SEGA still unsure about increasing game prices to $70

SEGA executive management gives an unsure answer on whether or not it will raise video game prices to $70 like most publishers in the games industry.

[cammers1995]

$70 for games is just insane.

[andy85]

Some were that in the 90s. I'm surprised we've only just hit that tbh given how primitive games were then

[babadivad]

I remember Street Fighter 2 being $10 less than the Mega Drive.

That was the exception, not the rule. $70 for every game is a bit much. Especially when every game comes with microtransactions.

[NotoriousWhiz]

Every game isn't 70$. Only the AAA ones and maybe a handful of AA. It is sad that the number of AAA games without microtransactions is dwindling.

[gold_drake]

yup
thats we said in the EU in 2010 too.
the pirce been here ever since. has been increased to 80.

[Yi-Long]

I mean, I could maybe understand their consideration of charging 70 bucks IF they made a game with the kind of immense quality and scope that Zelda TotK has, but I honestly can’t remember the last time Sega even came close to that kind of major release.

[MWH]

70$ is expensive for any game, in my humble opinion.

[Yi-Long]

Oh, I agree with that, and I’m certainly not paying 70+ bucks for a game, but I guess they’re watching what Sony and Nintendo are doing, and so now they’re considering hiking up their prices as well, and TBH, they should first be focused on delivering games which are worth 50 bucks …

[Rdeal]

What was Sonic Frontiers, Zelda bores me seriously, looks like crap, runs like crap and you are hard pushed to tell the difference between it and the first game

[lellkay]

Sonic Frontiers is absolute garbage though haha, it barely feels like a AA project... and are you really going to say Zelda looks and runs like crap when Frontiers looks like unity asset flip while objects constantly pop in under your nose... yikes.

[porkChop]

The Yakuza/Like a Dragon games are the best thing coming out of Sega these days. I'd consider them top tier.

[adaminoregon]

Zelda is a 720p 30 frames a second game. That aint worth 70 dollars in 2023 unless you are a nintendo simp.

[TheEnigma313]

Don't buy them until they are cheaper and all the patches are out.

[senorfartcushion]

Meanwhile every company said they “had to” raise prices.

[adaminoregon]

I never have and i never will. Only a sucker spends 70 dollars on a game. Especially if its just a digital file.

[MadLad]

Dealt with the Microtransactions and season passes, yet we still get the price hikes.

You know someone will try to justify the $80 game probably in five years, and the industry will slowly make it the norm over the next five.

[Agent75]

Oldest debate in gaming. Mega Drive games back in 1990 sold for £50 tops, import Mega drive games well over that. Nintendo 64 games topping £70 and that was from the mid to late 1990s. Switch games for £60 is Nintendo having a laugh, although Nintendo are banned in the UK for setting prices. If Nintendo raises the unit price, retailers put the price up. But the idiots are the people who pay these prices. One guy in Canada on here said he $90 for the latest Zelda. Games are worth what you think they're worth. I work five days out of seven and don't get on my consoles much. Saves me money.

[andy85]

Exactly. I don't really see the issue. Which other entertainment medium has barely increased in price in 30 years. Games back them took a couple of hours to finish, now we're getting 40+ hour games with massive worlds. People are paying 30 at the cinema for a couple of hours but we get 20 times that for 70 and you can sell it for most of the cost back afterwards? Literally don't get it

[andy85]

And to add to that, they're never 70 anyway. The most expensive one I've bought was Ragnarok at 60

[HyperMoused]

Video games have become the biggest entertainment platform on the planet, more people and more sales than ever before, they have also been monetized to hell and back, special editions, in game currency, DLC, battlepasses, season passes, MTS...all the while high level executives on $30m a year complain they dont have enough money, BS do game prices need to rise.

[Vipre77]

OK, so don't do it then? Pretty sure it's still up to them to set the prices for their games judging by the wildly diverse range of prices for games being sold in B&M and electronic stores.

[isarai]

I hate the whole "price hasn't changed since the 90s" argument. 1st of all most games were not a full 60 back then, most games were 35 to 50 for larger games. 2nd of all production has gotten WAAAAAAAAAAY cheaper in every aspect of production, from software to hardware most things are filled with industry standards and universal pipeline, tools, resources and precesses where up until about 13yrs ago almost everything was proprietary and required top tier talent to even get something playable.

The price hike is nothing but greed under the guise of "inflation" just like everything right about now. Now they're stating sales of new games are slowing down since the price hike, no sh!t, people only have so much money, and especially with how deceptive game launches are these days, $70 is just too much to gamble.