GreatnessRD
Member
Please delete this goofiness because what?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
I think it's time we paid more for our hobby, this feels unsustainable.
- Thread starter Ivory Samoan
- Start date
Guerilla Munch
Member
Game pricing doesn't make sense and never will. Stardew Valley was developed entirely by one person, is hundreds of hours long, and costs $20, while Hellblade 2 was developed by hundreds of people, is 5 hours long, and costs $50.
Nintendo games are literally several generations behind the competition graphically, yet they sell for $50 to $70 and almost never dip below that price range, even years later.
Publishers would absolutely charge $100 for their games...if they could get away with it. They cannot. Sales would crater as gamers wait for the inevitable sale. I don't know what the solution is, but it certainly is not $100 games.
Nintendo games are literally several generations behind the competition graphically, yet they sell for $50 to $70 and almost never dip below that price range, even years later.
Publishers would absolutely charge $100 for their games...if they could get away with it. They cannot. Sales would crater as gamers wait for the inevitable sale. I don't know what the solution is, but it certainly is not $100 games.
What ways could the devs. cut costs?
1) utilizing existing engines for game creation as opposed to creating one from scratch.
2) Not every game is a GAAS and yet I feel like the devs want them to be.
3) The writing was on the wall years ago... look how the small game indie scene grew the switch player base.
4) as someone mentioned... buying some of these studios seems like a growth model that only works with quality product. I worked for a business that tried to grow too fast and buy its competition. It went bankrupt!
5) Not against a price hike if the game warrants it.
6) we need something to come along that can decrease the dev. time for gaming. Is it AI? Im not sure, but spending 6-8 years building a game that some streamer will beat in 18 hours is not a wise return on investment unless its like a GTA that sells millions upon millions.
7) less games = better games? debatable....
1) utilizing existing engines for game creation as opposed to creating one from scratch.
2) Not every game is a GAAS and yet I feel like the devs want them to be.
3) The writing was on the wall years ago... look how the small game indie scene grew the switch player base.
4) as someone mentioned... buying some of these studios seems like a growth model that only works with quality product. I worked for a business that tried to grow too fast and buy its competition. It went bankrupt!
5) Not against a price hike if the game warrants it.
6) we need something to come along that can decrease the dev. time for gaming. Is it AI? Im not sure, but spending 6-8 years building a game that some streamer will beat in 18 hours is not a wise return on investment unless its like a GTA that sells millions upon millions.
7) less games = better games? debatable....
HerjansEagleFeeder
Member
Just imagine wanting to pay more as a customer for no added benefit at all. All these poor multi billion dollar corporations, I'm in tears.
Rawbutt Jellybean
Member
Maybe they should start with not making bloated 50+ hour games or running out of some of the highest COL cities in the world.
I'm happy to wait for price drops to refill my backlog.
I'm happy to wait for price drops to refill my backlog.
Angry_Megalodon
Member
How about they manage their shit in a much better fashion?
Customers should not pay for their bad decisions. They have pushed the race for RT, 4K / 120 FPS, and whatever unrealistic crap, and now games are very expensive to make. People will buy GOOD games, regardless of graphic fidelity and superfluous things that in the end don't improve the actual quality of those games.
Customers should not pay for their bad decisions. They have pushed the race for RT, 4K / 120 FPS, and whatever unrealistic crap, and now games are very expensive to make. People will buy GOOD games, regardless of graphic fidelity and superfluous things that in the end don't improve the actual quality of those games.
{insert code here}
Member
Gears of War was 59$ at launch (2006). Thanks to inflation that 59$ is now 91$.
Note sure I agree with you OP but your premise is 100% correct and it gets magnified the further back you go.
Ocarina of Time 59$ at launch (1998).
That is 113$ in today's money.
Note sure I agree with you OP but your premise is 100% correct and it gets magnified the further back you go.
Ocarina of Time 59$ at launch (1998).
That is 113$ in today's money.
Thaimasker
Member
I'm sorry but this is the stupidest fucking thing.
Microsoft is making trillions of dollars and Xbox more money than ever...
They aren't doing these layoffs because they need to.
Notice how none of these billion or million dollar executives are taking pay cuts.
Microsoft is making trillions of dollars and Xbox more money than ever...
They aren't doing these layoffs because they need to.
Notice how none of these billion or million dollar executives are taking pay cuts.
Last edited:
Hari Seldon
Member
You cannot raise prices when the supply is so high. This is basic economics. If you own a PC, you have more games than you can possibly play. In the last few weeks I have purchased Last Epoch, Balatro, Helldivers, and Enshrouded. I had to skip Pacific Drive and Nightingale because I simply do not have time to play them. Releasing $70+ games into a market like this is crazy unless that game can not only beat all of these other games in terms of excitement, but beat it WHILE justifying costing 2x as much as any other game on that list (except Helldivers).
You CAN raise prices on console exclusive AAAA CINEMATIC EXPERIENCE!! games since the supply of those is low and the audience is captive. Just like how super niche war games and flight sims can charge a lot more than market rate. I'm not sure if this is a winning strategy in the long term.
You CAN raise prices on console exclusive AAAA CINEMATIC EXPERIENCE!! games since the supply of those is low and the audience is captive. Just like how super niche war games and flight sims can charge a lot more than market rate. I'm not sure if this is a winning strategy in the long term.
DonkeyPunchJr
World’s Biggest Weeb
I don’t even play most of the big AAA blockbuster story-driven shit. Yeah the industry is unsustainable but I don’t like the big expensive shit they’re making anyway.
Reasonably priced mid tier games seem to be doing just fine. If Sony wants to charge $150 for The Last of us 2 Remastered Remake Definitive Edition because it cost them $400M and 8 years to develop, they can go right ahead, but I’m not buying it.
Reasonably priced mid tier games seem to be doing just fine. If Sony wants to charge $150 for The Last of us 2 Remastered Remake Definitive Edition because it cost them $400M and 8 years to develop, they can go right ahead, but I’m not buying it.
OmegaSupreme
advanced basic bitch
Alan Wake 2 was every bit as good as any Sony game as far as "cinematic experience" and production values. That game looks insane. Yet somehow it cost a fraction of what those sony games cost. What's the difference here? It isn't quality.
Last edited:
Elysium44
Banned
If they move to cheap cities, those places are cheap for a reason, and the talent won't want to move and live there.
Movies are produced in Los Angeles, one of the highest COL cities in the world but people still flock there wanting to work in the industry. Many will try, most will fail to make it big. That's just how it is. The answer isn't to move Hollywood to Detroit.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
fart town usa
Member
The market is flooded and large numbers of gamers absolutely turn their nose up at perfectly quality games or complain about the cost of games like games just magically fall from the sky or inflation isn't a thing. Nothing will solve it because the hive mind will do what it does but it is such a damn shame. I think back on when I was younger and it's not like every game was quality but we took chances and if it sucked, we'd still get some laughs and enjoyment from it. Way too much reliance on reviews/click bait these days and people are absolutely terrified of taking a chance on a game that may have received a less than stellar review score.
The same people talking you out of buying and playing games are getting review codes for free, making ad revenue dollars off the back of developers, and in 5 years will be telling you to play hidden gems that they themselves scored low and told people to avoid at launch. They're also controlling a narrative to cause drama and get you to click more. Lots of issues in the industry but there's also no shortage of quality games to play and studios to support.
The same people talking you out of buying and playing games are getting review codes for free, making ad revenue dollars off the back of developers, and in 5 years will be telling you to play hidden gems that they themselves scored low and told people to avoid at launch. They're also controlling a narrative to cause drama and get you to click more. Lots of issues in the industry but there's also no shortage of quality games to play and studios to support.
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
OP is getting killed in a thread where he speaks the absolute truth.
Yes, production costs need to lower, but gamers need to learn how to value the products they supposedly enjoy.
Yes, production costs need to lower, but gamers need to learn how to value the products they supposedly enjoy.
Nydius
Member
Gears of War had no paid DLC and was a complete game out of the box.
Gears 5 Standard Edition was $60, Ultimate Edition was $80 and didn't include post-launch DLC. Hivebusters was $20. Multiplayer in Gears 5 was built around their entire microtransaction "cards" system that required buying "Iron" in game. There were separate cosmetic items that cost money directly.
That "$91 after inflation" figure doesn't seem quite so meaningful anymore, now does it?
I was wondering when you'd get around to posting another braindead opinion like the ones you vomited around here last week.
Last edited:
Danny Dudekisser
I paid good money for this Dynex!
The companies literally hire people to manage costs. Suggesting they put more of the burden on consumers - after a recent jump to $70 base games with microtransactions - is exactly the kind of short-sighted bullshit they love to see. This is their problem to solve, not ours.
Last edited:
Majormaxxx
Member
How about no.
No price hike.
How about instead they pay devs less, hire devs in eastern Europe, north Afrika, east Asia.
In Brazil or Argentina people's salaries are abysmal and game prices are double.
Not to mention India, Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, etc.
Let's not forget African countries etc.
I'm in eastern Europe and the average salary is less than $1000.
Places close to here even $700, $500.
Stop being first world centric.
R6Rider
Gold Member
That price isn't much different than other regions including the US. The actual price of a 70 USD game is 90 CAD which is equivalent to 66.50 USD.
If including tax at a higher (not average) of 15% then that is 103.5 CAD. The US price with the US average (8.9%) is 76.23 USD. That's roughly 30 cents difference in CAD.
Not to say it's not a lot, but to show it's not that different.
Last edited:
Black_Mamba
Member
Absurd simplification that doesn't even consider the increase of consumers. Surely a game like Immortals of Aveum costing US$ 80 (why not US$ 100) would have secured jobs for that studio, right?
Reizo Ryuu
Member
It didn't require buying shit, it required you played the game.
Xaeroxcore666
Member
Not all world works like NZ and 1st world countries. The 10$ rise in cost here in latin america traduces in an increase way superior, depeding of each local currency devaluation vs US dollar, and also the taxes of each country for imported products, like videogames! As some said, problem is more the costs of development of AAA games....and as Skull and Bones has showed recently, it doesnt mean higher quality in game experience and not even better graphics....Also we have nowadays subscriptions (on consoles, mandatory for online gaming)}, DLCs and lotta microtransactions. So...Industry gotta figure out how to make better AAA games and also spending less. Quite of a challenge but they HAVE to do it, unless they want another '83 Crash scenario before 2030.
Last edited:
hinch7
Member
If they charge more for games, less people are going to buy them. Just look at how well games like Helldivers and Palworld are doing compared to other newly released AAA games at $50-70 on Steam. Its about time big publishers reigned in on big budget games that take 5+ years to make and make more quality games with smaller projects. Less bloat, more content. Its a win/win for both publisher and consumer alike. Add cosmetic DLC's for those who care for that kinda thing.
Be smart and reuse assets and animations if needed.
Be smart and reuse assets and animations if needed.
Rawbutt Jellybean
Member
Well the talent is starting to get laid off so I think they'd prefer a job in a different city than no job.
Black_Mamba
Member
Considering the US market only and total stagnation of consumers, distribution costs and so many other factors, this would make some sense. Try applying the same logic of inflation to a country like Argentina for a start.
fart town usa
Member
I completely agree.
AAA development costs are ridiculous. The issue I see is that even if a AA game is $60, people act outraged because it isn't $30. They also act outraged over reused assets which I honestly don't understand. Even something like Elden Ring. Some people still act like it has countless reused bosses and enemies. It's so absurd. People getting mad at Resident Evil for reusing assets. Like WTF is wrong with that? People don't want to pay current asking prices but they also hold this insanely high standard, even towards quality games that aren't cheating you out of anything.
phant0m
Member
The truth no one wants to hear, as I'm sure you've gathered from the responses. Game prices haven't kept up with monetary inflation, let alone the explosion in development costs (partially related to inflation, partially increased complexity of modern games).
GTA IV was one of the most expensive games ever at a cost of ~$100M when it came out. Now it barely cracks the top 15 and that's just official #s.
Most of the big $ brains here don't remember paying $60 and $70 for Super Nintendo carts in 1996:
Granted, the console itself was cheaper. But $70 for NBA Hang Time!
$60/70 today is a fucking bargain comparatively. It's also a super cheap hobby comparatively speaking. Try getting into 40K models/painting, cars, woodworking, etc. People pay $500 every season just for their ski lift pass that they only get to use for 3 months.
Thread is proof!
Side note, RT is garbage and the bain of gaming right now. For starters, it's barely noticeable in most implementations without side by side screenshots. I recently played CP2077 Ultimate on PS5. Toggled between RT and Performance mode, couldn't pick them apart visually other than one ran like shit. Second, AMD is fucking bad at it and both XSX and PS5 are AMD platforms. We'd be so much farther ahead if devs and engines could focus on resolution, IQ and performance instead of shitty lighting gimmicks.
Last edited:
Punished Miku
Banned
Most everyone rented NBA Hang Time. No one was buying that shit unless it was in a bargain bin with stickers all over it and the manual lost. That's exactly what would happen if they want to go back to comparable prices like that for crap games. No one would buy it. We'd be back to the era of a game selling 1 million copies being a shocking achievement. They'd make so much less money it's not even funny.The truth no one wants to hear, as I'm sure you've gathered from the responses. Game prices haven't kept up with monetary inflation, let alone the explosion in development costs (partially related to inflation, partially increased complexity of modern games).
GTA IV was one of the most expensive games ever at a cost of ~$100M when it came out. Now it barely cracks the top 15 and that's just official #s.
Most of the big $ brains here don't remember paying $60 and $70 for Super Nintendo carts in 1996:
Granted, the console itself was cheaper. But $70 for NBA Hang Time!
$60/70 today is a fucking bargain comparatively. It's also a super cheap hobby comparatively speaking. Try getting into 40K models/painting, cars, woodworking, etc. People pay $500 every season just for their ski lift pass that they only get to use for 3 months.
Thread is proof!
Bkdk
Member
What I am seeing is that the highest budget games and usually the highest paid gaming employees produce the most disappointed games, so no, gaming doesn't need to increase in price. First, fix the culture and get rid of game devs who refuse to design good looking female characters, second, outsource game development, finally all DEI employees must be fired TODAY. it's getting clear and clearer that many asian and eastern european game devs are just as good if not better in terms of game design, why spend so much to set up big game development teams in NA anymore, the much higher salary seems to not be worth it from what I see recently. Japan is on fire right now, highly doubt any of their pay is close to as high as the NA game devs. At this point US is probably only better in game engine development, unreal and unity still dominant players in game engine.
Last edited:
mystech
Member
$70 game prices are more than reasonable. What’s really unsustainable is these MASSIVE game budgets. $200 million for Last of Us? That’s insane! These companies need to manage their money better. If a 16 year old can download Unreal Engine 5 and create a halfway decent game on zero budget, these AAA studios are out of control and they keep operating this way, more layoffs are inevitable.
Dr. Wilkinson
Member
Are you new here? As in, knowing how people think? Have you ever read a fb or twitter thread and seen what people say? IQs are low, bro.
The nuance and complexities of purchasing power and inflation over time are lost on the vast majority of the population. I thought most people were aware of that.
CrustyBritches
Gold Member
I don't think OP is being serious, but there's a problem with this sort of thinking. That is, if big pubs push $100 AAA games, then little indie and AA will come in and eat their lunch with $40-50 games. Helldivers 2 is a recent example. Made by like 100 people and sold for $40. People don't need the big corporate gaming industry that churns out nonstop clones of Assassin's Creed, Gears of War, and Batman Arkham.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
That’s when rom chips in a cartridge were probably $20 alone. A blank BR disc is probably 25 cents. A digital transmission is probably a nickels worth of bandwidth fees. Back then you also had inventory costs so if a game doesn’t sell its bargain time for costly rom cartsZ. Now there is almost zero inventory holding costs since most people buy digital.The truth no one wants to hear, as I'm sure you've gathered from the responses. Game prices haven't kept up with monetary inflation, let alone the explosion in development costs (partially related to inflation, partially increased complexity of modern games).
GTA IV was one of the most expensive games ever at a cost of ~$100M when it came out. Now it barely cracks the top 15 and that's just official #s.
Most of the big $ brains here don't remember paying $60 and $70 for Super Nintendo carts in 1996:
Granted, the console itself was cheaper. But $70 for NBA Hang Time!
$60/70 today is a fucking bargain comparatively. It's also a super cheap hobby comparatively speaking. Try getting into 40K models/painting, cars, woodworking, etc. People pay $500 every season just for their ski lift pass that they only get to use for 3 months.
Thread is proof!
Side note, RT is garbage and the bain of gaming right now. For starters, it's barely noticeable in most implementations without side by side screenshots. I recently played CP2077 Ultimate on PS5. Toggled between RT and Performance mode, couldn't pick them apart visually other than one ran like shit. Second, AMD is fucking bad at it and both XSX and PS5 are AMD platforms. We'd be so much farther ahead if devs and engines could focus on resolution, IQ and performance instead of shitty lighting gimmicks.
Also sales were low back then. If a game sold 1,000,000 copies that would be solid and be labeled greatest hits kind of thing. Now 1,000,000 is nothing. You got no name indie games that can sell a million copies across the world.
Last edited:
R6Rider
Gold Member
You mean you aren't seething because GoW Ragnarok uses the same boat animations from GoW 2018?
Last edited:
Aces High
Member
I remember very well.Most of the big $ brains here don't remember paying $60 and $70 for Super Nintendo carts in 1996:
But I don't care. I'm not gonna pay more.
Most games of this gen have been boring fast food experiences.
Why would I pay more? So they can hire more Sweet Baby idiots to make the games even worse?
If these big corpos go down, I will not shed a single tear.
phant0m
Member
This is the other thing that comes with "big business" and isn't unique to game dev. Too many cooks in the kitchen. Too many people getting paid that contribute dick all. Too many meetings and arguing over every little bullshit detail. "Dev hell"
Need to get back to smaller teams that can execute and deliver.
Last edited:
marjo
Member
If you can't afford to tip at least 30%, then you have no business buying the game!
/s
Borowski_1
Member
Son, i paid 80 bucks this week for FF VII Rebirth
Isn't that enough?
Isn't that enough?
bitbydeath
Gold Member
Games are already too expensive which means less people buy them and they make less money, if anything they need to reduce costs to make more money.
lughnasadh123
Member
It's going to take longer than people think to readjust to what the Covid bubble did to everything.
Eiknarf
Banned
Alan Wake 2 doesn’t have the fluidity or the fidelity of the melee combat and gunplay that The Last of Us Part 1 or 2 have. I know this because I’m playing Alan Wake 2 now and it’s boring in that department. It’s a walking sim with killer graphics where you shoot shadows without them needing to show any reaction physics
Last edited:
Sleepwalker
Member
The extra money won't go to less crunch, better paid developers and better games, it will go to executive bonuses.
So nah, I'm good.
So nah, I'm good.