AAA game prices are about to rise for the first time in 15 years. Are we prepared to pay $70 for a video game? Yes. Shut up.
I don't mind if they want to rise the price, but........ I'm going to be very careful to choose what game I buy. I used to buy every game that I like for $60 or less. this is a opportunity for Gamestop and other store to rise if the price used games right.
How are you going to buy a used copy of a digital game? Because, digital only is the next step.
if that's true, why they are releasing consoles with disc drive?
Better question, if it's not true why are they releasing consoles without a disk drive?
@Hakuoro Why? Well as an option. I wish I could buy the digital only version but I have 5 physical games that cant be purchased on the Playstation store... I agree physical games are probably gonna eventually phase out though... And when they become niche, consoles will no longer have disk drives. However it wont be before at least another generation. I think subscription services and streaming are gonna kill it ultimately just like music and movies.
Digital only will never fully happen simply because of poor Internet. Personally I'd never buy digitally because it would cost be over 5x as much to game. Physical gaming is SO much cheaper
I only do physical unless there's absolutely no way to get something physical such as Soma
Except they releasing physical consoles so it’s not disappearing anytime soon they don’t launch a console to drop an entire format... What QSPR said 😜✌🏻 They releasing consoles without as it’s an option they know some are happy to never own their games or just rent them. A fair old few of us will always be physical and as some of these collectors editions can be as pricey as the consoles they ain’t going anywhere anytime soon. They still release films on dvds and blu rays and music on CD’s and even Ye olde vinyl
@ hakuoro Sorry to burst your bobble (nah who I’m kidding I love it) physical games aren’t going anywhere any time soon.
If you went back to the early 90's and told people there wouldn't be boxed games in the future they would have said some of the same things you're saying. The same if you had said in 2000 that they would release a console with out a disk drive yet here we are. It's clear the industry is moving us in that direction, every year a larger and larger percent of games are released digital only even from large publishers. You guys are naive.
this is not going to happen,only digital.there are people who collect games like me! I dont give a shit about digital only and i never buy such a console. The vinyl record was invented in 1931 an it sold like hot cakes in these days.so it will be with video games in the future.
I support $70 games. $80, even better.
I guess no one remembers the N64 days when quite a few games were $69. All I can say is we better have more demos and better refund policies if we’re going to fork over $69 for a game.
I remember Super Nintendo games being $70
Carts were always more expensive back then but yeah I remember paying £59.99 for goldeneye but then that lasted me best part 4 years I’m not paying £40 for Fifa let alone £60/70 😂😂
Games nowadays are less complete and have more BS. Some may fork over $70 but many others will not and will be pushed towards the used game market.
Pokemon stadium 2 memories. And freaking Superman 64
Killer Instinct Gold on N64 was $79.99 for me at EB back in 97 or something. But just because that's true, doesn't mean I want more of that in the here and now.
Super Nintendo games used to cost around $80 when the system first released. And that was back in the early 90s.
i can't believe you people. you're definitely older than me, because I wasn't around at a time where you had to pay $70 for a game. i'd assume as people got older they would realize spending over $70 for a game is absolutely ridiculous. i guess not... i mean i don't even spend $60 for a game i usually wait for sale or trade in to get it, once in a while i'll spend full price...but over $70 for a game?! and you guys are okay with this and justifying it? these companies are laughing at you guys while robbing you of your money...
O I remember that lol!!! Even before N64, SNES and Sega Genesis had games that cost $70 to $100 dollars as well. This was due to the rise of 3D gaming. I remember the ridiculous prices of Turok, Mission Impossible at $80 bucks!!! Perfect Dark $50 dollars but requires $20 dollars accessory(forgot the name lol) to run the game smh!
I remember those 70$ cartridge price days like it was yesterday..🤣.. Although I think this price hike was inevitable looking at the current market. I hope however we will get some relief on the actual console price, as I am diffinitly not eager to relive those days.I myself however will still be continuing my digital purchase's ;as it's just more convenient for me.
Price hikes just mean I'm more fussy and will buy more games in sales.
you bought every game because you were kids back then, now you got rent to pay, so nation state money matters until crypto wins over
There is so much nonsense when defending the rise of the costs of gaming. Do these people seriously think $60 isn't sustainable to keep making AAA games? These people make out that the extra $10 price hike is NEEDED, but that couldn't be further from the truth. AAA games companies make more than enough money without the raising the price of their games. It's astonishing that so many people are so easily manipulated by the rubbish spouted by the people at the top of these games companies.
The fact that these gaming companies are making so much money off game sales sort of proves the price hike is BS. If they were struggling I think we'd all look at it differently but this is just the same corporate BS we're always told about the cost of development. If cost are going up so are revenues and profits, this industry is doing just fine at the top. Now, the indies, they might deserve a bit more of our attention.
The average AAA game has been at $60usd for 15 or 20 years . I'm not in favor of a price hike , but at some point you guy's need to realize there's this thing called inflation. $60 20 years ago isn't worth $60 today , and then there is the increased cost of development. There isn't a single product that you can buy today selling at 20 year old price points other then video games. It's just life ... deal with it.
With the rise of digital sales prices should be going DOWN.
"The average AAA game has been at $60usd for 15 or 20 years . I'm not in favor of a price hike , but at some point you guy's need to realize there's this thing called inflation" Why do you people keep saying this and completely ignoring other factors? The gaming industry is not the same industry it was 20 years ago, it's the most profitable form of entertainment in the world today. It has a much larger reach and games are easier to access than ever before. You also ignore things like DLC, microtransactions and multiple editions of games that actually cover that inflation and more by a massive amount. Do you truly believe that games need to be that extra $10 more expensive? Do you honestly believe that they aren't sustainable at their current price? If you believe any of this, then you are would swallow any crap that comes out of the mouths of these people. AAA gaming could be cheaper and still be completely fine, that is how well it is doing right now.
It's more like supply and demand. When a game doesn't sell they go down in price. If they go up in price they will see a surge in used sales and therefore receive less money. The PC market will also see a rise in pirated games.
Ok but what you don't understand is that games have gotten more popular and have an infinite supply. The price hike doesn't make sense from a supply and demand perspective. Also physical and digital movie prices have not risen very much either it's more of an entertainment thing because these things are getting more popular and cheaper and easier to get.
you thought you were on to something here, didn't you?
Zack I am onto something, I'm talking to children who don't understand economics and who are rather entitled. You want cheap games and cheap consoles, and now you get to deal with MT'S.
You don't seem to actually understand economics as well as you think you do. Supply and demand is just the basics, freshman level intro to econ stuff. The actual systems are infinitely more complex and nuanced. And calling people who don't agree with you children is not an effective way to show how much more you know than they do.
Then you understand that $60 20 years ago is only worth about $45 today. The cost of development has risen, wages have increased, the cost to just keep the lights on has increased. These are the underlying cost , gamers want more but are not willing to pay the developers what they are actually worth. Supply and demand is fundamental with everything, what difference does that make when you expect to pay prices from 20 years ago? Sure I'm no economist but I understand inflation and the value of the dollar.
You're not wrong but you're looking at one aspect as if it's the whole picture. You're point is a good one and I won't take that from you. But I would add that access and interest in gaming has exploded over that same time to the extent that the highest revenue games are free to play and fully funded by MTs. Demand has skyrocketed while supply is almost infinite. Thats were things have ballanced out and why these companies are making so much money. Every car Ford makes costs them money, so for every car they sell they have to spend money to make it no matter how many they sell. For Sony selling games, after they've made their money back on labor and promotion, every penny is profit. So if Sony's budget calls for a break even of 1.5 million units at a MSRP, every copy sold beyond that is profit at no cost aside for the obvious of maintaining their network and printing disks, costs that at their scale are almost negligible. The other issue publishers are up against is stagnant wage growth. In the same 20 year span you mention wages have stayed basically flat, so the markets ability to buy their products has actually gone down slightly with the price of food and housing also having risen in that same time frame. So while the cost of making a game has risen, the market has widened and different revenue streams have emerged. This has lead to a industry that seem very well positioned to serve almost every potential market. In this I might be making your point for you in that we may see games with bigger budgets set at 70-80 (sort of like the PS1 era) that don't expect to sell as many copies as they would have in generations past or that look to capitalize on hype then drop to the 60-50 range to reach the wider audience after initial release. Okay, I'm having too much fun with this. Back to pretending to work.
If we had the equivalent of Box Office Mojo for video-games giving a rough idea of production costs along with the overall gross of most game, this narrative that games NEED to cost more would die immediately. Games like FIFA are quietly making billions each year, easily making more money than most MCU movies with minimal reporting. Games may cost more and there has been inflation but games also have a much wider audience (higher sales) now along with DLC, micro-transactions, digital deluxe editions, etc. To ignore all these factors is just dishonest. Games make higher profits now, not less. I would be interested to see examples of popular games that didn't make a profit.
well said @SegaGamer one more other point is that games next gen will be much easier and cheaper to make. This is due to not having to make LODs. This will significantly reduce game dev time so dont buy any of that BS that games are more expensive to make next gen
LODs arnt going anywhere to think they will be gone is wishful thinking
@reefskye I m just going off what epic games have said. Unless you know any better or have proof, i will stick to what has been said thanks
No offense but the opposite is true. You all have stupid arguments against the price rises.... here's 2 that I've heard: 1) Gaming is so much bigger now than it was in the past. Is it? What proof? Past generations sold more consoles than current gen. 2) Microtransactions. Yes, that helps. But most games do not have microtransactions. Some publishers abuse it obviously. You all are focusing on some big name companies. That doesn't mean everyone is making a crapton of money. It is a fact that games cost extremely more money to make than in the past. It takes 3-5 years for some of these games.
I think a lot of people arguing this "they make more than enough money" point are for the most part confusing revenue with profit. Just because a game posts revenue numbers of 380 million, doesn't mean that was all profit. Beyond that, the price point is set by sales. If they raise the cost of the game and it still sells well, they will keep it there. If it fails, the price will come back down. They enabled, funded, developed, marketed, and published the game so they have every right to try and make as much money off it as they successfully can.
Xbox Game Pass is your friend. If games go to $70, then I wait til XGP.
I agree XGP is amazing except I wish they had better single player first party games like Sony. Edit: to be fair though its only a matter of time before Microsoft hikes the price of XGP as well. But regardless I think it'll remain a good value.
I buy games when they hit like $20 or XGP except for Nintendo games because they never drop that low
If you think Gamepass and PS Now won't be getting a price increase in the future because of this then you have some pretty good delusions/
Still a great deal, even if they up the price a couple bucks. Especially if they start pushing out quality games for the service.
I find it funny that the first thing out your mouth to counter is that..."well XGP can see a price hike too"...ANYTHING CAN...the point is would it still be a great value than paying $70 a pop each time you go to play a new games...
Until it's the only way to get your games and they price hike it. Developers aren't happy with profits of 30-60$ a year but are going to be happy with a sliver of 120$ a year per person? I don't think so.
Yeah, definintely worth $1.
Its also worth the $61 I just paid for the next 12 months of Ultimate too. Did it with a smile on my face. #DayOne XGS and 3rd party titles and only waiting a few months to play a lot of the bigger 3rd party AAAs...ill take that all day.
Dont you already only play games that are on XBGP? I dont think ive heard you say anything else but how you only use GP and will wait til games go on GP for couple years now. You rarely talk about anything else.
No. Recently bought Minecraft Dungeons, Batman Arkham knight and Ori 2. Batman was bought on sale AFTER it left XGP and even though the other 2 are currently in XGP, I still bought them because 1, I knew I wanted to own them and 2, I got Microsoft Reward points when I bought them.
If the base price of games goes up, you can expect that that GP pricing will go up as well.
If its a must buy good AAA game like gow ps4, a franchise or dev Im a huge fan of then sure. Ill just wait for sales like ive been doing this gen for most other games. Games like nba and fifa should be a no no for everyone considering the money they make off of microtrans lol but who am I kidding...suckers will still buy those games.
This won't affect most people who buy sports games as they buy 1 or 2 games a year. But people who post here are probably going to buy 5 to 10. Extra 50 to 100 dollars a year. Wondering if switch games will go up as well...they probably will. 🤣
I will I've been paying 70 USD for my games for over ten years now I live in Australia and games can easily cost $100 here digitally which is around 70 USD.
@Versus Lol right as soon as the next gen systems come out with the new games at $70... Nintendo like yup Switch games r $70... Switch is all of a sudden a next gen console. That damn console Switches ish up so much who could have a clue whats next to Switch....But so far it mostly Switches down for the worse like the Lite console that peeps pay $200+ for n think its a bargain over the original Switch. But yea the only thing Nintendo does with the price is Switch it up higher for games, consoles and accessories or lower the price but give you not even half what the console is supposed to be used for i.e. Switch Lite
I always find games on sale down here in S. Florida
If a single game that is 70 has microtransactions, then I'll do everything in my power to show the company that brings out those games, how much of a greedy piece of trash that company is. I don't buy any game that has microtransactions now and if games start at a higher price, plus microTRASHactions I'll shame anyone that is for supporting them, because of your selfishness game developers think this is alright. I'm all for DLC like CD Project Red did with The Witcher, that increases the length of the game, but when you have to pay for cosmetic stuff like a sword, that infuriates me, because that should be free. So please don't support these greedy companies.
Guaranteed to happen. Watch as no body of authority brings this up over the next year. Microtransactions are in games because "games are too expensive to make." This - up to now - has been proven false, and now that the conglomerates have their $10 price hike, we should see no more MTX in games, as a lot of these same conglomerates have said "price hike or MTX." Because it's the games industry, we are going to get both and no one with any expendable power will point out the problems.
I'm actually a little shocked that we haven't seen an increase in so long... Not that I want to pay more, but watch the credits at the end of a game. It's at least doubled movies for AAA titles.
What? Last generation games were 42/45 this gen they're 50!
Actually... Look into it. New games have been $60 for over a decade.
Sorry I'm talking about here in UK, each generation they jump by 5 pounds or more
Ahh... I should have specified U.S. dollars.
2K is the new EA.