The $70 Lie

VGChartz's Taneli Palola: "Sony and 2K Games have both already made the first steps towards $70 base price for games, with titles like Demon's Souls, Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War, and NBA 2K21 all costing that much. While other game companies have mostly remained silent on the topic, you can bet they're watching very closely at how those games perform on the market at that price point. If they prove successful, expect other companies to follow suit, increasing pricing to supposedly offset the rising costs of game development. There are just three problems with that basic premise to begin with."

[Blastoise]

Good article. Game prices never needed to increase, the money isn't going towards development or developers and it isn't going to get rid of microtransactions or other scummy business practices. It was purely about game companies seeing an opportunity to test the waters with next gen, and the sad thing is it'll probably work.

[alb1899]

So much true in this article.

[Dir_en_grey]

You know there is something that happens in every economy of every country, it is called inflation.
So over time cost of living goes up, wages needs to go up, cost of game development, shipping, running servers and services, and running a company overall goes up.

In other developed countries minimum wage are adjusted with inflation automatically, but in US you gotta pass bills for minimum wage to go up, and the minimum wage haven caught up with inflation for years until a minimum wage raising bill gets passed.
That's why so many people are poor (in terms of the standard of living) in US even though they get paid the same numbers. The numbers of the money you own gets weaker over time.

First you need to understand the above, to understand why good jobs and good companies, they raise wages over time so people would stay, rightfully so due to inflation and cost of living. They don't wait for minimum wage bill to get passed because they don't pay minimum wage, but recognize that wages are getting higher somewhere else.

Mean while for many folks that their wages are gauged according to the over due adjustments of minimum wage in the US, they just get that much poorer with inflation.

People put time and work in, and companies risk investing that money, and these companies with stock have to keep raising the profit so stock would go up & stock holders wouldn't complaint. That's economics for ya.

Somebody somewhere's gotta crunch the numbers to balance the economy out in everybody's country, but video game is an luxury and not necessity to living. But the price of games going up is just the same as the price of everything else going up and will keep going up. Pay if you can afford or don't pay if not, or just use this to motivate you to get a better job perhaps?

Complaining without understanding or providing a solution is just, complaining...

[FinalFantasyFanatic]

The problem with inflation is that minimum wage should have increases along with it, not only that, how much inflation are you factoring it? Before covid, Australia sat at 2% a year, I believe America is much higher than that (almost double?).

[SpeedDemon]

"just use this to motivate you to get a better job perhaps?"

Or how about people like yourself, pull their pants up and stop letting greedy companies take what they want from you?

[bovandy]

If you want entertainment, get a better job is a heck of an argument.

[Drithe]

By your logic milk should be 100 dollars a gallon now.

[Rachel_Alucard]

You seem to be under the impression they raised prices due to inflation or something out of their control. You know damn well they make way too much off other factors beyond the sale of a game, and the digital takeover will remove any of the physical cost associated with it. It doesn't even cost $60 to make a copy, yet they want to increase the cost anyway. Must be easy being a businessman when you have consumers blaming themselves for anything you pull on them.

[neutralgamer1992]

Blastoise

i can't believe your comment has disagrees

Geronosaur

yes 30 years ago there also wasn't digital revenue, post launch dlc, micro transactions etc, raising the game price to $70 is fine but than remove all the other nonsense. What is actually happening is even with price being raised these greedy publishers will keep pushing MT and gamers like you will keep saying it's cosmetics only. Big media outlets won't lower the score even if they reviewed the game using XP boosters and gamers would have to pay $10 extra

chop

exactly

RGR

companies spent more on advertisement than actual game development

[SmokinAces]

We didn't NEED subscription services either. Its odd to me that people will complain about spending another ten dollars to own their game but praise paying forever to rent them and loose access to them if they stop paying. Matter of perspective I guess and whatever side of the fence one is hurling their criticisms from.

[milohighclub]

No one praised sub services. They're pretty my chain universaly hated here.

[Pretentious]

I would only be okay with this price point if no DLC was ever released. Give us the game in its entirety, and you've got a deal. If not, then, I guess we're just going to have to spend the money anyway because if the game is good, we're gonna buy it. Damn it!

[Lore]

Well we don’t know if Microsoft is taking this same approach because they don’t have any exclusive next gen games set to release until 2024. So we won’t know until then

[Shane Kim]

They will. That way, gamepass will look even more attractive wich is all MS is concerned about.

[RickRoland]

Gamepass prices will slowly increase ala Netflix.

[Rude-ro]

Game pass is paying for it.
You have access to games.. but where you play and for how long dictates it success.

And instead of loot boxes you now have season passes and micro transactions.

I can not fathom someone saying paying for the online service, paying for the game rental service, and season passes with micro transactions is any better than $70

Microsoft offered what should have been indie or free to play games at AAA prices to make game pass look like a deal.

I assure you.. profits are flowing a plenty

[chrisoadamson]

@RickRoland Phil Spencer has come out on record stating there will be no increases to gamepass for the foreseable future . The current model is highly sustainable .

[porkChop]

2024? Is that supposed to be a joke?

[Lore]

Yes. I’m sure Avowed and Fable (the only two reasons thus far I plan to get the XSX) will be out by 2022 but I made the joke because I have empathy for dedicated fans who only prefer to play on Xbox. Xbox 1st party offerings have been shit for the past decade. I have no stake in either company so it doesn’t matter to me, just digging a bit at Msft in this instance.

[purple101]

Microsoft's game line up is the only joke arround here. Wait till e3..he says....5 years in a row he says....

[glennhkboy]

The article is about the price of PS5 game. If you buy all the major launch exclusives (4 to 5 games between November to December), it will cost you US$300 to US$400. For the same price from GamePass, you can play thousands of games. There is no competition from the costing perspective.

[Lore]

Does Xbox game pass get every single new release on day 1? Open your eyes

“You can play thousands of games”

Game Pass has 100 games. If you want to mention a service that has “thousands” of games, then i believe you’re referring to PSNow with about 800 games.

[glennhkboy]

@Lore
"Does Xbox game pass get every single new release on day 1?" Yes, we do.

[milohighclub]

Is there still anything worth playing....? No there isn't.

[Ausbo]

Gears tactics was $60.

[Petebloodyonion]

It's been said often in past article that the 70$ price tags come from market research that showed that PPL were expecting to pay more and wanted to pay more for a video game so companies will suit themselves.

Now all the argument brought by the gaming industry for the needs of price Increase has been debunked.
The CEO's of Activision, Take Two, Ea, ect all got huge bonus in the last couples of years due to the large profit made.
Monetisation will still be there and it's still bringing huge amount of cash.
2020 will probably be one of the best year for video games due to Covid 19.

[purple101]

Yeh i think when these companies make millions in profit....an increase is not needed.

If they did need it to cover their are costs of development that would be another situation, but the fact they're turning out millions and profit that after all costs have been taking into consideration, there is absolutely no need for this rip-off pricing.

[Phoenix76]

It's already payday over @ activision. They saw 1.2bil made within 3 months from Mt's alone!
https://www.pcgamer.com/uk/...

[Bathyj]

Just quit gaming you tightarses.

[MadLad]

Shut up

[FunAndGun]

Didn't think I would ever agree with ya, but bam, there it goes, I clicked it.

[wwinterj]

Nah. I'll just buy more games in a sale and guess what? That's my choice and I win whatever I do.

[jamesclark1991]

AAA launch prices absolutely need to increase (something I never thought I'd say!). Dev teams are getting larger, consoles are getting more complex to work on yet we still pay the same launch prices as the PS2 era. I don't want this market to race to the bottom and devalue dev teams hard work. The games industry isn't ready to become Netflix (not yet anyway...).

[Petebloodyonion]

Did you have to buy DLC with the PS2 to a have the complete package?
Did you have roadblock to slowdown your progress in a game so you could have a pop up suggesting to buy a booster pack?
Loot box?

[Bathyj]

Not that much of a problem in Sony's games. Happy to play for quality.

[Petebloodyonion]

" Happy to play for quality."

And read my initial post in the thread
"the 70$ price tags come from market research that showed that PPL were expecting to pay more and wanted to pay more for a video game so companies will suit themselves."

[jamesclark1991]

No, but I never had that issue with PS4 games either. Because I didn't buy games that contained loot-boxes. I voted with my wallet.

[Petebloodyonion]

@Jamesclark
And how many of the games you bought failed commercially or barely broke even suggesting that the price should be increased?

@Bathyj mentioned that he was happy about paying more for quality and like I pointed it's the main reason why there's a price increase because ppl wants to pay more (hey it's next gen texture so it should cost more right?)

[Shane Kim]

Dev teams are larger yes, but game development is easier. Every industry in the world is getting fully or partially automated. We are having computer aided programs to help with basically whatever task thrown at us, in this case being coding. The reason for costly games are not the development of it. It's the actors, writers, producers and advertisments.

[jamesclark1991]

That first part is absolute nonsense. But I agree about the rest.

[jznrpg]

Automated video games? Right......

[wwinterj]

Game development is actually more easy these days. Still as you "vote with your wallet" so will I. I simply will be more picky on games that I buy full price. I'm already picky as it is. Also I still pay for "quality". The UK is seeing a £20 increase in games. That £20 can buy me another game.

[anast]

It will be used to push people toward all digital gaming, this is the beginning of the end of physical games...I hate MTs too

[wwinterj]

You do know digital gaming often costs more as it in on PSN right?

[anast]

@ Ted I sit at my computer desk (I work and game on my PC) in my office. The living room has a TV and a PS. The living room is more comfortable. I'm not going to move everything to the TV and back to my office every time I want to play a game.

[blackblades]

I'm fine with it, I always wait for deals anyways. Besides you know how much these games cost to make and they go up over generations. Thats alot of money to make a game, if you want awesome exclusive there should ve any complaining. Know one is forcing people to buy the games.

[ChasterMies]

Will you really pay $70 for games? I won’t. They might get away with this during a new console launch but long term this only works if people are willing to pay more.

[Unknown_Gamer5794]

I sure won’t. I normally wait for price drops anyways. At $70USD, which is sure to mean a good $90CAD, I’ll just be that much more inclined to wait on games.

[ChasterMies]

Exactly. A higher starting price means I’ll wait longer for a decent discounted price.

[njitram2000]

This price hike was already done in Europe with the PS4 generation and it never went down for digital prices or physical in normal shops. Only amazon would sell it slightly cheaper. So then you have to wait for a sale. Oh and by the way: the prices may rise from $60 to $70 in the US but in Europe they are raising them again from €70 to €80

[Zeldafan64]

So why are consumers in Europe willing to pay those prices in the first place? Enabling those companies' greed is ridiculous.

[njitram2000]

Who says we are WILLING to pay those prices? Sony and Microsoft have a monopoly on the console market (Nintendo is even worse when it comes to pricing) so we don't have a choice.
And sure, the typical response is "then don't play games" but that's a crappy argument. Imagine if there were only two car companies that set the prices. Would you say "then don't buy a car"? And to make the analogy complete, there are no bicycles, motorbike, etc. and you are unable to walk to places. So it's buy a car or never leave the house.
PC is a little cheaper and prices drop faster but those have been rising too and there are many Sony exclusives that people want which are part of the monopoly. Hell, Microsoft was fined by the EU exactly for creating a monopoly with Windows.

[Father__Merrin]

IT COSTS MORE to develop games now its as simple as that. early generations you could sell a simple arcade game for 29.99 39.99 etc but now gamers require online multiplayer, persistant updates etc massive worlds its very cut throat so thats why the price has risen.

btw i dont agree to high prices i always believe aaa £39.99 is fair £19.99 for budget titles etc

[Unknown_Gamer5794]

That sounds reasonable enough, until you notice that it’s companies like EA, Activision, etc., pushing that narrative. Not a single one of those companies is one you should feel bad for. They rake in huge money on their games and I don’t believe for a second that they’re hurting. 2K is one of those companies. Sony’s usually cooler than that, but it goes to show even they are susceptible to corporate greed.

Devs closer to the AA end of things have so much more to lose if one of their games doesn’t do so well. Why aren’t they pushing the narrative that games need to cost more to help them recoup their costs? Why aren’t they implementing MTs to serve that end as well?

I’m sure a company like 2K puts more dollars into game development quantity-wise, but what percentage of their bottom line goes into a given game? I’m pretty sure they get their money back and then some the vast majority of the time too. For that reason, I reject their narrative.

[chadwarden]

Regardless of whatever the narratives are, on pure inflation alone, a $60 game back in 2006 would cost $77.46 today. We're pay LESS for a game today than we did 15 years ago.

[SegaGamer]

@chadwarden

Another one that brings up inflation but ignores the fact that most AAA games and many AA games have been including microtransactions, DLC and Season Passes to EASILY make up the cost of inflation for years now.

There has to be a cut off point somewhere. People don't have unlimited amount of money, and our wages aren't going up enough to keep up.

[MadLad]

@chadwarren

If we want to take about inflation, most states still don't hold a minimum wage of more than $9 an hour.
Yes, inflation happens; but when the majority of jobs out there barely make rent, I'm more worried about the consumer end of the deal. Not whether or not the million/billion dollar company bumped their profit up 5% this quarter from last year.

We have microtransactions and yearly content passes making giant profit for companies crying poverty over the costs of game development.
These things were implemented under the guise of keeping games cheaper. All it really gave us were less finished titles, and games designed around pushing you to use microtransactions to better enjoy the experience.

Now it's 2020, and they now want $70 + for games, and have no intention of moving away from their microtransactions and season passes.

[ChasterMies]

Games sell so more copies now than they did in the 80s and 90s that it more than makes up for the cost of development. This isn’t about survival of the industry. It’s purely for profit.

[njitram2000]

Did you even read the article?

[whitbyfox]

Nobody here remembers SNES games being £/$70 in the early 90’s.

[VJGenova]

Street Fighter II in 1993 was $75. Bought Turok in 1997 for $80. And with Street Fighter II, they released a "complete game" every year; Turbo and then Super, both of which cost $70+. I remember saying "wish I could just upgrade to the new version." I wished for DLC. Now that it's common place, people see it a plague. If you're that worried about getting the "full game" wait for a complete edition in the discount rack.

[Exthun]

Paid 80 for copy of Sega Genesis Strider on 1990!

[whitbyfox]

Absolutely, i remember Street Fighter 2 being £70. The babysitter brought it round every time.
Also good times knocking on people’s doors who had a SNES who you hardly knew to swap games due to a friend of a friend.

[specialguest]

I remember those games. There weren't many of them and those games came later during the life cycle of the SNES. The reason why there was a price hike was because those cartridge had 3 times more megabytes of memory than the average 8 megs SNES cartridge. It was costly to the developers to push for 32 megabytes of memory, and they had to pass on the cost to the consumers. Some cartridge had special add-on hardware like the Super FX chip.

[QuePasa87]

That was generally allowance money or gifts, so the value of hard earned money didn't mean as much to me back then.

[0rbital71]

what about the SNK games, they were over a 100 for some of them

[AceRimmer302]

I always wanted to buy Phantasy Star 4 but it was something like $85 and little me could never afford it. Just had to rent it like 4x in a row to beat it. $20 was doable as a kid. With inflation, these games would be $130+.

[tombfan]

Games these days costs MILLIONS to make, is absurd gamers complain about a 10 dlls increase

[Phoenix76]

Same companies make over a billion in just 3 months from Mt's alone. See below.
Its absurd people defend a price increase.
https://www.pcgamer.com/uk/...

[Braindeadninja]

What abt the games that don't have microtransanction?

[northpaws]

@Braindeadninja

They don't care, just because a free to play game makes billions, no other games can increase their price, even the one without microtransaction. At the end of the day, everyone just cares about themselves, who care if a good studio is surviving or not.

[garos82]

Nothing absurd about it. Games are becoming cheaper to make. Price hike will cause me to buy less games overall so that's not good for the industry and various studios at a whole

[MadLad]

Microtransactions and season passes were brought in and labeled as a means to keep the cost of the games, themselves, down.
They now bring in billions of dollars a year. Sometimes overtaking the profit on the sale of the game itself.
All the same, it's now 2020, and now devs cry poverty as they ask for $70 + for the base game, and still want to implement all of the microtransactions either way.

What's absurd is you're defending companies who typically bring in record profit year after year, but see nothing wrong, as a consumer, of them straight up asking for more money, as if it's actually needed for the company to survive.

[tombfan]

I wrote the message thinking about Sony games (like the cover image) Sony games usually don't have MT's, therefore, I think they do deserve a price hike.

[wwinterj]

£20 in the UK. £20 can get me another game. Try harder.

[aaronaton]

Well i remember paying for games in the PS1- PS2 era for £40. Not only are games more expensive to make, but there as also been 20 years of inflation during that time. Do people really think that products should cost the same as they did 20 years ago?
Phones are like £800+ now, granted the technology has improved from the 3210 days.

[Shane Kim]

Phones back then had a real upgrade to it as well. Today they resell the same thing with a new sticker on it.

[Elda]

Again...price increasing on video games is inevitable. Mostly $60 price tag on AAA video games started in 2005,for 15 years games were $60. 2 generations later of course video games were going to go up in price.

[aaronaton]

Facts of inflation that has been around since the dawn of currency.

[smashman98]

Lol people feaking out for 10 dollars when in reality a 20 - 30 increase was likely kind of makes me laugh

[Jericho1337]

It’s all subjective - should games with endless replay value like open world RPGs or multiplayer FPSs cost the same as 5-6 hour story-driven single player games?

I bought Resident Evil 3 for £50 earlier this year and felt ripped off. In an ideal world, game prices should be scaled by value, because it’s becoming a minefield as to whether or not to take an expensive chance on a game. This is where services like Gamepass really soften the blow.

[Fishy Fingers]

With increasing game sales, the billions made from DLC and microtransactions that might of been able to offset a price hike. But I guess its inevitable and a new gen is the best time to do it with new (device) users hungry for new content.

Although celebrating them as if its deserved or we should feel obligated to pay more (when they have new, higher grossing revenue streams) just seems strange from a consumer POV.

But either way, my day one days are behind me and PC (90% of my games) has too much competition for you to have to pay RRP prices so meh.

[chiefJohn117]

I could understand it if it was next-gen exclusive due to the last of install base but the fact the games are releasing on last gen yet still received a price hike I feel it's BS

[Profchaos]

Cod is not Sony or 2k

[agent4532]

Excellent article, remember back in the day on how digital distribution was going to reduce the cost of making videogames. What happened to that. All I see is a bunch of greedy companies that want to hoard 💰

[CDbiggen]

Demon's souls is £69.99 in the UK, the price of new games currently is around £50. So maybe we're even gonna miss the £60 barrier for new games xD.

[nommers]

Good thing I’m very patient. I’ll wait until they come down to 20-30

[hiawa23]

I usually buy Ultimate Editions for many games especially the big ones so, if it is $69.99, that is cheaper than the many games I buy now.

[smashman98]

Overtime everything increases in price, games movies, food, rent, everything. It's 10 dollars. When accounting for inflation even just 15 years ago when games jumped to 60 we were paying more for games than we are now. So chill.

[RgR]

Of course it's a lie.
I'm not buying a single 70$

And any company that will treat its consumers like garbage I will not support.

This means bargain bin or used.

[Gaming4Life1981]

Speaking the truth in this article.

[VersusDMC]

Well nintendo releases wiiU ports at 60. Nintendo is always allowed to charge what ever they want...why would sony look at a 60$ Pikmin 3 and not think they should be charging more?

[nommers]

Thing is those $70 games will be far lower in price by a years time or less before Nintendo realizes how far they have their heads up their butts to finally lower their games prices.

[sourOG]

Don’t buy day 1. Game prices drop so quickly that there is almost no reason not to. Unless you are an ignorant enthusiast like me who needs shit immediately lol. The early adopters always put up the cost though, that’s just the way it is. Next gen I’m going to be buying only my most hyped games on day 1. The others I will wait for price drops.

[smashman98]

lol I say the same thing every gen don't lie to urself. You're gonna keep going as you've been going. Us day 1 folk can't help it.

[sourOG]

Probably right lol

[lio_convoy]

The answer is pretty simple for me. Most of the titles coming out, I'd wait for them to drop in price. No drop, no purchase. It's a rare title I pick up on day one.

[SegaGamer]

"But prices for games have been $60 since 2005, they have to go up because of inflation"

So many comments on here that say pretty much this. Why is it that none of you reply back when people bring up microtransactions, dlc, season passes, mutiple edition games, all of the things that more than covers the inflation costs? You people also ignore the fact that gaming is making more money than ever, it's not the same industry it was back in the mid 90's and early 2000's, it doesn't need to be this expensive anymore.

Sorry, but if you think the likes of EA, Activision, Ubisoft, Sony, Microsoft, etc, need to up the price of their games, then you're gullible fool. You have fallen into their trap nicely, and you will keep doing it as they add more and more ways to get every last penny out of you.

How do you not see that you're being played? These big gaming companies that have been adding more and more money making schemes to their games suddenly say the prices of games need to go up at the exact time a new console gen starts, and you buy it. These same companies have CEO's that are receiving billion dollar bonuses every year........and you still buy their excuses? You absolute mugs.

[Edgelordsupreme]

Billion dollar bonuses eh? You really think Andrew Wilson or Yves Guillemot are taking home Billion dollar bonuses? Anyways, I think the inflation argument is probably a simplification of more complex issue the same way I think waving it away as "The DLC took care of that!" is also a simplification.

[SegaGamer]

I meant million dollar bonuses.

[Edgelordsupreme]

Doesn't really change the fact that its more complicated than you're making it out to be.

[Positivelypositive]

If minimum wage does not need to go up for 20 years neither does game prices.

[smashman98]

experts agree minimum wage is long overdue for increase

[Rebel_Scum]

The article made some good points. But completely ignored the overheads having increased, marketing budgets increased and inflation.

[garos82]

I don't care about stupidly high marketing budgets. Not my fault they need to plaster their ads all over the place to try to sell

[smashman98]

this I don't care mentality really just baffles me. Like, they don't care about ur opinion. All their data likely shows that games will continue to sell just as well as they've been selling at this price

[Rebel_Scum]

Nor do I but I guess the marketplace
is that competitive that they feel they need to do it.

[Braindeadninja]

People are saying that companies are making lots of money by microtransanction.
I will ask about the companies that don't have microtransanction which make single player games. Like sony, capcom, rocksteady do they not deserve the price hike for their games?

[Edgelordsupreme]

I really want to spend 89.99 CAD on Umbrella Corps, that was a great single player experience.

[Zeldafan64]

Not all their games have DLC but many of them do. There isn't a single big company out there that doesn't have microtransactions in at least some of their games.

[Kaii]

Does spending $60 give you the whole game?
It does not so stop justifying price increases.
SegaGamer's comment hits the nail on the head.

[jjb1981]

There sure a bunch of people in here that completely understand game development costs, economics and logistics. Amazing!
/s

[dcbronco]

The response to price increases shows how little understanding of business the hardcore gamer has. It also is why acquisitions and Game Pass work as a business model. Microsoft and Sony get this. It's a matter of time before Sony has to admit they get the GP model.

[Zeldafan64]

No it's very simple for us to see needless greed.

[dcbronco]

If you believe it's all greed you don't get it. On games like call of duty it's greed. But on the average title it's survival.

[QuePasa87]

The more expensive games are, the more patient I become :)

[Manubiggs]

Its economics 101 - supply and demand; In a free market all actors demonstrate profit maximizing behavior - if they think you will buy it at $70 , they will price it at $70 because that is what the market currently determines as the value (regardless of whether that is true or not). If the public doesn't buy at that price, then price will go down.

[GordyNYC]

With digital sales increasing company profits I wouldve thought that game prices would lower to 49.99 but alas its not to be. Guess Ill be buying games later at sale prices...

[Fonsecap]

I'm from Europe, here games at full price are 69.90euros which at this point is 82,25 us dollars, If they increase price to 79,90 in Europe, and with the pandemic and all I think the sales of games at full price will decrease immensely, and people will just wait por promotions

[Zeldafan64]

I can't believe the European market would be foolish enough to even accept €70 games.

[Fonsecap]

The €69.90 is the price tag for full price games, in Europe, since the beginning of the 7th gen (PS3/X360) physical or digital until now, that's why I hope they won't make it €79.90 for the 9th

[Dragonscale]

Greed pure n simple.

[Yi-Long]

The announced price-hike is THE reason why I've postponed getting next-gen for now.

As these are launch-games for a new generation, I expect them to do well regardless of their higher price, also because there simply isn't much competition yet and people will need some new games to show off and enjoy their new console, but I don't see myself EVER spending 70 bucks on a game.

I'll wait until next year when perhaps some of these games are hitting the bargain bin, before I decide if I'm gonna jump in or not. Might possibly even wait for a mid-gen console update with bigger SSD inside, and/or some nice bundle.

[FanboysKiller]

It's inevitable , there's no escape from it.

[GrizToof]

Look yall, this is a very easy issue to fix but a majority of gamers have this mental problem where they will complain to no end but when it comes time for action they fall immediately. What i am doing this new gen is what I have been doing for the last 2 years, I wait. It's that simple, if you wait around 6 months before you buy a game you can nab them up for around $40 or less. I'm supposed to get my PS5 today in the mail and it will be the first new console I have ever bought without a launch game. I will not pay $70 for a remake or $50 for an expansion, I do have plenty of PS4 games that are gonna get patches that I haven't played yet. One game I am excited for is Ghost of Tsushima, it will most likely be the first game I play. There are a few exceptions to this rule I have and they are, if it's a limited edition that I feel will sell out quick or if it's Cyberpunk 2077, which is $59 anyway so I'm not breaking my no $70 rule anyway. Yeah thats it yall, don't let these companies rip you off, have some pride and don't let yourself get taken advantage of by greedy multi billion dollar companies that only want your money and as much of it as they can get from you. Don't be fooled, Sony doesn't care about your sex, skin color, age, weight, who you voted for and what racist group you like to kneel to, everything they do is a strategy to get money and they will keep pushing those limits till you push back. Have a great day and game the fock on yall!

[Phantom68]

Very informative but would it change anything? What would make a difference is gamers voting with their wallet and I suspect this is not going to happen.

[Terry_B]

Has been years since I paid 60 bucks for a game.

[Mroc13]

There is no justification for the price increase imo. The console base increases at a much faster rate from generation to generation. This is why lifecycles are shorter as market saturation happens in less time. Also games are selling much more than in the past. devs can sell millions of copies vs thousands. Even new ips are setting records. Devs are making a lot more money now to be able to cover developmental costs

[Canadiananimal]

Up in Canada the 70 dollar games are 90. It sucks shit. And then you gotta buy the season pass or else you have an unfinished game. Yeah, life is great.

[DefaultComment]

well, their justification for $70 a game is no longer a valid justiication. If they keep adding microtransactions then why the hell they need to raise the price.
If you are so concerned about this scam, then vote with your wallet, boycott their games and soon they'll realise that is not worth their greed and most likely they'll reduce the price back to $60. Cause I seriously doubt they'll ever let microtransactions go.

[DaleCooper]

*APPLAUSE*

[darklaw]

I see a lot of inflation comments, and quality of game services, but there is a fine point no one has touched upon yet.
The games I remember used to come with manuals, maps, and maybe a collectable coin or something. However, since the digital age emerged the costs to include these items has disappeared, sure there is an online manual or map you can download, but they companies don't have to include one in every box, saving millions of dollars. Then look at the cost of saving games to disk and shipping and distribution, they no longer have that expense as well. Did the price of games ever go down because of this?

The prices have steadily risen over the years and will continue to do so. we as consumers can't really dictate prices, but we can dictate quality. Getting screwed on loot boxes is unacceptable, this is a huge issue with the community and developers know it because we have a unified online voice. Also getting an unfinished game and paying full price for it is unacceptable, even with the promise of future updates and DLC content it's an insult to all consumers.

Word of mouth is a powerful tool, and we have already blacklisted companies for letting us down and taking advantage of us. I dont mind paying more for a product but the quality of that product better be there if they are going to raise the price. If not, we have a voice, and we're not afraid to use it.

[Exthun]

Don't pay the full price of $70!!!

[anubusgold]

Oh development is high but they will still have over priced dlc, loot boxes and games as a service Bs this is a money grab pure and simple.

[Spartacus10]

Every game drops in price. If you don't think its worth it then don't buy it until it drops to the amount that you want to spend on it. Its simple.

I haven't spent more than £15 on any single game for many years now, with the exception of RDR2 on launch which was a waste of money since I never got around to playing it until it was worth £20.

If you have a backlog of games you want to play, there's literally no point paying the launch premium.

[CrimsonWing69]

Voting with my wallet. I'll be waiting for a price drops on 90% of next-gen games.

[Anomander]

if you are that worried about prices for consoles, get on PC and get them cheaper. Eventually, the games are going to be there. It may take a while, but hell Sony is even putting the games there.

[FPS_D3TH]

Lmao it’s as if inflation doesn’t exist at all

[jznrpg]

If 10$ more gets me more and better games from Sony and any other company I’m fine with it . I won’t buy all games at full price but I will support the companies that make the best games that I like. I know the 10$ is to make profit what else would it be for? But profit is also used for more games and reinvesting into the companies that them . These are companies that must turn a profit or they go away . It’s simple economics . They do better more games I’m happier and so are they .Support the games you like the most and pay full price if you can afford it , if you can’t just wait for it to go down to an acceptable price for you . I’m buying Demons Souls for 70$ I love the game and Sony makes great games I want more from them . I’m not buying Madden until it’s 10-15$ next year and if they stopped making the game maybe someone else would come and make something better but I don’t care if it went away. I will gladly pay for my hobby . It’s a small fraction as expensive as some of my other hobbies .

[chobit_A5HL3Y]

they increase the prices simply because they can. with games going digital now, prices should be levelling out, even with the higher cost of production.

[Bender6502]

If this continues across the board the result will be less game sales overall. People will either wait for prices to fall, and/or only buy absolutely must have games. In turn this may lead to even more bad behaviour from publishers as they try to compensate further.

[Profchaos]

When you make a product you can set the price

[P_Bomb]

Man. I wish I could go back to $69.99. Now sitting at $89.99. Prefer physical but I’ve been exclusively digital this year if for no other reason than no tax.

[Ulf]

Inflation folks. Game developers don't deserve to starve so you can play their games, or play buggier games because they can't spend the money to get them ready for market.

What really needs to happen is the physical retailers need to allow DIGITAL games to be sold for LESS, than their physical counterparts. Yes, THIS is the reason games are so expensive -- retailers like Wal-mart can't make money off games if they don't hike the price, and they won't do business with publishers to sell their games, until they price-fix digital copies to be the same price.

So you pay extra, for some guy in a blue vest to unlock a cabinet and hand you the game. And to have the disc printed, and then for the ability to hand it to your friend.

If you gave up on all that crap, games would cost $40, brand-new. $70 is cheaper than it should be, TBH. Physical games are a plague on the industry.