The $60 Experience

From one controversy to another…

This is the Nintendo Switch. You don’t need me to tell you it’s popular, its sales do that already. I also don’t need to say that much of the Switch’s library’s been well-received, their reviews spell that out. I really don’t have to say much of anything, but I am. Woe unto me!

A while back there was a Tweet. This Tweet went viral for irritating reasons. In it, the poster compared Metroid Dread to a PS5 game, using the latter to bash the former for being $60. The backlash was inevitable, with people pointing out that they were different stylistically and not warranting of the same visuals. The Tweeter soaked all this in with glee, so it persisted.

I’d normally let this go, but another incident happened recently. This time, it was Pokémon Legends: Arceus against Horizon: Forbidden West, with the Tweeter using their moment in the spotlight to state that anyone debunking the argument was a “Nintendo shill”. Once again, the Tweet received backlash. But this time, any attempts at reason were met with mockery. (Basically, Twitter was a mistake.)

I’ve been seeing a lot of these takes recently. They’re meant to rile people up, true, but underneath that is a problem I don’t think people fully appreciate. There’s an expectation that if a game from one console isn’t on-par with one from another, it’s automatically “bad”. And in light of the issues that’ve come to fruition in the video game industry lately, that’s pretty harmful. Let me explain why.

Video games, aside from being entertainment, are a business. They take plenty of time and money to make, not to mention manpower, and this isn’t acknowledged enough by gamers. That AAA title you own took years to make, perhaps even several delays. Even though you’re enjoying it, as you should, the amount of care that made it good didn’t materialize from thin air. It came from people, people with names.

Unfortunately, many of those people have undergone unreasonable overtime to make these game happen, possibly without being properly compensated. I know I’m speaking in hypothetical broad-strokes, but employee burnout due to “developer crunch” is something that’s only starting to get coverage now. It might seem relatively recent, but it’s not. And it’s happening all over the industry.

All of this to make products for gamers to enjoy. But since games aren’t an exact science, and something has to give, the visuals aren’t always “up to snuff”. And if we’re being honest, do they have to be? Why do shiny buckles and whistles equal quality? And why does failing this arbitrary metric matter for the sales price?

Then there’s the issue of Nintendo. Nintendo’s guilty of many shady practices: they’ve shut down gaming preservation sites without hesitation, and all while not preserving classic games. Their emulation of classic games when they occur, especially recently, has been piss-poor. They still don’t understand online functionality, only recently updating their servers for the modern age. They’ve also issued unfair copyright takedowns of fair use material. And they’ve used game announcement streams, or Nintendo Directs, to distract from all of the above.

However, when it comes to their games, they know how to deliver. They might delay a AAA title, only to scale back on some features, but their end-products are almost always good-to-great quality. Do they always look “high-tech”? No. But they don’t need to, because Nintendo stopped trying to do that after the disappointing sales of the GameCube.

I wish more gamers understood this. Not every video game needs to be high-tech and chock full of content. Nor does it need either to be worth full price. $60 might be expensive, but that should also reflect long-term value. And many Nintendo games do.

Think about it: how often do you play Smash Bros. or Mario Kart entries? How often do you go online? And how often do you keep coming back to the online? When you buy Nintendo games, you’re usually buying an investment. That’s why so many stay full price for so long, even outside corporate greed.

Besides, and I must emphasize this, I’d rather a shorter game with worse graphics that wasn’t exhausting to develop. That’s also something I don’t think enough gamers appreciate. With all of the stories of Activision-Blizzard that are circulating right now, to name one example, wouldn’t it make sense for game programmers to be treated fairly? You’d think basic human dignity would come before entertainment, right?

Does this mean you can’t enjoy Horizon: Forbidden West? Not necessarily. Video games are incredibly personal, and one size doesn’t fit all. But at the same time, I don’t think complaining that a Nintendo title is $60 at retail, especially when there’s a good reason for it, is a valid complaint. Because, again, one size doesn’t fit all. If the medium is be taken seriously, then this needs to be taken seriously too. And it’s not.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have more important issues to attend to…