• ricecake@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    2 months ago

    That is a good point.
    On the flip side, they’re not largely selling something that has any physical finiteness to it anymore, and the sales volumes have increased drastically, resulting in significantly higher profits despite a smaller inflation adjusted unit cost.

    The cost of a good decreasing as an industry matures feels right. Jello cost 23¢ a box in 1940. Adjusted for inflation it should cost $5.17 a box now, but it’s only $1.59.
    When there’s 2 games to buy, they can be justifiably more expensive than when there’s a massive surplus.
    The games are different, but it’s not like consumers can’t find a different one they’ll also enjoy if the first one they look at is too expensive.

    Inflation has made $60 less valuable, but they’re not selling to the same market that they were 30 years ago either.
    It’s hard to use inflation to justify raising prices or adding exploitative features when you’re already seeing higher inflation adjusted profits due to a larger more accessible market, lower risk due to reduced publishing overhead, and more options for consumers, which would be expected to bring prices down.