[TulliusCicero]

> Gaming is getting too expensive.

Gaming is so much cheaper than when I was growing up that I'm kind of blown away.

SNES games went for $60-70. That's like $130-150 in today's money. And they usually had less content than today's games, even if you never do microtransactions today!

In contrast, major AAA titles today are half the price, and you can find indie games packed with content for a paltry $20. Hell, with Steam sales, you can find them even cheaper than that! Some free to play games like Dota 2 make all of their core gameplay content free!

If you check when games like Quake were released, their minimum requirements were absolutely INSANE compared to today. We're talking about mid to high-end CPUs released within the last two or three years, none of this "oh yeah something lower-middle from 5 years ago is fine". Average prices for computers were much higher too (well, maybe the current RAM/SSD crisis has equalized that a bit, but other than that).

Controllers? 8bitdo and the like make highly competent gamepads for $30, which would've been $15 in the 90's. You couldn't even get terrible third-party shitpads for that little back then! It's disgustingly cheap.

If you want to game these days, you can spend a very reasonable amount of money on a mid-range gaming PC* and have it last at least a good 5-6 years. You can then buy games for a steal on Steam, and get surprisingly decent peripherals like gaming monitors and mechanical keyboards for almost no money. The idea that gaming is "too expensive now" is itself laughable.

* Well, other than the memory crisis fucking things up, but before AI companies ate all the RAM, things were very reasonable

[karahime]

Nobody wants to look at it, but I think this is a lot of it. The original Prince of Persia PC/Amiga version retailed at $39.95, or roughly $100 in today's money. In fact, roughly $100 in 2026 dollars was actually quite a stable price point for a very long time.

A $60 game in 2006 is also roughly $100 in 2026 dollars. I think what happened is that around then, people generally decided that "$60 is the price of a AAA game, and anything more is a sham". If I had to bet, I'd guess that that was around when a lot of the public got into gaming as something that wasn't just "for nerds".

I think that if people were willing to drop $100 up front, base price for a game, you would not find the microtransaction, ultimate edition, day 1 DLC shenanigans that you see. Companies would find it easy to say "But of course all skins are unlockable in game!"

[jemmyw]

It makes sense though for the price to fall (in relation to inflation) when the general public got into gaming though. The cost of development is unchanged whether you sell 10,000 or 1 million. Which is my argument against the microtransaction shit being driven by a price fall.

[TulliusCicero]

The gaming audience increased, but budgets also massively went up. You weren't spending $100m+ on Super Mario World.

[GoofGarage]

>SNES games went for $60-70.

I don’t believe you were intending to paint with a broad brush, but for others I’d like to explain where SNES game pricing was in more detail, as there was quite the range of prices depending on the game and when it was released.

———-

The plain Jane SNES game was $50 at US launch in late 1991. Normal-ish ROM size (4Mbit). This included later released first-party titles like Super Mario Kart (1992).

Prices went up with ROM size, and as there were higher supply costs starting in late 1993 and into 1994. So something like even LOZ: A Link to the Past was $60 (8Mbit ROM used, game a bit smaller). Mega Man X was $60 for the same reason. Final Fantasy II (IV) in the US was $65 at launch (again, 8Mbit ROM). Street Fighter II (16Mbit) was $70 in 1992.

Then there’s larger games still, with ROM prices going down then up. I believe Final Fantasy III (VI) was $75 USD at launch, but that was a 24Mbit ROM. Secret of Mana (16MBit) and Chrono Trigger (32MBit) were $80 at launch. Then you had Ogre Battle which I believe was $90, despite fitting within 12Mbit (8Mbit + 4Mbit).

Another reason for $70 prices were the SuperFX chip. Stunt Race FX was $70 in the US at launch because of that chip, even though it fit into an 8Mbit ROM. Yet Star Fox was $60 was the same hardware, but launched at $60 in 1993 whereas Stunt Race FX came out in 1994 where ROM prices are higher.

—-

So $50 - 90, with it more in the $50-60 range at launch, and then $60 being more common through the rest of the console’s lifecycle. Special and larger games were trending towards $70 later in the console lifecycle. Then you had the few crazy games (excluding games with accessories like Lethal Enforcers) in the $75 - 90 range.

[Fire-Dragon-DoL]

Gaming is cheaper now than when I was growing up, but gaming has become a lot more expensive in the last 10 years. Anybody remembers the humble bundle good era, along with the steam sales that would hit 90%?

I accumulated so many games over that time that my steam library will last for me and my kids and probably more.

I don't know why people focus so much on AAA, this year we got silksong for 20$ and it's a mind blowing game with incredible graphics (2d)

[TulliusCicero]

The inflation adjusted price of (decent) peripherals seems to keep going down. You can get monitors and mice and keyboards of reasonable quality these days for almost nothing.

It's also amazing how many f2p games are out there that are actually not too exploitative. I've put in hundreds of hours into Deadlock for zero money, and I couldn't give them any money even if I wanted to (because it's closed beta, but still, the game is already very solid).

[Fire-Dragon-DoL]

I play only with controllers unless the game strictly requires a mouse and keyboard.

You can get controllers pretty cheaply though

[TulliusCicero]

Yup, gamepads are super cheap now too. You can get actually good quality gamepads for $30. Were you getting good gamepads in the 90's for $15? Definitely not.