is paying $10/hr.  So for the last 10+ years the same job has been paying roughly $10/hr.  You have shown inflation has gone up plenty in those 10 years.  But those lifeguards at the exact same pool are not making a dime more.  

I've found most low end jobs (excluding big companies like walmart, mcdonalds, ect) roughly pay around $10/hr and have been for YEARS.  Minimum wage has not affected that.  All it has done as I said has brought up the starting wage, but the max $10-12 has not changed.  From when I started working to watching my much younger cousins that has been the case.  So for the last as I said 10-15 years the typical pay for the SAME job has been around $10.  



 

overman1 said:
Tamron said:
platformmaster918 said:
so game prices haven't gone up since then yet production costs have sky rocketed. I see why so many devs are closing

game prices have actually gone down,  people just like to conveniently forget about inflation and let their sense of entitlement run riot

I have being saying this for years...I really think the price of games should go up by $10- $15. Devs really need this. It has come to the point that for the average developer to suceed or even stay afloat in this industry. They have to sell at the very least 1.5 million copies for every game produced or they start losing money. We need as many developers as possible so that new and fresh ideas can easily arise...rather than re-ashing the same thing over and over again (yeah, I am looking at you Activison and EA) because it is the safest thing to do.

 

No, game prices need to go down to about $20-$30 and they would sell far far more - similar to how DVD and Blu ray prices. I pirate almost all my games because the prices are ridiculously high compared to other media - if prices were $20-$30 I would actually pay for those games as would millions of others. Charge less and sell more.





irstupid said:
Tamron said:
irstupid said:
I hate when people bring up inflation.

If I was making $10 an hour back when I bought an N64 and am still making $10 an hour today. The N64 was cheaper. Inflation means nothing. It's all relative to the individuals income.

If you were making $10 in 1996 and are still making $10 an hour at the same job in 2014, you've got bigger issues than how much you're paying for consoles, namely legal ones.

I'm not, heck back in N64 days i was too young to even have a job legally I think.  Pretty sure I was only like 12 or so when it released.

I'm just saying.  There are PLENTY of peope making around $10/hr in this day an age, and there were tons of people making $10/hr back then too.

To those $10/hr people $300 is more expensive than $200.  Inflation means NOTHING.

What someone with their pay grade could afford in 20 hours now takes 30 hours.  (excluding tax takin out of paycheck and tax included in cost of system)

Are these the same exact jobs you are takling about? because if not, your analogy doesnt make any sense...