The discussion about game prices for the past year just reeks of spoiled entitlement.

Inflation is a thing. Games are (generally) more complex end require more resources than ever to make.

To expect them to still cost $60, like they did on the 90’s, with no adjustment for inflation alone just shows how disconnected from reality this discussion is.

Yeah, I like cheap games too but I can not be upset that prices go up with time.

But the point is if the game is already 80 at launch and the upcoming DLC is 30, then it's 110...

vs 60 for the base game + 20 for the DLC

It's a 37,5% increase, for a hobby that was already extremely expensive a couple years ago

Saying a $60 base game having $20 DLC makes it the same as an $80 base game is just silly.

Is Pokopia now a $105 game because of the expansion pass? No.

"What's the difference in Nintendo charging $60 for FEFW and having a $25 expansion and just charging $80 for the game?"

Presumably the $60 full game + $25 expansion would have more content than the $80 game. You're also weirdly assuming $80 games won't have paid DLC.

Presumably, But what about actually? 

Pokopia doesn't fall under these examples because they did make you pay for DLC. And yes, it would be $105 if you want the full game. People wanted DLC for TOTK which was $70. That would have made it an $100 game to get the full experience intended by the developers. 

I don't take too much issue with the price point in and on itself; what I take issue with is that Nintendo started this market movement from a position of being the ones with by far the smallest budgets and highest profit margins on their 1st party offerings. It does smack of pure greed, especially given their messaging about making gaming for everyone, along with their already insane prices on accessories and refusing to lower software prices, even years after release. Granted, Nintendo doesn't have any other major division of operating income to fall back on for harder times, but their messaging has almost always collided with their actions. 

I have no big problems with 80$ as a base price for good games, I have huge problems with Nintendo's pricing history and market philosophy.

PS: As other have already mentioned, comparing a base game + DLC/Expansion with another base game is not a very good tool in the discussion. If I built a performance car and sold it at 75k, released a tuning kit for 15k, and then launched a follow-up car at 90k (with the same performance as the base first one), I'd be hard-pressed to call them equal value on release. 

Well we have an actually in Mario Kart World that was $80 and has 30 tracks. It has less tracks than base Mario Kart 8 and far less than MK8DX or MK8DX + Booster Pass. There is zero evidence $80 games will have as much content as $60 games + their DLC had.

So no the price increasing from $60 to $80 is not a guarantee that games will now have more content than they did before.

Additional content is additional content, you don't need it to have the "full game". This is all just very silly.

If they started charging $80 but gave everyone the season passes for free maybe you'd have a point, but that's not what's going to happen. It's a price increase simple as that.

Where's the DLC for Mario Kart world?

Two less tracks than MK8 equate to not having as much content when the game is open world? Nintendo initially wanted to put MKW on Switch1 but the game was too much for the hardware. MKW has 8 more playable characters, allows you to do multiplayer of 24 people which is twice as many as MK8. who's to say they don't add more content even without putting it behind a paywall?

 "Additional content is additional content, you don't need it to have the "full game"."

Yet again, did you miss the point of the initial post or are you just here to pick a fight?

The point is to match value for value. There is no difference in giving you all the content for a seemingly higher price and giving you base game and putting the rest of the game behind an extra pay wall. In the case of Pokopia, yeah, that's just a price increase. We'll see what happens with MKW and FEFW in the future.  

 "Additional content is additional content, you don't need it to have the "full game"."

Yet again, did you miss the point of the initial post or are you just here to pick a fight?

The point is to match value for value. There is no difference in giving you all the content for a seemingly higher price and giving you base game and putting the rest of the game behind an extra pay wall.