On a recent episode of the Pachter Factor, Michael Pachter laid out the real reason why the price of games is increasing and it's not because development costs have gone up.
huh... completely forgot about this guy.
I finally agree with Pachter. Never thought this day would come. Lol
Same, this is sort of a miracle..
Pachter's predictions are usually wrong but he's still very pro-consumer.
Yup I agree with him as well
Same here Jin lol. I completely agree with him on this subject matter.
You and 80% of N4G I remember this guy getting LAUGHED at hard on here like 6-7 years ago. Jesus.. time flies..
Don't forget whatever he says the opposite would become true, so $70 will become very reasonable in the future.
This is what the left does to appease left wing activists... it's called pandering
Do ppl still listen to this guy? He was a joke a decade ago. Any article with Pachter as it's source is weak sauce. And yes, nobody wants price increases, but looking at the fact that an official increase hasn't occurred in decades, it at least makes sense on next gen exclusives considering inflation alone has dropped profit margins and legitimately great developers with well known IP are struggling to stay afloat. I'm speaking for myself, in the USA. I know Canadians and even UK residents have been struggling with more abhorrent prices, but I can only comment on what I know, and what I see. $10 more, for me, on next gen exclusives is a drag, but certainly understandable if it helps projects become profitable and ppl keep their jobs. Now, I understand the counter is, but the publishers are greedy and the money will merely line their pockets. Technology makes development cheaper if anything. No. Just no. Devs/pubs are dropping like flies. Independent developers are forced to sign bad deals or be acquired. The desperate need to break even amidst rising costs is the reason why we continue to see fans getting screwed over with EGS deals and arrangements like the one with Yakuza Like a Dragon that ultimately spit in the face of the fans that have truly supported the franchise over the past generation. Publishers need revenue more than ever, so they are more willing to sign deals that hurt their reputation or their own fan base. Major AA or AAA games are indeed more expensive to make/market, particularly on next gen. Projects are riskier and riskier, hence why we see games taking less risks and injecting more egregious monetary practices. MTX in full priced titles are commonplace. Day one DLC, tacked on GaaS features or season passes, and the rise of the lootbox are all because of the fact that publishers need to squeeze more revenue from these releases. The prevalence of game services only adds to the MTX craze. It alters the business model into something more akin to a f2p. In other words, the lack of the game industry's ability to increase base price to a minimum level of at least keeping pace with inflation has largely created these abhorrent financial practices that have poisoned gaming over the past half decade or more. If this minor (for me in America) next gen price increase can help to counterbalance some of these practices and make games releases more clean, I can live with it. Obviously some will abuse it by continuing to stuff their full priced next gen products with egregious MTX, but if some portion of publishers can use the increase as a means to not nickle n dime the consumer in other areas and if it can give quality ppl and quality products more security and more confidence in taking risks, again, I can live with it. We'll see.
Guy works at Wedbush and you don't lmfao so whose winning huh
Games are more expensive to make and market yes. But the audience has increased significantly increasing profits. Where I am prices have gone from £50-55 up to £69.99. That's way above inflation. People's wages however have declined during the same period on average. If anything it will be least interesting. I know for me, this hike has decreased my likeliness to spend on a new game. It'll have to be near perfectly reviewed and empty of micro transactions for me to even consider it. These companies are reporting record profits whilst letting their developers go (I'm looking at you Activision). Meanwhile the guys at the top are collecting massive $200 million bonus'. If you think Devs are profiting from this you'd be wrong.
So wrong on so many levels. The facts are easy enough to find. Charging £70 for a game is obscene. Many of these devs make their entire costs of development back in a single day. Are you really trying to suggest that they’re hard done by and struggling??
@iamtylerdurden1 You are completely missing the fact that game companies make millions and millions off of games these days through MT's, which they opted for as opposed to DLC. So these companies charging $70 for a game, and then milking you on top of it through MT's, is exactly what it says on the tin, greed.
Sorry but no. What's created the gaming practices we all hate over the years is greed by the publishers. Publishers who STILL will do these things. Publishers who ARE NOT struggling for money. The only publishers that will charge $70/£70 are those already making so much money. The "struggling" publishers/devs won't charge $70/£70 because they are indie game makers to begin with. Patchter is right on this one. It really doesn't matter how you choose to justify this greed to yourself. It's still greed and not needed period.
Prices haven't increased in decades? Where have you been?
that's a load of crap. making the customer pay more isn't a good way to garner support.
Explain how the little guys work 100+ hours a week, their jobs get slashed, and the CEO makes over 200 million dollars. Charging more for games only helps the one guy make more money. It doesn't go to the developing team. The problem is infrastructure.. and needs oversight to prevent the manager or corporates from abusing the employees. I'm not one for union but the capitalistic failures is most evident in the gaming industry where high moral fiber is practically shatted on.
@Bruh. I dated a girl named Webb and she had a huge bush... does that count?
Yeah $70 dollars is ridiculous, mainly because they are not making better games, they are making the same games and just charging more, these new titles have nothing going on that was not in the $60 buck game... it's just a cash grab, and that's a dam shame.. If the game had better physics's and more things going on, better destruction, longer story ( meaning the game lasted more then 6 hours to beat) had more enemies far better effects, then I would be all for it.. But to pay more for the same game, which is what these studios are doing, that's a hell no.... Complete Epic Fail..
Exactly, Demon Souls is exactly the same game and charging $70. Is it Excellent? Yes. Fun? Yes. New? No. I mean It Takes Two although it does offer best platform and co op experience with smoothness and creativity still only charging $40. Although it miles better than most Ubitsoft and EA themselves, it miles cheaper and nowhere near the indie quality or performance.
@RPGer why don't developers ask you first how much you want to pay for their work.
€80 is an even tougher pill to swallow. None of Sony's launch games have had even a small discount on the PS Store since the launch almost 5 months ago. I've completely avoided these €80 games but I think Ratchet & Clank is going to break me. Hopefully Miles Morales goes on sale because I intend to bounce back and forth between them (Insomniac sugar high) - it would offset the €80 price a bit I suppose. I'd like to play Demon's Souls, but €80 is too much.
That's why going digital is a bad move. You can get a physical copy of Demon's Souls for way less than 80 dollars.
That’s the reason to get the physical edition.
@Kornholic Doesn't make a difference in price whether it be digital or physical. No need to lie bro. https://www.bestbuy.ca/en-c... The best option is to wait a few months for a good sale.
I came here to say the same thing. In EU they charge 80 euros for a single game, frankly it's ridiculous. How to they expect us to buy new games at that price? I for one won't be spending that amount of money on a single game. I've also noticed that there were no deals on ps5 games (digital or physical) to date. Even used DS:R discs start from 65 all they way up to 80 in some cases (including shipping) and they are hard to find. I was open on perhaps getting a few games digitally this time around but these ridiculous prices and lack of discounts have solidified my decision to sticking with physical/used market no matter how much time it takes for the prices to go down. Things are getting prohibitevely expensive by the day for us gamers and with recent times where the games industry is moving closer to going full digital (no ownership/ resell option), is it looks like gaming will be taking a back sit afaic.
@Army_of_Darkness Are you kidding me? That's only one retailer, you do know that right, or are you so out of touch? Apparently you don't know how to use Google search.
Exactly the games on current gym cost 60 and the same ports on next-gen consoles cause somebody makes zero sense. Just like Miro transactions publishers got away with it and now they're getting away with this. We as a gaming community are too busy arguing with each other and not standing in solidarity to make our voices heard
Remember when Activision’s exec said “price increase or microtransactions.” We got both lol
Not to mention they have far more ways of making money now, like from cutting content and selling it as DLC, and having microtransactions.
For once Pachter is actually right...
I do find that I won't purchase a £69.99 game at all...2 weeks after launch it drops in price anyway! Just makes you feel stupid when you buy early, it's like they think we are suckers who have no self control.
I've learned my lesson with buying games day one. This price increase is just going to make me more picky. Even more so when many games come out with complete editions down the road anyway. It's always more "worth it" to wait with tech, even more games.
Or it will be a PS Plus/PS Now/Game Pass title before too long.
Believe it or not...Pachter actually predicted that Xbox would purchase Bethesda a years before they Xbox bought them. There is a certain truth to what he says... it's just the way he says it.
To be fair there was lots of rumors about it back then. Bethesda and MS always had a great relationship. I always wondered why they didn’t back then.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day... When you make so many predictions one is bound to be right every once in a while. Doesn't change the fact that he's wrong 99% of the time lol.
Was gonna post the "broken clock" analogy but I see someone already did. Pachter is the perfect example of it. His list of bad takes is enourmous.
Gouging for money is dumb, but if they've too(most likely not) just increase prices on special editions.
Pachter is just playing to the crowd. He's right And he's wrong. More obvious stuff coming from him. Just a normal day. I'm a discount guy or sales guy. Or even free guy when I can get it.. Last gen, I may have bought 5 games at full price because I wanted a game right away at $60. That's because I'm older and wiser and have more patience to wait on something I know will lower in price eventually. When I was younger, I bought games at launch for Atari, Coleco, Nintendo, Sega and NEC systems, etc all the way up until PlayStation 2. I even bought games like Phantasy Star and Virtual Racing for $80 and $100 decades ago. You eventually learn you don't have to have something right away. Companies aren't wrong in asking for that price. He mentions that it's easier engines and cheaper development hardware, etc. What he tries to ignore is the inflation as if it doesn't exist. He mentions it. But he ignores it. "Oh, it's only a little more." Bullshit. Does he mention that a lot of these big AAA games have a team of 200 or more artists, programmers, animators, voice actors, advanced sound design, etc than games years ago? Does he think that buying that equipment or renting it to make these top games is cheap? No. He doesn't. How much does it cost to market the games worldwide in print, television spots, etc? Shipping the games? The logistics of protecting product from being stolen? You need security a well. He's not being realistic as well. I love lower prices. I'll take it if you give it. It also means you don't have to go buy the game at that price. No one is forcing you to buy at that price. But you can't expect games to stay $49.99 forever when everything else is going up. Yeah. I'm playing the devil's advocate. And just for thought, how many Sony first party single player games have micro transactions? Can't find one in Ghost, GOW or Spider-Man. He neglects that as well.
Devils advocate...nah. tbh this is the first logical post in this comments section.
Thanks. It's not that I want $70. But it doesn't mean I have to buy $70. And if gamers don't buy, these companies will have to lower the price anyway. Gamers will let them know when it's too much. We don't see them screaming that consoles are now $400-$500. They did before with PS3 at $500-$600. But PS3 gave gamers everything and the kitchen sink. I bought the $600 PS3. Then when Sony ripped shit out to lower cost, they complained they didn't get launch system features for free. PS4 releases cheaper than PS3 at $399. They complain it's laptop CPU's. But those laptop CPU's produced Horizon, Spider-Man, Ghost, etc. I bought PS4 at $299 with 5 free games. Now, they seem to not complain about $400-$500 current gen systems. Gamers are all over the place on pricing. Some just want to complain and just follow the herd. They forget game systems used to be $199-299.
You know what you're right. I used to go to gamestop and do the midnight launches for my fave upcoming games. Now I wait till they are $40 with DLC, or even better, less than $30 with DLC. I mean a good game is still a good game later on. I literally do the same thing usually and look for good seasonal sales and never feel ripped off. Then for the few games I might be on the fence about, Gampass has let me try a few and then some turn into a purchase (with discount) or I simply beat them while on Gamepass. If I was a single guy or teen again, I'd probably beat and play even more titles. Now I kinda budget it with my available time and go, "Do I really have time for another open world game right now?" Or, "I'm gonna play that other MP shooter I already have 1st, till I unlock everything I want, and THEN I'll start this new one" Unless of course a few "must have" games come and of course, I just buy em cuz they have me sold from the start. Good times for gamers who want to find a good deal or price.
Which makes sense. Some games you know you want right away. You know what you want to play. It's those other games that have unproven developers. But even main developers can create duds. But it's rare. The question becomes on if you want it right away. Sometimes I do. Sometimes I don't. But no company can force me to pay $70. I'll just wait. Yours makes sense as well.
Agreed. It's not like you are forced to buy these games at launch. I can't even recall the last time I bought my games day one. I either got them on sale or being given via subscription service i.e. PSPlus. And for games that have season passes like most Ubisoft games, I'm willing to wait until their Gold edition of games gets on a deep, deep sale which eventually happen and often before buying them.
Why don't you mention the record profits that both Sony's gaming division and Activision had prior to these companies upping the price of games wich renders any argument you have completely useless? Patcher is being realistic in calling out these companies greed and you're doing what you do best: corporate shilling for Sony.
He’s a broken record.
Lol. A shill trying to call me a shill. Instead of speaking for yourself and creating an argument, you just spew useless name calling. I just support the market leader that's better for gamers. Gamers like you talk about Microsoft profits all the time. But Sony gives back to their community with free games. Yes they make profits, but they're more consumer friendly. When XBL was released, Microsoft went 10 years giving nothing in return. But are the richer company. Sony starts their online, and gives back hundreds of dollars in games. Microsoft releases zero games for the launch of a new system. Sony gives one away packed in. Sony gave away games last year and this year because of covid. What did Microsoft do? Got damn nothing. All you guys talk about is paying for subscriptions bundled together. Sony offers a subscription with PS Now and the online is free. Fools like you were paying to play F2P games. Lol. Keep lying to yourself and continue to fall for the wait and see tow line. Fools usually do. Who's the shill? I support a company that puts in effort and takes risks while giving back. You support a company that can't even release a VR headset and just lies about why they can't. There's only one shill here. And it's not me.
And obvíously you reply with crapola that doesn't have anything to do with the discussion at hand because you're full of shit and you know it. I couldn't care less about wich multi-billion $ company you support you useless tool. I care about what's best for me and for my fellow gamers and upping the price of games in an exercise of greed is not what we gamers needed especially when there is an economic crisis looming over our heads so go on your usual kowtowing routine in hopes that Sony let's you lick their ass and I'll be here to call you out on your bullshit.
Never thought I'd see the day where I'd agree with him
I have no problem with games that increase in price, as long as there are no micro transactions in them.
The thing is, if they were going to do it, it needed to happen across the board or not at all. Either $70 needs to be the standard price for AAA games, or it needs to be $60. Because now there are people (many of them on here) who refuse to buy $70 games when some are still $60. However, there are inevitably going to be people who look at anything launched under $70 as being "budget" and thus not worth their time (just as there were people last gen who wouldn't buy any game that launched under $60 and who won't buy digital only games because they see both types of games as secondary).
I also believe the subscription model is giving some gamers a false sense that it doesn't cost these companies millions to make and market their games. I'm aware they want to make profits if you let them. They're businesses. I expect them to try. But gamers shouldn't think it's as easy as Pachter makes it out to be. He mentions Unity. As if Rockstar Games, Sony, Microsoft, etc use unity for their big games. Some barely use Unreal to make their games. They build their games from the ground up. And employ hundreds of people. That takes skilled workers great at math, architecture, science, biology, zoology, chemistry, etc. People doing research, photography, sound recording, orchestras. Using Sony as an example, we see they create their own game engines. They program advanced weather patterns and lighting. They put in some of the best textures from artists. They get some of the best actors or voice actors from each country they are releasing the game into. And that's just Sony. Look at Rockstar when they make GTA. That's not a 20 or 30 man team. I know gamers what prices to stay the same. But my guess it's going to be a case by case basis. We know Indy companies can't charge $70 on a 3-4 hour game with less production. And we know games with a micro transaction model can't be $70. But hand crafted games, and that's basically what a lot of these games are: HAND CRAFTED. These gamers have to understand that high quality might mean a higher price.
I mean games are on sales all the time so regardless I go for the cheaper game most the time. Still I really don't think someone seeing a new game for £50 is going to think it's a budget title. Even more so if it's a well known franchise. I hope as many publishers as possible stay with todays price and not just onto the bandwagon of a price increase.
There’s always sales going on and games are much longer these days. I haven’t paid full price for a game in awhile.
Very intelligent. A sign of an aware consumer.
The last few games I spent full price on is The Last of Us 2, Ghost of Tsushima (worth it) and Final Fantasy VII Remake.
Maybe we can all be like xbox fans and stop buying games completely.
yay a dig at xbox, here's your troll candy sir
That troll candy must taste good since there's so many trolls for everything.
$60 adjusted for inflation is $74-$75 today. $70 makes perfect sense, and whoever disagrees just simply doesn't understand economics.