Are we really supposed to buy the $80 price increase is because "games cost more to make" from Microsoft?

But these motherfuckers also earn a lot more per game than they did. Especially now with secondary revenue streams like DLCs, microtransactions and subscriptions.

And games that take 10+ years to develop because of retarded project management is not something I am willing to subsidize.
 
Learn some self control and stop buying games at $80. Wait for discounts. I did this, and stop caring about buying games at launch for a long time.

Video game is not a necessity in life.
 
Well I looked up a few sources on the size of the market and when you do not include mobile (mobile is not what this is about) it's about anywhere from 2 to maybe 4x larger. Remember PS1 sold like 80 million consoles and PS2 160million. It has not increased 10x like u say.
I am not including mobile. But good job at ignoring PC which steam alone is at over 1B accounts, but lets count half of them as bots, still 500M vs how many PC gamers that ACTUALLY BOUGHT games in 1995? Yeah that number was close to zero. And that's just steam.

And since you specifically mentioned GTA. If this list is to be believed then GTA V sold over 200M units. GTA III is not on the list which means it sold less than 28M.


there is also this list which if true means GTA V sold more than 10x what GTA III sold


So does GTA really need to cost 80$+ because of development costs doubled or tripled? I don't think so, but 2k certainly wants you to think so.
 
Last edited:
Inflation plus company bloat and minus old talent and skillsets...

While it's totally avoidable, I can see how, in their current situation, they believe it is correct (as well as the other publishers).

Rather than downscale both company and game while keeping key talent, push out smaller games at lower costs.

But in that scenario, you can't go mental with the latest MP craze zeitgeist and push battle passes and floop floop dances, etc.
 
Last edited:
I am not including mobile. But good job at ignoring PC which steam alone is at over 1B accounts, but lets count half of them as bots, still 500M vs how many PC gamers that ACTUALLY BOUGHT games in 1995? Yeah that number was close to zero. And that's just steam.

And since you specifically mentioned GTA. If this list is to be believed then GTA V sold over 200M units. GTA III is not on the list which means it sold less than 28M.


there is also this list which if true means GTA V sold more than 10x what GTA III sold


So does GTA really need to cost 80$+ because of development costs doubled or tripled? I don't think so, but 2k certainly wants you to think so.
Let's agree to disagree then because every stat I can find online shows a 2 to 4x increase (depends how you count inflation) from the mid 90s to now when you ignore mobile which supposedly accounts for 50% of the entire market today.
 
Last edited:
These price hikes are really funny. If these happened during a new gen launch with clearly visible jumps in production values then it would be acceptable. But they are still offering barely better games than lastgen and asking more and more for it. All they will get is less launch buyers. Fools.
 
Move the studios out of the most expensive states to house them, idiots. Some of those bums aren't worth their overblown salaries.
 
Well, bottom line will be.....fewer games sold, less revenue, more people will try F2P games, some will subscribe to PS+, GP and NSO, companies will think that's what gamers want, release more GAAS games.
 
Move the studios out of the most expensive states to house them, idiots. Some of those bums aren't worth their overblown salaries.

Probably why bunch of pubs are looking to start studios in countries like Poland etc. activisons new studio is also in the euroblock.
 
Fuck Microsoft, nothing but L's for those fucking losers.

And FUCK NINTENDO, THOSE STUPID FUCKS for setting the bar with their early PS4 looking dogshit games going for 80 bucks, greedy cunts.


a70q0pbkq9j91.gif
Facts bro. Now lets wait for the nintendo and ms employees to come in here and damage control. Lol.
 
A special Kebab is £19 at Mr G's round the corner from me.

£19 fucking pounds. Kebabs cost more to make, why not games?
 
A special Kebab is £19 at Mr G's round the corner from me.

£19 fucking pounds. Kebabs cost more to make, why not games?

Where do you live? Mayfair?

£19 for a kebab! What's so special about it that they charge £19? I think they're ripping you off, mate.
 
I'm not making excuses for any of the major console platform holders who have been raising prices the last 5+ years, including most recently Microsoft just this last week. But it does need to be continually pointed out that monetarily speaking, games and consoles have never been cheaper, adjusted for inflation.

For example, the SNES launched in North America for $199.99. Adjusted for inflation, that would make it $468 today. And certainly, we can easily imagine the margins for Nintendo on a $200 sale back in 1991 would have been much higher, given how cheap materials were to manufacture those machines back then. It was just an entirely different world. Games were built with teams numbering in the single digits, and a million dollar budget was considered "large".

It is odd if you zoom out and see how expensive everything else we buy nowadays is, that we expect consoles and games to never, ever go up in cost. 🤷‍♂️
 
Last edited:
Blackpool!


fh7JzPq.png

£21.90 for mixed kebab in Blackpool?

To be fair, it is a mixed kebab. If I wanted one of those in my neck of the woods (Swindon) I'd be paying around the same. In fact, I think I'm getting a better deal down south. I can get lamb chops in my kebab for £17 sheets.

tk8a5QL.png
 
My advice is to say to hell with the greedy bastards. I do not have to play their games on release dates. IF I really want to play them, I will just wait a few weeks or months and buy it from a third party. That way I fuck the publisher two ways. I don't support their overpriced products at launch and when I do buy it, it's from a third party where the publishers get none of the money.
 
I'm not making excuses for any of the major console platform holders who have been raising prices the last 5+ years, including most recently Microsoft just this last week. But it does need to be continually pointed out that monetarily speaking, games and consoles have never been cheaper, adjusted for inflation.

For example, the SNES launched in North America for $199.99. Adjusted for inflation, that would make it $468 today. And certainly, we can easily imagine the margins for Nintendo on a $200 sale back in 1991 would have been much higher, given how cheap materials were to manufacture those machines back then. It was just an entirely different world. Games were built with teams numbering in the single digits, and a million dollar budget was considered "large".

It is odd if you zoom out and see how expensive everything else we buy nowadays is, that we expect consoles and games to never, ever go up in cost. 🤷‍♂️
One could also argue the Quality and Fun factor of games overall has never been less fun.
 
£21.90 for mixed kebab in Blackpool?

To be fair, it is a mixed kebab. If I wanted one of those in my neck of the woods (Swindon) I'd be paying around the same. In fact, I think I'm getting a better deal down south. I can get lamb chops in my kebab for £17 sheets.


tk8a5QL.png
£20 though, Whats worth more? 4 delicious lamb chop kebabs or Mario Kart?
 
£20 though, Whats worth more? 4 delicious lamb chop kebabs or Mario Kart?

Very good point.

Personally, I wouldn't blast £20 on a kebab. However, a few weeks ago I couldn't be arsed to cook. It was the weekend, so I ordered Dominos for the family. 4 large pizzas and some sides cost me almost £60. Was it nice? Not really (I had a large cheeseburger). My body wasn't used to eating that much junk food in one go and I felt like I was going to die in my sleep. I also just shat it out later the following day and had to work extra hard in the gym.

However, I never thought twice about spending that money. But when it comes to a video game, one that will give me possibly years of fun, I feel bad that I'm blasting £60, let alone £80.

At the other end, I wouldn't think twice about slapping down over £100 for a 50ml bottle of Acqua di Parma. It'll allow me to smell amazing, but it doesn't last forever. Yet, £80 for a video game still feels too much.

Funny that.
 
Very good point.

Personally, I wouldn't blast £20 on a kebab. However, a few weeks ago I couldn't be arsed to cook. It was the weekend, so I ordered Dominos for the family. 4 large pizzas and some sides cost me almost £60. Was it nice? Not really (I had a large cheeseburger). My body wasn't used to eating that much junk food in one go and I felt like I was going to die in my sleep. I also just shat it out later the following day and had to work extra hard in the gym.

However, I never thought twice about spending that money. But when it comes to a video game, one that will give me possibly years of fun, I feel bad that I'm blasting £60, let alone £80.

At the other end, I wouldn't think twice about slapping down over £100 for a 50ml bottle of Acqua di Parma. It'll allow me to smell amazing, but it doesn't last forever. Yet, £80 for a video game still feels too much.

Funny that.
Im just try to figure out how you got a cheese burger from dominos.
 
I'll ask this, but is Game Pass a detriment to the gaming industry?

I feel like companies/development teams wouldn't get compensated fairly for their work if everyone is essentially paying for a monthly rental service.

I'm not thrilled about price hikes, but I can understand wanting to get what you feel like you deserve for your work.
 
I'll ask this, but is Game Pass a detriment to the gaming industry?

I feel like companies/development teams wouldn't get compensated fairly for their work if everyone is essentially paying for a monthly rental service.

I'm not thrilled about price hikes, but I can understand wanting to get what you feel like you deserve for your work.
I don't think so. Looks like Dev's can hedge their bets and get MS to pay for the development cost's and everything after that is gravy. Seems like a win win to me in a very risky environment.
 
Using the ole inflation calcular, $70 in 2020 when the price jumped is equal to $86 today. Which, to be clear, I'm not at all happy with this or one of those 'bu bu bu inflation!' posters. But the gains they were hoping to get since Covid were basically wiped out, and they're no doubt using that as reason to up the price again. The problem continues to be, wages have not kept pace for decades. If someone was making $70k in 2020, they'd have to be making $86k now but I'm betting many/most people didn't make the same jump ( especially if they've stayed in the same job, position and not gotten promoted or left for more money). How is the minimum wage in 2025 barely above what it was like 2009, while everything else jumps up tenfold?

All of these simply can't continue to go up. They're going to sell less copies at $80, just as they lost some people at $70. Another big issue with these games are the frequent price drops( I know that sounds odd from a consumer, but bear with me). What's the point in pricing a game at $80 and then 6 months later it's at $50-60 ( asides from Nintendo first party)? Why does Ubisoft price their games at $60-70 and then they're $30 two months later( and EVERYONE knows not to buy their games at launch)? I'm no economist, but why not just price the game at $60 and leave it there for a year or more? And when its on sale after a year, its at $40.

Again, I'm certainly not advocating for games not to go on sale, I'm just asking how much do these games 'really' need to be priced at out the gate when most companies willingly drop the price within 4-6 months? It just feels like they're long-term fucking themselves over because you're going to have more and more people nope out with every increase, instead of pricing it at a level that's less exclusionary and sustain it longer instead? It's like the companies are trying to catch flies with vinegar instead of honey.
I would have figured they make the most money right out the gate from the first few months of sales and have to wait several years to match that profit. Plus, if you've already waited 6 months, I doubt you are going to buy the game at full price these days.
 
I'm not making excuses for any of the major console platform holders who have been raising prices the last 5+ years, including most recently Microsoft just this last week. But it does need to be continually pointed out that monetarily speaking, games and consoles have never been cheaper, adjusted for inflation.
And the gaming market has never been bigger and the cost of producing a billion copies of a game is only marginally higher than producing 100 copies. Boo hoo rockstar, making gta v was twice as a expensive to make as gta iv and only sold 8-9x more copies. So sad.

It is honestly impressive how other industries as they get bigger and get more efficient in production and distribution, things get cheaper over time, despite them being physical products. Meanwhile games that can scale distribution infinitelly at marginal costs, need to get more expensive.

They're making more money than ever. And you know it. Why does it matter that production got more expensive since you're making more PROFIT than ever? And none of the devs are gonna be paid more with the increase in price. Anyone justifiying the price increase is just supporting shareholders filling their pockets at bit more than they already do.
 
I would have figured they make the most money right out the gate from the first few months of sales and have to wait several years to match that profit. Plus, if you've already waited 6 months, I doubt you are going to buy the game at full price these days.
I think your last sentence kind of plays into what I was saying about conditioning the customer that the value of a game drops off in a short period of time so just wait. Anyone who likes what Ubisoft produces, for example, knows they slash prices very quickly.

I guess what I'm saying is, pricing the game lower at launch and holding that price for longer will attract more people out the gate and doesn't train the customer to think 'well if I wait 6 months, the game will be 40% off'. Effectively, what Nintendo does ( but I would argue they're the worst company to raise to $80 especially given how they maintain the MSRP indefinitely). The fact that many other games barely hold their MSRP over 4-6 months makes makes me question the pricing strategies.

Like I know there's some calculation surrounding development costs mixed with projected sales, but there's some 'what we think people will pay' tossed into the mix as well. And when you start seeing games getting slashed pretty quickly in price, it tells me they overshot what they were hoping to sell at what they were asking, hence price drop.

I get that a company wants to sell the most at the highest. But $80 is really getting to the point where only something like GTA, COD, Mario Kart and a few others can hold that pricepoint. I could be completely off-target and clearly you can tell I have no idea how the insides of these companies operate, I'm just speaking as a customer watching the $$ going up and up and wondering when will the dam break.

EDIT: just an aside, I get that physical games eventually go on sale because finite warehousing/retail shelves have to inevitably clear out stock to make way for new releases. But why does digital have to go up in price in the same manner, when there's no tangible object taking up space? You're removing all the middle men from distribution. If we think things are getting ugly now, wait until physical completely goes away( which alot of people oddly campaign for), and you're completely left at the mercy of these publishers. We've well known on our way to that now.
 
Last edited:
I think your last sentence kind of plays into what I was saying about conditioning the customer that the value of a game drops off in a short period of time so just wait. Anyone who likes what Ubisoft produces, for example, knows they slash prices very quickly.

I guess what I'm saying is, pricing the game lower at launch and holding that price for longer will attract more people out the gate and doesn't train the customer to think 'well if I wait 6 months, the game will be 40% off'. Effectively, what Nintendo does ( but I would argue they're the worst company to raise to $80 especially given how they maintain the MSRP indefinitely). The fact that many other games barely hold their MSRP over 4-6 months makes makes me question the pricing strategies.

Like I know there's some calculation surrounding development costs mixed with projected sales, but there's some 'what we think people will pay' tossed into the mix as well. And when you start seeing games getting slashed pretty quickly in price, it tells me they overshot what they were hoping to sell at what they were asking, hence price drop.

I get that a company wants to sell the most at the highest. But $80 is really getting to the point where only something like GTA, COD, Mario Kart and a few others can hold that pricepoint. I could be completely off-target and clearly you can tell I have no idea how the insides of these companies operate, I'm just speaking as a customer watching the $$ going up and up and wondering when will the dam break.
But if you like what Ubisoft produces you most likely will buy it day one. I mean at least for me I know I'm not waiting 6 months just for the future devil may cry game to go on a 40% off sale before I buy it.

I get what you're saying but I'm guessing it is simply just a matter of them getting as much money as they can at launch and it seems for most big companies pricing it at full price seems to be the way to go. I am curious though how much sales they would get if it was at $40.

I think what's crazy is the 50% off sales for those future $80 game.
 
Everyone in here sounds like an ActBlue donor all of the sudden.

Yes there has been wage inflation.People tend to notice the price inflation more than the wage inflation though. It's why Kamala got BTFO'd in the election.



They're called Europoors for a reason.
Dude, stop with this corporate bootlicking nonsense. Wages might have ticked up slightly, but they're still not keeping pace with the skyrocketing cost of living, not even close. Rent, groceries, healthcare, and basic services have all shot up way faster than paychecks. Pulling one blog post that says "wages surpassed inflation for 12 months" and acting like that magically solved everything is just lazy and dishonest. That stat glosses over the fact that real wages plummeted for two years straight before that, and the so-called "catch-up" hasn't even come close to filling the gap.

You're pushing a shallow narrative based on cherry-picked data that ignores the lived reality of millions of people. Try talking to someone who's had to move because they couldn't afford their rent hike, or someone juggling two jobs just to cover bills. Stop pretending corporate-friendly stats are the whole story, they're not.
 
But if you like what Ubisoft produces you most likely will buy it day one. I mean at least for me I know I'm not waiting 6 months just for the future devil may cry game to go on a 40% off sale before I buy it.

I get what you're saying but I'm guessing it is simply just a matter of them getting as much money as they can at launch and it seems for most big companies pricing it at full price seems to be the way to go. I am curious though how much sales they would get if it was at $40.

I think what's crazy is the 50% off sales for those future $80 game.
It depends on the game and level of attachment to a particular IP(Ubisoft). A hardcore Assassin's Creed player may be there day zero, but someone casually into that series may just hold off till it's $30-40, which doesn't take long especially when they drop alot of games in the fall. I wouldn't touch a Ubisoft release in September because that shits likely to be heavily discounted on Black Friday.

I get 'inflation' and the cost of things going up, but these are video games, not milk and eggs. $70 turned into $80 in the last 5 years, so what happens when $80 becomes $90 and then $100? These companies operate like we are bottomless pits of revenue sources. The overall cost of living is going to force people into cutting out superfluous spending, or if people begrudgingly accept $80 for their favorite IPs that's going to come at the expense of smaller AA/Indies games.
 
Dude, stop with this corporate bootlicking nonsense. Wages might have ticked up slightly, but they're still not keeping pace with the skyrocketing cost of living, not even close. Rent, groceries, healthcare, and basic services have all shot up way faster than paychecks. Pulling one blog post that says "wages surpassed inflation for 12 months" and acting like that magically solved everything is just lazy and dishonest. That stat glosses over the fact that real wages plummeted for two years straight before that, and the so-called "catch-up" hasn't even come close to filling the gap.

You're pushing a shallow narrative based on cherry-picked data that ignores the lived reality of millions of people. Try talking to someone who's had to move because they couldn't afford their rent hike, or someone juggling two jobs just to cover bills. Stop pretending corporate-friendly stats are the whole story, they're not.
I keep saying this. This is why people hate inflation. It's not corporate bootlicking, it's reality. I didn't say that wage inflation "solved everything", inflation leaves everyone poorer because things keep getting more expensive.

IIRC, productivity also plummeted during the plandemic. It probably costs 30% more to make a game today than it did in 2019. It's a real thing, I don't know what else to say.
 
Last edited:
The level of quality of the games that Microsoft delivers on a regular basis is subpar. Those buttmunchs should pay us to play their games because daaamn they are hot garbage and suck balls.
 
I keep saying this. This is why people hate inflation. It's not corporate bootlicking, it's reality. I didn't say that wage inflation "solved everything", inflation leaves everyone poorer because things keep getting more expensive.

IIRC, productivity also plummeted during the plandemic. It probably costs 30% more to make a game today than it did in 2019. It's a real thing, I don't know what else to say.
That response just highlights a fundamental lack of understanding of how inflation and economic dynamics actually work. Inflation doesn't "leave everyone poorer" by default, that only happens when wages and productivity don't keep up. And no, productivity didn't "plummet" across the board during the pandemic, it actually spiked in some sectors due to remote work and tech adoption, then leveled out. Blaming inflation as this vague, unstoppable force, while ignoring corporate pricing strategies, wage stagnation, and profit-seeking behavior, is just misdirection.

And about your "it costs 30% more to make a game" example, that's not inflation, that's a business model and labor choice. Costs rising in one sector doesn't explain broad economic conditions. If companies pass every cost to the consumer while squeezing wages, that's not inevitable, that's a policy and corporate decision. So yeah, if you don't understand inflation as more than "prices go up," you're missing the full picture.
 
It depends on the game and level of attachment to a particular IP(Ubisoft). A hardcore Assassin's Creed player may be there day zero, but someone casually into that series may just hold off till it's $30-40, which doesn't take long especially when they drop alot of games in the fall. I wouldn't touch a Ubisoft release in September because that shits likely to be heavily discounted on Black Friday.

I get 'inflation' and the cost of things going up, but these are video games, not milk and eggs. $70 turned into $80 in the last 5 years, so what happens when $80 becomes $90 and then $100? These companies operate like we are bottomless pits of revenue sources. The overall cost of living is going to force people into cutting out superfluous spending, or if people begrudgingly accept $80 for their favorite IPs that's going to come at the expense of smaller AA/Indies games.
Folks buying the big budget games over the smaller AA/indies has been a thing for forever so the change in price isn't really changing much since that is the way it is already.
 
I get 'inflation' and the cost of things going up, but these are video games, not milk and eggs. $70 turned into $80 in the last 5 years, so what happens when $80 becomes $90 and then $100? These companies operate like we are bottomless pits of revenue sources. The overall cost of living is going to force people into cutting out superfluous spending, or if people begrudgingly accept $80 for their favorite IPs that's going to come at the expense of smaller AA/Indies games.
Devs have to buy milk and eggs too. So their cost of living rise too and so is a wage? leading to more expensive games.
Games dont come out of thin air, someone has to do them, and this someone has it's cost rising too.
 
Microsoft mainly wants higher game prices to make subbing to Gamepass seem like a better value. Also, Gamepass is growing like crazy, it will grow more if prices keep going up.
 
Devs have to buy milk and eggs too. So their cost of living rise too and so is a wage? leading to more expensive games.
Milk and eggs( in other words, necessities) are essentials, games aren't. My point had nothing to do with Devs having to buy milk and eggs as well. My point is that the cost of living is so expensive nowadays that superfluous things like gaming is eventually going to be cut out of the average persons budget. Somehow this narrative is circling that gaming is 'luxury', but if that was the case it never wouldn't have gotten as big as it has. People will keep dropping the 'an n64 game was $70 in the 90s' meme, but back then people could afford the basics( rent, gas, groceries, electricity) so a $70 game wasn't breaking the budget. No, the cost of living increasing isn't the 'fault' or 'problem' for these companies when it comes to what they want to charge for their games, but discretionary income continues to shrink for the average person and that's the determining factor with whether $80 games will be accepted or people nope out/wait for price drops. The market will determine that, as always.

Plus, who do you think these higher prices are benefitting mostly since you seen to advocating for higher prices? Devs aren't going to be able to afford 'milk and eggs' any more than they currently are because most of the profits and price increases are benefitting the C- Suite and shareholders, not the creative. Out of a $10 price increase, the devs will see pennies of that if anything.

The gaming industry isn't having a problem making money, and lots of it, it's the idiots at the top who thought 2020-2022( pandemic lockdowns when we were stuck inside and gaming got a major boost) was going to be the way of life going forward and then pivoted( hence the thousands of layoffs since) when the line leveled off. $80 games and $600-700 consoles( and these numbers likely represent the baseline for next gen) isn't bringing new people in so that the industry can sustain itself in a healthy way, It's just milking those of us left. You're simply cutting off huge numbers of potential, more budget- conscious customers. So what happens then? Well, the price increases again, naturally. How's $100 games and $1000 consoles sound to you?
 
Last edited:
Folks buying the big budget games over the smaller AA/indies has been a thing for forever so the change in price isn't really changing much since that is the way it is already.
Yes but the current level of inflation is going to force some people out of the hobby or to cheaper options than $80 games. The prices can't just go up and up without it slicing off segments of people at every increase.
 
Yes but the current level of inflation is going to force some people out of the hobby or to cheaper options than $80 games. The prices can't just go up and up without it slicing off segments of people at every increase.
Doubtful. If you are already spending 70 on a game, a price increase of 10 isn't going to force you out of the hobby. For most casuals I don't think they even buy that many games a year so while a price increase would bug them I doubt they would stop buying their sports games and call of duty. This really only affects the hardcore who sometimes buy several games at full price a month.
 
Last edited:
Doubtful. If you are already spending 70 on a game, a price increase of 10 isn't going to force you out of the hobby. For most casuals I don't think they even buy that many games a year so while a price increase would bug them I doubt they would stop buying their sports games and call of duty. This really only affects the hardcore who sometimes buy several games at full price a month.

'Only' affecting the hardcore as if that's not a significant section of the market to risk alienating? Forcing out of the hobby is perhaps am overstatement, but it absolutely wil force alot more people, casuals and hardcore alike, to either wait for deals or go to alternatives( or even pirate if the option is there to them). Those same casuals who may have bought the odd game in addition to their annual COD/Madden may now cut those odd purchases out of the budget because now that extra money will go to the aforementioned getting more expensive. There's too many games IMHO for the market to support and alot of otherwise good smaller scale games are going to end up collateral damage. By the tenor of your comments I imagine you'll say that's always been the case, the survival of the fittest, but it's going to get worse and it's not good for the overall health of the industry.

It's not just 'oh its another $10', it's that $70 became $80 pretty quickly so when does it get to $90 and $100? Do you think there is a point where people will be priced out or do you believe they'll just continue to suck it up into perpetuity? Yes, you'll have your whales for which money isn't an issue, but these games are produced at budgets that require they sell a certain volume. If a certain number of people nope out or wait for deals, that inevitably means they'll just make it up by raising the price. Or the companies will have to adjust their offerings because there's no more blood to extract from the stone.
 
Last edited:
Things go up in price. I hate it, but it does. Now, the question doesn't have to be, "Are we getting more value because of the price increase?", because the previous value now costs more. If you want increased value with the price increase, you aren't looking at capitalism right. If you want that, expect bespoke pricing like in the N64 / SNES days when some games were 50 bucks, and some were 90 bucks. Rising prices are inevitable. If they were going up by a few bucks every gen, the outrage would be less. Its just playing catchup right now, and its sticker shock.
 
. If you want that, expect bespoke pricing like in the N64 / SNES days when some games were 50 bucks, and some were 90 bucks. Rising prices are inevitable.
Personally I don't have an issue with this. The industry adopts this line pricing strategy for AAA games as if all games costs the same to produce or the 'value' of the game is equal( which is subjective). Something like Expedition 33 just released at $50 and is both a commercial and critical success. We keep hearing gaming costs are going up, but I'd love a breakdown of how those costs are distributed. It wouldn't surprise me if some of the fat could be cut, but the companies would rather just blow out the budget and then expect the customer to just pay whatever is being asked without question.
 
Top Bottom