• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Why the $70 next gen title price increase is horsesh*t.

Ic3man

Member
One of the reasons why Game Pass is so awesome. Otherwise I just wait for a sale and I never buy new games.
 

The_Mike

I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
Isn't it only Sony that has raised the prices? The thread makes it sound like every manufacturer does it.
 

TheAssist

Member
But they also used to sell WAY LESS units and didn't have any kind of DLC or in-game purchase. It was one and done.

I dont know if thats even true. Console sales werent that much lower. And while the attach rate might have been lower, so was your competition on the market.

Looking at top selling charts during SNES or PS1 era, its not that far of from today's charts. Back then, you had a few super hyped games per year, now you have stuff every few weeks and live services and mobile and what not. The market has increased, but not all of it was the console AAA market (most of it was mobile).
 

brian0057

Banned
People are actually arguing that despite everything getting more expensive, this should not go for games?
Like...in what world are you living in? Unless there is a disruption in the economy everything will always get more expensive at some point (usually when the industry has matured and has reached stagnation in terms of its audience size).

The arguments made in the OP are BS. Because movie ticket prices are different in different regions game prices cant go up? What?

Also this seems to be a very american way of thinking since the rest of the world is paying much more for games have gone through price hikes in the past.
Shit DLC, MTX and Loot Boxes are a result of stagnant prices (to an extend) and now that they are here, they are here to stay.
I'd rather pay more if that ensured devs can make a living and game ideas dont get scrapped during pre production because "it can not be monetized".


The market has to decide whether people are willing to pay for it, but outright saying that games should never get more expensive is another level of entitlement. Crazy talk.
You either didn't watch the video nor read the TL;DW.
Your spiel about MTX and lootboxes is BS. They'll do both. They'll sell you the game at $70 while still shoving MTX and lootboxes down your throat. Why would they stop doing it when it gives them so much money?

Also, the market decides the price? Great. Then I'll decide to wait for the market to drop the price.
 

Plantoid

Member
You guys should be thankful, here where I live games have 70% tax...

That's why gamepass is incredible value for me

If I had money for sure I would be buying a ps5 first, there's no arguing against sony first party, don't get me wrong, I'm not ultra poor, but a game can cost 1/10 of my wage or more, gamepass costs me 1/66 of my wage
 

TheAssist

Member
Morons always justify scummy practices by gaming companies. It's like Stockholm Syndrome or something

Raising prices is like the least scummy thing the video games industry has done since .... I dont know. Since video games I guess.
After surprise mechanics, forced DLC, crunch and a ton of other things, I think saying "Here is the game, thats the price. Take it or leave it." is not very scummy.
Of course a lot of companies will eventually raise prices along with having MTX and loot boxes, because the market is now used to these practices. I can see how people do not like that.
But Sony traditionally has not but the practices into their games and therefore I am willing to pay more, if the game itself is good.

Its a mater of preference and how much money you have of course. But I can not stand the stance that says all games should never cost more than x amount. Because thats a stupid thing to say.
 

TheAssist

Member
You either didn't watch the video nor read the TL;DW.
Your spiel about MTX and lootboxes is BS. They'll do both. They'll sell you the game at $70 while still shoving MTX and lootboxes down your throat. Why would they stop doing it when it gives them so much money?

Also, the market decides the price? Great. Then I'll decide to wait for the market to drop the price.

I guess you havent read my post :)
 

lock2k

Banned
Raising prices is like the least scummy thing the video games industry has done since .... I dont know. Since video games I guess.
After surprise mechanics, forced DLC, crunch and a ton of other things, I think saying "Here is the game, thats the price. Take it or leave it." is not very scummy.
Of course a lot of companies will eventually raise prices along with having MTX and loot boxes, because the market is now used to these practices. I can see how people do not like that.
But Sony traditionally has not but the practices into their games and therefore I am willing to pay more, if the game itself is good.

Its a mater of preference and how much money you have of course. But I can not stand the stance that says all games should never cost more than x amount. Because thats a stupid thing to say.
OK, but I bet if a company comes and swing a dick to someone's face, there's always going to be a moron to defend it. "Oh, the corporate bukkakke was really good, I really enjoyed it, you should feel great to swallow (insert company's name)' cock, it's a privilege" :messenger_tears_of_joy:

I remember people defending Capcom after the disc locked content from SF X Tekken, I mean, c'mon...

But you do have a good point.
 

brian0057

Banned
I guess you havent read my post :)
I did.
And it's cute that you think that with the game at $70 the developer will get more money when reality has shown that it isn't the case. Just look at Activision/Blizzard who made a metric tonne of cash last year but still fired hundreds of employees whill Bobby Kotick received a $40M salary.

Also, if you have to keep cutting content to meet a deadline or risk bloating the price of the game? That's a you problem. Manage development better or suffer the consequences.
 
I believe the $70 price point is to get more people to pull the trigger on $30 to $35 games a few month after launch.

People that normally wait are probably going the distance and waiting for games to hit $15-$20. At that point, publishers are just getting pocket change and may be better served by going to game pass or plus. There is still money to be made in the middle of the spectrum, but last gen I think less people jumped in at $30 than publishers wanted. Now they will. $30 is a "steal" now.
 
Last edited:

dano1

A Sheep
If it’s a true AAA game I have no problem finding 10 $1 bills to show my appreciation for a job well done. Do your homework first before you blindly spend your money! I don’t care if it’s $20 I’m not buying it if it’s trash!
 
Last edited:

Hudo

Member
I mean, if games are going to cost more and still have the audacity to have microtransaction, season pass and lootbox shit in them, I am just gonna be picky as hell about what I buy (and consequently buy less games overall).
 

quest

Not Banned from OT
Meh jack your game prices up... i just buy less games, take less chances on unproven IPs and enjoy services like gamepass that much more.

People defending these prices while Bobby Kotick took home 40 million alone last year lol
You sir have my axe. Summed up my thoughts perfectly on the matter. I paid more in the old days but they had a big built in cost of the cartridge. Also had many local rental options for short games.
 

hybrid_birth

Gold Member
Depends on the game. Miles Morales only being 8 hours represent terrible value in comparison to COD; with single player campaign, zombies, multi-player and warzone.

The cost to hours played ratio makes a mockery of Morales.
I could of sworn the base miles morales was $50. Still id rather spend my $50 on a 100+ hour rpg .
 
You do know after 5 years and the $900 you spent you own absolutely nothing. 0 games!

I've spent £120 for 3 years so nowhere near that amount. But anyway, I have zero issues with this when it comes to Netflix / Spotify.

Are you going to tell all the people who have subscriptions to these the same thing?
 
Last edited:

RoadHazard

Gold Member
Depends on the game. Miles Morales only being 8 hours represent terrible value in comparison to COD; with single player campaign, zombies, multi-player and warzone.

The cost to hours played ratio makes a mockery of Morales.

MM isn't $70. Just like how $60 became $70, $40 became $50 (which is a slightly larger relative increase, but yeah).
 

Edgelord79

Gold Member
I love paying more for a product. This is terrific!

Looking forward to $100 games more though, just more convenient to go into a store and hand over a $100 bill and not deal with all the change. No big deal, I'll just get another job.
 
Last edited:

ReBurn

Gold Member
I don't mind paying more for a truly exceptional product. I don't think that every new game that releases is worth $60-$70. Outside of Sony first party, RDR2 and Forza Horizon 4 I haven't seen much worth paying full price for this generation. Raising prices will make me more selective, but I'll still pay it for the handful of games that I know are worth it.
 

Nikana

Go Go Neo Rangers!
I wouldn't call it bullshit but I would call it short sighted. The solution for the game industry to stop ballooning costs is not to raise the price of games. They have already done that successfully with different paths to revenue with success. The cost to the consumer has already gone up quite a bit to get the complete package.

This notion that $70 is long over due would make sense if games didn't now nickle and dime the shit out of you. They are still making more than enough money on these projects but they are seeing that their long term profits are in jeopardy which is why the price increase is happening now, to protect those future numbers.

Good luck with that.
 
Last edited:
If gamers could get over the “I have to have it day 1”. You could enjoy this gen and never spend more than 50 on a new game
I think the reason that is, is because people can't keep their mouths shut when a new game/movie is released and wanna be the first to stream/talk about it. Most people have some form of social media, and love to spoil shit. Gotta get there at moment 1 to avoid spoilers sometimes.

I hate the movie theatre experience because people are incapable of keeping a phone in their pocket for 2 hours. But if I don't go opening day, it will get spoiled.
 
Last edited:

John2290

Member
I'm not paying 80 euro for games and I'm pretty fucking hardcore, I'll be letting next gen lag. They've shot themselves in the foot here, I'd reckon but sure you can't underestimate idiots and their money.
 

Aesius

Member
Back in the day we used to get our games on cartridges. In those days you could finish a game within an hour for a cool $60-$80, some even hit $90. Good times.

Yep. I remember seeing Virtua Racer for Genesis for $90 in Kmart as a kid. I think I paid $70 for Goldeneye on N64.
 

Andodalf

Banned
Gamers want game with better graphics, more content, and live support, but also want them to stay the same price despite inflation, and have no MT.


Something has to give my dude.
 

me0wish

Member
I remember when dlc was a joke.
I remember when microtransactions were a joke.
But now, they're not just acceptable, but celebrated as well, just look at how people were reacting to price reveal of the dual sense and how they're reacting now to 70$ games, I think 80$ games will be here sooner than we expect.
 
Last edited:

me0wish

Member
I mean, if games are going to cost more and still have the audacity to have microtransaction, season pass and lootbox shit in them, I am just gonna be picky as hell about what I buy (and consequently buy less games overall).

Enjoy next gen.

9FWKFvv.jpg
 
Last edited:

SafeOrAlone

Banned
I'm all for it if the experiences continue to get better. If they continue with microtransactions or other poor practices, it will no longer be worth it for me.
 

Fbh

Member
I'll say so far I'm seeing nothing in these new games to justify $70. As cool as, say, Demon Souls looks, it seems to be a 1:1 remake of 11 years old mid-low budget game.
As always though, it's up to people to vote with their wallets. If publishers see day 1 sales dropping considerably they'll probably adjust the price. The way these things go, I expect people to bitch and moan while they still end up paying up, so this price increase is here to stay.

Honestly though, if you are living in the US it's not that bad. Hell, I wish games would only have gotten $10 more expensive around here instead of costing literally twice as much as they did 10 years ago.
 
Last edited:

ReBurn

Gold Member
Gamers want game with better graphics, more content, and live support, but also want them to stay the same price despite inflation, and have no MT.


Something has to give my dude.
If we weren't already paying for more content via DLC and micro transactions I could see using that as a reason for raising prices. But this price increase isn't intended to increase value. It's to increase revenue.
 

Andodalf

Banned
If we weren't already paying for more content via DLC and micro transactions I could see using that as a reason for raising prices. But this price increase isn't intended to increase value. It's to increase revenue.

They are businesses. Games cost more to make now. If they put up a bigger investment they want a bigger return.
 

truth411

Member
This simply doesn't work. You can make the same argument with the increase in price from $50 to $60 back at the begining of the 360/PS3 era.
 

MHubert

Member
This video right here summarizes why every argument in favor of the price hike is wrong.



For the TL;DW crowd:
  • "Budgets have gotten insane, so the price increase reflects that."
When RDRII has horses whose ball shrink when it's cold, you know money could be shaved off somewhere.
This is a management problem. Manage better.
  • "Movie tickets have gone up in price due to inflation. Why not videogames?"
Movie ticket prices vary by region, by time, and even by film. But overall, the price is not standardize, unlike gaming. Also, using DVD's doesn't work since those prices haven't gone up in over 15 years.
  • "It will get rid of loot boxes and micro-transactions. So it's either that or paying -$70."
No, it's gonna be both. Why would publishers get rid of such lucrative practice. They'll sell you the game at $70 while also shoving in MTX and lootboxes.
  • "Games will be better."
This is highly subjective and depends heavily on individual developers. And considering the state of the last two generations, I'll just keep my money instead.
  • "It's inevitable. People will pay it."
This is actually the least BS reason. No, I won't. I'll just wait for titles to drop in price or during a Steam sale. Good luck getting that new standard to stick.

I get it feels bad to pay more, but games have become more expensive to make, and we have had the good ol' 60$ standard for a long time now without it adjusting to inflation. No matter how you twist and turn it; that is the simple reason and it is not horsesh*t at all.
 
Last edited:

brian0057

Banned
I get it feels bad to pay more, but games have become more expensive to make, and we have had the good ol' 60$ standard for a long time now without it adjusting to inflation. No matter how you twist and turn it; that is the simple reason and it is not horsesh*t at all.
So... N°5 then? "It's inevitable"? No argument, basically.
I can just as easily say they can fuck themselves and wait for the games to drop in price a month after launch... just like literally any game not made by Nintendo does.
 

MHubert

Member
So... N°5 then? "It's inevitable"? No argument, basically.
I can just as easily say they can fuck themselves and wait for the games to drop in price a month after launch... just like literally any game not made by Nintendo does.
Sure. I'm just adressing your overall point that the reason(s) for a price hike in games are H-sh*it, when in fact it makes a lot of sense for obvious reasons.
 

Tmack

Member
The DVD argument is totally wrong.

The home video is a dying market and by no means a fair comparison.

VIDEO%20MARKET.1573232240621.png


And btw, adjusted by pure us inflation, games had to cost 79 and not 69.
 
Last edited:

AgentP

Thinks mods influence posters politics. Promoted to QAnon Editor.
Morons always justify scummy practices by gaming companies. It's like Stockholm Syndrome or something

They are businesses, they don't have personalities. They have stockholders and have to make money. If they don't they will invest elsewhere and you will have less games to play. Due to inflation and rising costs of development, we are all paying one way or another. There is no free lunch.
  • Outsourcing - moving jobs to low paying countries.
  • Loot crates - and no not all games have them and they are becoming less popular and sometimes illegal.
  • Quality - ship games incomplete and buggy. Fallout 76
  • Game length - Just put less in the game, sell more later as DLC
  • Price - come games are not full price, they are cheaper to produce. We hade $40/50 releases this last gen. We have $20 indie games.
  • Remasters/Special ed - recoup costs with extra releases
  • Kill the resell market with physical- MS thought of this, want it to come real?
  • Digital market - more profit, no resale
You cannot just ignore the real price of game production, the consumer is paying no matter what. You either pay up front and make a healthy ecosystem or you force them to make you pay later or with hidden costs.

The fact that I paid more for some games in the 1980s than now is just staggering. Those game probably took 40 people 18 months to make versus hundreds of people for three years. Since I want more games being made and want more people in games development, I want to pay for my games. $70 is completely reasonable for a 10-40+ hours of entertainment IMO. Everyone has the option to not buy on release day and let the competitive nature of the market drive prices down.

Maybe I'm just a "moron", but at least I'm not a child who doesn't understand economics.
 

nkarafo

Member
Game company CEOs are millionares (a few even billionares) and they get paid such huge bonuses that they could produce an "AAA" videogame just from those alone.

Recently, Activision's CEO got such a massive bonus (while letting go hundreds of employees but that's another story).

They claim games are more expensive to make and we have to pay more for them, while earning enough money to fund new games just by themselves and see little to no difference in their overall net worth at the same time.

So yeah. It's all bullshit.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom