Would you pay $69.99 for Next Generation Games?

GamerFitNation's Gregory Laporte writes "Let me be clear before I begin, games are not going to cost $69.99. Sony has said that they are in fact going to be cheaper. However, during an EA investor call EA's CFO mistakenly said they will be. Well after hearing this, it raised some thoughts in my mind. If games did cost $69.99 would you be willing to go all in next generation? Earlier this month head honcho Jack Tretton said games are actually cheaper than PlayStation 3 games. If this is true, then how could EA even mistakenly mention this? Is it to in a way gauge consumers interest or is this EA living up to its reputation."

[pr0t0typeknuckles]

looks like ill be waiting for price drops this entire gen,if a game is $75.

[Thatguy-310]

I'll pay for them. But I'll be a lot more selective at what games I get at or around launch. Basically what I'm doing now

[T900]

Well in some regions of the world game are already selling for 80usd. I wonder what will happen if the price rises to 75usd in the US. It probably will rise to 100usd where i am at.

Oh well.. Good old Steam, already have 200+ games there. Most of them bought on discounts for 10-15usd. Ill just carry on buying games on Steam, no harm done.

@delboy

"You'll pay, one way or another believe me."

That depends, I dont buy DLCs and for the sort of games i like aka "Skyrim", there usually are so many Mods on the PC it makes DLCs look like a joke. In todays day and age being a bit smart can save you a chunk.

[delboy]

You'll pay, one way or another believe me.
There will be more dlc (cut out content) next gen and microtransactions on top of that.

For me next gen is on pc, and games are cheaper also. :-P

[Cupid_Viper_3]

I'm with you on that Dboyc310. Especially when multiplatform games a developed with the lowest common denominator, why the would I pay $69.00 plus taxes for them?

Games like GT5, Halo 4, Uncharted Series, God of War, Gears of War, yes. As those games are pushing the boundaries on their respective consoles.

But if EA thinks that I'm going to pay $69.00 plus Taxes, plus Micro Transactions for new soccer cleats in FIFA 14, than they've lost a cx in me. I've been Playing Fifa since I came to the US in 1999 til Present day. So EA can count the years and make the decisions on whether or not it's worth it to Nickle and Dime their customers.

Rant Over......for now.

@ so-called Journalist from Major Websites, This is a great opportunity to do something for the gaming community for once. We have Youtube and Facebook, and Twitter, shove a camera in their faces and make those execs explain to the gaming community why they "think that we LOOOVE micro transactions" and other BS they come up with, and post it on youtube and facebook. You'll gain back some credibility from us gamers.

Expose them for the crooks they are. Why not make it so that $100.00 buys you to games brand new, and you'd solve the used games sales problem by half already.

[ProjectVulcan]

I remember back when Xbox 360 first arrived, the games sold for their RRP in the uk which was £44.99-£49.99. It was at least 6 months before games came down to £39.99 and most big titles were no less than this, Gears of War was a year after 360 launched and it was still mostly £40-£42 new.

As generations go on typically game prices do deflate a little mainly because the userbase swells and the greater sales of games make up for it.

I fully expect games on a brand new console platform to come in to £44.99 or more for the first few months.

If you wanna be an early adopter you have to pay up for it...be it hardware and games. Thats a fact.

[admiralvic]

Indeed, though I don't think it will come to this. Thanks to the failure that was Call of Duty Black Ops Declassified, companies SHOULD have seen how angry people can get about a minor jump in price. It would have to be a universal jump to avoid this, which I can't see every company attempting this.

[AngelicIceDiamond]

Lol there's no way I'll pay 69$ game. Because every dev will think their game will be 70$ quality.

Publishers will advertise like crazy, Hype it up to no end, tell you everything you wanna hear. Just anything to take your 70$.

You go to the store buy it take it home play it and it turns out it has just as much quality as Aliens: Colonial Marines and Duke Nukem Forever.

There's no way I'll let them burned me out of 10 extra bucks with a fear of buying a game that could possibly be crap.

Believe me, if that's the case devs will do and say anything to sell it at a extra 10$. They'll probably release false demos (Aliens)

Just because its "next gen" doesn't automatically mean its gonna be a 70$ product? Devs will still make bad games come next gen. As well as some games not even looking next gen. Devs have more power with these machines but its up to them to make a AAA game that's scream 70$ if they want my extra 10$. As far as I know, there's no more excuses when it comes to limited tech. Its new tech VS developer skills and imagination.

[joab777]

Exactly...i hav no problem paying for a ge like bioshock. But i will be very selective.

[LOGICWINS]

Screw that. If that happens, I'm just gunna get Steambox and enjoy my heavily discounted games. $75 for a game is a joke.

[ceballos77mx]

Don't forget the DLC that's allready in disc.

[Good_Guy_Jamal]

I don't pay $60 already for current gen games, I sure as heck won't be paying $70 next gen.
I'll go with Wii U not Steam though, I like physical copies.

[Cupid_Viper_3]

We don't always see eye to eye on most issues, but I agree with you Logic.

Used games sales on the rise:

Real people--- Economy is bad, I'm depressed and struggling to make ends meet, I want a distraction but I can't afford a $60.00 + Taxes game, So I buy it used.

Execs with big Bonuses--- The used game market is on the rise, let's raise prices of games, also ask for online pass on used games. Oh, let's also lock access to content on your disc as DLC, and let's add micro transactions, "They Love it!"

It's like they're living on planet Mars or something. The reason people buy used games it's because the current price of games ARE TOO DAMNED HIGH. Plus some systems requires that you pay extra to play online, Plus DLC's, plus internet bills. And not because they don't want dividends on your stock prices to fall EA.

[LOGICWINS]

^^Steam is only getting more and more popular. Once people see how much value the service offers, other services/publishers will be forced to follow suit.

[BlmThug]

I already buy carefully at £40. £45-50 will mean even more waiting for price drops for me

[Blacksand1]

Hell No! Its already bad when you buy a game that's not good, then you pay for one 70-75 that's not good too.

[ElitaStorm]

depends how good the game is

[BillySpandex]

I'll just be more selective. It means fringe games or new IPs will have to find ways to entice me. Older IPs will have to work hard to keep my interest. It's a sad reality, but a higher price point means that I won't just walk into a store and walk out with 5 or 6 games.

[ajax17]

Same here. $60 is bad enough.

[fermcr]

There are still too many unanswered question relative to next gen consoles, and this is one important one.

How much will AAA games cost ?

I'm not rich. If games become too expensive, then next gen will probably be a no go for me.

[aceitman]

it will be the downfall of next gen , not in this economy .

[lilbrat23]

I won't like others will wait on price drop. Even now $60 is a bit much for half a$$ games that you beat in less then 5 hours.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

Nope. I hardly pay $59.99 for current gen games nowadays so there is no way I'd pay $69.99. Games need to go back to the $40-$50 sweet spot. I hardly buy games day one anymore because of the price. I don't like to buy used so I always end up getting a game a couple months after release now due to waiting for price drop.

[WildArmed]

Ditto, I picked up games last gen (ps2/xbox) new because they were in the sweet range of 30-40$.

Now they are 60$ and I rarely buy a game on launch anymore. I just keep a 6 month delay on new games, I always have games I want that are much less than 60$ because they were released 6 months ago.

And sometimes you see great deals on amazon and such. I rarely pay the 60$ tag, I don't think I'll ever pay beyond that without some deep thought.

[BillySpandex]

I haven't bought a launch title in months. These days, I generally only buy games that are going on sale. The shift from $50 to $60 has definitely meant less game sales from me, and if it hits the $70 mark, then I probably won't buy new releases.

At least, the back catalogue of PS3 and Xbox games will be cheaper, so all in all, the onus will be on nextgen to entice me to part with my cash.

[SOD_Delta]

If EA (or any other publisher) is going to charge 69.99$ for a game I won't be buying a lot of games day one. But I don't think 70$ will be next gen standard MSRP.

[shackdaddy]

Nope. Especially if they were like this gen. I'll just wait for sales.

[Godmars290]

Considering DLC, you're paying $70+ for a "full" title right now.

And if gamers were $100, as they are in countries other than the U.S., they would still be asking for more money via DLC. as they actually are.

[Zodiac]

Nope. 60 dollars is too much as it is.

[AzaziL]

If only gamers understood economics, I searched the front page of comments and not one hit on the word "INFLATION". To put in perspective, a game that released for $60 in 2000 would now cost $80. Spending $60 in 2000 is the equivalent of spending $45 in 2013.

TL;DR: your money is less valuable now then it was a decade ago. Thus games at $60 are actually cheaper then they've ever been.

[fredolopez]

Only if DLC became a thing of the past would I pay so much

[worldwidegaming]

We already pay when we pay for DLC.
Just add $15 to the price and see.

[Bimkoblerutso]

Unfortunately the DLC/microtransaction trend only seems to be intensifying. So...seventy bucks plus the price of the "real ending" or that day one dlc that, take it from them, was NEVER meant to be in the original game.

[ddurand1]

Not really too knowledgeable, but if these consols are more like PC platforms shouldnt development costs be lower?

[infamous-butcher]

$69.99 is £46
We in Briton already pay this for a new game and have for some time.

[banjadude]

Probably not, seeing as how certain limited/collector/special editions are $69.99+ and they are total crap! Also, with review embargos being so fierce, it gets even more difficult to decide.

[PRHB HYBRiiD]

Maybe...i'll gladly pay 75 for a next gen GTA,BF,GT and uncharted game but not for any.

[Riderz1337]

If it's a great game and has a big single player campaign then I would gladly pay 70$ for it.

[Conzul]

'fit were a playstation exclusive I'd pay $70 for it, but not gladly. And never for a multiplat, lol don't they wish.

Can you imagine? Two AAA games and you're down $150. Phuck that.

[Arai]

The industry is becoming even more greedy...
40-50 USD should be the average price for games...IMO.
70 USD = 70 Euro = 85 USD +- for a game.....hell with that.

[2pacalypsenow]

we already are 59.99 plus DLC and for some games dlc is a must like halo you have to buy map pack to get into certain games

[ALLWRONG]

hell no

[princejb134]

if its 69.99
i would say goodbye gaming
or maybe go into only handheld games which are cheaper

[THEMIGHTYDOOVDE]

Hollywood movies cost more to make and we're are not asked to pay $70 for admission or a copy!

[Conzul]

That's cus we're forced to make up for all the money lost from people who aren't interested in games.

[ShaunCameron]

That's because Hollywood movies have established multiple revenue streams to recoup the costs such as retail media sales, foreign box office sales, digital streaming/downloads, etcetera. You can say that Hollywood movies are subsidized.

Video games are heavily reliant on retail sales thus unsubsidized. It doesn't have multiple revenue streams (yet).

@ Conzul

<That's cus we're forced to make up for all the money lost from people who aren't interested in> games.>

Isn't that the result of rising development costs and a stagnant core base?

[dazzrazz]

Steambox

[orakle44]

You all will pay whatever they charge for a game, you do now, whats gonna change for the next console cycle. Dont kid yourselves

[ApolloTheBoss]

I've made mistakes in the past when it comes buying suckish games at launch. I've learned from them and won't be making them again. The only games I'll be buying at launch are the ones I absolutely KNOW will blow me away and will get a lot of good reviews. Everything else will be bought when the price drops to at least $40.

[BLKxSEPTEMBER]

Hell No!!!

[StrongMan]

Nope

[TheCommonDan]

This article lost me when they mentioned that in the UK we had to pay 69.99 euros, weve got the pound sterling.

[Bznoutlaw]

depends on the i will be more selective tho. 75.00 is alot for a game

[FrigidDARKNESS]

I will pay 69 .99 for Bf4 but not on a Madden and NBA Live.

[CapsLocke]

Only retarded console fanboys would pay 1/3 price of their entire console for a single game, and than complain about how PC gaming is expensive. Lol.

[R_aVe_N]

I will not pay 69.99 for a standard game period I will wait for price drops. I don't even pay 59.99 now for new releases I can always find it cheaper someplace.

[SkullBlade169]

No.

[sdozzo]

I think we will see some titles at 39.99 and 49.99 more than the 69.99. These companies have to move software. Not many but more than we saw this generation.

[DethWish]

No. I'm already waiting for price drops

[PooEgg]

I would be on board with pricing being different to match the quality of each game, but 69.99 across the board is not something I am excited about.

Games keep getting shorter, buggier, less interesting, and more expensive (due to DLC). A lot of games are not even worth their current 59.99 price tag, so if developers want me to pay more they will need to start by making games that are actually worth their asking price.

[Thirty3Three]

PlayStation 4's games are going to be 60 bucks. They've already confirmed this...

smh

http://coinarcade.org/2013/...

[xabmol]

GameFly.

[DwightOwen]

If they stop leaving out content to sell later as DLC? Then yes.

[Drekken]

Since games these days have no longevity. NO WAY.

[Sainox16]

Haha hell no I'll wait till price goes down

[DarkZane]

Also, they say they want to eradicate piracy, yet an increase of 10$ would likely push people to do it even more and if people decide to do it, they can't stop them. A lot of people live in a place where it's not even illegal. Hell, I could do it here, I live in a place where it's completely not illegal for personal use. So here, you can pirate freely and they can't touch you unless you start selling something.

Also, if you make money from it, unless you sold your stuff on the Internet, good luck catching people who sell those things to their friends for cheap.

[OneAboveAll]

I already do! It's called TAX!

[Sh0ckWav3]

f-ing no...theres no need to do a price hike..specialy when a lot of game are getting a digital release..theres a ton os games i havent played and if they do a price hike..ill be on last gen for a long time..

[BuffMordecai]

You would be a fool to buy a game at that price and companies would be foolish to even ask for such a price. Its because of shit like this that will lead to another gaming crash, the exploitation of the consumer has gotten progressively worse this generation and I fear for the tactics that may be implemented in the next. In a way, we are enabling these companies to get away with this by complying and just bending over to the will of corporations, be it disk locked content, excessive dlc, price gouging, pay to win, etc; you give them an inch they will take a damn mile. And as Quefy B said, it is a business in order to make money, but that doesn't mean you bludgeon the consumer over the head with excessive pricing and then expect them to shell out even more money for content you intentionally left out in order to bleed them dry, you instead make a quality product that is fully worth the price of admission and deserving of its sales. Unfortunately, there seems to be a lack of smart consumers discouraging these questionable business decisions so the situation will probably get worse.

[SatanSki]

I would even pay $100 but nobody will do a game to my preferences :-)

[SEAN1617]

If the same game, developed for a PC today is $49 why the heck is it sold on current consoles for $59? Is it because development is easier on PCs today?

If that is the case, then in all likelihood games this Generation SHOULD be cheaper than last Generation, since the architecture for PS4 and 720 are based on PC.

EA Don't even try to push up prices more, your games are awful to begin with, except for a few, and if you are looking for a reason for the slump in game sales, you only have yourself to blame.

Companies like EA and Activision, are killing gaming with mediocroty. Well I say keep your over priced garbage.

[Double_O_Revan]

No, I'd just wait for price drops like I've been doing now.

[Shacojin]

Will pay that much for certain games, hopefully still $59.99 US, but annualized sports games like Madden, 2K, fifa and the sort should only be $49.99 or less.

[V0LT]

If you buy DLC you are already paying $70+.

[Jamiex66]

Australia have been paying even more than that for years.

[dee-ecks]

NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO,

[jakmckratos]

You have 720 nos...is this coincidence?!?!?!? Xbox 720 just announced! It's slogan is "NO"!

[dee-ecks]

Weird, I had no idea I could tell the future!!!

[LtFaku]

They are more greed than ever. They desing DLC when they make the game, and they charge extra for it as if they would have to do extra work to make it.

No, I'm not paying 69.99

[jakmckratos]

God no. I'm excited to learn that games will be easier to develop and therefore cheaper. I hope this leads to quicker releases for titles, less delays and more titles to be created by a single developer...next gen could be the best possible.

That being said $60 is like ridiculous..I only pay that for titles that are super promising and I have waited for a longgggg time for. A $70 would be like Kingdom Hearts 3 BUT it has over 50 different disney based worlds to explore. It would honestly need a loooooot of content to warrant $70..

[HonestDragon]

Ha! No way. I know what that EA representative said was completely asinine, but even if games did get that high in price, I sure as hell wouldn't buy them. With games already being 59 dollars and 99 cents, state tax jumps that up to a little over 64 dollars.

If games were ten dollars more as a retail price, you would be spending at least 75 dollars per game. That is ridiculous. Movies cost millions of dollars to make, but you don't see them making you pay twenty or thirty dollars to go see them at the theater. Video games are of almost the same budgets, but with the current price they are at now I don't see the need for them to be even more expensive.

[doublejj]

Yes

[BitbyDeath]

That'd be a pricedrop for me so yea, most games here are between $70-$120

[DFresh]

Hell no.
A lot of times games aren't even worth paying the full $60 tag for a game once you throw in the fact your not getting a full game with all of this DLC/micro transaction crap going around lately.
Steam/GOG/Amazon have spoiled me.

[ShaunCameron]

It's gonna be whatever it's gonna be next generation. But I might end up buying less games than I have this generation though most of the games I bought this generation were at a discount or bargain-bin prices. I don't have any real problem with games at their current $60 price tag. I'm not under the illusion that video games are cheap. They were never cheap to begin with. They certainly weren't back in the NES/SNES days when the average price was $60. Besides, $60 would have been a bargain to a Neo-Geo owner, and definitely so for those who live anywhere except North America.

@ HonestDragon

<That is ridiculous. Movies cost millions of dollars to make, but you don't see them making you pay twenty or thirty dollars to go see them at the theater. Video games are of almost the same budgets, but with the current price they are at now I don't see the need for them to be even more expensive.>

That's because movie prices are subsidized by other revenue streams, and the industry has a much bigger audience. Video game prices, Steam aside, are not.

[RuleofOne343]

Depends on what am getting in return with my purchase of said game .

[airgangstarr]

if they go digital like said the games should be 40 bucks top price... secondly the game play isnt changing graphics wont be upgraded that much until everyone owns a 4k tv so 70 bucks for what a digital copy of the same gameplay jus a little better graphics eff that

[josephayal]

i will pay $90-$100

[worldwidegaming]

profit profit profit!
If we said $100 for a game would be just fine they would
sell it at that price.
Please do not start saying "I can pay it!" because that is one of the ways DLC got the way it is today
(I want my horse armor!)
Most countries pay way more than we do.
Not saying its right or wrong but
there should be a discount for buying the digital version.
(nope, its the same price!)
Expenses for making a PS4 game should be better provided
the costs for using the new Engines are similar and going cross-platform should be as well.

[triplev16]

A few games in the past have held high price tags. Super Street Fighter II for SNES was $99.99 when I went to pick it up at launch at Toys R Us.

I left empty handed.

I'm confident that games will remain $59.99 or lower. And if people are still not willing to pay in full, there's always price drops. Publishers will lower the entry fee sooner to give a wider audience access to micro-transactions or DLC found within the game.

I actually see some game prices on the way down if the title has a strong focus on DLC or micro-transactions. Free-to-play will have a much bigger role this coming gen. I'm not a fan of this model, but it seems to be the way it's going. Just my opinion BTW.

[hazardman]

Hell NO! If prices are that high, I probably will only buy one console next gen.
Right now PS4 is looking like day one, but things could change depending on what MS does!

[Jakens]

Deliver on $70 games to get a chance at my $70. Money is tight and I pass up about 12+ games new every year. I am broke man

[MasterD919]

I think if it included a season pass I could see some sales at $70...but even then it won't be record breaking numbers.