Clearly the Japanese shouldn’t be making all our Japanese games! We need American businesses making Japanese games!
The Switch 2's price won't be impacted by Japan's new tariffs, but its games might
Submitted 3 days ago by fifty1@rimworld.gallery to games@lemmy.world
https://www.thegamer.com/nintendo-switch-2-game-prices-could-increase-us-tariff-japan/
Comments
Eggyhead@lemmings.world 3 days ago
Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 days ago
A JRPGA-JRPGmagic_smoke@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 days ago
Its like skyrim, with wait… Yeah I think that’s just skyrim.
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 2 days ago
anyone ready to reopen the “is avatar anime” debate?
skeezix@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Affected, not impacted. Never use the word impacted when you mean affected. Use impacted when bodies collide.
Agent_Karyo@lemmy.world 3 days ago
At first I was thinking, why not use “impacted”, it sounds a little bit awkward, but I’ve definitely seen it being used in relatively formal situations (or at least that’s what I remember).
But no, I looked it and “impacted” should not be used in the sense of affected. TIL.
emb@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Impact, impacted, impacts are totally fine for these use cases. As a native English speaker, I’d never heard of these rules against using them that way.
But even if there is a rule, it doesn’t matter; if the terms are used this way and fully understood by both the speaker and listeners, then the rule is void.
mohab@piefed.social 3 days ago
Where did you look it up?
Merriam-Webster defines it as:
the force of impression of one thing on another : a significant or major effect
And lists "affect" as a synonym when impact is used as a verb.
datavoid@lemmy.ml 3 days ago
Wow, reading this has a huge impact on me…
While the definition may disagree, I would argue that language is constantly evolving, and the actual meaning of words is based on how you use them.
otp@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
If media can say “slammed” to mean “said something about”, I can use “impacted” to mean “affected”. Especially when we have the word “impactful”.
Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
The Switch 2 seems doomed to fail. “Fastest selling console yet” isn’t much to say when your loyal base is huge. But as in most things the Pareto principle applies to sales, and most sales of any product comes from casual buyers. I don’t see casual buyers putting up with this. Parents might just buy mobile games for their kids, and teenagers and adults might as well just buy a PC handheld.
IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 2 days ago
I’m betting switch 2 implementation will be gradual, as switches get old and break, they will be replaced by the switch 2.
plus the occasional holiday consumption.
k0e3@lemmy.ca 3 days ago
What do they mean by Japan’s tariffs? It’s not ours, it’s the stupid Americans that’s imposing them.
PieMePlenty@lemmy.world 3 days ago
No, no, you don’t get it. It’s the other country that pays the tariffs… duh.
ms_lane@lemmy.world 3 days ago
In some cases ‘they do’ (they don’t) as the tariffs imposed may well be enough to stop people buying X at 150-200% of normal price, if selling X to US was a big enough chunk of BizY’s business, then that does impact the target country, not just US citizens.
In all cases US citizens hurt, but in a few the target country does too.
dwev@lemmy.ml 3 days ago
Well, Nintendo increased the sale price on NS2 in Europe and Australia to compensate for the tariffs in the US, so they could keep the end-user price down for US consumers even with tariffs. This effectively shifted the cost of the tariffs to European and Australian consumers, which is why I have sworn off Nintendo for good.
k0e3@lemmy.ca 3 days ago
I get that Nintendo’s policy is fucking you and the good friends in Europe and Australia, but it still makes the title misleading. My (Japanese) government didn’t impose the tariff on Nintendo products — the Americans’ did.