• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom is $70

hemo memo

Gold Member
Nintendo Sycophants who are ok with this deserve to be fleeced to hell and back. I hope they charge $100 for there next game. They deserve it.
It make sense for Sony and Microsoft as their game goes on sale a short period after release. For Nintendo it doesn’t make sense as the price never goes down so you are already making big money keeping a consistent price. It is a shit move.
 

anthony2690

Banned
I liked the first game on WiiU ($49.99), but I'm not paying $70 for a 30fps Switch game. I'm 100% positive the game will be amazing and it will be both a critical and commercial hit, but I can wait forever for a better price, new or used, if need be.
You'll die before it hits a good price, it's bloody Nintendo.

Unless you are in the UK and happen to catch one of the great Tesco clearances sales where games are literally dirt cheap.

You can get a switch for £115 at Tesco currently and an oled switch for £152.

And the Pokémon games are £18 each.


I remember getting captain toad for £7.50, Mario Rabbids gold edition for £10 & donkey Kong tropical freeze for £7.50 a few years back during one tesco clearance sale.
 
Last edited:

Chastten

Banned
Nintendo Sycophants who are ok with this deserve to be fleeced to hell and back. I hope they charge $100 for there next game. They deserve it.

I'd easily pay that for a game that I know will entertain me for several dozen hours, no questions asked.

I mean, it would be nice if all games were given away for free and I could still buy a console for €100 or a decent graphics card for €80, but it's 2023 and that's not gonna happen anymore. Time to accept reality. I no longer make only €6 an hour so it's really not an issue for me. I guess it sucks if you live in Eastern Europe or South America or something but yeah, at the end of the day it's only a game.
 
Let’s see what happens tomorrow. But if this is true and there is no Super Switch version to justify it, people should not buy the game. Nintendo needs sales a lot more than we need this Zelda game. We have the power in this economy, so might as well use it and push back against mid-gen price increases.
 

CGNoire

Member
I'd easily pay that for a game that I know will entertain me for several dozen hours, no questions asked.

I mean, it would be nice if all games were given away for free and I could still buy a console for €100 or a decent graphics card for €80, but it's 2023 and that's not gonna happen anymore. Time to accept reality. I no longer make only €6 an hour so it's really not an issue for me. I guess it sucks if you live in Eastern Europe or South America or something but yeah, at the end of the day it's only a game.
Yeah you really thought this through....
 

Mr Reasonable

Completely Unreasonable
Still £60 in the UK, I wonder if that'll get adjusted too.

I don't need another Zelda, but tempted to bung a pre-order in to get it for £50 at an online retailer (which seems too much already) while I still can.
 
Last edited:

TintoConCasera

I bought a sex doll, but I keep it inflated 100% of the time and use it like a regular wife
I paid that for Street Fighter 2 in 1992. Stop crying.
Surely that came with a nice packaging, a color manual and a cartridge. Now they want you to pay that same ammount for a digital product.
 

Knightime_X

Member
This means 1 of 2 things.
A: Nintendo said: "Fuck it! We're going $70 from now on!"
B: Switch 2 games will also be $70 and Zelda is a crossgen title.
 

Dazraell

Member
I was looking for an excuse to not buy it for launch and dayum, price is a good one. Shame that they probably won't reduce it in a long while
 

Mr Reasonable

Completely Unreasonable
I've just put an order in at the same price as it was yesterday - will cancel if there's no change in price, since I wasn't desperate to grab it.

I'm slightly worried that this will run at a solid 23fps and be a poor version of the Switch 2 version that will be the actual game people want to play.
 

hemo memo

Gold Member
I agree with this, digital should be 20% cheaper
It is the opposite here. As physical is cheaper even though retailers get their cut and a lot of logistics has to be done. While digital they cut the middle man and get all the profit. It doesn’t make any sense to me.
 

Robb

Gold Member
Nintendo needs sales a lot more than we need this Zelda game.
I don’t know about that man
scratching chappelles show GIF
 

Tams

Member
Let’s see what happens tomorrow. But if this is true and there is no Super Switch version to justify it, people should not buy the game. Nintendo needs sales a lot more than we need this Zelda game. We have the power in this economy, so might as well use it and push back against mid-gen price increases.

I like Zelda. I want more Zelda. I enjoyed BotW perfectly well. TotK is releasing on my birthday.

I'm going to buy it whether you like it or not.
 
Bring the pop corn!!! Also, it's less than two weeks after the release of Redfall. Suit up everyone, it's going to be a bloodbath. Hopefully Redfall isn't eaten alive like Zero Dawn was when it launched right next to Breath of The Wild. I'm not holding my breath though.
 
Last edited:

BlackTron

Member
If it's actually a great Zelda that solves all the issues I had with BotW, then fine. Heck, if it was the Zelda I wanted I'd pay $100 for it.

After BOTW, SS and TP, I have a feeling this won't be the case. Guess we'll see.
 

Petopia

Banned
Keep the same energy Nintendo fanboys, when you guys go off on playstation games going up to 80 and when that price stays, let the tears flow down like you guys waited for a decent friggin game 6 years later.
 
Last edited:

DeezNutz

Banned
People keep on saying OoT cost 60$, but lets not forget OoT was a technological marvel at the time, its world size and graphics blows everything both PS1 and Saturn had to offer out of water in the same year. The new Zelda, Not so much

Unless you are shareholder, no reason to root for this greed, the budget they spend to make the game makes no excuse to charge that much
Zelda Oot didnt cost $60 because of it being a technological marvel it cost $60 because it was on a cartridge medium, and cartridges were more expensive than CD-rom ,that is why N64 games were more expensive that Ps1 games and also Resident Evil 2 for N64 was more expensive than the Playstation version,
STOP SPREADING MISINFORMATION ,its unhealthy
 

Banjo64

cumsessed
Alongside Elden Ring probably 2 of the only devs on the planet who should be charging £70. (Doubt this’ll be the price in the UK, Switch games are always available in the £30 region, I pre-ordered this for £48).
 

hemo memo

Gold Member
I paid $70+ for games routinely for the NES and SNES back in the day. For example, Super Street Fighter 2 for SNES was a $90 game in 1994. Even at $70, games are cheap now.
People bought brick dumb mobile phones for $3000 and now smart phones cost $600. Doesn’t mean price have to go up just because.
 
Last edited:
I could see if it was coming out on their next hardware , but Switch tech is way too old to charge $70 for. Fortunately BoTW routinely hit the $30-$35 sale price over its lifetime and I imagine this one will as well. I can play the waiting game as I'm in no hurry to play it. Still poor form by Ninty.
 
People bought brick dumb mobile phones for $3000 and now smart phones cost $600. Doesn’t mean price have to go up just because.
Sure, but I think there are many valid reasons for price of games to go up. It’s certainly not just because. Relatively speaking, pricing of games are fine, even at $70, in my opinion. Historically we are still in the cheapest era of gaming. Even at $70 a game.
 

hemo memo

Gold Member
Sure, but I think there are many valid reasons for price of games to go up. It’s certainly not just because. Relatively speaking, pricing of games are fine, even at $70, in my opinion. Historically we are still in the cheapest era of gaming. Even at $70 a game.
Not Nintendo though. I know why Sony and Microsoft and other publishers do it as to capitalize on early sales then price go down. Nintendo games rarely get discounted and it is on the Switch and it is a sequel building on the same structure so obviously development cost on the safe side.
 

PeteBull

Member
On one side, its switch game, aka about one third of xbox one graphics power, somewhere in the middle between ps360 and ps4/xboxone gen, on the other, and here lemme embrace all nintendo/zelda fans:


Some PS5 owners(and many other non ps5 owners aka concern trolls;p) were complaining about 10$ next gen graphics tax, didnt realise how good they had, bowser said to jimbo- hold my beer and a joycon- and went pedal to the metal asking 70$ for a fricken switch game, console that launched in march 2017 so in a month 6 years old :D
 
Not Nintendo though. I know why Sony and Microsoft and other publishers do it as to capitalize on early sales then price go down. Nintendo games rarely get discounted and it is on the Switch and it is a sequel building on the same structure so obviously development cost on the safe side.
Nintendo is working in the same market as the others and has the same inflation pressure to adjust pricing. To stay at $60 is a price cut. Going to $70 now is roughly staying in line with recent pricing. Here is data to 2020, which excluded inflation from the past two years which is probably about the $10 delta.

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2020/07/the-return-of-the-70-video-game-has-been-a-long-time-coming/
 

LeFAIS

Member
So BOTW and Smash are already the only digital Nintendo Switch games in EU that were 69,99 on release (still are lol).

So is TOTK gonna still be 69,99 or are we going to see that 79,99 price tag…
 
Last edited:

N30RYU

Member
That's the fee for the devs for reusing assets
So BOTW and Smash are already the only digital Nintendo Switch games in EU that we’re 69,99 on release (still are lol).

So is TOTK gonna still be 69,99 or are we going to see that 79,99 price tag…
79,99
 

Zannegan

Member
Not to mention how low the budget and care they put into each game, the new pokemon's performance is horrible, they could only be greedy as much as people keep on buying them. Even many Indie studio now produce better looking game and even more innovative gameplay.
Eh, let's give (negative) credit where it's due without being silly. Pokemon's always been an outlier because Gamefreak is a joke. Acting like it's representative of the rest of their output is extremely disingenuous.
 

scydrex

Member
No offence NONE these mean shit, maybe I'm alone on this but to me game's worth is all about my enjoyment, I couldn't give rat ass how much budget they spend or high tech the graphics are. To me game like Horizon worth less $10 because I simply didnt enjoy the game at all, meanwhile game Nier and 13 Sentinels has less high tech graphics I was more than happy pay full price because thats how much enjoyed those games.

You guys put waaaaay too much value in graphics.
No you are wrong. This is not about grahpics. Horizon is a good game but was not that great to me. I paid $30 for Horizon this year. Like i said i don't pay 60 or 70 for any game in this time. Ragnarok for me yeah i spent those 70 happy and i think it was woth it. Does it have the best graphics? No. Is Callisto Protocol worth 70 because of graphics? No. You guys are only thinking about graphics and is not only that. I would like to see how much money or what is the budget of the Switch games and see. Would you pay 70 for a indie game? Even if the game is good? Even if good is an indie game and paying 70 dosen't justify it. With the logic some have here. If Nintendo gamea are better than Sony or MS then Nintendo should ask 80 for their games because is worth it and still are good games.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom