The $70 Price Hike Is Preferable to More Microtransactions

KeenGamer: "As Sony and Microsoft announced an increased price ceiling for PS5 and Xbox Series X games, there was some debate on whether it was preferable to pay more upfront, or deal with a AAA gaming landscape increasingly dominated by in-game storefronts. In a hypothetical where we get a choice, let's lay out an argument for the upfront price raise."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Zeeb37d ago

Well good news your getting both!


cleft537d ago (Edited 37d ago )

You are being sarcastic about it, but this is the reality. If companies would be fine with just the $10 hike then yeah I would take that over paying for dlc and cosmetics. But thats not going to be the case. These companies will charge $70, then double down on dlc and cosmetics.

It's always funny listening to the stupid people acting like the $10 increase is justify and will lead to benefits to consumers. The reality is that games costing more to make don't make them worth more. Hell most games arent even worth $60. I look at Genshin Impact which is a free gacha game and see more value in that then most $60 games. But now companies want to charge $70? Where is the value? Where is the justification? Where are the companies saying we will be charging an extra $10 but all dlc and cosmetics will be free? No where!

GamerRN37d ago

Unfortunately there is just too much money being made by Warzone, GTA, Fortnite and Destiny for anyone to care what we think

TallDarknWavy36d ago

It's extortion. I'll take microtransactions that aren't pay-to-win any day. More outfits and gun skins, who cares? As long as there's no tactical advantage or pay-to-win scheme I'm fine with it. Fortnite's entire business model is skins, why do you think it's so popular? People don't feel like they're being cheated by people getting advantages by paying to win.

Cueil36d ago

is there really a problem with cosmetic micro-transactions? It's when the MT becomes needed to progress in a game that there is a problem. Otherwise, I agree

TallDarknWavy36d ago (Edited 36d ago )

Cueil - I'd rather take cosmetic microtransactions over a price hike or pay to win MT's, or Loot Boxes any day.
Anyone against cosmetic MT's and would rather pay higher prices is just a whiny cuck.

Magatsuhi36d ago

the sarcasm is from the good news part.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 36d ago
hulk_bash198737d ago

Anyone assuming the price hike will eliminate future microtransations is either naive or delusional.

Phoenix7637d ago

Anyone who's supports the idea that a price hike in games from so called AAA devs and publishers as being justifiable is an idiot.
These companies are already raking in millions upon millions of £'s every year whilst claiming games cost more to make, yet largely remain the same. And year on year those profits are increasing already. With a price hike and push towards digital format, which cuts out huge amounts of costs already, they'll make even more ludicrous amounts of money whilst find new ways to monetize their games.

Atom66636d ago

All true.

But they're not running charities. All you can do is speak with your wallet where you can.

Aussiesummer36d ago

Yet we will all pay it won't we.

Seraphim36d ago

there will be at least 100 games I do not buy next gen. Very likely even more. Games I would have normally bought for $50-60. There will likely be at least another 100 that I do buy but only on sale for $50 or less. It's likely by next gens end I will be able to count the game I paid full price for on my fingers and toes. As apposed to 200-400+ full priced games, each generation, from the PS2 generation to present.

Even $60 games took a toll. I had over 400 PS2 games alone plus a bunch of Gamecube and Xbox games. PS3 that number dwindled to maybe 150-200 over the course of the generation between 360 and PS3. PS4 that number has dropped as well I believe. Whenever I do get my hands on a PS5 I might buy 1 game. For $60 I would've bought at least 3 off the top of my head. Unfortunately this is where I need to make a stand. All those extra $10 bills on all those games is something I simply can't afford anymore. An extra $1,000 for 100 games. 3 games for $150 or less (PS2), $180 (PS3) and now $210 for 3 games. If they're that hungry they can eat their own greed far as I'm concerned. yes, it's a business, blah blah, blah. doesn't mean shite to me. there's a lot to be said about pricing items reasonably and unfortunately over the past decade companies have lost sight of that and passed on to much onto already struggling consumers.

Steppenwolfmother36d ago

@Seraphim I get your point, gaming is an expensive hobby if you really go all in, but you do realise that games are just rising for inflation right? PS2 games retailed for $50 which is the equivalent of $76 now. Plus games usually go on sale and reduce in price pretty quickly in the months after release.

I have no issue with the price of games going up especially if it helps the developers who aren’t EA and Activision etc. there has been a lot of great studios that have closed over the years because their game didn’t take off. Also publishers can go nuts with cosmetic micro transactions for all I care. If you don’t like them just don’t buy them. Loot box’s and pay to win MT can fuck off but we don’t see those as often anymore.

DeusFever36d ago

Phoenix76 speaks true. If you look at inflation then you an see how games are cheaper now than in 1995. But wages have remained flat while expenses like college, housing, and healthcare have risen much, much higher than the rate of inflation. This means discretionary spending for games is down. And yet more people buy games today than ever before. The market for games of fantastic and publishers are making more money than ever. My recommendation for consumers is hold out. If you don’t buy games for $70, the publishers won’t push the $70 price. Vote with your wallet.

PS-Gamer-198637d ago

Well, IF mt went away then i would agree. But i doubt that the majority of publishers won't take profits from both, micro transaction AND price hikes

SirCharles37d ago

For your next trick, rationalize Activision locking premium gun skins in Modern Warfare behind $25 cosmetic packs.

Ruegrong37d ago

Remember when we thought digital would be cheaper

1nsomniac37d ago

**cough** you mean remember when we were told digital would be cheaper **cough** **Sony** **cough**

russo12136d ago

This time around price will have a surge due to greedy other than piracy. The obvious part is everybody can predict the industry will be impacted by an increase on piracy, we just don't know how much.

Note - Piracy is all digital and it's cheaper /s.

Show all comments (58)
The story is too old to be commented.