LogFAQs > #986448367

dragon504 posted...

So, it will indeed cost $120 to get the full experience.

If you don't already have NSO, and an NSO subscription has uses beyond Pokemon. If Pokemon is the only game you're buying and you want everything, then yeah, you can spend up to $120 (though there are 1- and 3-month options for NSO that would probably be better than buying a whole year if Pokemon is going to be the only game you use it for, so $20 isn't necessarily realistic), but that's such an extreme that calling that the "cost" of the game is overtly misleading.

_Kaz posted...

You don't get engagement without hyperbole.

Pretty much. The backlash to the Switch 2's price has offered a bandwagon that gaming youtubers have to jump on to remain relevant, and that means lots of exaggerated clickbait.

bachewychomp posted...

There are so many other far more evil corporations out there

Yeah, that's really the thing. Yes, Nintendo's definitely too heavy-handed with their anti-piracy and patents and whatnot, but all of this boils down to "the big mean company is charging more money for the optional luxury than I want to pay!" That's... not a big deal, in the grand scheme of big mean companies. Even just within the video game industry, Nintendo doesn't make a habit of buying up studios and gutting them once their recognizable IPs have been milked dry, they're generally pretty good about DLC, they've avoided the worst of the predatory monetization that plagues the industry (at least in their paid games; the free ones are another story), they don't routinely generate stories about "stress casualties," nobody's getting raped on the job and having it covered up by senior management... They just sell games at prices some people don't want to pay. Oh no.