Poll: Would You Pay $70 For The Legend Of Zelda: Tears Of The Kingdom?

I still have a voucher so I will use it if TotK will be compatible with it

Yess, I have no problem but not more. Because it is a Zelda game and it must be really big not map the game must be big. Like Majora's mask.

For games produced for mobile based tech then no. It was bad enough with playstation and then xbox charging £70 for games but when all things considered they are next gen games which cost more money and time to make than Nintendo games do.

Hopefully if the price raise is true then the game is still included in the 2 for £84 voucher deal which basically makes the game £42, if not then I will get it physical either second hand a few weeks after release or wait for a deal later on in the year.

Fleece them Zelda fans, Nintendo. Fleece them good!

Why not. I almost paid $60 for Sonic the Hedgehog 3 back in 1994. I ended up with a cheaper alternative purchase at the time: a Caltoy Sonic the Hedgehog plush.

If that means no additional DLC, sure. I'm already paying that when you include DLC for their games.

Well, I managed to get mines for £45 so I'm not worried about this.
Its the games after it where the base rate will be £65-£70 that I will be most worried about.

Right now with this news I do not think it will be $70.

@Phillips455 Can I ask where from?!

@Preposterous Do you think the same of Xbox and PS5 games which have been this price for some time?

For a game that is likely going to have DLC and stuff, no. The reason games are getting more expensive despite us having better tools to make them is that the games industry at large has extremely high employee turnover rates so a huge amount of the more costly modern video games market is just training new employees after you've dumped the old ones into an asylum.

I found it for £49, which is $59 apparently.

It's not like you can't get it at discount, second hand, with vouchers, etc.

Since i didn't enjoy BoTW as much as I would have liked, nor finished the story, this would be a first time I would turn a Zelda game down. I would buy it if it's more like OOT and less like BoTW but since it's a sequel, it won't change too much. Will wait and see what they have to show us but as soon as I see breaking weapons then I'm out.

I mean I’ll obviously still buy it but if this is the new standard I’ll be skipping a lot more Pokémon and Mario sports titles

I sometimes forget that some games back in the 90s retailed for $80 or $90.

I’m gonna buy the CE and OLED so yeah. Gonna pay more than 70 bucks. Way more.

Grew up in the 90’s… gaming is still a cheaper luxury hobby.

You can’t stop inflation. So you either adapt to it or get priced out.

£48.85 in the UK for physical at Hit

https://www.hit.co.uk/buy/product/the-legend-of-zelda-tears-of-the-kingdom-nintendo-switch/dgc-zeldabow2ns.htm?gclid=CjwKCAiArY2fBhB9EiwAWqHK6tF0slC3f14vDRm8luIzYoyQ8e1BQSDtrFSJ4Ko3ci4qMeyjqPW37BoCsUUQAvD_BwE

So I may pre order it now just in case Nintendo do announce a raise in price in which id expect retailers to also do the same.

@HotGoomba Yess Banjo Tooie and maybe Perfect Dark to.

I wouldn't, but I generally don't buy games at release ever anymore - maybe one a year? I bought Elden Ring last year for full MSRP, and I plan on getting Street Fighter 6 at launch but that's it.

For the record, I don't think $70 is unreasonable for new games, Zelda or otherwise. It's just not a luxury I can afford often.

Back when the N64 came out, you could pay up to $70 for a game when they first came out. It was only around the end of the N64 era that the standard $50 seemed to set in.
Also keep inflation in mind. $70 back then was worth more than it is now.

Gonna buy the limited edition so I’ll pay more. If I was just to buy the game, I would buy physical as it’s also cheaper than Nintendos digital shop

I will likely wait to buy it second hand.

I wouldn't be thrilled about it, but I'll pay it. Choosing not to pay is just delaying the inevitable, as Nintendo games so rarely go on sale.

It's just the way the industry is headed, no sense being sour about it. Just be more choosy about what you buy.

Says the loony who's about to pay $100 for Theatrhythm.

@presenttense ah, it was £49.85 for me at shopto but I had a £5 voucher because they delayed my fire emblem engage order (arrived on the Monday after launch).

I'd pay £100 if they remove the weapon durability! 🤞🏻

the botw series proved itself worthy of the $70 price range for me personally, but should still be the exception and not the standard for nintendos case. not all their games are made equal, botw and odyssey are whole diff beasts

Depends on the content of the game. If it just seems like a repeat of Breath of the Wild, I'll probably wait for a sale or something. If it's the game I want it to be, then I guess I'll pay what I have to. $70 is getting uncomfortably high, though. You used to pay that much for a special edition.

@Phillips455 fab, thank you! That was a good find!

Nintendo can add microtransactions to their games and I guarantee there will be people on this site that will try to justify them and say why they're good. I don't know why a fair amount of people are ok with game companies making things worse for all of us.

I don't mind if the game's good, however, where i live theres a retailer (odly enough called Liverpool) that makes you a 10% off everytime you pre-order a fisical game with them so, yeah, not gonna miss this one

Absolutely no, I'm not a Nin simp or a cash machine.
I'll buy a used one it's much chipper.

This pricing increase situation has slowed down my purchases from a handful of games a month to 1 or less.

I find myself being extra choosey with the games I get at that price point or I just wait for a better price.

Makes me think about how DKC cost $75 and that was my “big” Christmas gift and I had no other SNES games to play that year unless I found a bargain bin game. (Rival Turf, NCAA basketball, etc)

Considering they:

1) Didn't lay off people
2) Decided to give their employees in Japan a 10% pay raise

I'm totally OK with spending $70 on a new game if it means supporting the game and the people who made it. Especially during a Pandemic witch is probably an Endemic at this point sadly.

But if something like Pikmin 4 is $70 then I don't know lol but I'm a suckered for Pikmin so maybe. This should be only for their major hits imo

Smash Ultimate was more expensive than other games when it came out in 2018 and nobody complaint

The amount of corporate kowtowing I've seen on this conversation is supremely distressing.
Offering to throw all the money at Daddy Nintendo Senpai won't make it become a close personal friend. At the end of the day, Nintendo is a money hungry corporation like the rest, nothing more.

Now about the price: if I squint my eyes really very hard, the $70 price tag makes sense for a game running in 4K on a HD console. But for a Switch game? lmao no.

Not sure about Zelda cause I wasn't the biggest fan of BOTW, but yeah if it was a game I wanted that went up £10 I would still get it, games are still the cheapest (and best) form of entertainment there is, well worth it.

Was expecting the price to go up as everything has become more expensive. Not happy about it, but what are you gonna do about it

It depends on the quality of the game. If it is better than BOTW then it may be worth the price. I will wait for reviews.

I'm lucky enough to be able to afford it, for one, and I expect to play the game for at least three times what it's worth, like BotW. It'll be a good investment !

Even with $70 new release price point across the board, gaming is still extraordinarily cheaper now than it was in the 90s. Disregarding that, it still doesn't bother me much, considering a 16% hike is peanuts compared to other rising costs I'm having to eat.

I was planning on spending $100 for the special edition anyway, so yeah

This, BotW, and Smash Ultimate are among the minority of Switch games in Australia (and Europe, it seems) with a AU$10 premium (compared to the standard AU$79.95 for "AAA" Nintendo-published titles). Third-party publishers tend to use the AU$89.95 pricing tier more often, but those games also tend to plummet in price rather quickly. And only a tiny number of games have been priced at $99.95 (which was standard during the Wii era, with PS3/360 games often retailing for $119.95!).

I wouldn't even mind a price increase if this meant that the game required a 32GB cartridge and/or that there would be no post-release patches or paid DLC, as publishers have become much too complacent with rushing unfinished products to shelves.

But I would also prefer that physical releases be delayed until the game's development is complete (patches and all), which is far more valuable to one who prioritises physical over "limited editions" that contain useless trinkets with an incomplete "version 1.0" build in the package (and sometimes no physical copy of the game at all!).

And I would forgive all of the above if Nintendo especially released complete editions of their games more often. I double-dipped on BotW and bought the Japanese revision (which includes all patches/DLC on the cart), even though this release was marked up so that it essentially cost the same as the base game + DLC.

People complain about a $10 price hike, but I know that I'd rather pay an extra $10 for a physical re-release of Smash Ultimate with the extra characters than an extra AU$85 (and that's not even including all of the costume DLC)!

No, because I just don't really want it. It wasn't so long ago that you could pre-order a new game for £30 (maybe not on Switch, but it still wasn't that long ago). £60 is OK if you really want something, but it's too much to take a chance on. £30 I'd get it, £60 not so much.

I’d pay $100. May can’t come soon enough.

@TheDragonDAFan Guess you weren't here when Nintendo released an overpriced toy with a useless function that could have easily been implemented into the game itself. Of course I'm referring to "Zelda Skyward Sword" Loftwing amiibo.

People here were actually saying they were proud to spend the extra money for the Qol feature of "Teleporting instantly out of a dungeon."

Yes, but reluctantly, I didn’t like it when PlayStation and Xbox did it, and they had higher graphical performance, not saying that’s all that matters of course.

Only if i must to. Otherwise I would try to find cheaper one.

I think 60 bucks should remain the top price for a game, barring DLC. This game is most likely going to get some DLC so the price could go over 100 coupled with that. I think that's a bit much for one video game.

Yes I'm aware of some games having hundreds of dollars "worth" of DLC, doesn't make this much better lol.

Though to be fair, Zelda is usually one of those franchises that deserves it at least. It's such a high quality series.

How much has the average Pokémon go player spent? Fortnite or call of duty fan? Free games with micro transactions, or every year buying a $60 and then dlc. But then a zelda game comes out every 6 years and we going to complain about $10.

That’s about £50-55 in real money, not a big increase from other games

BOTW has always been € 69.99 in the European eShop, which is currently US$ 75.

I will buy it physical and order online. Doubt its gonna be that expensive. Even if, people will buy it regardless, me included. Is it worth it? prolly not

I'm not into botw but i would if I was excited for a game that I would dump hundreds of hours into and is incredibly entertaining, seems like a decent return on investment. Not advocating for it all the same

Depending how much content will be in a game. it would probably be worth at that price. if said game doesn't have enough features to be worth that 70$ price tag. then no it isn't.
now if this was leaking a special edition of some sort, that would be a different story.

I loved BOTW, but no I will not pay that much for a game. I'll wait for a physical sale somewhere years down the line. I'm fine waiting.

I would pay, but I was already concerned about affording it. I'll get it after the summer.

I was fine with BotW costing extra, I felt more cheated by the DLC if anything. Didn't feel worth it at the time, maybe if I was replaying it.

Yes. My electricity bills have gone up 500% in 3 years, so I think I can stand a 15% price increase on this one too.

Yeah… I’m gonna sit out on this one until I can take advantage of a sale or a store’s BOGO deal to get it for less (or possibly for free), that’s how I get most of my newer games these days.

Also, do we know if the price hike only affects international customers or is Japan getting one too?

I will make my decision after the direct.

Nah, skipping it myself. I'll be okay till the price drops or a cheaper deal comes along. Even better if a friend has it, I can just play their copy.

There are plenty of games to be played until then.

No. Nintendo's going to have to release a new or upgraded console if they expect me to pay more for their games.

Unfortunately, yes I would.😕

Ooor. Just buy some vouchers before the price increase.

Considering Nintendo published games never really go on sale, I’d just eat the cost.

Out of my PS5 games I’ve only paid 70 twice. For Horizon FW and GOWR. Other than that I’ve waited for sales for everything.

Most I've ever paid for a Switch game is £42.95. If Zelda is a little over that I'll bite, and I doubt it will be over £50 if you shop around.

@PrinsPaddestoel : AU$90 (the RRP for TotK) is now worth US$62, and considering that most vendors will be selling the game for AU$79 (with at least one taking pre-orders at AU$75), it ultimately works out to be even cheaper than the US release, especially as our prices are almost always inclusive of GST (Goods and Services Tax), whereas I am lead to believe that some US states add taxes at the point of sale, meaning that the game may ultimately work out to be higher than US$60, which is rarely spoken about whenever conversations around game prices are had.

70 bugs for the sequel to the best videogame? I'd also pay 700.

In Canada, BotW is still $79.99, so I guess yes.

I bought Smash bros for $90 on the Eshop with the dlc

Let's say I spend HALF the amount of time playing TotK that I spent playing BotW. That would still mean, at $70, that I'm paying about twenty-five cents per hour.

Still sounds like a deal to me.

A lot of folks seems to say that $70 is fair for the higher-end consoles with 4K graphics, but shouln't the value of the product be measured in the game itself? We used to happily pay 50 bucks for 8-Bit games, and that was in 1980's money. That doesn't necessarily mean that I want to see Nintendo going to a $70 standard, but I don't think that they should be held to a different standard.

I don't understand why this is even a discussion. The eShop version of BotW goes for €69,99 in Europe. So it's very likely that TotK will cost the same.

For me, it's a small price to pay for the next installment in my all time favorite game series, which I'll be playing for 250-300 hours.

Considering I am only about five hours into Breath of the Wild and have extensive backlog across several systems, I can wait for some form of a discount….

Didn't buy or play the last Zelda. Graphics looked awful.

I would just use a voucher, but yeah. Games (and everything else) are getting more expensive. Even more so on the SONY and XBOX side of things.

@Sam_TSM Nintendo in Kyoto is one of the best employers in Japan. They pay their workers a decent wage and seem to have some of the highest happiness ratings in the country. Can't speak for the other divisions, but the main headquarters seems to do good by their employees.

Since it is likely to be my last major Nintendo purchase, sure. Innovative gaming on the AAA front is dying. Indies only for me.

I ordered it off of Amazon for $60. Hopefully they won't raise it since it's already locked in at $60.

Here in Wisconsin, US, Walmart regularly sells physical copies of first party Nintendo games for $50. No way am I paying $70 this generation. Switch's successor, sure, maybe, but not now. It'll be $50 at Walmart, or maybe $60 if Nintendo sells it for $70.
Has anyone else seen Walmart or other retailers in their area selling physical copies of games for less than the standard $60?

Yes. Seems reasonable for a game that took 5-6 years to develop, and is the sequel to BotW.

Other retailers are still listing it for $59.99. Wonder if Nintendo let slip they're planning on releasing a Switch with newer hardware? They typically wouldn't jump the price unless a new generation was being released... it is 2023, the OLED came out in 2021 and the Lite (plus V2) in 2019.

@UltimateOtaku91 dude, wtf are you talking? You are like a tech nerd without having real knowledge and using that as a excuse to not buy something. You are the worst kind of people.

No, but it's because I'm not a big Zelda fan. Metroid prime 4 though? Fiiiiiiine.

@BrianJL The value of a game stopped being worth the price tag the moment companies started saying "Release now. Patch later."

Here's the thing. If consumers didn't get screwed over so much by corporations, I genuinely believe many of them wouldn't have problem with the price tag.

Corporations have ruined their relationship with consumers, and as such many of them are okay with giving the middle finger right back.

The cost of game development is going up. The cost of living for the developers is going up (and Nintendo has announced a 10% pay increase for its staff). Inflation is pushing up material prices in ways that it didn't previously. Unfortunately, we're going to pay more now for a game than we did 20 years ago. And I'm happy to do so under the circumstances.

Zelda has proven itself as a series that prioritises high quality, again and again.
I wouldn't want to pay so much for every new game, but Zelda is special.

Games and indeed consoles haven’t jumped in price at the same rate as wages. Back when I was in primary school OoT wasn’t much cheaper so I think that’s completely fair

I live in Canada we already pay 79.99 for games without tax for Switch games and Xbox Series and PS5 games cost 89.99. So yes I would pay more since we all know Nintendo games rarely go on sale and when they do it's years down the line.

I probably only buy 3-4 games on day one every year, so the extra $40 a year isn’t enough to prevent me from buying a game if I’m super interested. With TotK though, I was thinking of waiting on it anyway. BotW, while it is a really well-made game, is actually one of my least favorite Zelda’s. Maybe the hype will eventually get me, or maybe the reviews will convince me to pick it up in it’s first week, but it’s odd that this is the least excited I’ve ever been for a Zelda launch.

I've ore ordered it in the UK for £48 and I'm happy to pay that. Biggest game of the year for me

I've never paid $60 for a game, so I'm certainly not going to pay $70.

Man, a price increase like this in Canada would look a whole lot more intimidating. Imagine coming in here from America or the UK and seeing games in stores going for $100!

I will wait 2 years for it to get a big discount sale….. for $40. 🤣. I have a huge backlog and don’t need to play games on day one.

Since I live in the UK I won’t be purchasing Zelda in $. For non US gamers the poll is really pointless.

@Platinum-Bucket The struggle is all too real my friend!

@UltimateOtaku91 I always order my physical games from Hit! They’re really good.

@GoshJosh Now, that's fair. I do agree that a $70 should be very polished and bug free at the least. I would absolutely factor such things into the value equation.

People don’t need to like it, but it is happening everywhere and has nothing to go with graphics. The cost of many things have gone up, businesses included. To offset this, consumer prices get raised. That’s all there is to it.

This will not deter me from paying $70 for TotK.

It’s like people forgot Smash and BotW are €69.99 on the eshop since launch.

And yes the physical ones never went above €59.99, so who knows same applies for the new Zelda game too.

More misdirection by Nintendo life, the thread should read.

"Would you pay $70 for the digital version of Zelda tears of the kingdom"

More faux outrage for clicks as usual.

@BrianJL : Yeah, I think that's a pretty stupid argument, even more so as we're talking about a AAA system exclusive here.

On a similar note, I don't think that the Switch versions of multiplatform games should necessarily cost less just because they also happen to be available on PC/PS5/Xbox, particularly if the content is otherwise mostly identical. The Switch has the distinction of doubling as a handheld device, which in itself makes games on the platform better value for money (as, in most cases, you're essentially getting a handheld and home console game for the price of one, whereas in past console generations you would have to buy the game twice if you wanted both).

And if people would rather have the games in their best presentation, then there's always the PC and home console versions that they can default to.

As much as I default to Ultra HD/standard Blu-ray for film/TV due to their superior A/V presentation, I overwhelmingly prefer gaming on Switch as I find handheld gaming to be far more comfortable and enjoyable (and the fact that I can do it almost anywhere at any time). I played the PC version of DOOM (2016) after completing the Switch port, and I found the PC version to be rather underwhelming (unimpressive, even) considering all that the developers were able to accomplish on less capable hardware. And that's a trade-off that I am more than happy to take.

The thing that’s interesting is that it increases by $10USD, but also only increases by $10CAD, so this games way cheaper in Canada than the US.

(Way, as in $3, which is still decent)

I'll NEVER buy a $70 game. Nintendo just lost me as a customer. DOA. Bad business practice. Not consumer friendly......

Ok fine I'll buy it day 1. Wouldn't miss it for anything 🙃. Then again, I've had it pre-ordered forever so it was $60 when I did.

@dew12333 Absolutely.

Not for a Switch game. I wouldn't even pay that for a PS5 game. If they're charging top price, they need to update their mobile system and make it worth buying. Thing is, people will still buy it because its a Zelda game.

@Phillips455 you don’t care that a president might be being set for future game prices which you have not gotten a deal yet on.

I remember buying Battletoads in 1991 for $75. $70 for Zelda in 2023 is a no-brainer.

These are true Tears of the Kingdom.

In all seriousness, being in Mexico, I already pay those $70, that's what I paid for Kirby and the Forgotten Land last year. Do I feel ripped off? Not at all.
As I said in the original story, during the pandemic, Switch games could have costed 1700 pesos (about $85) over here. I remember Paper Mario: The Origami King and New Pokémon Snap costing that at launch.

It's a marquee zelda title. It's inevitable that it will eventually be re-released as a player's choice discount title.

I'm old enough to have paid £65 in the early 90s for Street Fighter 2 on the SNES which must be about a gazillion quid in today's money. (Possibly £125 ish according to internet) $70 or £70 sounds a lot but there's two of us in our house who will 100% TOTK. It is a lot, but in terms of cost for overall time spent, probably actually pretty good

BotW is my favourite game of all time. If this was €80 I'd be buying it. If there's a special edition I'll likely go for that.

I paid EUR 64.95 here in the Netherlands for Breath of the Wild back in 2019. Mario Odyssey was EUR 59.95.

Different pricing for different games is very normal. Just look at the pricing in Japan for Nintendo first parties, it's all over the place. That every game is $60 is just a US thing.

@RasandeRose

Holy crap dude?!! What country are you in?

Here in the states my light bill has went up about 15%. But 500%??

@sixrings ehm, that's actually what I said? The price change doesn't directly affect my order of zelda but I'm worried about its impact in later games.

I don't see where any confusion would lie in my original message?

@Tober No. The average price for a AAA game in the US is 70$ now. 60$ was 10 years ago, and 50$ 20 years ago.

When Breath of the Wild came out it was $60.

A dozen eggs was $1.40. Now a dozen eggs is $4.99, and I'm still buying them.

So yes, I'll pay $70 for Tears of the Kingdom.

I would hope they have a reason for why it's $70. If it's on a new cart that can hold it, then sure. If not, then I'm concerned for the future.

I liked BotW but I didn't love it as much as many others. So since I don't want to support an uncalled price increase I would happily wait until I stumble upon a sale.

@ElRoberico inflation is a thing.

A new title on an aging console shouldn't cost the same as a new title on next gen hardware. The principle of it just shows Nintendo, yeah, we'll pay anything. I love Zelda but am not looking forward to this release enough to shell out 70

@DripDropCop146 I've been buying AAA games for Nintendo consoles since the 90s, and they were almost always $59.99. I think some really big SNES RPGs retailed for more.

@ElRoberico Inflation is enough of a reason, IMO. The dollar is worth significantly less than it was five years ago.

@OrtadragoonX

Sweden. It's only in the winter though 😉

@peterbasement The difference between eggs and games is one is more needed than the other.

Food and gas price hikes in the USA are hurting people, not helping them. The middle class is shrinking, and those on the low end of that class suffer more with the hike in prices for basic needs.

Sorry, I just think you could have used a better comparison to justify the price instead of something that most people rely on for basic subsistence.

I wonder if the game wont be compatible with the vouchers

BotW was already 70€ in Europe, I am surprised that was 60$ and everyone is talking about its price. And I got it on 2017 with DLC for Wii U (I got my Switch in 2019) and last year I wanted to play it again on the go so I had to buy it again for Switch unfortunately. Glad it's only on ine console this time!

@WaffleRaptor01 That's a fair point. The metaphor fails when stretched. My point was that inflation is plain to see in fuel, groceries, utilities, etc., and it shouldn't be too surprising (even though it's upsetting) that prices for non-essentials also increase. After all, Nintendo is paying for fuel and utilities, and its employees are buying groceries - perhaps the $70 price for AAA games will result in more pay for Nintendo developers and other employees, meaning more grocery money in their pockets.

You must not really be interested by the game in the first place if a 10$ difference makes you change your mind.

If 10$ is really a major increase for somebody, well then maybe just wait for a sale or buy the game second hand. There are many legal solutions to get a game at a more affordable price.

For those in the UK you can get it for £48:85 on shopTo

Simple answer, no! Games have been $60 for the past 15 years or so, ever since Xbox 360 and PS3 came out, and I do not want another price increase. I have a few Zelda games I like, and I can wait for a better price and play those older ones in the time being.

I already buy games on a budget (wait for sales or price drops), so I have to be really selective over full price games. I have to really want to play it, if that means waiting on Zelda and playing something else, I'll do that.

Last year, I only bought one full price game on release (not including two I got as gifts as they were gifts), while I like Zelda, there might be another game I might enjoy more. Always been a causal Zelda fan, I do like the games.

It will cost less physical anyway.

I think i will get it for around 55 bucks on day 1 in local store.

Botw is at a higher price even now

@Sunsy Game prices haven't changed much in 30 years, so i don't see the problem with price increase especially now when everything else have increased in price last year.

And besides. This is the digital price and you will get it cheaper physical.
Physical is always cheaper than digital, otherwise local stores would refuse to sell them.

Not day 1, likely after a while if I start saving and when I feel more comfortable to paying that much.

I don't agree with the increase but if the game is as good as BotW I probably won't miss out on it.

Some of yall are weirdly eager to pay more for video games...

I buy maybe 1 or 2 full priced AAA games a year. Last year it was literally just Elden Ring and GoW: Ragnarok. So yeah, I'll get it at launch, no biggie.

sure won't.

I am unwilling to pay $70 for most games, and Zelda isn't on that very short list. In the last year or so, really only God of War Ragnarok and Final Fantasy 16 have existed on that list for me.

Tears of the Kingdom is one of the few games I'd buy regardless of the price (within reason, of course).

If Nintendo starts charging higher prices for their games, though, I'm going to start being more selective about what I buy from them overall.

I paid $79.99 USD for TUROK: DINOSAUR HUNTER when it launched as it was sold-out everywhere that had it for $69.99 USD (#CartridgeTax). I want TotK just as bad. So I guess if it's $69.99 USD I will pay it. However, with most games I do wait for a sale. I only pre-order around 2 to 3 games a year.

@UltimateOtaku91 i’m sure making breath of the wild took more hours of creative work than most of playstation or xbox’s games took to make.

@Ventilator I do buy physical and digital games on both Nintendo systems and PC, most likely if I do get Zelda, it would be physical anyway hopefully it will be cheaper when I get around to getting it.

Most games I get are either sale price or a price drop, saving full price day one games for one game I want to play the most. Even if that game might not be Zelda, I'm ok with waiting to play it.

@CharlieGirl While I'm not happy with the increase and also think some people might be taking it too well, the way you replied isn't really the way to do it. It just sounds like a tantrum.

I guess this is how they're providing their Japanese employees with 10% raises. I don't want to sound like an angry old person but everything cost more, prices keep going up, everything is increasing but my paycheck.

I’m still hoping it was an error, but when Breath of the Wild came out it was my only game and I would have gladly paid the $400 for a Switch/BOTW to play the game. $70 is nothing compared to that.

Reading some of these comments makes me want to moan. Games have never been cheaper! As $60 USD is not the same as $60 USD in the mid-00s or even $60 in the 90s. Games were far more expensive in the 1990s. The equivalent of spending $60 USD in 2006 is the same as spending $88.33 USD today. To put that in further perspective spending $60 USD 1990 is the same as spending $136.25 USD today. So, to put that in further perspective spending $70 USD today is cheaper than spending $60 USD in 2006. And might I remind people salaries were also lower at those times too as the average personal income in the US in 2023 is $63,214 USD, the average income in 2006 was $59,600 USD and $50,200 USD in 1990. So, the average salary has gone up year after year in the US, yet game prices have stayed the same.

Making games have gotten more and more expensive (about $1-6 million USD in 2006, yet it is over $80 million USD in 2023 to make a AAA video game), yet the actual price of games has stayed the same. People wonder why companies have used insane DLC practices and live services that is why. Now, some companies are just straight greedy, there is no denying that. But, the expectation that games will always cost $60 USD is in itself insane.

Will this mean I spend less on games? Probably as inflation has infected every part of our daily lives. But, in general I've spent less on games year after year as I've gotten older in general. Those having a temper tantrum because the new Zelda might, and I repeat might, be $70 USD need some perspective.

I'm confused by all this complaining. This is a mainline Zelda game we're talking about. I'm not even a Zelda fan myself, but BotW alone is considered a masterpiece or at least an extremely good title by a lot of Nintendo gamers, and on top of that it has so much content.

I don't understand why Kirby Star Allies or Mario Golf are full priced games, but to complain about an additional $10 for TotK seems a bit overdramatic to me.

@LoroTalby
Yeah. I splurged at launch and pre-ordered the BOTW Deluxe Edition that came with the Sheila Slate case, cloth map, and soundtrack. I rarely buy those editions, but wanted to celebrate the Switch's release with it. I wonder if they will announce a similar edition for TotK today.

@Sam_TSM Don’t you think it’s strange that games prices have been the same for 30 years, but the cost to develop them has increased exponentially in that time frame?

A standard game at $70 is a hard NO from me, for any system, any developer, and at any time.

I'll either be priced out of the next gen, or stick with backlog and Indies + sales.

As it is my family and friends pass our games around - that will continue and I will play ToTK for free.

just $70?

...$80 is the average price for a new game here in México U_U

If I can use one of my 2 for $100 vouchers then I'll get day one. If not, I'll probably wait for the reviews or see if it gets re-released on Switch 2 like Breath of the Wild went from Wii U to Switch.

@SonOfDracula It is no conspiracy really. Developers and publishers have been wanting to increase the cost of a new AAA game for over a decade. There has been general discussion of this in the games media since 2014. But, actual developers have been discussing this since the late-00s when game development cost ballooned with the HD twins.

Now, I'm not advocating that games get more expensive to buy... but we've seen publishers use increasingly more drastic practices to recover that development cost... so... this should had happened over a decade ago if I'm being honest.

Absolutely no chance. I'll get it secondhand or during a sale but $70 is my line in the sand that I will not pay.

I think Nintendo moving into the 70$ price point with out any new hardware really I don’t think the games should be more. Since xbox and PlayStation are on next gen I think the 70 to 80$ price point is understandable. If there is new hardware, then a bigger price would be something to look into.

I'm just annoyed I could have pre-ordered this for $60. If pre-orders were $70 from the beginning I wouldn't be annoyed at all. Given the global inflation over the last 2 years, it makes sense they would make new releases $70 moving forward.

@Audiogore0733 It could just had been a glitch as Nintendo has not confirmed the $70 price point. But, based on how inflation and cost of development has gone up the past 30 years... games should had gone from $60USD to $70USD over a decade ago. The fact game prices have stayed the same for this long (and actually gone down from where they were on the, SNES and N64 where a game being $70 was rather normal) is bonkers. I mean a new copy of Shaq Fu was $64.99 at launch in 1990s money... Shaq Fu? I feel bad for 90s kids.

Source: https://i.redd.it/k5n5p1pbkmn01.png

We paid 70 for breath of the wild and we already knew that the price for tears of the kingdom will be the same. I don't see the problem

Breath of the wild was 70 euro in Ireland when it launched, so… Yep!

Zelda is probably my favourite series, so I answered yes, but reluctantly. If other games increase in price, I'll end up buying fewer “AAA” games at launch and buy more indies whilst waiting for a price drop or to buy them second-hand.

I assume developers can charge less than in the 90s, inflation adjusted, despite games costing more to make because the market size and number of sales has increased faster.

I mean, BotW was already 70€ on eShop in Europe and I didn't see many, if any, complaints back when it came out. Plus, Nintendo's first party stuff is voucher compatible and NA finally got the voucher deal back so if you decide to buy from eShop, you get it for $50 regardless of if it's $60 or $70. I don't really see what the big deal here is.

I'm betting that the cost of the game is due to either three things: The cost of everything in inflation or development costs of the game being delayed a couple times, or the content is going to be very big this time around. They've been working on it for how many years? 3 almost 4 years now (kinda typical for the Zelda series)

If it’s a complete game without dlc, sure. BotW ended costing $80 because of the paid dlc

Yes I don't mind. The cost of game development is way higher than it was back in the day, and that's not even accounting for inflation. The fact they've held onto the $60 price tag for so long is impressive.

I grew up in the era where cartridges retailed between $70 and $90 for SNES games. This is a mainline Zelda game so it'll be worth it. Hopefully.

No. Never. No game deserves $70 + $DLC (future).
Thats because i love Steam (pc, tv, steam deck, etc). The games are cheaper than nintendo consoles.

Bye bye Zelda

90% of my game time is playing Steam
10% playing nintendo.

Today i don't see reasons why i should buy a (next gen) videogame. Steam is bigger and better than xbox, Sony and Nintendo.

Steam...is all generations ...past, present, future, all games.

I love the Zelda series but BotW didn't do it for me so I was going to pass regardless of price.

I remember paying $99.99 CAD for Chrono Trigger in 1995. Apparently that's about $172 CAD today due to inflation, or $128 USD. No regrets though!

@johnvboy They're really poking the hornet's nest today. Mind you that's not too difficult with such a hypersensitive crowd....there's not even been any confirmation that this is the price yet either.

I've seen this happen on here before, loads of people up in arms but it amounted to nothing (apart from clicks and views obviously...)

@johnvboy What it should say is "Remember when you got your hopes up for Mass Effect on switch? Yeah, the person who listed this was also clumsy."

Not sure what all the complaining is for, I am not sure if you have noticed but literally everything has gone up in price. Add to the fact that games have been similar prices for a long time, this has been coming for a long time.

One thing I would say is that I feel sometimes the prices for smaller games cost too much money and if you put into context what goes into Zelda and a smaller game, then maybe the smaller games should cost less.

@dew12333 buy games on Steam...is cheaper and cheaper each new year. My new games on Steam..(february):

• Devil May Cry 5 (complete): $9
• Melty Blood Type Lumina: $4
• Guilty Gear strive (complete): $14
• Vampire Survivors: $2
• Elden Ring: $19
• Ori and the Blind Forest Complete Edition: $4

@sevex Actually that's bad math, because game prices haven't actually changed. 60 usd has been the standard since the snes. 100 cad was about 72 usd back then, which was a bit more, but not out of the question for alow print run rpg in the wild west of video game exchange rate prices.

This isn't to criticize you, because inflation IS insane, but the reason this is a change is because something that has been in place for a long time might shift. For me that indicates that game designers are going in what I consider a bad direction. And personally I'd prefer that Nintendo doesn't follow.

@Wexter - LOL @ Shaq Fu. Being a huge Orlando Magic fan when he debuted in the NBA, I got that game. Don’t remember what I paid for it though. I do remember, however, paying $70-$80 US for games like FFIII, Chrono Trigger & Mario RPG on the SNES, plus some N64 games like NBA Hangtime and Turok.

Depends on how many new elements are in the game.

@Rykdrew How did you get Elden Ring for 19? I didn't see it drop that low

@Rykdrew I've gotten 700 hours out of Elden Ring, so far. If they had asked $70, that's still a steal for the amount they are asking. 700 hours of movies would cost exponentially more; consider that we are still enjoying a hobby that is cheaper than many others, comparatively.

@Poodlestargenerica Elden Ring was never $19, even at key resellers. Sounds off, to me!

@Poodlestargenerica in my country it was $19. You can change the store (by country)

This is why I always like to be a year or two behind thanks to my backlog. Always get great deals come Black Friday, or individual store sales throughout the year.

My final two cents for today: If you truly enjoy and value the time, work, and skill that a dev team puts into their game, then you'll support them at their asking price. If you don't want to support the dev teams you love, then you won't buy at their initial asking price.

@Divide_and_Wander I was just a touch too young to remember buying games in the 1990s (I do remember them being rather expensive). I inherited a large collection of Nintendo Power magazines and I remember flipping through older issues gawking at the cost of some of these games... gaming in the 1990s was not cheap when you consider the buying power of $60 back then and the general lower minimum wage (anywhere between $3.80 to $5.15 USD) so I tip my hat to you kids who slaved away to afford those games back then.

@SonOfDracula $19 is better than $70 for the same game time!

of course i will pay the price for totk..

@Rykdrew kinda jealous to be honest! I'm all for supporting devs, but when someone is practically giving away an awesome game for $20 bones I'm biting down on that deal!

I mean I'm all for paying $70 for a game, but a deal is a deal.

it took 5 years for breath of the wild price to come down so no if it is 70 it will be that way for 4 or 5 years so unless you can get a used game waiting will not help

@DripDropCop146, The topic is about Nintendo first party pricing. I do believe that is $60 today no?

Donkey kong country on SNES was 70 on launch 30 years ago...so they went back down in price for a while? And ninty is a blood sucking corporation all this time? Im lost

The Legend of Zelda sold for $49.99 in 1986.

I understand there's a lot of worry about money right now, but I'd direct that frustration at the oil and gas companies personally and not Nintendo.

If you sold The Legend of Zelda today, allowing for inflation that has naturally taken place between 1986 and 2023, it would cost $109 !

That's before you even factor in the perceived value of the game versus Tears of the Kingdom.

If you're struggling for $10 I do sympathise with you, but the problem with cost of living right now isn't with Nintendo's pricing. Not even close. They are cheap compared to NES and SNES!

On principe alone, it infuriates me. It’s have been much easier to swallow if it coincided with a new hardware iteration but mid cycle it’s weird. It doesn’t look good and comes off as “people will pay it so do it.”

That being said, I know the game will be gushing with quality so I know I’m getting my money’s worth. If it was almost any other series I’d not be anywhere near as accepting. Says a lot about Nintendo quality!

I'm starting to wonder if the cost of living crisis is only in the UK?! lol

These are some frankly ludicrous comments about Nintendo's prices.

How much more is a pint of milk today versus this time last year? How much more is your heating bill?!

@Kirbysonic I am absolutely not going to judge someone on their money situation. And I'm really not. But I literally could FIND ten pounds just walking down the street a few times between now and May...

I won't pay £70 for ANY game and if that's the road they wanna go down then I'll be skipping this one until I find it cheaper

@nocdaes Visit LA sometime

@dew12333
I can't agree with that reasoning.
Sure prices have not gone up for a while now, but overall profits still have.
There was some real market grow for the last decade and during the pandemic especially, gaming companies made a fortune.
That in an industry where production cost isn't much of a factor.

So be careful with that, as far as I can see this is very simply what the industry wants you to believe.

All that being said, I personally always sinply evaluate whether the game is worth the price to me. 70€ games like this are almost never worth it to me, however this would be one of the few exceptions.

@Wexter Nowadays there are so many good games and little time to play.

For me, there will be no room for $60/$70 games.

I have many good games to play.

And honestly, I've played a lot of Zelda in my life. I'm sick of playing Zelda and other old franchises over and over and over again.

I want to play new things. I never played Elden Ring. There's Uncharted Trilogy on Steam, super cheap, and I've never played it.

I want to play games I've never played. I'm quitting playing the same old games. They don't amuse me anymore, I'm sick of it.

@Rykdrew I think that is fair. For me it is more time commitment. Can I justify spending $60/$70 when I need to also maintain family commitments, my job, and my other hobbies. I find as I've gotten older I just can't justify that the same way I could in my 20s where staying up till 4am to eek out that final dungeon was justifiable with my low life commitments.

I find Zelda, Pokemon and others more like comfort food. They bring me back to a time where things were simpler and my life was not as hectic. But, I can also see it the other way with people who want to unwind with new experiences. It's all good.

But, man $20 for Elden Ring that is a steel and I'm impressed by your thrifting skills on that one.

People tend to forget that Xbox and PlayStation games will inevitably depreciate or go on sale at a price point that’s actually enticing. Game Pass in particular is a very cost effective way of getting your hands on new releases if you’re an enthusiast.

To be honest, I think Tears of the Kingdom will back up the asking price if £70 is real, but that’s an exception for Nintendo amid the Wii U ports and filler Mario sports titles.

@Rykdrew I'd have to buy something to play them on then, not sure it'll work if I do that. .
In my younger years I did buy something different to a nintendo console in order to fill all my gaming needs, but now I am over 50 I just don't have so much time so can easily keep myself busy.

I was just reading your comment to Wexter and agree with lots you said there. I wouldn't say I am bored of franchises yet but I do love new things. As much as I like that we now have lots of choose from all these 'smaller' games being developed I really struggle with how they seem to copy so much from others. We just need more innovation in the industry.

I think I'll only buy it at launch if they completely drop the breakable weapons mechanic, if not I'll wait til it goes cheap

@CammyUnofficial cartridges were always more expensive. It’s part of why the PS1 obliterated the N64.

No, i would not.

@Kirgo Based on the fact that I paid £50 for games a long time ago I just it makes sense that they would cost more now. I understand your logic especially basing it on how many games they sell now to then. But we definitely have more cars on the roads now and petrol is still loads higher than it was then.
So I still feel that no matter what logic you apply prices always seem to go up, not down.

I do whole heartedly agree on 'worth', that is what basis I use all the time for buying games.

@nocdaes I think for a lot of people it is more an emotional argument. The classic "how dare the man make this thing I enjoy more expensive! It has been this price for a long time, it should be this way always!" The man yells at tree argument I like to call it. But, @SonOfDracula does have a point. In some major cities like LA, New York, London even small cities like Toronto cost of living has been nasty for people trying to make ends meat for a decade now ($2000-3000 a months rent in New York City is not uncommon). But, then again cost of living has not gone that far up in more suburban areas and rural areas. It has hit the urban folk quite hard! The obvious answer would be to move out of those areas, but that is easier said than done for most folks.

So, while we can look at this logically and go $10 is not that much of a leap and in the grand scheme of things it's not. But, I can see for those already struggling to remain in the hobby this extra step can be what pushes people out if they already are in some of these areas.

But, for everyone else who is just mad for the sake of being mad to maintain the status-quo... those are the ones that could use the ice cold bucket of water that is gaming is at the cheapest it has ever been on a consumer level.

I paid $70 for Zelda in the '90s, and I'll pay $70 for Zelda again! Like any rational consumer, I wouldn't LIKE it, but prices go up. It's what they do. It's kind of amazing they ever went down from the N64 cost.

BOTW is a great deal at $60.

Link’s Game Boy HD port is not worth $60.

No, because I don’t like Zelda. But I would pay 1000 USD for a new Donkey Kong game.

@delt75
They won't raise the price. Legally can't either.

@WiltonRoots,

So true, everybody up in arms about nothing, as it's not confirmed, but Nintendo life sure knows it's audience on here.

@Wexter,

People being mad just for the sake of it, on here, the sheer suggestion of it is pure insanity.

For Zelda and Metroid I would pay the higher price. Luckily I already had them preordered at lower prices. Any other games I will wait for sales as always. It likely won’t matter in the long run after they reset our currencies to CBDC.

@johnvboy I know and if you dare having a difference of opinion "you're a troll." But, as I did state in my post there are people who do have legitimate grievances if the price is real and they're already struggling. But, I mean just like how going to the cinema is luxury so is gaming. They should get their house in order first before looking at buying a game at launch.

The amount of ignorance and software snobbery in here is breathtaking. As if a Switch game requires less ability, time and effort to make than a next gen 4k visual style game. There is no difference. Most 4k 'hyper real' visuals are actually a bit easier to make than stylized original assets. There are so many tools, texture libraries and procedural help to make 'realistic' games it's not even funny. I can imagine Nintendo have spent a huge amount of time, had people producing new assets, creating textures and designing game modes and new levels. There is no difference between this or any other game.
£70 is pretty steep, but then the global supply shortages, manufacturing, wage increases, transport cost increases etc. etc. think yourselves lucky that games aren't £100+ nowadays.
Still I get it £70 is a big number, but it is what it is. No-one will force you to buy it. You might have to wait for second hand copies to turn up. I loved BoTW, I WILL be getting this too.

@Wexter,

Very true, nobody likes prices going up, and even though this price is far from confirmed as yet, it's just a fact of life.

Everyone saying they have got their pre-orders in (like me at £49)...

Remember as per the terms and conditions, (on Amazon, Shopto, thegamedcollection and Hit) that if Nintendo does indeed raise the price of the physical copy of TOTK to something the store/website wasn't expecting, they have the right to cancel your pre-order as it is mispriced.

Then relist it at the correct price that they can afford to sell it at. Obviously stores buy in bulk from Nintendo but they will still have profit margins to reach to make it worth selling.

Roll on 10pm. 🙂

@dew12333
I just don't think that prices in general going up is much of a reason to accept it.
Other cases are just as debatable with some industries having solid reasons for the price increase, while others don't. So it is debatable from case to case.

The fact that it just happens, in itself, shouldn't be a reason for acceptance though. It is just based on whataboutism.

It is usually not an issue though, as long as you can just not buy something that you find too expensive without running into problems.

I paid 70 dollars 25+ years ago for an SNES cart of Street Fighter 2 Turbo. Game prices are very fair, particularly for non special or collectors editions. With inflation in the last year, it's probably about time standard releases go up to 69.99.

@Rykdrew I've put almost 400 hours into Elden Ring and I am playing it again. Be sure and don't skip that one.

@Kirgo,

It's not a case of accepting it or not, if prices go up you have a simple choice, buy on release day or wait a while.

But as I said nothing is set in stone as yet, and pretty sure there will be cheaper physical copies on sale at launch.

Answer is yes - I will use a price comparison site but I always do. Of course a price hike is not welcome, but when absolutely everything gets more expensive I'm not expecting them to be the one exception.

I wont pay $70 for any game. Since that trend started, I have just waited for sales, now I actually spend less per-game than before since before I would preorder so many games at full price, games that would just go to my backlog.

I actually paid more for some games almost 30 years ago, at some point the price has to go up.

@DiggleDog oh good call

Considering that Nintendo is ultra profitable, the 10eur increase is a no go for me as it shall be for all other gamers

I'd buy at $70, though reluctantly. I mean, speaking as an American, we video game shoppers have had it good here for a long time. Standard AAA retail prices have stayed at around $50-$60 since the SNES days. Game prices have been fairly immune from the cost of living inflation that's affected most things in life lately.

Also, I lived and shopped in Japan for many years, where game prices were more nuanced: Super Mario Odyssey was a fairly typical JPY6,500, but Xenoblade Chronicles 3 was JPY8700. They've had premium pricing for big, content-heavy games like that for decades now.

If $70 is accurate, I just hope ToTK is that kind of premium outlier and not a new standard price point for all 1st-party Nintendo games. I certainly would adjust my shopping accordingly if the latter is true.

Well, here in Canada a game is normally 70 bucks... which means it's going to be 90 dollars here. Dejected whoo.

I'm honestly not sure. Does it come with the DLC? Is the game going to be worth it? Is this the company making sure its employees are taken care of, or being greedy and throwing 50 bucks of DLC on top of it?

I'm not sure. If they were charging 100 bucks and giving us all future dlc, I'd be for it in an instant. I will wait and see. Not trying to judge, but I definitely can live without having the game day one.

Nope. I’d wait for a sale or get it used. I have a policy for myself not to buy full priced games anyways, unless it’s a very special exception.

@johnvboy
Sure, I just mean that I can understand people being annoyed by this as well.
None of us likes the price increase right?
It is just a difference of whether you question if the price increase is warranted or not. I would argue, that price increases should always be questioned at least.

This isn't much of an issue yet in game pricing, but in other fields it already is.
Looking at graphics cards for PCs for example. Prices there have exploded in the new generation, to the point of which these prices are frankly completely irrational and will hurt everyone.
People who still buy, waste a lot of money, which shouldn't be necessary.
People who don't buy anymore will have no access to new hardware (It is no solution to buy cheaper hardware, as that is still ridiculously expensive when seen relative to what it can do.).
And the software industry has the problem of the entire market likely declining in the future because of the second mentioned group.
It is at a point where frankly no one should continue buying these things and enforce a price drop that way, because they literally hurt everyone including themselves by buying.

Situations like this are possible if people always just say that price increases are just fine for no reason, so I would argue that discussions like this are completely fair.
Even if in this case you still have more then enough options to avoid high costs. Getting our voices out can also send a message out, if nothing else.

Absolutely not. I have some level of self respect. It’s honestly disgusting seeing so many people say they will, but I don’t expect much less from Nintendo fans, so it is what it is.

I’ll buy it used eventually if that’s the case. The principle matters. Imagine if they tried pulling this crap with Scarlet/Violet? If they do price TotK at $70, and it sells well, they’ll start pricing every Switch game at $70. Which is absolutely ridiculous.

Imagine paying $70 for a game on less powerful Xbox One hardware, that’s a direct sequel which means reused assets, environments, animations(meaning less dev cost), that doesn’t have any reason why modern games are so expensive(such as full voice acting, motion capture acting, Ray tracing/graphical fidelity, etc). Nintendo is literally only doing this because they know their fan base won’t say anything and blindly buy it.

I know Nintendo fans love getting ripped off, but this is a new level of nonsense if it ends up being true. Extremely disappointed.

@KalamStrifeVII If TOTK is really 90 CAD, I hope this is a one-off cause it’s BOTW’s sequel. But if Nintendo apply the increased price tag to every upcoming major new game, I am certain software sales will go down across the board.

I was considering but didn’t get any Mario sports game, and I am glad given how lacking they are. If they were launched with the increased price, they would be DOA for me. I just don’t like Mario that much. 😝😝

I think I paid $75 for chrono trigger in 1995, so I've long been expecting game prices to get back there. Not that I'm thrilled about it.

I normally get most new releases at £40 quite easily in the UK. I would be happy to stretch for TOTK as I know the value and experience will be there.

I remember buying SNES games on release in the early 90s for £50-60, so in reality console games are cheaper than they used to be.

No way, i don't want to spend more than 50 euros really. So i am either gonna wait for a sale or get the game second hand somewhere

@Rascal0302 I've sure I've gotten a fair amount of people calling me a Nintendo-shill over the years... but is a take where I will put my foot down and just call bad.

Hardware power does equate the quality of a product. If that was the case Ryse: Son of Rome and The Order 1886 would be classified as gaming classics... which they're not. Rather they're remembered as vapid and boring experiences despite still being gorgeously realistic looking games that still marvel today visually.

The thing is we know barely anything about TotK and it could be double the size of BotW and fix all the legitimate issues that game had (the progression and dungeon issues). If it does that then I'm sure even naysayers will pay $70 (which is unconfirmed). But, the crux of the issue I have with this comment is price of a game should never be pinned to how good a game looks as you will miss out on some amazing games for the sake of some bland and dull "AAA 4K" experience...

@Rascal0302
The only thing that confuses me a bit on your take, just like everyone elses writing something similar, is why this is tied so much on the hardware power.
This made a little sense in the pre HD time, where big graphical upgrades almost always meant one hell of a lot more work. Now this isn't the case as much anymore, as textures, for example, and such are usually made in very high resolutions anyway and then just scaled down to whatever Hardware is necessary. There are also way better tools making it easier and easier to make a game look better and better.
At this point, a 70$ PS5 game isn't necessarily much more expensive to make than a Switch game, it can be, but doesn't have to. Especially a game like Zelda BotW is probably not that cheap to make because stuff like the physics are not easy to make, we can also just look at how long it takes to develop to get a very rough idea.

The elephant in the room, to me, seems to be the industry is highly profitable, even without price increases. This is true on any platform though.

For me personally, I have a pretty hard limit at the 70€ we are talking about. It is a price I am willing to pay only for rare exceptions, which this is.
If other Nintendo games also get more expensive, then I will not buy those without a discount. This is already my stance on 70€ games, regardless of the platform.

@Poodlestargenerica I'm not sure if it's bad math necessarily. When I was a kid a chocolate bar probably cost 90 cents, now they're usually over 2 dollars. The fact that the price of a new video game is usually less than it was back in the 90's is kinda crazy.

Having said that, I still can't usually bring myself to buy "premium" games brand new these days, unless it's something really special, because of the cost. Especially since there are so many great indie games that are often even more enjoyable for so much less.

@Rascal0302 I think ripped off is subjective and not everyone's opinion. I've got a huge amount of value out of most full price games that I have bought from Nintendo.

I'm fine with titles holding their price after release as they are still new to me so I don't expect a company to discount them because I am late to the party. Look at other consumer products. Many hold their price until they are replaced.

I like Nintendo products. Am I a fan? Yes I suppose I am.

If you decide that an (unconfirmed) 10$ price increase is ok for a game you want it does not mean that you like being ripped off, nor that you are a blind Nintendo fanboy. This narrative is ridiculous.

@Kirgo This right here:

"The elephant in the room, to me, seems to be the industry is highly profitable, even without price increases. This is true on any platform though."

This is something I very much agree with! The gaming industry is highly profitable. While logically we can discuss inflation and development cost as legitimate reasons to increase the cost to $70 (I even wrote an entire post detailing how we are on average paying less for a game now than back in 2006 by an average of $20. Post #155). But, the game industry itself is caught in an ouroboros. We demand higher and higher graphical fidelity which cranks the cost of development where publishers then charge outrages prices for DLC, micro-transactions and freemium experiences and are rewarded for it... then gamers complain and the cycle continues because they buy it in droves anyways.

The reason a lot of these practices exist is due to THQ (not THQ Nordic the original THQ) which to compete with Activision, EA, Ubisoft and others cranked out AAA experiences at ballooned development costs and to recapture that cost implemented season passes, microtransactions and "online passes" (thank Mario that practice is dead and in the trash). Yet despite those practices still went under due to the weight of their own dept. Yet, completely viable companies latched onto those practices and milked them for all their worth. Some for legitimate reasons and others just out of pure greed.

If developers back in 2006-2014 were just honest and increased the price of games to help offset the cost we'd probably have less of these practices. But, even then this is why even increasing the cost now will not offset those practices because it is too little too late. Even at $70USD developers are still making less on each game sold then they would had back during the 360/PS3-era. So, even then it won't make much of a difference outside to just offset maybe the production cost of the physical game rather than development.

So, yeah... I agree. The elephant in this room is still very much so there despite the very logical and reasonable reasons a game now-a-days should be $70... yet even then I'd argue a new AAA game should be $90 and should come with the season pass as free updates. But, now I just sound crazy and I'd rather not give EA and Ubisoft ideas.

I probably will, it’s been so long that at this point I don’t really care. It’s a bit annoying but again, it’s not too big of a deal. I just hope this doesn’t set the standard from now on if it actually is $70.

It's wrong, but yes. I don't care

Yes and nintendo knows we all will.

@KingofSalvagers04 You do realize the attitude is precisely WHY this will be the standard, right? If you buy this, if you support this, they will start doing it for every other game. Anyone who buys this game at $70 is contributing to this practice.

@Crockin Stuff like this kills me. Gamers have absolutely no will power or self control when they’re getting taken advantage of. It’s no wonder this industry has become so toxic and anti-consumer in such a rapid timeframe.

I have no problem with the price of the game as long as it's well-made and no MTX.

I rather spend $100 to get 1 good game than 5 $20 mediocre ones with lootboxes.

@Duncanballs It’s not subjective, value had through time spent is different, I’m talking full on monetary increase in price for quality that isn’t going to be worth that jump. We’re taking a direct sequel to a game on such weak hardware that the original, a Wii U port, couldn’t even hold a stable 30fps.

It’s about having standards. You look at a game like Demon’s Souls, Ratchet and Clank, Dead Space Remake, God of War: Ragnarok, you SEE why these games can and should cost $70. They have significantly increased the quality of their presentation, from graphical fidelity to voice acting to motion capture and other things for this new generation of games. Nobody is charging $70 for the Xbox One/PS4 versions of these games, they’re still $60.

This is why Nintendo is ripping everyone off. Ragnarok costs $60 on PS4…but Nintendo is going to charge $70 for its direct sequel on hardware way less powerful and a game that’s way less impressive? Absolutely no way. It’s a rip off, whether you get value out of it or not. No one should be ok with this, but they know most Nintendo fans will cave, because they don’t have the willpower to say no.

Nope, i have been buying games only on discount in the last few years. I can wait if necessary, i have plenty of to play on my Switch and PC, heck even my 3DS still has a big backlog that i have to clear.

I already thought it was going to be US$70, as I rarely pay attention to games with prices that high.

How much are the PS5 games? 🤷‍♂️

@sevex I should have clarified, I'm not saying you did math badly, just that applying that sort of math doesn't work. I think the amount of people playing games has just grown so much that they've been able to not raise the price as games sold more and more. MK8 deluxe could charge the same as MK64 because 4 times as many people were probably going to buy it. So if we're at the point where 70 is the new norm, then thats based off something more grand scale than inflation. That's all I'm saying. I also think that every Zelda made has essentially been worth its asking price at the time of release so I'm not too worried, and will probably day one totk.

@Rascal0302 I have plenty of will power.

Graphic capability is secondary to me if a game is really good.

I think in terms of quality and value, we obviously have different opinions and that is fine.

I would just ask that you don't accuse people of having no will power etc. If they make their own choice as to what they spend their money on.

If true, it’s only $10.. dunno what fuss is about.

It's Zelda and $70 is the new industry standard, but Nintendo Switch as a hardware is really outdated, so I don't know... I guess I'd pay it for Zelda, but not for any other Switch game.

@Poodlestargenerica oh yeah I get what you mean. I'll also be getting this one on release day, whatever the cost! Hoping they'll accept vouchers for it though.

Thankfully Walmart has even new games $10 off, so at least I'd have that >.>

@Rascal0302 it isn’t about willpower. Most people accept that gaming is a luxury hobby and find their investment worth it. Could I wait for a sale? Sure but I want the CE and to play Day 1. I suppose you could say that is a lack of willpower but it isn’t like we didn’t know this game was coming. If one can’t put aside the price of a game that has been in development for several years then that is a budgeting issue. And those that either budget or can afford the game outright are not going to sit and wait to accommodate those that don’t or that don’t want to pay or can’t pay full price. Even if we collectively did the largest boycott in history it would only send the message that we don’t want more Zelda unless people are willing to stop buying games across the board at the unwanted price. And even then layoffs and budget cuts will happen first. It will still go on sale down the road. No one is being forced to pay full price. But much of the market agrees that the price is bearable. (I haven’t commented on the price directly as I don’t think there will be a price hike but I also don’t care. )

No willpower are the inevitable “I will pirate” fake virtue signaling comments because sure they want quality product but don’t want to pay for it and always had that stance but will use the price as a scapegoat.

Everyone saying they paid more for SNES or N64 games, you were paying for the carts and the memory chips. If this game uses a bigger cartridge, the price increase could be justified. Maybe.

Why are you acting like this isn't shocking? Why would a Switch game, of all Nintendo consoles, cost the same price as the NEW GEN consoles?! I bet this is a mistake with this version at least, an omen that this will undoubtely be a huge game, or maybe a hint about New Gen Nintendo. Yet there's also the fact Metroid Prime 4 was also delisted of pre-order, yet Pikmin 4 wasn't.

Sorry, but this game costing $70? How's this in the big context of blockbuster games anyway? If more games costed that price, I would've heard of them in the first place. Admittely though, I'm not a looker on rival hardware's game details.

I will not buy day one full price, after the full price beta of Pokemon Scarlet and violet...

@kalosn : why does the hardware something is on dictate the price to you?

I could make a series x game in a few weeks.. would that be worth more, just because of the hardware it’s on?

It's too much for any game on any platform, but I would pay that for THIS game. Yes.

@Ryu_Niiyama I've had 5 years to save up...prepping my card for tonight, it's gonna be a good one!

Good I preordered in Amazon Mexico like 6 months ago or something, so should get the previous price regardless.

@WiltonRoots I can’t even be bothered. I’m going to enjoy the direct and leave it at that. Bingo used to be fun but now it’s just predictable. I do hope they talk about the movie and theme park though.

I still have BOTW in my backlog so I can’t justify purchasing TOTK until I finish that game first.

I'll get it cheaper, someone's bound to take the price hit to sell more!

I'm sure $70 is worth it if it's anything like BOTW, and it's free if you go physical and sell it back on ebay. But I probably won't get it myself, I see the appeal but I'm really more into bite-sized arcade like experiences, and quick competitive online multiplayer. If there weren't so many games to play, I'd love to pick it up, but these action-adventure games aren't really my preferred kind of game (not counting rogue-likes).

I can't even get through Bored of The Wild...good luck getting $70 from me.

@MarioLazor I mean games went for $70 or more in the N64 era as well.

no problem.. I have a real job and would pay $100 since it is worth it 10 times over.

Hopefully there is a super elite highly limited collector version being made just for me.

@MarioLazor go enjoy your crappy mobile gaming then.. oh wait you want a real experience?? then pay up!!

by the way.. battle passes are horrid garbage that replace good content with naggy nonsense

Chances are I'm not buying it anyways, soooooo...

I have a job and other responsibilities but I'll gladly pay $70 for this game.

I’m not buying it right away, but if I was considering it, that’s a hard sell the more I think about it. And it’s not about the $10 dollar price difference. For me, it’s more about the principle. I feel like they are doing this with no announcement of a general price increase like Sony did. They are doing this specifically with Zelda because they know they can get away with it. It just feels like such a “Nintendo” move, and that’s coming from a huge Nintendo fan. No last gen game on the same cartridge format they’ve been using for the past 6 years on the same 6 year old hardware can justify the obvious cash grab here IMO. Unless there’s some details missing that will be clarified in the direct…

@RevengeFan right but 70 bucks in 1994 is like 130 now?* seems like a tall order for chips and carts? genuine questions
*=google

@nocdaes And how does anything to do with pricing increases in the past few months have to do with a game that had the bulk of its work done in previous years and is by all signs mostly an asset flip anyway?

TotK did not, by any stretch of the imagination, cost anywhere near as much for Nintendo to make at BotW did because by its very nature they had to do a fraction of the work. I'm sure it'll be a big, expansive game, but the only thing that justifies the price hike is, "Billion dollar companies need to consume everything they possibly can because capitalism is a hellscape."

Nah, I was never into Zelda. Which is unfortunate because it would have been an awesome birthday gift for myself if I was.

Don't like the upwards trend but, yeah, I guess I would.

@ChakraStomps I'm all for season passes if the content is genuinely good and the base game is already exceptional. I'm talking Xenoblade 2 (Torna was like an entire extra game), Smash Ultimate, Mario Kart 8 Delux... but for the most part Season Passes are just filler with no killer which will get bundled in later with a "Game of the Year" Edition anyways... if we are specifically talking Battle Passes like found in Fortnight and other "live services"... yes... I want that practice gone next to the Online Pass in the forgotten graveyard of death. Why is it Splatoon 2&3 keep rolling out free updates years after release with quality content, yet Epic and Blizzard nickel and dime the consumer with those nonsense passes.

IF anyone wants to hear what a single crazy fan did ( me obviously) for the first BOTW then read up.
I bought BOTW standard, limited AND COLLECTORS editions day one. not to mention a switch the strat guide, all of the amiibo, a pro controller and a case (despite have one in each edition of the game)

THEN I bought the Explorers edition a year later. OH AND the Wii U version. that might sound crazy to you but I got over 100 hours in that game so it came out to less then $1 an hour of entertainment.

A $10 increase isn't going to stop me. Breath of the Wild is my favorite game of all-time and was well worth the $60.

i will not pay $70, even if Legend of Zelda Tears of the Kingdom is the supreme masterpiece, this is ludicrous, charging a next gen price for a resued sequel, ridiculous this

Will I pay it for this game? Yes.

Does it rub me the wrong way that they may be charging a premium for a game that reuses the engine and assets from a 6-year-old Wii U game? Also yes.

Will I pay it for any other Switch game? Not likely. If it became the standard Switch game price I would reevaluate my purchasing and would probably end up with fewer games going forward.

@Nintendo_Thumb Legend of Zelda Tears of the Kingdom, is just Breath of the Wild in the sky, is Nintendo been greedy for the sake of be greedy, no way a reused sequel that was in development for 6 years is worth $70.

@Scrubicius $70

@D_Munk dont try to justify this absurd increase on games prices, Nintendo budget for it games is very light compared to a Xbox/Playstation game, we barely have a Nintendo game bugdet at a $100 milions, most of Nintendo games are bugdet around 12/50 milions

Preorder on Amazon. They’ll honor the original price if they indeed raise it.

Who is “happily” paying more!?

@marnelljm Amazon took the listing down when the price increase was teased so that isn’t an option.

I would've bought it for $50 at Walmart like I've done in the past for similar titles. If it's going to be $60 or $70, I'll have to look carefully at how well the emulation runs on Steam Deck. (if BOTW is any indication, the answer is that it'll run better than on Switch)

Well, it supports the vouchers so I'll probably go ahead and pick it up at launch just since I'll still be saving money on picking up Pikmin or Advance Wars or something in the long run anyway.

@Giancarlothomaz I sort of agree with you but think it's too early to really say until reviews come in, but so far it does seem like it's just BOTW in the sky, and I guess that's why I'm hesitant on buying, I feel like I've played this already. What got me to buy the first BOTW was, like I said I'm not a big Zelda-er, but it looked very different from previous games and it really was. I liked it a lot, but, after a while of getting used to the game, most of it seemed empty, or there were cool things and it looked pretty but most of the items were useless junk and the threats generally avoidable and while I beat the game none of it seemed to require very much skill. It was fun for a while, but I think it got repetitive after a while, and the sequel doesn't look to change things up very much.

Yet, we don't know that much about it really. Until I see some reviews and/or gameplay on Youtube, I can't really say whether it's worth $70 or not. The way I see it is, if the number of hours of great original gameplay is worth it, then it's worth more. Like take Enter the Gungeon for instance, I paid I think $10 for it, but it was easily worth $60 or $70 if you really think about how many hours of enjoyment I got out of that. Zelda, same thing. Something else, like a Kirby definitely not, but people are still to this day making videos about BOTW, so I think you'd have a hard case saying that this game isn't worth it.

@Rascal0302 I can easily afford it and wanna play it. What you want me to protest it? I buy like 2 full price games year. Good luck in your Noble quest. Maybe aim at Nintendo next time and not consumers?

@Clammy I don't know, because that was news only months before the PS5/XSX arrived...? The simple mindest could've thought "wow, so this is what next gen will cost". Then, I forgot about that... and now this happened. To be honest, I don't know either, why games cost $10 more on the new consoles. If you become a game developer one day and find a publisher, maybe you could learn something new.
I didn't invest my time in analyzing the $70 game situation on the other consoles before, but that could change now that it is confirmed this game will be Nintendo's first to cost such amount.

I’ll probably pay it, but I am buying significantly fewer games now. My budget is being squeezed by everyone who either used inflation or trying to extract maximum profit as an excuse to raise prices. Meanwhile my salary has flatlined and is on life support. Something has to give and that means I put up with free, free to play and included with subscription more often than not.

Gaming is a luxury and just paying the bills is becoming an uphill battle. But hey that GDP is still moving up and to the right. Who cares if everyone is being slowly reduced to subsistence farming again.

Mixed feelings. Is it a fair price? If it’s as good as BOTW or even better, absolutely. Do I like spending more money. No, I do not, nor do I like one of my favorite companies gouging just because they can. Does this surprise me? No.

I’m one of the patient few who will wait for a sale. I know, I know, “good luck.” If it takes long enough, I’ll pay the $70 eventually with no regrets. It will be just as fun playing it for the first time in two years as it would be on launch day. I’ll try to avoid too many spoilers, but that’s not a major concern for me. In the meantime, I’ve got plenty of cheaper great games to buy and play.

@Wexter yeah it’s really interesting to look into stuff like that.

If we support it being 70 now. It could lead to confidence in making more games 70. Do not buy at 70 if you don't like 70 games.

I tend to play Zelda games multiple times but let's be real here,it is only a 720p/1080p game with ps3 graphics, an empty weekend with few NPCs... 70$ is pushing it

Use the vouchers and get this game plus 1 more for $100

Obviously $60 would be a better price, but I am not going to miss out on this because of $10.

Once again, the polls never seem to reflect the comment sections...SeventyDollarGate looks like it's going to be a fun one, which will obviously get forgotten like all the other storms in a teacup that happen in here.

I buy physical games when I need something extra to qualify for free shipping. That way I got it on sale...kinda...right?

Hahaha noo! Nintendo is trippin. That's what the used game section is for.

@MrPKOmega Since when is $60 more expensive then $70?

@WiltonRoots I'm not one to argue I want to pay more for a game.. but this really is not the hill to die on. If you don't want to buy it at $70 wait till the price drops, a sale or get it second hand later. Buying games at launch is a luxury expense. That and the people saying "well inflation does not matter blah, blah" people bring it up because games in the 90s costed more not just because of inflation, but because they just were more expensive.

So, either way it really does not matter and I doubt this will harm Zelda's sales.

@Wexter It does make me laugh, people are going on about the cost like they're getting horrifically gouged and their basements bumrushed - then next week talk about the fact they snagged a PS5 or a new graphics card for their PC rig...as it is, how much would it hurt to put a dollar or so aside every day until it comes out, or to trade in a couple of titles they're bored with? It's not a biggie. Add to that most retail outlets will sell it for less than the listed price anyway.

The other thing people seem to be blind to is that to some people $70 is mere pocket change and won't even bat an eyelid. It's just a handful of stingy people making a racket in a comment section thinking they'll get sent to prison for breaking into a ten dollar bill.

Its a slippery slope. I bet Metroid 4 is $70 and every mainline game following. You can't compare to PS because look at how cheap most PS4/5 games are compared to NS after a year or two. Games drop to like $20 on Playstation but a used copy of mario cart is nearly $50.

I just ordered it at 60 Euro wich isn't that bad. Twilight princess did cost me 60 Euro back in the day.

My Preorder at Amazon is $59.99+tax for standard version? But I preordered this way way ahead of time when I found it and preordered it. I suspect those looking now that didn't preorder before all this rush to buy TOTK will expect the 70$ price tag if they didn't get the early preorder price.

@Selim yeah storage wise totk is going to take up a whopping 18.2 gb compared to botw's 3 gb.

If it wasn’t sold out I’d have paid over £100 for the special edition!

@Giancarlothomaz are they now? Do we have any confirmed sources.
Looking at the development of Zelda it seems to be pretty lengthy time.

@Scrubicius Nintendo has sent a survey to a select numbers of players, when in this survey it state Legend of Zelda Tears of the Kingdom will be longer then Breath of the Wild

https://nintendoeverything.com/nintendo-survey-hints-at-zelda-tears-of-the-kingdom-details/

@Giancarlothomaz unfortunately people wont understand if it takes more time it will cost more. 😁