Support NeoGAF

[adamsapple]

 

[iQuasarLV]

tbh the gaming prices stayed for a very long time the same.

For good reason.

 

[Chronicle]

An extra $10 on first party? Looks like we won't have to pay that.

 

[In Cold Blood]

Was always going to happen.

Inflation, cost of developing games all rising, has to be paid somehow.
It also makes Gamepass look all the more inviting, so maybe it's all a ploy from MS now that there are some big games coming from them.

 

[SF Kosmo]

Eh this was inevitable and with Game Pass being what it is, doesn't really affect my life any (not that an extra $10 on a couple purchases per year would either).

 

[The Tourmaline Gorilla]

Sure but eventually they'll raise the price of the sub I think.

Of course they would. People who tout this, as though it's some sort of preventable inevitability make me chuckle. Of course Game Pass prices are going to raise, eventually. It's just a matter of time.

In fact, it might raise several times, over the course of several years...several years from now. That's obvious. Same for the prices of regular games, as is taking place now.

 

[Clintizzle]

I don't think I have seen any argument that justifies the price increase. Sucks for consumers.

 

[Mr Moose]

Doing it two years earlier (Before the Ukraine War) is way more anti-consumer than doing it now. And if anything I'm seeing way more of the "hypocritical fanboys" acting like this is absolutely terrible but when Sony did it it was justified. Also with Game Pass you at least have a way around paying those prices, with Sony it's $70 or you can't play the game

Yeah sure it was lol Jesus Christ.

 

[reinking]

Laughs in 1990's NeoGeo at people shook by $70 game prices.

 

[Airbus Jr]

Remember when xboxers making fun of $70 game on ps5

Look where we are now

That darkmage guy is busy damage control hahaha

 

[AngelMuffin]

Most likely a strategy to drive an increase in GP subscribers.

 

[OmegaSupreme]

Doing it two years earlier (Before the Ukraine War) is way more anti-consumer than doing it now. And if anything I'm seeing way more of the "hypocritical fanboys" acting like this is absolutely terrible but when Sony did it it was justified. Also with Game Pass you at least have a way around paying those prices, with Sony it's $70 or you can't play the game

Sony doesn't put games on sale?

 

[Dick Jones]

Sony doesn't put games on sale?

No. I bought Demon's Souls Day 1 and the price on the store now is double that amount. Everyday you don't buy Jim adds another 20 cents. The bastard

 

[digoutyoursoul]

If they make the games I’m interested in, that are not yet another Forza game or more first person games and that feel I could really enjoy then I would pay it.

Thank fuck for that Hellblade 2 showing because that’s the only game from them that’s genuinely impressed me two years in with this friggin console.

 

[AngelMuffin]

Laughs in 1990's NeoGeo at people shook by $70 game prices.

Yeah but those were arcade PCBs for use at home. But yeah, I remember paying $79 for Crusin USA in 1997.

It’s not really as simple as using an inflation calculator though since the way games are developed/manufactures have remained static…vs say, a loaf of bread or a gallon of milk.

Back then, carts still cost a lot to manufacture and accounted for a proportional amount towards the overall cost to manufacture a game. In contrast, disks were/are pennies in comparison. On top of the shift to cheaper media, the overall gaming market has grown exponentially the last 20 years and game sales have risen along with that growth which has, in turn, kept game prices in check.

 

[Bridges]

N64 games were routinely $60, especially the major titles. Do you know how much $60 in 1998 is worth now?

And people are complaining about game prices going up $10 for the first time in like 10 years? Give me a break.

When I bought a N64 game, they didn't continually try to squeeze more money out of me through micro transactions. This is a false equivalence.

If $70 gave me something feature complete I wouldn't complain so much. When it gets me Gotham Knights I have questions.

 

[ProtoByte]

I love being priced out of the gaming market by cold unfeeling corporations who increase prices because of "inFlAyshun" despite making record profits

Posts like this indicate a widespread lack of financial and economic understanding.
The whole "record profits" thing is severely dampened when you consider that profits are subject to the inflation you seem to be insinuating doesn't exist. Which it absolutely does.

If you guys want any chance at getting higher quality games with higher fidelity, you're going to have to accept that that comes at a cost. The higher that cost and the longer it takes, the more the investor is concerned with increasing their returns. Why increase dev costs by x% as it takes y% more time just to make the exact same profit margins, before taking inflation into account?

Obviously, diminishing returns kick in, and with it will come a plateau in what you can expect from a game. That's already happening now, to some degree. No more technological quantum leaps incoming compared to what's in the cutting edge now. But even then, the games market doesn't exist in a vacuum. Strange how you accept food, appliances, subscriptions and movie tickets increasing in price and not games.

Perhaps more of you need to be more discretionary. If I don't thinkna game is worth full price, I'm probably not going to buy it at any price. And I'm reasonable with what I expect out of a full price game, which I notice some you also aren't.

 

[Kumomeme]

in the end everything is a bussiness not a charity. everything has a cost. there is always a catch for something that sounds 'sweet'. sooner or later.

moral of the story, becarefull when someone said something that people prefer to hear

Phil is smart guy, he know what he need to tell to people and he know who he need to turn into villain.

especially for the sake to ride the flow, 'win' a moment despite he know there gonna be u-turn later in future.

thats how the marketing works since atleast end of previous generation and it is working well since people been simp and eating everything he said

no need to be suprised pikachu here. there is no goody two shoes all these time.

 

[FrankWza]

Remember when xboxers making fun of $70 game on ps5

Look where we are now

That darkmage guy is busy damage control hahaha

 

[skit_data]

It was always going to happen, at least people will finally stop talking about this in a console war sense (one can dream)

 

[ProtoByte]

When I bought a N64 game, they didn't continually try to squeeze more money out of me through micro transactions. This is a false equivalence.

A) Most of the single player games that come out don't have microtransactions these days. Even the ones that do have more content and are of a completely different quality than N64 stuff when considered without.

B) You shouldn't be buying games with MTX in the first place.

If $70 gave me something feature complete I wouldn't complain so much. When it gets me Gotham Knights I have questions.

As bad as Gotham Knights is - and I'm shocked that you thought it was a good idea to buy in the first place since it looked like shit from the start - if you're insinuating that it's baseline allowed on the market should be 30+ dollars lower than the 90 dollar games you were buying even 17 years ago... no. Sorry, but no.

 

[Solidus_T]

Given the fact that MS has not released very many major first party titles since the beginning of the gen, it's almost like they adopted Sony's pricing from the start.

 

[Topher]

Doing it two years earlier (Before the Ukraine War) is way more anti-consumer than doing it now. And if anything I'm seeing way more of the "hypocritical fanboys" acting like this is absolutely terrible but when Sony did it it was justified.

The price of these games are not being raised because of any war. From Microsoft: "This price reflects the content, scale, and technical complexity of these titles". Microsoft is raising the price of games for the exact same reasons Sony did. A lot of Xbox fans have been jabbing Sony fans about these $70 games for two years so I really don't think you want to play the "hypocrisy" games with all this.

Also with Game Pass you at least have a way around paying those prices, with Sony it's $70 or you can't play the game

And I agree with adamsapple in that there are plenty of ways to get around $70 games. His reasons apply to Sony as well. But yes, Game Pass is a great option. Even better when combined with MS Rewards.

Buying, reselling, renting, getting used copies etc is the main reason I'm always 100% physical, as long as physical-disc enabled consoles exist.

 

[Roxkis_ii]

What's the point when their still doing day one on game pass?

Yeah, it's the few people who care about game ownership, but Phil has been training Xbox fans to just wait for games to drop on gamepass this whole gen, so why would people drop $70 on Ms titles when they can play it on gamepass?

This is looking like MS played themselves.

 

[adamsapple]

What's the point when their still doing day one on game pass?

Yeah, it's the few people who care about game ownership, but Phil has been training Xbox fans to just wait for games to drop on gamepass this whole gen, so why would people drop $70 on Ms titles when they can play it on gamepass?

This is looking like MS played themselves.

This has 0% impact on people who are subbed to game pass for the first party output.

You're right.

Feels good to be stacked till 2025 right now lol

 

[FrankWza]

What's the point when their still doing day one on game pass?

Yeah, it's the few people who care about game ownership, but Phil has been training Xbox fans to just wait for games to drop on gamepass this whole gen, so why would people drop $70 on Ms titles when they can play it on gamepass?

This is looking like MS played themselves.

Could be a change coming there too…..

 

[GHG]

What's the point when their still doing day one on game pass?

Yeah, it's the few people who care about game ownership, but Phil has been training Xbox fans to just wait for games to drop on gamepass this whole gen, so why would people drop $70 on Ms titles when they can play it on gamepass?

This is looking like MS played themselves.

Because making money is important, especially so when their subscription growth targets are falling short. So this gives them the opportunity to make money from games that have the opportunity to sell well even while gamepass is an option (e.g. Starfield).

 

[feynoob]

12 pages already. Damn, you guys do work fast.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

Boom we eating.


I remember when everyone accepted Sony putting hardware costs up due to inflation and now we have ten pages of posts over ms mirroring the prices everyone else has had for 2 years haha.

Classic shit

Yep, a decision was coming sooner or later once they took control of Activision Blizzard also, who charges $70 for their games.

May as well get it out of the way. Game Pass doesn't suddenly stop existing.

 

[MMaRsu]

Was always going to happen.

Inflation, cost of developing games all rising, has to be paid somehow.
It also makes Gamepass look all the more inviting, so maybe it's all a ploy from MS now that there are some big games coming from them.

Uhh these companies are making record profits.

Inflation hasnt meant increased wages so... how does it make sense?

 

[Robbinhood]

Oh boy LOL. Fanboys in disarray

 

[@gkTH]

This could have less impact becase the X/S has no many games out.

 

[Celcius]

I'm surprised they weren't charging this already to be honest. Seems like everyone else is these days.

 

[Shakka43]

Not necessarily true... I've been sitting on this screen for the past 2 hours trying to convince myself to make the purchase

Don't do it, from what I've played from the trial it is not worth that much.

 

[FearlessBelgian]

All of that at the worst moment ... Honestly i can afford these prise but dude i definitively don't want to... That madness and the worst is that today you are going to pay 80€ for a game and in this game there is a lot of f*cking trash microtransaction and battle pass shit, so at the end of the month, the game cost you more than 100€... It's totaly not worth it...

 

[oldergamer]

This is nothing more than goalpost moving. Psychonaunts 2 also released at $69.99.

But again, you basically said Xbox fans knew this would happen. How is that even possible when they were calling out Sony for charging $69.99?

Dont know where you get your games but it didnt cost me that much.

 

[clarky]

I don't think I have seen any argument that justifies the price increase. Sucks for consumers.

Inflation?

 

[jorgejjvr]

Sticking with gp

 

[clarky]

Uhh these companies are making record profits.

Inflation hasnt meant increased wages so... how does it make sense?

Inflation in increasing the cost of everything. Been down the supermarket lately? utility bills? Transport? And yes wages( at least where i am from).

 

[Bridges]

A) Most of the single player games that come out don't have microtransactions these days. Even the ones that do have more content and are of a completely different quality than N64 stuff when considered without.

B) You shouldn't be buying games with MTX in the first place.


As bad as Gotham Knights is - and I'm shocked that you thought it was a good idea to buy in the first place since it looked like shit from the start - if you're insinuating that it's baseline allowed on the market should be 30+ dollars lower than the 90 dollar games you were buying even 17 years ago... no. Sorry, but no.

If you include indie games sure, most SP games probably don't have mtx, but they are usually not "full price" releases. I don't have stats but it sure feels like most full price SP games have mtx these days.

I did not pay for Gotham Knights, but I did play through it. Would've been a perfectly acceptable $40 game. The only $70 game I have picked up so far is Modern Warfare II.

They're free to charge however much they want but I don't have to like it and I don't have to buy it. If you don't have a problem paying more then good for you. I have enough of a backlog as it is so this just makes new releases less enticing for me.

 

[oldergamer]

Every game maker has been saying the cost of development has been skyrocketing. And Sony wasn't the first publisher to do so.

Not every game maker, no. Sony wasnt the first but they literally didnt need to at the time. Anyway keep moving the goal posts.

 

[adamsapple]

This is nothing more than goalpost moving. Psychonaunts 2 also released at $69.99.

No it didn't, it's $59.99.

You're confusing the standard digital release with the limited special edition physical one.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

I think the "value" argument is subjective. Best value in gaming... for people with ADHD who constantly jump from one game to another and don't care about their shit being tied to a rental, sure. But I've tried, and it is not for me. Many people feel the same way.

The idea Game Pass is about switching quickly from game to game is one of the biggest falsehoods about the value of Game Pass. It's every bit as vital or useful for the person who sticks to one game at a time. It's less about how many different games you can jump in and out of in a matter of weeks or months, or even over the course of a year, it's about all the choices between so many high-quality videogames at your disposal when you decide to play something new. The list also just keeps growing. Not only is it saving you money you don't even need to bother spending, you try way more games that you might have never pulled the trigger on or been hesitant about.

I personally feel at some point everybody will feel the need to join Game Pass. It's just too damn good a deal. I still buy plenty of games too because there are games not on Game Pass, but for what's available on Game Pass I'm saving hundreds of dollars I don't need to bother spending and it helps me with discovering so many other games I would have never given a chance.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Most likely a strategy to drive an increase in GP subscribers.

So they can increase GP price as well.

Phil mentioned all three things in his interview when hinting at a price increase: game prices, console price, and subscription prices.

"We’ve held price on our console, we’ve held price on games… and our subscription. I don’t think we’ll be able to do that forever. I do think at some point we’ll have to raise some prices on certain things." -- Phil Spencer

 

[Heisenberg007]

A) Most of the single player games that come out don't have microtransactions these days. Even the ones that do have more content and are of a completely different quality than N64 stuff when considered without.

B) You shouldn't be buying games with MTX in the first place.

True. We know that Redfall has an active MTX shop. So that game will launch at $70, and it will have MTX.

The $70 price tag and increased dev costs argument make sense if the games are big blockbusters (which warrant the high dev costs) and free of MTX (to be in line with 20-year-old games with similar price tags).

 

[Varteras]

The handwaving. The mental gymnastics. So FUCKING delicious! Look in the mirror. LOOK IN IT! Now rub your nipples and repeat this phrase: "I'm a hypocrite! I'm a whore!" And don't you DARE stop! Not until the tears stop! Only then will I be satisfied.

Seriously though, welcome to reality. These prices were going up across the board one way or another. It's not the first time and it will not be the last.

 

[oldergamer]

you can laugh but its true. Go ahead and post the receipts.

 

[oldergamer]

True. We know that Redfall has an active MTX shop. So that game will launch at $70, and it will have MTX.

The $70 price tag and increased dev costs argument make sense if the games are big blockbusters (which warrant the high dev costs) and free of MTX (to be in line with 20-year-old games with similar price tags).

That is mental gymnastics. How about this one, not paying 70 dollars for games that don't actually take advantage of the hardware?

 

[adamsapple]

True. We know that Redfall has an active MTX shop. So that game will launch at $70, and it will have MTX.

No we don't.

It's actually the opposite. All things that hinted at MTX systems were removed as of the latest showing for the game.

The $70 price tag and increased dev costs argument make sense if the games are big blockbusters (which warrant the high dev costs) and free of MTX (to be in line with 20-year-old games with similar price tags).

This is some grade A concern tho, not gonna lie, you're good.

 

[akaFullmetal]

Writing was on the wall. It was inevitable but it wasn't long ago Spencer was saying they weren't going to raise prices. I guess that only meant consoles. Sucks that prices are going up