Nintendo set its flagship title for the Switch 2, Mario Kart™ World, at $79.99. That’s $20 more than its predecessor, Mario Kart™ 8 Deluxe. That’s even higher than recent AAA titles like Call of Duty Black Ops 6 and EA Sports FC 25, which launched at $69.99 last year. All prices are in US dollars in this article.
Why did Nintendo raise its prices? Will the $80 price tag become the new norm, and will other AAA titles follow? What would be the criteria for $79.99 games?
Why Nintendo Raised Its Price Tiers
One challenge for hardware platforms like Nintendo is increasing revenue per user. Some players buy the hardware, purchase just a few titles, and keep playing the same ones for years. I don’t have public data to prove this, but it’s a recurring concern I hear from both platform and publisher sides. Some players spend hundreds of hours on titles like Animal Crossing™: New Horizons or Street Fighter 6, without buying anything else.
For developers, this is an honor. It shows that the game is attractive for a long time. But for the management, this causes a headache. It does not add revenue although the user is active. You cannot create these games every year. Nor can you launch new IPs with that level of success annually. And unlike free-to-play games, you cannot charge players through in-game items.
Raising the price for a long standing package game is one of the few ways to increase revenue. Nintendo tested this approach in 2023 with The Legend of Zelda™: Tears of the Kingdom, priced at $69.99. Nintendo may have gained confidence from strong sales, despite the $10 increase over its predecessor.
But not all titles can benefit from a $79.99 price tag.
Why Nintendo Created Multiple Price Tiers
Titles that can be priced at $79.99 are the ones that drive hardware sales. But most titles don’t drive hardware purchases. They’re bought later, after players already own the system. Nintendo positioned these titles in a second price tier at $69.99.
One way to understand consumer behavior in packaged games is to segment players based on how many titles they purchase during a hardware cycle and how much they are willing to pay per title. This framework helps explain why Nintendo introduced multiple pricing tiers, and why only certain games are likely to be positioned at the $79.99 level.
The horizontal axis shows the number of games purchased within a hardware cycle, and the vertical axis represents title price.
On the top left are the Flagship Buyers. These players may only buy one or two games. They are not especially price-sensitive, not because they are eager to pay $79.99, but because they buy games so infrequently. Some of these players may look like core gamers, but they spend years with just one title, like Grand Theft Auto V or Street Fighter 6.
On the top right are the Core Enthusiasts. These players buy many titles and are generally comfortable paying full price. They are highly engaged with the medium, often following new releases closely and supporting a variety of genres and franchises.
On the bottom left are the Occasional Buyers. These players purchase fewer than ten titles during a hardware cycle. Their purchases are often driven by trends, word of mouth, or viral success, rather than consistent engagement with the platform. Even players who normally spend hundreds of hours on a flagship title occasionally behave this way. Titles like Suika Game appeal to this kind of purchase behavior because they are low in price, easy to pick up, and often shared through social buzz or family recommendation.
On the bottom right are Budget Enthusiasts. These players are highly engaged and buy many games, but they are selective about price. They may occasionally pay full price for a highly anticipated title, but most of their purchases reflect price-conscious behavior. Titles in this segment compete on timing, pricing, and discoverability rather than brand power alone.
While players can shift vertically within the framework, paying full price for some titles and waiting for discounts on others, their position on the horizontal axis tends to be more stable, shaped by long-term habits or platform usage patterns.
It’s important to note that this framework maps behavior, not fixed player identities. The same person might buy Mario Kart™ World at full price and spend hundreds of hours on it, then casually pick up Suika Game for fun a year later. Their behavior moves across segments depending on the title.
Third-Party Publisher’s Pricing Strategy
Titles that drive hardware sales are not limited to first-party games. Elden Ring and Grand Theft Auto VI are games that make people buy the hardware. These titles are likely to adopt the $79.99 price, following the path Nintendo has pioneered. Titles that have a strong brand, don’t release sequels frequently, and are played over multiple years are more likely to justify an $80 price tag.
That said, not all AAA titles can price their title at $80. Titles with frequent sequels tend to sit on the right side of our framework. Asking $80 from the same players repeatedly may cause resistance. If these titles set their launch price at $80, they may need to offer frequent discounts or a cheaper alternative with limited modes.
What’s especially interesting is the tier below $59.99. This was home to many Nintendo first-party titles during the Switch 1 era, but appears vacant in the Switch 2 lineup after the price lift. How can publishers approach this price tier? There are broadly two ways.
One way is to attract players on the right side of our framework, Core Enthusiasts and Budget Enthusiasts. These players actively follow platform updates, publisher news, and discount sales. They’re familiar with a wide range of games, so they quickly understand what makes your title appealing. I assume many publishers already know how to develop and market to these segments.
Development Strategy for the Underserved Segments
The other way is to target players on the left side of our framework, Flagship Buyers and Occasional Buyers. These players often buy games that are already years old. They’re not particularly price sensitive. They don’t discover games through announcements or discounts, but rather through recommendations from friends, family, or YouTubers.
To reach this segment, I recommend that publishers and developers avoid looking at other games for inspiration. The title needs to stand out visually and conceptually from typical games. Look to other entertainment for ideas: films, books, music, theme parks, live performances, and sports. Look at personal experiences that you can capture in a video game: building something, catching something, moving your body, and communicating with others. Players on the left side of our framework play games when something catches their interest, but if it doesn’t, they won’t even turn on the console. They don’t have a dedicated time or budget for games.
To be clear, it won’t be easy to sell Switch 2 titles at $59.99 or $49.99. Many players will pay $79.99 for Mario Kart™ World, which reduces their available budget for other games. When a $59.99 or $49.99 title doesn’t feel worth it, players may choose even lower-priced games that offer better value, or they may simply not turn on their Switch 2.
Now that Nintendo has moved up its price tier, there’s a clear opportunity for third-party publishers to explore the lower price segments. Almost any topic can become a great game if it’s carefully crafted and with a bit of luck.
What’s Next
Many in the industry had been waiting for a price increase. Someone had to go first. It was Nintendo, not Sony, Microsoft, or any other major player, that opened the door.
If titles like Grand Theft Auto VI raise their price to $79.99, it will benefit third-party publishers. It would also benefit Sony and Microsoft by hundreds of millions of dollars, since their platform cut increases as well.
But Nintendo may also have an opportunity to reduce PlayStation and Xbox hardware sales by bringing high-demand third-party titles like Cyberpunk 2077 to its platform. I’ll explore this in a future article.
Thanks for reading. Feel free to share your thoughts or questions.
