And with inflation taken into equation even if we ignore that the cost to make games have gone several orders of magnitude higher the price for the games is lower than they were 20 years or 30 years ago.
It would probably be an easier pill to swallow for more gamers if it was $70 across the board for games, but Nintendo and Xbox are still charging at max $60 for their first party games for the foreseeable future, if not the remainder of the generation alongside other major studios like Capcom and Sega. Causing more doubt in gamers if $70 is actually necessary.
Not to mention the scummy companies like EA and 2K charging $70 for their sports games when they're still riddled with microtransactions. It just causes even more questions as to whether $70 is justified.
Sony games (With only a handful of exceptions) Are not riddled with Microtransactions. When you buy something like God of War or Horizon or Ratchet & Clank or Demon's Souls or Returnal, you get a full game. Fullstop. Yeah, charging exorbitant prices on games that also have microtransactions and all that crap is bad, but for the most part Sony (And Nintendo) don't do that. And, since Inflation is a thing and game budgets are ballooning in order to keep up with demand, hiking the price up is perfectly reasonable.
Remember, video games are a luxury, not essential. Either pay the price or don't, but whining about it just makes you look petty and ignorant of actual economic factors involved.
This 'games shouldn't be 70 bucks' narrative is just baffling to me and always has been. Gamers as a whole are one of the most entitled groups of people I've ever met. a shame since videogames are my favourite medium by far.
My Console Library:
PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360
3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android
Top 6 this generation:
Bloodborne, Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice, God of War, The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, Dark Souls III, Red Dead Redemption II, Rock Band 4