>>39497310It's a fad like any other, they all pass with time
I don't think they need to be regulated anyway, let retards be retards, it's false to assume that they have significant impact on how much resources other large chunks of a franchise may get, good ventures pay for themselves usually, the only real issue is that naturally there is more useless garbage to ignore because they tend to copy them
>>39497325I think a better example would perhaps be something like about 4 to 6 million in sales lost from their average, not necessarily solely to the price rise though, it's just that the switch doesn't have such a high number of users to begin with and that 20$ might seem not like a lot but basically all of the favela kids who'd buy the ds games before on their cheap handheld can't do it anymore.
On the topic of elasticity though, how elastic pokemon goods are is directly linked to the trust people, particularly parents I think, have for the brand, if pokemon falls beyond a certain threshold (one that is ever increasing because peoples standards never go down) where they can't appeal to say, kids, for example, it is unlikely that their parents will ever buy another pokemon game for their child again, which would mean a rather slow and painful bleeding out unless the quality of the games actually increases to compensate for that, I agree that pokemon has more than enough money to make a few losses with their mainline titles, but one too many even at that point will make them crash and burn because it is the driving crux behind their real revenue, merchandise, without the context of a game it is very hard to sell plush toy lines. Though all this is just my opinion
