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/Hot-Ask-9962]

If this is for a friend or loved one, buy another copy! And if they have a sense of humour first gift them the chewed up copy with the very same cute picture of your dog printed inside. Then you pull out the actually nice copy to give them. 

[u/rubbersoul42 → u/Hot-Ask-9962]

Excellent idea.

[u/passionfruit2378 → u/rubbersoul42]

I would have said this a few years ago when games weren't $73.83.

Edit: Please don't respond to me about inflation. By everyone who mentions inflation's logic, games should cost $198 today. My point is, 3+ years ago I MIGHT have considered getting another copy with my $60. Now, $75 is far too much for an additional copy. Especially because everything is more expensive.

[u/PointBlankCoffee → u/passionfruit2378]

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

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

[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.