HYPETRACKER
EN ES FR DE
Controversy · comment analysis

Are video game prices becoming excessive?

What the comments on The Blood of Dawnwalker and Fire Emblem: Fortune's Weave really reveal, with the numbers to back it up.

Updated: 01/08/2026
Yes for some commenters, no for others: $70-80 launch prices are dividing opinion. On The Blood of Dawnwalker (~7% of discussion) and Fire Emblem: Fortune's Weave (~6%), the debate pits boycotters of an inflated price tag against players willing to pay for the content or to support the creators.

The context

Since the Nintendo Switch 2 launched in June 2025, several publishers have raised the standard AAA game price, long set at $60, first to $70 and then $80 for some titles (Mario Kart World, The Outer Worlds 2 on Xbox), sparking public discussion over this new pricing tier.

Rebel Wolves and Bandai Namco announced The Blood of Dawnwalker on December 15, 2024. When detailing its editions, they set the Standard Edition at $60, while the Eclipse and Day One editions were priced at $70. The game is scheduled to release on September 3, 2026, for PC, PS5, and Xbox Series X|S.

Fire Emblem: Fortune's Weave was announced by Nintendo on September 12, 2025, during a Nintendo Direct. On June 9, 2026, Nintendo revealed pricing of $69.99 digitally and $79.99 physically, with a special edition at $119.99. It is set to launch on September 17, 2026, for Switch 2.

Sources: Fire Emblem: Fortune's Weave Price And Box Art Revealed – Nintendo Life · New Fire Emblem confirmed to cost $80 boxed – Video Games Chronicle · The Blood of Dawnwalker Editions Guide and PC Requirements – VULKK.com · Will Video Game Prices Go Up in 2026? Industry Analysts Weigh In – Operation Sports

Factual background compiled from public sources — the debate analysis below relies exclusively on the comments.

How we got here

as told by the comments
June 12-23, 2026

Before any price backlash, Dawnwalker builds quiet hype (pre-orders, imagined mods), while on Fortune's Weave a first comment already defends the $80 price as standard Nintendo fare.

July 1, 2026

Dawnwalker's gameplay demo crystallizes the debate: visuals seen as dated spark the first "this isn't worth $70" comments as soon as the video drops.

July 2-7, 2026

The price-versus-quality comparison intensifies on Dawnwalker, with some cancelling collector's editions while others pledge to support the studio despite visual flaws.

July 19-20, 2026

The topic resurfaces on Fortune's Weave through price comparisons with other Nintendo titles, with defenders citing the expected hours of content as justification.

July 29, 2026

Both camps settle into position: an outspoken boycott of rising AAA prices on one side, loyalty to the creators or the content on offer on the other.

The Blood of Dawnwalker

~7% of the discussion on this game

On Dawnwalker, the price debate ignites right after the July 1 gameplay reveal, as visuals seen as dated fuel the claim that $70 is too much for this level of polish. Some players still back the studio, citing its smaller budget against AAA giants.

Boycott 65 %

The full $70 price tag is seen as unjustifiable given animations and visuals perceived as dated.
« This can't be worth $70 🙃 »
— @ChristianSanchez-k1x · ♥ 85 · translated · see original ↗
Day-one DLC and the broader rise in AAA prices are denounced as commercial drift, regardless of actual quality.
« Day 1 DLC is nothing but cut content and another way to monetize us, on top of games already asking $70 or even $80. Thankfully indie developers still make great games at affordable prices. »
— @DManDRoy · ♥ 75 · translated · see original ↗
Some argue that even initial excitement doesn't survive the price-to-quality comparison, leading to cancelled collector's pre-orders.
« I cancelled my collector's edition because of this video 😂 »
— @kozis7985 · ♥ 59 · translated · see original ↗

Understanding 35 %

Some players say they want to financially support the studio out of loyalty to The Witcher 3's creators, despite rough finishing touches.
« Can't wait to support this and support the actual creators of The Witcher 3. »
— @Dino9474 · ♥ 148 · translated · see original ↗
Others put the price in context, arguing the "cheap-looking" animations reflect a smaller budget than industry giants.
« This gameplay demo convinced me to buy the game. I won't be too hard on the somewhat cheap animations — I want to support developers doing their best with the budget they have. »
— @Djovell · ♥ 59 · translated · see original ↗
A core of fans stick to their day-one purchase, betting on trust in the studio's vision rather than the sticker price.
« This has been a day-one purchase for me since it was announced. Glad my faith in their vision paid off. It won't be perfect, but it'll be a solid game in a sea of trash. »
— @BallisticSollution · ♥ 0 · translated · see original ↗

Fire Emblem: Fortune's Weave

~6% of the discussion on this game

On Fortune's Weave, price talk stays marginal but resurfaces through comparisons with other Nintendo titles at the same price point. Most comments justify the $80 tag by the sheer volume of content and hours expected.

Boycott 25 %

Some commenters consider $80 excessive for a game, drawing mockery from others who point out their own inconsistent spending habits.
« The poor guy who refuses to spend $80 on a game probably spent $110-140 on a deluxe edition of another game — it just doesn't feel like it since that game's base edition is $60-70. »
— @malcovich_games · ♥ 0 · translated · see original ↗
A minority feel the price remains steep for a traditionally-scoped RPG, even given the promise of content.

Understanding 75 %

Players note that $80 matches what Nintendo games have cost for years, justified by 300+ expected hours of play.
« In Denmark, $80 is roughly what Nintendo games have cost for years, VAT included. Expecting 300+ hours out of this game, that price feels well worth it to me. »
— @ximeria2435 · ♥ 0 · translated · see original ↗
The announced content volume, said to be the series' largest, is cited to legitimize the development costs.
« This looks set to be the biggest game in the series, with the most content and hours — which also justifies the development costs. »
— @madnessarcade7447 · ♥ 22 · translated · see original ↗
Price comparisons with other Nintendo titles show the tag is in line with market norms rather than an outlier.
« Even Arlo's critics note the UK price is £10 cheaper than Mario Kart World, and Fortune's Weave is in line with Bananza's price. »
— @Wd52800 · ♥ 56 · translated · see original ↗
Where the debate standsThe pricing debate plays out at different intensities depending on the title: heated and divisive on Dawnwalker, where perceived quality fuels rejection of the price tag, and more muted on Fortune's Weave, where expected content seems to defuse criticism. In both cases the discussion remains a minority topic but reveals a growing sensitivity to perceived price-to-value ratio.

Frequently asked questions

Have video game prices really become excessive?
Comments are split: a majority see the $70-80 price as disconnected from perceived quality on Dawnwalker, while on Fortune's Weave most consider the price justified by the expected content.
Which games are caught up in the video game pricing debate?
The topic touches The Blood of Dawnwalker (~7% of discussion) and Fire Emblem: Fortune's Weave (~6%), two very different games facing the same scrutiny over their launch price.
Why do players think The Blood of Dawnwalker is overpriced?
The July 1 gameplay demo showed animations and visuals seen as dated, prompting many comments arguing $70 isn't justified for this level of polish.
Is Fire Emblem: Fortune's Weave's price really controversial?
Not really: most comments defend the $80 price by comparing it to other Nintendo titles at the same tag and citing the expected hours of gameplay.
Analysis built from 360 public YouTube comments on the tracked videos — updated on 01/08/2026. Our methodology