The Price Of AAA Games Would Not Be An Issue If Most Actually Delivered

Many AAA games released in the last few years cost the full premium price but don't deliver nearly half as much quality.

[TiredGamer]

Modern game journalism...

[Leeroyw]

You disagree with the premise? How? I haven't played many AAA games recently that gave me a very good gaming experience. Except Indies and AA titles.

[YourMommySpoils]

Stellar Blade is the only game that delivered to me this year.

[VersusDMC]

That and FF7 Rebirth for me so far. 70 price point wise.

[Snookies12]

FF 7 Rebirth is absolutely astounding. Can't even believe that game is real, lol. The only thing that is personally frustrating me is going for that platinum... Those stupid hard mode minigame collectibles are going to make me lose my sanity.

[TiredGamer]

In 20 years, a hamburger will cost $50 at McDonalds and gamers the world around will be complaining that new game prices were raised to $80....

[TheNamelessOne]

Gamers have been told that things like microtransactions are there to keep the price of games down, yet all we see is developers, more and more, developing these games around egregious microtransactions, yet still raising the price of games.

I get it in free-to-play. I don't understand why more and more "AAA" games are acting like app store releases.

[TiredGamer]

See my post below about inflation. Inflation isn't just a magical phenomenon... it's a combination of falling buying power, wage growth, and cost increases. Even still, dollar inflation is definitely NOT the sole culprit in the rising costs of games. Development staff, development times, and overall cost of game production has been on a monumental rise over the years.

What might have been a team of 20-30 people making a AAA game over the course of 12 months in the 32-bit era (selling a game for $50 or $60), has risen to 200-300 people working for 3-5 years. Just looking at basic numbers here, we're talking of real cost increases anywhere from 30 to 50 times higher than they were in the late 90s/early 2000s. That's staggering!!! Game prices haven't even doubled since then, and yet the resources needed to make a game can be 30-50 times higher, not including inflation!

I will always preach perspective on matters. The answers to why developers release remakes, remasters, DLC, microtransactions, and multiple/PC ports are largely all there. I would argue that it's because the price cap of games is so price inelastic explains why companies have shifted to all these other "hidden" fees and practices. You have to make it back somewhere.

[senorfartcushion]

That was all a big lie wasn't it.

No game journalists jumped in to try and stop it though.

[anast]

@tired

"Game prices haven't even doubled since then, and yet the resources needed to make a game can be 30-50 times higher, not including inflation!"

This means they were grossly over charging their customers for all these years. They wouldn't have been able to stay in business otherwise . It can't be a fair price just now because of inflation now can it. The price hike, in this case, means that the customer is getting grossly overpriced products just like the past, especially with new technology that allows for efficiency, the use of AI, and the use of cheap independent contracting. Not to mention, the customer is getting saddled with 100mil worth of marketing fees. We don't need all of that. It's a hustle not some honest attempt to 'just try to get by because of inflation', businesses don't operate this way. A good business will hustle the socks off their grandma and everyone else's'.

In addition, those hidden fees as you call it are microtransactions, which for SP games the customer is charged indefinitely, because when this happens the game is no longer a game it is a monetization scheme. So, now, we are sold an expensive arcade game that will never be a game. I'm sure you know what I mean. This means the customer is still getting the price hike while not getting he complete product which in this case is a game. It's never black and white like you are trying to make it to be. There is some of the inflation stuff you mentioned, but it's not the whole picture.

[TiredGamer]

They could write an entire economics book on the game industry, as many factors are in play. Volume and industry size play a lot into the dynamics. The game industry today is much bigger today than in the 90s, and back then, a game selling even 100,000 copies was considered a moderate success. Sony's original Greatest Hits lineup had a criteria that the game had to have reached at least 100k sales volume to qualify.... this number changed over time as the industry exploded, but it started that low. The reality is that in those early days, many games sold far fewer... check out the leaked sales data of some of Sega Saturn's titles that were in the low single thousands. The price had to higher to make the investment risk worth taking.

The other dynamic that is not often discussed is that games cost less to make in the day, and there was a constant chase for creating a variety of titles in different genres to corner the market. Of course, same games will be sales hits, and some will be sales duds, and so that entire portfolio of sales is designed to be able to cover the cost of the losers while still maintaining a profit. Kind of how retail stores factor in a certain percentage of loss to their overall numbers (theft, returns, broken items).

So were they "grossly overcharging" back then. That's not a one-size fits-all answer, and I don't think it's always the case. The industry is very different now than it was then, in both scale, size, and expectations.

As for today, yes, the cost is incredibly high to make a AA or AAA game. And marketing is important, even if it's a tremendous cost, otherwise companies wouldn't waste the money on it and just pocket the rest. Microtransactions are, unfortunately, a very effective tactic at increasing the revenue and helping to offset these costs. Not all games rely on them, and so the purchase price of the title becomes incredibly important in making it a viable investment. Remember, game companies are in it to make money... if they can make more money elsewhere, or even in another industry, they will. The market bares what the consumer tolerates.

[DivineHand125]

That $80 price point is likely to happen in 3 years, not 20.

[VersusDMC]

The premium price makes sense when switch games looking 2 gens old and wii U ports are accepted at 60$. Single game Ports and handheld games used to have a 40$ cap before the switch. I would charge more if that's accepted.

I don't know why Nintendo isn't brought up when talking about the increased price of games. Like it's crazy that there's controversy or a discussion to be had that Astro bot is 60 when remasters/ports of Luigis mansion 2 and Donkey Kong are 60 and all you hear is little complaining.

[shinoff2183]

Nintendo is not allowed to be criticized, you know it, I know it. Stop before they get you.

[TiredGamer]

Technically, the price of all games, Switch included, have been dropping over the aggregate. Check out the inflation calculator link - eye-raising stuff.

https://www.usinflationcalc...

A $60 Switch game in 2017 would cost $76.90 today. Here's how much $60 US was worth in past years:

2000 = $32.89
2007 = $39.60
2013 = $44.49
2018 = $47.96
2024 = $60.00

I like to approach things with unbiased eyes. it's easy to look at any price increase as an evil occurrence. As a business owner will tell you, cost management is incredibly important to your own survival. Sure, you can eat the cost of rising inflation and rising internal costs to some extent, but eventually you won't have a business left.

Is it not enlightening to understand that the $70 that companies are charging is actually less than what the inflation index is telling you that they logically could be charging (comparing against a $60 game from the start of the Switch generation (2017))?

[TheNamelessOne]

So Nintendo should be criticized, alongside Sony. Nintendo doing it is wrong. That does't make it fair that Sony is following their actions.

I think it's ridiculous that we have "remakes" of even the latest of Naughtydog releases, yet we can't get a single new IP since two generations ago.

[VersusDMC]

It is fair if a company raises their prices if others are as well. And the problem is that Nintendo isn't criticized as well.

And it's beyond hilarious that you're critizing Sony over Nintendo in regards to new IP. Just proves my point.

[senorfartcushion]

In fairness it's usually because once you pay for the game - that's it. You're not having the contents of a storefeont shoved down your throat 24/7 during the playing.

You pay a crappy price for a full game, while the blockbusters on consoles are £$70 for the beginning of the game.

[RhinoGamer88]

Some reasons in here changed my buying away from pre-order/day 1 to wait three months for a nice discount and 2-3 patches to deliver on the gameplay.

[TiredGamer]

Fair strategy. I can't say that I don't do the same with most games. The reality is that most platforms (except Nintendo) offer steep discounts not long after release.

[Armaggedon]

Depends on what you deem as quality. Suicide squd is understandable to be in the thumbnail, but for me, Starfield was great and has quality in its own strange way. But its a sly way to get views… and it worked.

[senorfartcushion]

It would.

They used to deliver at half of the price.

[Chocoburger]

I barely buy games these days, nearly every game these days is packed with grind and filler.

Why does every genre need "EXPERIENCE POINTS" shoehorned into them? Answer: because they want to make more money off you.

Why does every genre need to have "Equipment or Gear upgrades" shoehorned into them? Answer: because they want to make more money off you.

Its so obvious, the industry is trending away towards the fun we've had in the past, and trending towards copy/paste, generic, boring, slogfests. Yet people are buying up these trash games by the millions without a single thought as to how they're wasting their lives away on third-rate crap, while making these asshole CEOs laugh all the way to the bank. What a shame.

That said, there are some games I'm interested in this year, FFVII Rebirth, Astro Bot, and Visions of Mana, but its becoming increasingly rare to find something worth my time.

[gold_drake]

the only full price game this year that delivered for me was ff7 rebirth. such a fantastic game

[1nsomniac]

We live in a capitalist society, the very backbone of capitalism is to put less and less in, while increasing margins year on year indefinitely.

It’s fundamentally greedy and flawed at its very core. No ones stupid, we all know that, but we refuse to talk or correct it. For the fear of the rich capitalists stripping out every last bit of wealth beneath us. They believe they deserve it because it’s their wealth. But it’s not. It’s compounded wealth created from the interest of the loaned wealth. It’s not earned wealth. It’s manipulated wealth.

The long and short of it… the situation and the industry is only going to get worse. It will never get better.