Yes, the US Constitution filters down. Part of it reads:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
That is known as the Supremacy Clause.
Now you may find it inconceivable or at the very least a bit unlikely that the relative position of the planets and the stars could have a special, deep significance or meaning that exclusively applies to only you.
But let me give you my assurance that these forecasts and predictions are all based on solid, scientific, documented evidence, so you would have to be some kind of moron not to realize that every single one of them is absolutely true.
I know this is a Reddit community, and I get the anger about Reddit going to shit, but I don’t think this sort of thing is healthy. A typewritten postcard might work people on the internet into a froth, but that’s the end. At best the person who gets Reddit’s mail is going to throw it out. At worst people will read it and mock its performative, passive aggressive outrage.
The earnest form of protest is avoiding Reddit, cataloguing its failings, and advocating for alternatives. They’re not worth this sort of mental space.
Online sale have reduced distribution costs and unlimited scaling compared to physical media, so successful games are far more lucrative now than they were and unsuccessful games don’t have losses from overproduction and returns from stores.
Certainly a factor that should be included in determining what a game costs, as is the 30% off the top taken by Steam, Microsoft, and Sony for most digital sales. Distribution in 2023 was not a factor in determining the current max price for a standard edition non-sports game, which was set in the early 00s.
I’m also comfortable seeing games that cost less to produce carrying lower price tags, as in many cases they do, Hades and Hi-Fi Rush coming to mind.
If selling at the current rate wasn’t profitable, gaming companies would have stopped making games by now.
They continue to make $60 games, yes. No one can say whether some company would have made the greatest game of all time last year if they’d been able to sell it for $70, or $80 or $100. Maybe they’re making it now as GTA6.
The economy of scale is what lets companies operate at higher costs. According to Wikipedia RE2 cost about $1 million to make. $1m might still buy a PS1 caliber game, but the remake cost at least an order of magnitude more. Many games now cost nine figures; GTA6 apparently cost $1 billion.
I’m not saying games should haphazardly inflate with everything else for the sake of share holders, but I’m open to the idea that the formula used twenty years ago to decide that AAA games should cost $60 might be out of date.
deleted by creator