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

Yes, but then the blame lies on the game, or perhaps the marketing, not the market itself.

4 million back then was absolutely huge for a non-bundled game, nowadays there are tens of franchises that can achieve such sales.

I would argue the blame moreso lies on gamers getting cheaper and feeling entitled. Our 1990's bretheren spent more than double what we do and those games sold for far more profit at that price point. Nowaways we want all kinds of features in games, pushing developers to crunch like crazy and not provide higher pay scales/bonuses that developers deserve because we think games should stay at $60 in perpetuity.

One reason for the lack of price equity is that games aren't terribly original anymore.  "Time for the annual Call of Duty, *yawn*".  Originality matters a lot in entertainment.  I would probably pay $60 for a physical version of Cuphead on Switch, because the game actually feels fairly original.  Who cares that it is in 2d?  But Cuphead is unusual nowadays in that it is a well made original game.

I actually didn't think the SNES had much originality at the time, but I was comparing it to the NES.  Compared to modern consoles it was brimming with originality:  Street Fighter 2, Earthbound, Mortal Kombat, FF4, Mario Paint, Actraiser, etc... all felt extremely original compared to what came before, and they were all considered significant releases at the time (i.e. not budget titles).  Today's major releases don't have this level of originality.