Returnal is not the first game to be $70, but one of the first big test cases for the new price point. And it seems like a lot is riding on it because of that.
Returnal is amazing. I bought and Finished Spider Man MM which is also an amazing game. I have Demon's Souls on my radar for when I finish Spider Man Remastered and Resident Evil 8.
Games still cost the same price where I live
Also Returnal isn't the first $70 game. It doesn't seem like a lot is riding on it.
@eon it never says it the first 70 game, its about thats its supposed to be the 1st game that "truly tests" if games are worth 70 bucks or whatever that means. Bit of a pointless argument here, because 15% of the games might be worth it, and those will even be up for debate, doesnt mean the other 85% are allowed to follow suit costing 70 bucks because of it. Most games allready costs 100bucks + anyway when you consider dlc and post launch support. except now you will be forced to pay 10 for dlc instead of it being optional.
It's $89 plus tax in Canada! And as much as love games, I can't be shelling out nearly $100 for each new release! Got bills to pay, gas to pump and groceries to buy, so..... I'll have to wait for price drops and sales on psn.
Means I won't take a punt on anything I'm not 100% sure of. Will only buy dead certs at £70 and wait for sales for everything else. Hope this gross and greedy move backfires. But all it'll do is make Activision and ea richer while smaller studios with more niche games will struggle. Returnal would be a complete flop at £70 if we werent in such a massive game drought.
Seems like a quality title, but I'm not seeing how a game with mid-tier visuals, developed by a team of less than 100 people, had no giant advertising campaign behind it, and minimal voice acting warrants being one of the first games to push the price hike at retail. If publishers are going to claim that game development got oh-so much more expensive, maybe don't put a AA release at the forefront of your push for more expensive games.
Spoken like someone who hasnt played the game. Funny how everyone that owns loves it and says its worth it but then people like question the worth without even playing. Would understand i bought it and then said u know what this isnt $70 game, whatecer that means anyway
I can’t believe we’ve already got people defending $70 game prices.
You have to buy it to play it. And that means shelling out 70 euros for a title that may not be my cup of tea in the end, once the novelty wears off. It's a niche genre and from what I'm reading it is clearly not for everyone. Pretty sure people don't want to risk this kind of money for a title they are not sure of. For me, the easiest solution to solve this price 'issue' would be a demo.
@boing1 The game is actually €80 (almost 100 US dollars, tax included). It's mad. I feel bad for the devs if the sales suffer but €80 is too much money for a video-game, and this price point needs to fail.
So if the other two companies start charging $70 for games then you can't complain seeing as you're defending the price already
Not liking the game and not liking the price are 2 different things. I couldve bought godfall for 20 bucks and still wouldve been a waste of money, get my point. If the game is something u would like then its worth it the extra 10 bucks shouldnt make a difference. And just so were clear here im from australia paying 125 dollars which around 98usd, so iv basically got it worse than all u cry babys. If dont like a game dont buy it, if you like it then pay the price support the devs and get a great game in return. Well end up with FTP games with MT galore if u dont support the devs and games fail.
@flawlessmic ive bought it at full price and am loving it so far, but get lost with the defending of $70 thing. He is right , it doesnt warrant a $70 price range being that its a small studio that have the fraction of a cost of a AAA game.
I agree with him, and I have played the game Ah well...one man's trash is another man's treasure. Enjoy!
@LucasRuinedChildhood just adding a bit of information on your statement. the 70$ price tag is without taxes which obviously doesnt make it much more expensive. it avarages out on 76-77 dollars. but the reason for this is they try to keep the price the same not counting in the value of the currency when it comes to europe and USA they always have. obviously with there stupid tax system they always show the price without tax.
The shilling is real. If Sony priced the game at $90 id see the majority of this site defending it. Actually when Sony finally kills disk based games, everyone here will become pro DRM overnight.
@Flawlessmic why are you even paying @125 aud. Get it on Amazon for like $15 less.
Just odd reasons as well, minimal voice acting is one thing but because they didn’t waste a load of money on flashy PR campaigns or because the dev team didn’t have 300+ people 🤷🏻♂️🤦 🏻♂️🤣 some of the best games ever made come from the smaller teams, too many cooks and all that. I’ve not played it yet so can’t say too much but doesn’t overly seem my kind of game so holding off for a while top end price is too much for a chance got plenty else to play and I’ll only pay that price for top top games god of war, horizon, GTA6 etc. But that’s just me. Gran turismo will be another.
Did you even read what I wrote? I'm questioning the reasoning behind the $70, itself. If the price hike is to mitigate all these supposed development costs, then how do you justify it on a game that cost far less to make than your average AAA release? Value is up to the consumer. If you want the game, and are willing to pay $70, then go but the game and spend $70; but we both know development costs didn't warrant it, making this sudden price hike all that more BS.
I loved Hades, and so did almost everyone. Does that mean it should have been priced at 70 dollars?
I own this game, and it is great, but not worth 70 dollars. You basically get 5 levels that are just extremely difficult giving the game some length (technically if you are really good you could beat it in 3 hours). Performance comes from the game upscaling a 1080p image to 1440p then upscaling that to checkerboard 4K. Tbh, I can think of several other games that I would rather pay 70 for, but I guess joke is on me at this point because I paid it. This game should be more like 39.99. Ratchet looks like it would be more worth the 70 tbh.
@Rbeasley123 exactly, just because a game is great doesnt mean it must suddenly get an out of proportion price. in hindsight i would have probably paid 70 bucks for Hades if I knew before hand I would like it as much as I do. I prefer the 20 dollar tag though. its similar with most products i buy, if its a good product i gladly shell out a bit of extra cash. but when I need to pay 500 just for a brand name like apple on my machine ill pass.
Mid tier visuals? What? They are far from mid tier...
I think mid-tier visuals is a little incorrect, the particle effects are fantastic, and the speed it all moves at is very fast.
Not even AAA games with those resources behind them need a $70 price tag. The price increase is there because those biggest companies want them to be there. There’s no thought behind it but “more.” That is literally all.
Let’s keep complaining that’ll do something
One of the hardest games out. It took me hours to beat the second boss. Now I'm on the third boss and I put in over 40 hours already. The difficulty is worth 70 bucks. This game is a roguelike Dark Soul's 😊
Id venture to say not every find replay the same damn level over and over "fun". Difficulty isn't usually most people idea of "fun" man not everyone like dark souls games type games.
I'm enjoying dying in this games lol, just like any rogulike games, where you are just in the grove and want to get back up again and again.
I stopped reading at.id tier visuals. You haven't played it so I don't care what you think.
I'm not exactly waiting on bated breath for your opinion either. Just saying.
That's fine. Glad we can agree on something. :)
Spoken like someone who haven’t played the game nor has an understanding of basic capitalism, inflation, economics or price elasticity.
Spoken like a shill. I have eyes, and a brain. This would be considered a AA release in any other situation, were it not backed by Sony. Development costs were nowhere near the levels of, say, Last of Us 2, yet that retailed at $60. If the price hike is to mitigate development costs that are just oh so much higher than previous, despite game sales rising every year due to more and more consumers coming into the mold, then why does this game need to be $70?
It doesn’t they just want more money like when Xbox tried to hike their Xbox live gold price but thankfully changed their minds.
@TheRealTedCruz This was an ambitious game for Housemarque, a big departure from the kind of games they made before and I can imagine the R&D was not cheap. It's a little sad that gamers are so immature about price hikes, like their opinions are going to make a difference. This game is gold, definitely AAA IMO and the developers deserve all the sales they can get.
"I can imagine the R&D was not cheap." Yeah especially considering they made their own particle system for this game instead of using what UE4 already has available. I've Never seen anything like it.
@TheRealTedCruz With all you that you said ...... Yet the game is doing very, very well even at $70. Also I find it odd that in all you pointed out like mid-tier visuals, minimal voice acting, AA release and so on that no where do you mention is it fun. You mention buzz words like AA is if Single A, AA or AAA has ever been defined. One could call Returnal AAAA game the way this game is talked about, the way this game has reviewed so well and the overwhelming vast majority that did pay the $70 love it.
Stardew Valley was fun. Hades was fun. I've played a lot of fun indie games but they, typically, were priced accordingly to the cost of the manpower to bring it to market. I loved Greedfall, but there were so many on here arguing that it was a AA release, and shouldn't have cost full retail. Now we're sitting here justifying a glorified AA release, and its choice to be one of the first titles to take the price hike.
If voice acting determines retail price most Nintendo games should cost $5
Lol, I call out Nintendo's pricing and lack of sales all the time. It's funny that you avoided every single other point I made though. The points I raised are all the deciding factors companies are now trying to use to justify the price hike. If you have a highly cinematic title, which is seen in a lot of Sony releases, there's a lot of voice acting and mo-cap involved. It usually requires trained talent, and is typically a large dent in the development budget. Nintendo typically doesn't go that route. They're more mechanic based than story. All the same, their teams are comprised of hundreds of people, they focus on one platform, and there's a giant ad budget for almost every 1st and 2nd party release. Two vastly different development situations. Again, I have called out Nintendo on their pricing. Especially considering they target lower end hardware as of the last few generations; but taking my comment and cherry picking one thing out of it doesn't fly, and doesn't address my actual point. Look at me and my consistency.
I made a flippant comment about Nintendo based on your criteria. It wasn't personal against you and I have no idea if you call them out or not. Regarding your other comments, the game looks fantastic. The second area was impressive but the third really blew me away. I almost stopped to take screenshots. Haven't got past the third area. Hope this game gets a photo mode. So to summarize, I totally disagree with your comment about mid-tier visuals. I couldn't care less how many devs are on their team as long as they deliver the goods, and aside from the patch issue, that they fixed quickly, I`ve been enjoying this game the more I play it. Advertising budget? I haven't seen an advertisement for this, But I rarely see any advertisements for games other than Nintendo. That's nothing new. Did you have any other points? I forgot. I got R Type Final 2 on the same day. Played it for about an hour. I`ve played Returnal for close to 20 hours.
I have the game and it is worth it
I have over 20 hours on it, and not even past 3rd boss yet, so pretty good value for money so far. Can be frustrating, but dang that first area can kick your ass if you are not careful...
I paid 49,95 euros for the physical version at launch and it was 79,95 euros on the Finnish PS Store. A 30 euro difference is huge. That's why physical games are superior.
How did you manage that? I live in Belgium and the cheapest place for physical games is amazon.de but on there it is still 80 euro. With ps4 it took years before the amazon prices became more reasonable.
There are typically good launch day deals at certain stores/websites here, and if there aren't any particular deals, at launch the physical version is still usually 5-10 euros cheaper than on PS Store.
Budgetgaming.be you could get it new for 70 I think.
Might not be telling the truth?
@SenorFartCushion Do you want to see the receipt or what? You can see the price history here: https://hintaopas.fi/produc... and here: https://hinta.fi/2631217/so...
@elazz good to know that site. But 70 euro (or 67 in this case at the moment) is still way too much. During the PS4 gen, I bought my games on the US PSN store for 60 dollars. And I'll continue to do that because 70 dollars is still cheaper than whatever you find locally (except the voodoo stores Kornholic shops at 😁)
Physical games are superior in terms of occasional pricing flexibility but inferior in terms of convenience and physical fallibility
Not really. The pricing flexibility isn't occasional, it's consistent. The convenience digital games provide is also minimal at best.
@korn Not on PC. Having several digital storefronts aiming for your wallet means you're seeing fantastic deals on the daily.
Agreed. Here in the UK the lowest before launch was £55 which is still a significant difference to a store price of £70. Especially as you can easily sell it for £40+ after finishing
I paid 60ish quid if I recall, here in the UK, no regrets either, belting game.
No you didn't.
You are being very disrespectful and rude. I'm not going to return the favor. Instead, I will direct you to the post above where I gave two links to the price history of Returnal in Finnish online stores. These links corroborate my original claim of the physical version of Returnal costing 49,95 euros at launch in certain stores.
Looks like a good game but I won’t be paying £70 for it. Like it or not I’ll wait till it’s a sensible price.
Sadly that is the case for all Sony PS5 1st/2nd party games in the UK, they are all £69.99.
Remember when people were arguing over price increases and we were like: “360/ps3” games were 35 quid, PS4 games were 45-50 quid, what happened?”
Not sure, i have always paid around the same price for games for any console, between £49.99-£59.99 in the UK, even in the 360 era, the pricing in the UK has been quite static for a good few years now.
Same for me... apart from R&C. That game looks incredible, if it reviews as predominantly 9's I am going to suck it up and buy it.
Not sure what you are on about because I recall ratchet and clank 3: going commando releasing for 45 pounds way back when I was in like year 5 or 6 at school so we are talking some 16 ish years ago.games remained about that price at launch till pa3 era when they went up to about y0 pounds and stayed there. That was over a decade ago. Now their price has increased again to 70 which rbf if you consider the average inflation rate of about 2% a year here in the uk means that this price increase does increase the games by the equivalent of 83.33% of the amount they have devalued due to changed in value of currency over past decade.... it's actually less though given ps3 came out in 2006/7. But going with 10 years as its easier. 2% of £60 is £1.20. £1.20 x 10 = £12 . So games priced same in real terms as they were back in 2010 would cost roughly £72 in todays money
"So games priced same in real terms as they were back in 2010 would cost roughly £72 in todays money" But in today's money, they are still £39.99, £49.99, or top end £59.99. Like i said, same price range they have been since the Super nintendo/mega drive era, can not speak for US $ prices, but pretty sure they were $60 for SNES/$50 for mega drive, which is exactly the same cost as today's games.
Pretty sure I paid over ￡50 for Street Fighter II on SNES in the UK what, like, 30 years ago.
Exactly. I think Sony will see that there is a decline in launch purchases and will revert back to the original pricing eventually.