Cost of development has increased between 200% and 300% while game prices have remained flat
If you want to lower my excitement for a next gen console you start by talking about increasing game prices.
They better not increase the prices of digital games too. I mean they're already too expensive as is. I might be going all-digital for next gen. So that'd be a huge bummer if they decidedx to do that too.
The cost isn't really an issue, gaming makes 3.5 times as much money as the entire music and movie industry combined. It's just greedy executives looking for bigger bonuses. I refuse to buy games at full price in Canada at 80 bucks, it's crazy here.
They aren't going to raise prices at retail and then undercut themselves on digital where they make more money. Come on now. Lmao
i would have agreed with the majority. only problem is not greed that is going up; it's the costs of living. which sure you could say everyone's landlord is pretty much greedy so yeah it's partially correct in that sense.
more workers on projects also means more workers that need to be paid. which is generally why developers spend millions on average making new projects.
Oh they will!
Yeah. Costs have gone up, although not as much between last gen and this one, and it's probably not going to be significantly more going into next gen. But at the same time, the market has increased quite a bit over the last two gens. It ends up being a quantity of scale thing, and publishers just want to make more on their investment.
In the UK, digital has to be marked up at the same or higher than retail prices. They are not allowed to undercut them, to protect the brick and mortar game stores.
What i really want to know is...what is the difference between next gen and current gen version that they have to raise it by 10$. We're also talking about a yearly sport game filled with MTX.
Digital has to match physical or stock won't sell fast enough.
Gaming101 That's part of the reason I switched to pc. Luckily alot of the games I play usually release on steam or something at about $60 max. That $80 crap made me cut back so much.
#bishup25 Great point I said the same thing about Mario 64, Pilotwings, Mission Impossible, Turok, was all $70-$80 bucks!!! The worst was Sega racing game that was priced at a $100 dollars!!!! That was all because 3D gaming was on the rise that was brand new at the time of 1996. Now we have 4K gaming with 120fps modes, raytracing, and possible 8K gaming. The Ps5 tech demo had 8K assets as well. Gaming is going into movie visual territory.
Development costs have increased 200-300% but isn’t that because they have pooled 200-300% more resources to sell us micro transactions, which they make more than enough profits on?
The world is going into a hard recession with the pandemic not slowing down any time soon and you thing they’ll be stupid enough to raise the game price 🤣good luck with that suicidal move. They raise the price and what will happen is people will buy less games and take less risk on new franchises like in the 80’s when the industry almost collapsed.
everyone is asking for more money though. especially food catering services because of the pandemic. lots of services will be forced to sink or swim during this pandemic.
"It follows the news that NBA 2K21 will be priced at $69.99 on the next consoles, $10 more expensive than it is on the current devices." but this is nothing new though. remember when GoldenEye and Mischief Makers were $70 as well on the N64? https://gamespot1.cbsistati...
In an era when so many people are playing free games. How the hell could someone think people want to spend more money on less games?
Your right! But I guarantee they will!
Yup. My immediate reaction was some games I might normally get Day 1 will become Day When It Goes On Sale.
That's making game pass on Xbox an even better deal.
Also means that it's harder to justify making those big games for a service like that. Cost isn't lowered for MS to put their big AAA games on there in abundance, and the idea behind this article is that the cost to the consumer will either go up, or games will be cut back.
At least maybe people will stop the bad practice of pre-ordering games and show a little patience (restraint) and wait for a discount. I have no problem engaging in the sound consumer practice of waiting for a price drop or a deep discount, matter of fact, I have no problem waiting for the GOTY version with all the expansions and extra content is released for 20.00 or so, seeing that I always have a backlog, I just make that backlog work for me. SO, at the end of the day, If publishers want to raise the price of a game, that's fine, Let the delusional with money to burn and their foolish belief that paying full price is some sort of "obligation" of support take the full price hit.
All of them won't be $70. Just the crap people buy every year and they're only raising prices because people are expecting free upgrades. Thanks smart delivery, where would we be without you?
LOL. This next generation is not looking good. 1) I expect both consoles to be $499 on the high end 2) Maybe as low as $399 on the low end without disc drives 3) Raised prices for games Not sure there is a reason for me to move to next gen if the launch game highlights are Spider-man and Halo for each console. Spider-man is only two years from initial release so the launch game is probably just a new story and some graphical improvements. Halo could be more substantial because it has been 5 years from the last main game release. But since it is cross-gen, how much better will it really be?
We as consumers if rallied together and no one bought the product, they would be forced to lower the prices. As much as I love them, games aren't essential like food or medicine. We should strike and play old games we haven't finished and get other hobbies to force their hand
The best way to show a Publisher that they are pricing themselves out of their own market is to Never Pre-order and Never pay full retail for ANY game that you feel is over priced! Let the Suckers with money to burn and a delusional belief that paying full price is some sort of poorly thought out and ham-fisted support of the Developer. In reality, it is not a consumers "obligation" to buy a product at any price to keep that company in business. But, it is The Company/Publisher's obligation to provide a product at a price and quality that makes it attractive for purchase. If They don't fulfill, at the least, those 2 criteria, then they deserve to go out of business.
Wasn't dlc made mainly to offset these costs? Where was this argument when Street Fighter 2 for the SNES cost $70 when it came out? The gaming industry is already making money hand over fist. What need is there to raise the price.? Look at the comic industry for the moment, Although there are many issues, one of the issues in the comic industry is the price hikes. The price hikes in turn are a huge reason as to why the sales are dwindling. When they say things like "games are getting bigger", you have to ask yourself what they're actually saying. Do they mean in terms of content? They already cut content and sell it as dlc as it is so that excuse flies out the window. Do they mean cost of development? Many of these same companies constantly reuse assets so I don't see any major extra costs there. Do they mean R&D and bug fixing? In that case, should we expect restitution when they sell us games with bugs and glitches? Time for people to demand the gaming industry be clear about these things.
SF was cartridge, way more expensive to manufacture
It still cost $20 more than every other cartridge on the snes so that's not an excuse.
Thought they were all $70, I wasn't paying for games back then
I get paid over $90 per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I'd be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I've been doing, HERE► https://bit.ly/2zPpkEQ
SNES games were all over the board. Personally I played Genesis & had the Sega Channel. My sister had a Super Nintendo though and I remember seeing games priced all over the place one day at the store. Breath of Fire I believe was pretty expensive as well. That was the only game I owned back in the day for SNES since it wasn't mine lol. But yeah, I remember seeing games as high as like $85-90 while others were $60-70, etc. I certainly can't remember specific prices on games but I do know the prices varied greatly and some were pricey. But gaming has also grown into a behemoth. In the PS2 era even a game hitting 1-2 million was HUGE. A lot of games were moving only 500-900k units. Now, FIFA alone sells like 24 globally each year. Blockbuster are expected to sell something like 4+ million and that's probably a conservative figure. Plus we now have MTs, DLCs, Season Passes...
"It still cost $20 more than every other cartridge on the snes so that's not an excuse." Yes it is. The game required more RAM in order to perform at the level it did.
"Yes it is. The game required more RAM in order to perform at the level it did. " Then why did every other SNES arcade port have no issue. INCLUDING Street FIghter Alpha 2 which used more ram than SF2, Every one of them was priced like the rest of the SNES library
Don’t forget collector’s editions where they make even more profit
VERY well put sir, I believe we are coming to a crossroad where they will try to leverage these new prices against gamers in an effort to make microtransactions more favorable.
Man i remember paying that for street fighter 2, i was doing all chores, cooking dinner, whatever was needed to get it for Christmas lol. I remember staring at it in the christmas catalog books, i dont think they make those anymore it was so big but had everything anyone wanted kid or adult.
You're exactly right. Developers are making a killing off of DLC and micro-transactions, which was supposedly the answer for rising development costs. Ever since the micro-transaction craze started this generation, I've bought very few games new. If they increase the price of base games, then they'll just sell fewer games. Here in Canada, a base game, like CoD for instance, costs $79.99 plus taxes. If a base game goes to $90.00 or $100.00, then I suspect that Game Pass will become even more popular, and people will start to buy games a year or two after release when they go on sale. Australia will have a tough time with this also, due to the exchange rate, but they've been getting the shaft down under for years.
I don't think game pass can keep up. Game prices increase and publishers demand more from Microsoft. Game pass will either become expansive or divided into different tiers.
Lodossrage at the time Alpha came to the SNES demand and cost to manufacture may have dropped. It was also an incredibly compromised port on the SNES. You're advertising a bunch of assumptions together and claiming its fact.
What Assumptions? Go look up the chipsets for both SF2 and SFA2. Google it the same way I did. And on a side note, the SNES console demand DOESN"T alter the cost of the cartridge/software.
Exactly this. Let's assume for a second that the development costs have hiked by 1000%, you're telling me that microtransactions haven't made a profit for them ? Hell, they can even afford to give away Fifa/NBA and all these Mcs infested crap games for free and STILL make a killing. I think this is all BS and greed speaking. And what's hilarious is that on top of increasing the MSRP, they are STILL gonna include microtransactions, unbelievable
I agree with everything you said, I think they'll raise the prices so people will buy into the subscription model. I'm not sure how that is all monetized, but developers have been excited about this. I could see a future where it's cheaper to purchase one/multiple subscription services rather than buying multiple physical copies. If this price increase happens, hopefully majority of us gamers could put aside our differences and push back on this one.
There will be extra game developers working from home that is connected with the in house studios. This pandemic had made a lot of jobs give employee the option to work from home.
Asset creation is your weakest point. It takes up an enormous amount of dev time, even when reusing assets. Further asset reusal isn't inharently bad, I'd argue it extremely good and only logical. There often isn't a NEED to make strikingly similar assets when your getting the same point across and having so many unique objects has a negative effect on loading and possibly performance. Smaller games will reuse assets a LOT but they are smaller and have more contrants and if that's off putting then it's just not going to be a game for you. I've never really understood the complaint of asset reusal in the first place and I can think of any issue with it in my experience aside from getting tired of the same texture of a dungeon in some JRPGS.
"Wasn't dlc made mainly to offset these costs?" Smoke and mirrors, man. Smoke and Mirrors! It is just a tactic to squeeze more money out of you, so, now they got everyone use to the Idea of DLC and MT, now they think they can cry poor again and squeeze you again..........It never ends. The only way to fix this is to squeeze them back, NEVER Pre-order and never pay full retail. and if you can control the desire (epidemic) of immediate gratification, I would say wait for the GOTY or "complete" version of the game with all the added content included...at a discount. :P
Fine, make them 70. But season passes and DLC are now included right from the start. Otherwise, hell no.
Don't worry they will cut half the game out and call the other half included in the free season pass. Delayed of course. In this world upfront should be upfront.
Also, don't worry about microtransactions. They will never be in games. ... Until a few weeks after launch once enough people have bought it.
No, theyll continue doing that as well, because they know people will buy them
If anything all this will do for many is reduce the amounts of games they buy, and will now buy only the must have games like exclusive titles from first party. These third party publishers will start to see a decrease in sales, while places like Gamestop report high volume of used game sales. Effectively bring back used game sales which at the start of this generation many tried to shut down. I know if there will be a price increase I for one will wait for bargain bin deals or just do without.
I imagine EA will bring the 10 dollars online ransom thing back for used games
I don't doubt it, many of these corporations when a strategy does not work the first time, they sit on it for a few years then reintroduce it with a brand new name. The gullible then gobble it up with out realizing they were just fed the same old bullspit.
Yeah, but more units are sold now, plus dlc so it evens out.
Every things goes high but people still buying .. when it comes to gaming they start crying ... bunch of maggots
Gaming is already like the most expensive hobby and these devs already make bank from DLC and microtransactions and now they want more. If being a maggot means I'm sick and tired of getting nickel and dimed and not a bootlicker like you then good. Maggot and proud.
Are you kidding me? Gaming is dirt cheap compared to every other form of entertainment, YouTube aside. I can go to the bar and spend $20 on alcohol that will barely get me buzzed. Or I can buy a 2 year old game for the same price that will give me anywhere from 1 to 1000 hours of entertainment. Gaming is ridiculously consumer friendly. If you don't like microtransactions, don't buy them; no one's forcing you to. "But mom my Fortnite skin is so lame I need the new one, I need it."
Retail purchases dying out means more profit for pubs. This price increase talk is the first step to daylight robbery.
Another thing worth noting is that game software at its current RRP is highly profitable. The issue here lies in publishers expecting an ever expanding annual growth. That is just not sustainable and would have to peak somewhere. So instead we get a price hike with "game development costs" being used as the scapegoat. "Daylight robbery" is exactly what it is. Consumerist con job!
Xbox Game Pass is looking more and more like the way to go. About to extend my Ultimate subscription.
They way to go is to pay continuously for a subscription service forever? I knew some would try to use this as an excuse to rep game pass but game pass saves you nothing in the long run in fact all you end up doing is spending more over time which is exactly why MS came up with it in the first place.
$120 per year is 2 full price retail games. A lot of people buy more than that, plus indie games that cost anywhere from $10-$30 each. I'm not a fan of game pass, but you can't tell me it's not a good deal. I used to rent games as a kid in the 90s and they were about $5 for 3 days, if I remember correctly. I'd rent 2 games every weekend, that would cover the price of gp for a month of games, not just a few days
Game Pass adds new titles every month...lots of times they are #DayOnes, and every first party title from Microsoft. I mean I guess you could continue to buy $70 games everytime you want to play something new forever...what sounds like the better deal to you??? I'll play the games through XGP either #DayOne or not too long after release then wait for sale prices for the titles I wish to keep indefinitely...sounds pretty logical to me... It is what it is...we brought it up because XGP is a great value...period. You might get upset by that, but that sounds more like a personal problem to me.
You knew somebody was gonna reply gamepass? Why? Because it's the inevitable value comparison when talking about the price of games going way up and you simply don't wanna hear what many have been saying for years? To be blunt, You are a fool if you think 120 a year (it's often much cheaper on sale and you can buy 3 month codes or year codes online) for GP, which is always going to equal 100+ titles- many of which are quite new games, day 1 games, MS first party games, or some of the best indies. Xbox store is constantly having sales on titles that leave, and sales for DLC, and then combine that with the fact that Gamepass works for PC and xbox... if new games are gonna be 70 bucks a pop, you're telling me that for 50 additional bucks, you could have tons of fun to and games to play for a entire year... and somehow that doesn't sound good to you? Straight fool hardy denial is what you are going for then. With GP, you can actually SAVE money. You can still get the actual games you simply must have day one, at 70 bucks a pop. It let's you have a variety, the value is outstanding, gives you plenty to play for 2 types of device, and includes MP versus gaming membership which is still gonna be a separate cost on PS5. I mean, you can do what you want, and enjoy games however you want, that's totally chiil with me, but how you and many others on this site blatantly deny what is a good value when it's clear as day, is really getting dumber and dumber by the minute.
@kavor how long do you see them maintaining this price? All these publishers can't get by on the millions of copies they sell at 30-60$ but are going to be happy with a slice of 120 a year? This is an end game to justify ending retail sales before having up your only option to play. Subscription without owning anything
I don't want someone else to pick what games i get to play.
How so? If development costs are really raising as much as they say, it makes it even less likely investors will be on board for expensive productions going on that kind of service day one. It's not like MS is immune from the back end reason they're stating that game prices have to go up, and it makes MS service even less sustainable, or profitable.
Who said it has to be day one though??? I said XGP is looking more and more of the way to go...if devs and studios are going to adopt a $70 model going forward...it wont take long at all before those same studios begin to look at XGP as an viable alternative very shortly after launch. We already saw big AAA games hit the service mere months after release like Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Metro Exodus...how long before these supposed $70 games do the same thing. If games are going $70...that means I get crafty...that means a lot of these titles I simply wait for a sale or for it to hit XGP...whichever sooner. Ahhh...the ole "sustainable" argument...didnt Phil already come out and shoot that one down? Still trying to sneak it in are we? Lastly, studios will do it because it can actually boosts sales and reinvigorate a games playerbase. "If I take the month before we went into Game Pass, and compared it to sales of the game last week, we're now selling around 5 times as many units each week as pre-Game Pass, on a weekly basis Since we went into Game Pass, our total Xbox sales have TRIPLED Game Pass is good, yo" https://twitter.com/RaveofR...
@Tim That’s the problem with you Xbox fans, you take small samples and try to apply them as larger solutions. In the three years Gamepass has been out you named two big AAA games released on Gamepass shortly after launch, out of the dozens upon dozens that have been released. Just two. So because less than a handful of AAA third party games were released shortly after launch, that give you hope that AAA publishers will somehow start releasing their big games on Gamepass a few months after launch? How naive. And because some small indie developers see boost in sales after putting a game on Gamepass, you think that will also apply to big game publishers? Therefore making it sustainable for them? News flash, if it was a profitable practice for big publishers to put their games on Gamepass shortly after release they all would have done it already. The only time it’s profitable for them is when Microsoft pays them a nice lump sum (a la Tomb Raider and Metro). The Gamepass model is sustainable for small budget games, which is why like 90% of Gamepass games are shovelware (I just looked through the whole list of games on their website).