1) I see this from you quite often. Please stop using Ad hominem in your posts, it really weakens your arguments.

2) Please re-read the article if the only thing you got from it was "1% are wealthy". That's far from the main point of it. What it is showing is the rate increase for income is much lower than the rate of inflation. The poorest 60% of the population income is not well adjusted for the rate of inflation.

Lets use the numbers that you have. Most gamer are familiar with the 50$ cost during the PS/GC era.
To put it simply, say you make 200$ in 2001 (Gamecube era) and a game cost 50$, you're spending 25% of what you have. Now to convert that number to 2013, a 50$ game would be around 65~, so yes 60$ is in fact cheaper. But since income only grew around 10% in that time, your income is 2013 is around 220$. so a 60$ game is now 27% of your income. For many people, it's a noticeable increase in spending over the course of a year.

So yes, there is a very valid reason as to why people are upset about the price increase even if many do not realize it. Even without knowing exactly why, people tend to notice when a hobby slowly seem to cost more and more.

You can argue that games are indeed still cheaper than the Snes games from 1995 and the 60$ isn't too bad. Keep in mind that there are many people who did not have purchasing power around this time and is unaware of this fact. To them the 50 > 60 price increase really did significantly impact their budget.

FYI, the 60$ price tag doesn't really bother me in particular since i make a comfortable amount. To say that anyone who have a problem with the price increase is an "entitled shitbag" is a rather arrogant and ignorant statement however.