Arlo – It’s Time to Talk About Nintendo Charging $70 for Zelda
Arlo – It’s Time to Talk About Nintendo Charging $70 for Zelda
by ClarityEnjoyer
35 Comments
OnlyTales
Save yourself the click, Arlo doesn’t even take a side here and just regurgitates the same talking points we have heard from both sides.
gmanlurking
NES games were $50 in the ’80s
StampCollectorBill
I don’t take advice from puppets. I learned that lesson the hard way.
ponch070
I bought the pre order with a voucher so it only cost me 50$
BroThisJose
I pay $70 for shitty 2k and Call of duty every year I can’t complain
BernieCazaCorazones
It’s not a big deal for me as long as the game is worth it, for $70 i would expect no less than a great and super immersive Zelda experience with a wonderful design and a deep optimisation so the game runs smoothly.
Wolventec
botw was already €70(other games like mario odyessey are €60) for some reason, ive become used to this from Nintendo since 2017
Valkhir
$70.
Let’s assume I play this game for 100 hours. That’s a low estimate considering I have *multiple hundreds* of hours in BOTW on a single save, and I did not even technically complete the game (I never beat the final boss, don’t have all Koroks or shrines, even have some unfinished side quests left I think).
If TOTK is at least as big as BOTW, that means I’d be paying paying $0.70/hour or (much) less.
How much is an hour of fun worth to you? What else could you do to spend an hour that costs less than this and is as good as this (is likely going to be)?
CountBleckwantedlove
$60 in March 2017 is $73.63 as of January 2023, probably closer to $75 by time this game releases. Food for thought, people.
backstreets_93
Lol try being Canadian.
Gabario
Real talk, every Nintendo YouTuber should try other games. I appreciate that Arlo can be critical without being hyperbolic, but being stuck under the Nintendo umbrella really limits them creatively.
BluePinkertonGreen
N64 games were $70 in 1998.
ensignr
I’m pretty sure I paid AU$119 for BotW at release. I did math when the US$70 price tag dropped and hit panic buy on a pre-order of TotK from Amazon for AU$75 only to discover the next day it’s AU$90 in the eShop. The price I’d calculated was ~AU$111.
I actually would have preferred to pay the extra to download it, which is kinda bizarre.
Anyway my point is that I’m pretty sure I paid over the US$70 price tag for BotW and TotK is a bargain by comparison.
PS the math was US$ to AU$ conversion plus our 10% GST (sales tax) which is inbuilt to all pricing and by law has to be included in any advertised price; so all my pricing above also includes this tax unlike how Americans would discuss pricing.
NZepplin
I don’t mind paying that much for it because it’s one of the only games I really want this year. If it’s as good as breath of the wild then it’s worth it.
roman_urban
It’s a lot, but I’m buying. No talk
ChainsForAlice
Um considering atomic heart is $120 AU, $90AU is more than good, considering most triple A titles here have been $100-$110 RRP for a long time.
Kraigbot
I’m beginning to think that Arlo is in fact, a puppet
Lucas-The-Memer
The big thing for me with game prices these days is just the price they ask for is simply not worth it, new releases are so mediocre or even bad that 100 dollars (in Australia) is absurd, but if this game is anything like BOTW I think it will be worth it
EnergySquared
I’m in a lucky position that it doesn’t make a difference to me if it’s 50$ or 70$. And it’s no question for me that it’s worth it. If it’s anything like BotW, it’s worth more than 70$ to me. I have very fond memories of playing BotW that I like thinking about from time to time.
Dolly912
I think it’s fine. I spent like 600 plus hours in breath of the wild which is only a couple cents an hour. If I play even 100 hours on tears of the kingdom it will still be worth it.
Dannypan
My take on this: sucks to be American lmao
kcfang
It’s a complex matter. Consumers can decide with their wallet. Don’t pre-order, wait for review and be informative. Buy what you can afford. If you can’t, wait to pick up used copy or some Walmart discount. Discuss it but don’t complain about it.
BebeFanMasterJ
I don’t play Zelda so this doesn’t affect me whatsoever.
Just hope Xenoblade and Fire Emblem don’t ever have a price increase.
Ryth88
I will be waiting for it to go on sale – or pick up a used copy next year. because i am what you would call…poor.
nova1979
I don’t even get why everyone is so up on arms about this. Come to Canada; we’ve been paying $79.99 for years for games now (and $89.99 for PS5 games).
Don’t want to pay an extra $10? Then don’t buy it and wait for a used copy…
ShakeTheEyesHands
There’s nothing to say. It costs $70. That’s that.
And we’ll all get hundreds and hundreds of hours of entertainment from it.
So quit bitching.
Smashmaster12
Getting tired of seeing this muppet on my feed
sentientTroll
Weird world. We want good games with no mtx, but we also don’t want to pay $10 more. But the same people will go rip $2000 genshin impact to get a hot babe.
Zelda isn’t the game to take a stand in. Forsaken? Yes.
MoonieSarito
I think the price of $70 would be much more understandable and acceptable in a Switch successor, even more so because when Sony and Microsoft did it it was on their new consoles (PS5/Series X) and the console versions of those same games last gen (PS4/XONE) have held up at the $60 price point, it’s really strange to see a game with this price at the end of the Switch’s life with its hardware already quite dated and I know the game hasn’t been released yet, but the trailers did not show anything so different from BOTW that it would justify the higher price.
I know that many people think “Ah, it’s only 10$ more” but in some countries like here in Brazil, 10$ becomes R$50, in fact, the new Zelda is for some reason more expensive than any other $70 games (Zelda is costing R$358 while the other PS5/SX games are R$350 and below) and considering that unlike Microsoft and Sony, Nintendo never lower the prices of your games in the long run it will be hard to be a fan of Nintendo around here.
PianoEmeritus
Arlo seems like a good fellow but he sure does talk for a very long time to say nothing sometimes
catcatcat888
My problem with the price increase doesn’t stem from the actual cost, but rather it’s next-gen price range for something very far from next-gen.
thinkbee
The only reason Nintendo is doing this is because they know they can get away with it, and it is honestly disappointing to see so many people in this comment thread rally behind such anti-consumer behavior.
The whole situation reeks of “greedflation” in line with what a lot of other companies are doing: raising prices in order to pass off purportedly higher costs to the customer. Even if these higher costs will be justified in the quality of the game (which is no guarantee), Nintendo would end up making huge profits on the game whether it’s $60 or $70 – but hey, people will line up to play Zelda, so why not charge an extra $10?
In any case, I think the point I agree with the most from the video was the notion that Nintendo games in general are just overpriced. There is no reason for Mario Tennis Aces to cost the same as BotW, both in terms of quality and amount of content. If anything, I think such first-party spinoff games should be in the $40-50 range, and in general, digital versions should be 10% cheaper than physical since profit margins are already [nearly double](https://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2015/11/17/analysis-eas-digital-profit-margins-twice-retail-sales-and-why-matters-consumers.aspx) that of physical copies.
G4yWilli4mJ0hns0n
This shill is so cringe for using that puppet. Gosh what the hell is going on with nintendo
D1m3b4g
Hmmm. $70 huh. So no doubt even though it’ll be digital we in the UK will pay £70 and get shafted out of a whopping percentage like normal.
SnooHamsters5546
It’s a bunch of BS to charge 89.99 in Canada. Sony did it with new ps5 games because the hardware was more expensive which I can maybe get behind but still pisses me off. But for Nintendo there hardware never changed at all and there just doing it because they can. I wish everyone would not buy it and force them to lower the price but nobody will and once Nintendo sees everyone paid it all there new games will be that price
35 Comments
Save yourself the click, Arlo doesn’t even take a side here and just regurgitates the same talking points we have heard from both sides.
NES games were $50 in the ’80s
I don’t take advice from puppets. I learned that lesson the hard way.
I bought the pre order with a voucher so it only cost me 50$
I pay $70 for shitty 2k and Call of duty every year I can’t complain
It’s not a big deal for me as long as the game is worth it, for $70 i would expect no less than a great and super immersive Zelda experience with a wonderful design and a deep optimisation so the game runs smoothly.
botw was already €70(other games like mario odyessey are €60) for some reason, ive become used to this from Nintendo since 2017
$70.
Let’s assume I play this game for 100 hours. That’s a low estimate considering I have *multiple hundreds* of hours in BOTW on a single save, and I did not even technically complete the game (I never beat the final boss, don’t have all Koroks or shrines, even have some unfinished side quests left I think).
If TOTK is at least as big as BOTW, that means I’d be paying paying $0.70/hour or (much) less.
How much is an hour of fun worth to you? What else could you do to spend an hour that costs less than this and is as good as this (is likely going to be)?
$60 in March 2017 is $73.63 as of January 2023, probably closer to $75 by time this game releases. Food for thought, people.
Lol try being Canadian.
Real talk, every Nintendo YouTuber should try other games. I appreciate that Arlo can be critical without being hyperbolic, but being stuck under the Nintendo umbrella really limits them creatively.
N64 games were $70 in 1998.
I’m pretty sure I paid AU$119 for BotW at release. I did math when the US$70 price tag dropped and hit panic buy on a pre-order of TotK from Amazon for AU$75 only to discover the next day it’s AU$90 in the eShop. The price I’d calculated was ~AU$111.
I actually would have preferred to pay the extra to download it, which is kinda bizarre.
Anyway my point is that I’m pretty sure I paid over the US$70 price tag for BotW and TotK is a bargain by comparison.
PS the math was US$ to AU$ conversion plus our 10% GST (sales tax) which is inbuilt to all pricing and by law has to be included in any advertised price; so all my pricing above also includes this tax unlike how Americans would discuss pricing.
I don’t mind paying that much for it because it’s one of the only games I really want this year. If it’s as good as breath of the wild then it’s worth it.
It’s a lot, but I’m buying. No talk
Um considering atomic heart is $120 AU, $90AU is more than good, considering most triple A titles here have been $100-$110 RRP for a long time.
I’m beginning to think that Arlo is in fact, a puppet
The big thing for me with game prices these days is just the price they ask for is simply not worth it, new releases are so mediocre or even bad that 100 dollars (in Australia) is absurd, but if this game is anything like BOTW I think it will be worth it
I’m in a lucky position that it doesn’t make a difference to me if it’s 50$ or 70$. And it’s no question for me that it’s worth it. If it’s anything like BotW, it’s worth more than 70$ to me. I have very fond memories of playing BotW that I like thinking about from time to time.
I think it’s fine. I spent like 600 plus hours in breath of the wild which is only a couple cents an hour. If I play even 100 hours on tears of the kingdom it will still be worth it.
My take on this: sucks to be American lmao
It’s a complex matter. Consumers can decide with their wallet. Don’t pre-order, wait for review and be informative. Buy what you can afford. If you can’t, wait to pick up used copy or some Walmart discount. Discuss it but don’t complain about it.
I don’t play Zelda so this doesn’t affect me whatsoever.
Just hope Xenoblade and Fire Emblem don’t ever have a price increase.
I will be waiting for it to go on sale – or pick up a used copy next year. because i am what you would call…poor.
I don’t even get why everyone is so up on arms about this. Come to Canada; we’ve been paying $79.99 for years for games now (and $89.99 for PS5 games).
Don’t want to pay an extra $10? Then don’t buy it and wait for a used copy…
There’s nothing to say. It costs $70. That’s that.
And we’ll all get hundreds and hundreds of hours of entertainment from it.
So quit bitching.
Getting tired of seeing this muppet on my feed
Weird world. We want good games with no mtx, but we also don’t want to pay $10 more. But the same people will go rip $2000 genshin impact to get a hot babe.
Zelda isn’t the game to take a stand in. Forsaken? Yes.
I think the price of $70 would be much more understandable and acceptable in a Switch successor, even more so because when Sony and Microsoft did it it was on their new consoles (PS5/Series X) and the console versions of those same games last gen (PS4/XONE) have held up at the $60 price point, it’s really strange to see a game with this price at the end of the Switch’s life with its hardware already quite dated and I know the game hasn’t been released yet, but the trailers did not show anything so different from BOTW that it would justify the higher price.
I know that many people think “Ah, it’s only 10$ more” but in some countries like here in Brazil, 10$ becomes R$50, in fact, the new Zelda is for some reason more expensive than any other $70 games (Zelda is costing R$358 while the other PS5/SX games are R$350 and below) and considering that unlike Microsoft and Sony, Nintendo never lower the prices of your games in the long run it will be hard to be a fan of Nintendo around here.
Arlo seems like a good fellow but he sure does talk for a very long time to say nothing sometimes
My problem with the price increase doesn’t stem from the actual cost, but rather it’s next-gen price range for something very far from next-gen.
The only reason Nintendo is doing this is because they know they can get away with it, and it is honestly disappointing to see so many people in this comment thread rally behind such anti-consumer behavior.
The whole situation reeks of “greedflation” in line with what a lot of other companies are doing: raising prices in order to pass off purportedly higher costs to the customer. Even if these higher costs will be justified in the quality of the game (which is no guarantee), Nintendo would end up making huge profits on the game whether it’s $60 or $70 – but hey, people will line up to play Zelda, so why not charge an extra $10?
In any case, I think the point I agree with the most from the video was the notion that Nintendo games in general are just overpriced. There is no reason for Mario Tennis Aces to cost the same as BotW, both in terms of quality and amount of content. If anything, I think such first-party spinoff games should be in the $40-50 range, and in general, digital versions should be 10% cheaper than physical since profit margins are already [nearly double](https://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2015/11/17/analysis-eas-digital-profit-margins-twice-retail-sales-and-why-matters-consumers.aspx) that of physical copies.
This shill is so cringe for using that puppet. Gosh what the hell is going on with nintendo
Hmmm. $70 huh. So no doubt even though it’ll be digital we in the UK will pay £70 and get shafted out of a whopping percentage like normal.
It’s a bunch of BS to charge 89.99 in Canada. Sony did it with new ps5 games because the hardware was more expensive which I can maybe get behind but still pisses me off. But for Nintendo there hardware never changed at all and there just doing it because they can. I wish everyone would not buy it and force them to lower the price but nobody will and once Nintendo sees everyone paid it all there new games will be that price