games

thing is, economics of scale should reduce the price of digital games (which are essentially unlimited supply) and even the physical games which are at least manufactured using ubiquitous SD card technologies (a 256GB card, more than any game on the NS2 will be, costs like £30 at retail). Of course, software incurs a labour cost that is factored into software prices.

The only part of the commodity in question that could conceivably increase in price across a generation is the console, due to new/modified factory lines, retraining of staff etc. and the R&D that went into it.

We know from experience that software for these consoles does not need to increase in price over generations. Development costs are independent of the target platform beyond the cost of purchasing devkits and licenses (which is zero for a first party studio).

Perhaps a new system means your assets can be higher quality so you spend more time making them or something, but even then most assets are compressed and simplified, so in that sense a new platform would save some effort since optimisation is less necessary.

Point being, I might know jack shit about LTV and economics in general but the choice of inflating software prices is exactly that: a choice. It's a simple accounting decision to try and exhaust extra revenue streams by inflating every aspect of your platform's costs until they impact your profits.

It sucks for many of us, but Nintendo is just doing what Zynga and EA and Ubisoft did long ago: they're sacrificing their reputation and overall sales numbers for the suckers who will dedicate their entire existences to funnelling money into these companies who have discovered the rent-seeking phase of capitalism.