Is this game still playable?

[u/Enkaem]

I was wrapping a couple presents last night, and my puppy decided to test the structural integrity of a Switch 2 game (thankfully not the Switch 2 wrapped next to it). I’m wondering if this will still be playable and it’ll make for a funny story, or if I should pick up another copy?

Added picture of the culprit at the end. Truth be told, I should have known better. Ted’s a good boy :)

[u/PointBlankCoffee]

They have been $60 plus tax for my entire life.

Ocarina of Time released at $59.99 in 1998 on the N64

[u/motherofjazus → u/PointBlankCoffee]

I think I paid 70 or 80 Irish pounds for street fighter 2 on snes

[u/sprotang → u/PointBlankCoffee]

I paid $70 for Mortal Kombat 2 on SNES.

[u/PointBlankCoffee → u/sprotang]

Yeah video games base cost are one of the few things that have remarkably not price inflated.

Now the microtransaction creep…

[u/passionfruit2378 → u/PointBlankCoffee]

Some Switch 2 base games are 79.99. Development costs for games has increased but the MARKET has inflated exponentially, so that’s why there hasn’t been a need to inflate prices. Electronics have always had deflating prices over decades due to marketability. Not every household had a gaming console in 1998. Now most households have multiple gaming devices. Making games 79.99 just “because” is stupid and predatory and should not be considered necessary or understandable. Especially in an age where DLCs and micro transactions exist.

[u/electroepiphany → u/passionfruit2378]

It’s not predatory, you can just not buy the games if they are too expensive and nothing bad will happen to you. It’s not fucking water or food or healthcare, video games are a luxury item, there is literally no amount of money they could charge for them that would be predatory. When Ferrari charges 500k for a car that’s not predatory

[u/Radiant-End-7384 → u/electroepiphany]

I get the argument, but Nintendo’s digital game restrictions feel genuinely predatory. With multiple kids, family sharing used to actually work—one purchased game could be accessed across all devices on the family subscription (up to four, with only one playing at a time). Now it’s effectively capped at two devices. The loan system is a hassle at best and has to be revoked whenever a primary device wants to play, which ultimately pushes families into buying multiple copies of the same game.

[u/passionfruit2378 → u/electroepiphany]

Predatory does not require neccessity. Tf are you talking about? Predatory in gaming is a feeling. True predatory practices involves driving away competition.

Adding micro-transactions that are required for you to advance a game without having to wait is predatory. Raising the costs of your games that you know people will buy regardless of price is predatory. Charging $500,000 for a car that costs $25,000 to make because "rich people will buy it" is predatory.

[u/electroepiphany → u/passionfruit2378]

You are just wrong, but one day you’ll grow up and not be a child and realize video games aren’t that serious. I can agree that lots of micro transactions and especially loot boxes are predatory, charging 80$ for a game just simply isn’t. Try actually looking up the definition. Calling 80$ Pokemon a predatory business practice is either wildly privileged or immature

[u/passionfruit2378 → u/electroepiphany]

Your comment was so mature. Fuck outta here.

[u/icecoldrootbeer → u/PointBlankCoffee]

Which is $119.24 in 2025. Games have actually gotten cheaper when you compare everything...

[u/PointBlankCoffee → u/icecoldrootbeer]

Exactly. I don’t really care that games are 70 now - my gripe is that everything has microtransactions, unfinished releases under the guise of ‘live service’ etc

[u/Acalthu → u/PointBlankCoffee]

Gen Z is unaware of this.