TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
on 20 Jan 09:49
collapse
Word of mouth provided by pirates is still great for the AAA games industry, regardless of what they’ll tell you, and only helps perpetuate these bad practices you’re pirating to get away from. 99.9% of users are unwilling to pirate games, and thus when you reference them, say you played or enjoyed them, talk about pirating them, etc., it’s essentially just free advertising for those games to people who would in all likelihood just purchase them if they wanted them.
Meanwhile, playing indie games gives those devs some cash flow to keep developing and gives free, word of mouth advertising to other people through references, recommendations, etc. The more successful indie games with good practices are, the better the games industry as a whole. It’s not a zero-sum game, but there is some tradeoff involved.
Sorta kinda. We moved to 69.99 for major releases a while ago. Late 2000s in some territories, later in others.
In the US it was 59.99 for the CD era, but it was higher before when cart costs were a massive chunk of the retail price. I bought games that launched at 100 (or its local equivalent) in the 90s, particularly on SNES and N64.
But it's true that prices have been super stable while moving from expensive carts to cheap CDs and then trivially expensive digital releases. Now there's no way to cut costs on distribution (you're already subsidizing storage, it's just down to bandwidth, which is paid by the retailer anyway). So now inflation is catching up, since none of the money is going to making boxes, stamping CDs or shipping games in trucks. Now when inflation hits there's no longer a way to hide the pricing impact, so it goes to sticker price.
And people are so used to that stability that they immediately rage on the Internet, if this thread is anything to go by, so the only answer is to hide more of the cost in MTX and dump the sticker price altogether.
Kinda argued against myself there. The real answer isn't prices will "evenutally" go up, it's that they will go down to zero and traditional gaming will become mobile gaming. That's probably more likely.
hal_5700X@sh.itjust.works
on 20 Jan 08:26
nextcollapse
I have paid full price for a game in 10 years and GTA6 will be late to the PC party anyway. Looks like I won’t be playing it until 2035.
Soulifix@kbin.melroy.org
on 20 Jan 08:38
nextcollapse
"According to Matthew Ball's The State of Video Gaming in 2025 presentation, first spotted by VGC, some developers "hope" the next installment in the GTA franchise will be priced at $80–$100, fully capitalizing on its status as the most anticipated game on the market. This increase, the report suggests, would allow studios to raise the price of their own new games by at least $10 to offset declining player numbers and inflation while justifying the change by pointing to GTA VI's example."
Who the hell are the developers clamoring for this?
No, what's going to happen is that, with so many game sales happening every week, people are largely going to wait for the sales axe to come down on GTA VI until it's affordable. The only people who'd happily buy GTA VI at that price point, are gullible FOMO-pearl-clutching "gamurs", gaming "journalists", benchmark nerds and egotistical Day-1 flaunters. That's about it.
The moment GTA VI hits a single sale, then most will jump on it.
If these hypothetical developers are waiting for cash infusions to “fix” the finances of thesw disastrously managed companies, then they’re pretty naïve. Successful games are making multi-millions, even middling franchise games can pull that. More than enough to sustain a normal sized development team.
I imagine maintaining a reasonable team would result in fewer unemployed developers than overbloating the team thinking “more is biggerer is more money” and then cutting tens of thousands of positions for “costs.”
While I wish you were right, something tells me that even with an 80-100$ pricetag it’ll still be one of the most successful games ever released.
Look at diablo4, for example. 70$ base game, 90 for deluxe, and 100 for ultimate plus mtx in the store at stupid prices. And apparently it’s sold over 6 million copies and made over 600 mil in revenue in the first week. And it’s not even a good game, in my opinion.
I'll shamefully admit that I would've bought Diablo IV at launch. But the dealbreaker for me was when they made it online-only, like Diablo III. Good preventative measure.
PieMePlenty@lemmy.world
on 20 Jan 11:11
nextcollapse
I mean, I’d be pissed but I’d probably still buy it, providing it was fully playable offline and the content reflected the price. I play GTA when it releases, beat it, fool around a bit and never touch it again. The last time I spent money on gta was when V released on 360, more than 10 years ago.
I rarely spend more than 15 eurodollars on a game, but realistically for the average cough console cough player the difference between 60 and 80 is a few beers with your pals, and you spend way more time playing GTA than drinking those few beers.
Quazatron@lemmy.world
on 20 Jan 08:57
nextcollapse
Looks like PatientGamers’ membership numbers will be on the rise soon.
Screen_Shatter@lemmy.world
on 20 Jan 13:24
collapse
I never pay full price for a game.
Isthereanydeal.com
Humblebundle.com
Gog.com
Always running sales. If they aren’t just check history or set an alert on isthereanydeal and wait a bit.
I think there is maybe 1 game that I would consider spending 100 for the base game. And that’s because I love the series and it is very much a long term game for me, Street Fighter.
But that would be a very tough sell, it would have to be something really special to part with that much, even though I know I would get 1000s of hours out of it
You already spend more than 100 for Street Fighter and always have. The full roster for SF6 is currently 100/110 bucks. Not counting MTX and extra cosmetics.
Sure, you didn't pay it all at once, but that's no different than me buying SF2 and then Super SF2 the following year, each for seventy-ish bucks.
And the natural conclusion of that is why have the up front charge at all. You do the 2XKO thing or the Multiversus thing and just let people play and charge for the characters. Of course that may mean being online for purchase authentication, right?
I don't like where that goes.
I think SF in particular is pretty sure it can pull a decent chunk of cash up front and not impact sales too much, so that's better for them, since they're monetizing all the casual players, but sitll. It's a dynamic that's in play and I don't like it.
I think that’s missing a lot of the content. If SF6 was free to play, if wouldn’t have the single player portion. And would have had a couple of free characters.
2XKO is going to launch with something like 9 characters(might be missing remembering the number), Maybe they add more before release but it is a tiny roster for a tag game.
There is also massive changes between games, and they don’t disappear, so you can still have those tournaments. If it goes free to play, I feel like they kinda get stuck with the game and systems and no easy way to move onwards, with a bit of a PR nightmare(abandoning the game and all that).
I feel like there is pros and cons to both methods, but don’t really think f2p Street Fighter is a good move. I do think sf7 whenever that is released will be another paid game, and will be more expensive upfront.
Yeah, I have a love(like… tolerate)/hate relationship with the battle pass. I don’t mind it, cause it is cheap, pointless and you get your money back, and it is super easy to complete it.
But also, it can fuck off, battle passes suck in their timed implementation, it is pointless, you have to get premium currency to get it which is obviously not purchasable at the exact amount.
Only thing I think was good is that it bought in the emulated game catalogue.
That’s not true. I’ve been a developer for 18 years on big AAA and small indie games. Most people I’ve worked with very much cared about pricing. When you work on a game and put years of hard work into it, you want it to be a success. If the game is not profitable, you might lose your job so of course you care when management shows up with a pricing strategy that doesn’t make sense to you. Sure, passion is a big part of making games but it’s also our job and we’re not oblivious to what the game we’re working on is worth.
Oh and yes, we do get bonuses based on the performance of the game.
noobdoomguy8658@feddit.org
on 22 Jan 06:23
collapse
Opinions on that one time Microsoft closed Arkane and the studio behind HiFi Rush, despite the latter’s success and the fact the former made Redfall a slop because of total mismanagement? I’m curious in how nervous that makes you as a developer and how common this bullshit is as seem from within; from outside, it’s basically all I remember about AAA because I don’t often interact wit the scene apart from reading.
in fact, if the online is as ridden with issues as 5’s online has been, I’ll probably just pirate it. Why would I want to pay $60+ just so I can get squeezed for even more money via microtransactions; and having to pay even more for a mod menu, just to exist in a server without being hassled? Fuck that with a rusty fork.
FigMcLargeHuge@sh.itjust.works
on 21 Jan 07:34
collapse
For one thing, I'm not American, baseline game prices here took a similar hike during the PS4 era, so I'd be curious to see if or when US game prices adjust and whether that comes with a local price bump. Although looking at recent releases maybe they already did.
For another, it is kind of insane how much lower the baseline price of what used to be called "retail packaged goods" games has gotten, adjusted for inlfation. As I write this, Civ 7 is the best selling full price game on Steam, going for 69,99USD. That's 48-ish USD in 2010 money, the Internet tells me. The previous release to even get close to the best sellers list at that price (and it sold pretty terribly, as far as I can tell, at least on Steam), was Indiana Jones, for the same price. Everything else is much, much, much cheaper, with the list being dominated by games anywhere between free to play and thirty bucks.
That's two conflicting pushes. Games are dirt cheap now. You can't even sell them at the sticker price that was normal in the 2010s anymore, and even if you did, that's 30% less inflation-adjusted money than before. The average game developer salary has gone from high 90K to 115K in 2025 in that period as, again, the Internet tells me.
So basically GTA or no, I don't see how you get anything BUT GTA sequels and Call of Dutys going forward. It's MTX-fests or nothing. It's pretty messed up, IMO. I like splashy, good-looking AAA games and would take them any day over, say, a Marvel Rivals. But spoiler alert, Marvel Rivals is going to make all the money and you'll be lucky if you ever see a Ratchet sequel again, let alone a third party big single player game.
So... pick your poison, I suppose.
Dariusmiles2123@sh.itjust.works
on 20 Jan 09:31
nextcollapse
It’s surprising that games are getting cheaper compared to the cost of living. If you take into consideration the fact that games are becoming more expensive to produce, I really don’t understand it.
Gaming is way cheaper for me than it was during the ps2 or ps3 era.
We still have a ways to go before reaching the inflation-adjusted, $150-per-game peak of mass market games in the 1990’s. A key difference is games back then had way higher marginal cost (it’s near zero now).
The interesting thing is that the market is becoming a lot more like it was back then, full of people that only buy one or two games a year and only play those. Of course now, the model is retaining players with DLC and MTX, whereas in 1995 it was more because people could only afford one or two games a year.
ChojinDSL@discuss.tchncs.de
on 20 Jan 09:35
nextcollapse
Playing lots of RPGs and Jrpgs has trained my Patience. I never buy a game at full price, regardless of how much I want it. I simply wait for a sale until it’s below 35 euro.
Professorozone@lemmy.world
on 20 Jan 09:55
nextcollapse
People pay $1200 for an iPhone. I’m sure they’ll pay the $100 for a game. How? I’m not sure but they always seem to.
Personally, I don’t but I am never the trend setter.
They offer payment plans for a cell phones I’m waiting for the day that they start offering payment plans to purchase video games. They’ve already trialled with it with the hardware with the Xbox Series X launch with their all access pass, which don’t get me wrong was a great deal but, eventually we are going to hit the point where the everyday person if they want to buy a video game is going to have to do one of those by now pay later plans through like affirm or something, which is a scary thought. As is if it gets much higher than $100 it will qualify for paypals 6-month equal financing deal if you have their credit card, if this change had been just 6 months prior it would have already been qualified for it because they just recently raised their minimum so I think it’s like $120 or $140
I’m not paying if its not below $30, why would i pay for $100? GTA 5 is already disappointing i’m pretty sure they chop even more thing up and make most content online only. $100 is already rm450 in my country and that’s almost 1/3 of minimum wages, I’ll continue to be stingy and spend my money on better stuff.
How is GTA5 disappointing? I remember playing it a couple of years after release and it still is one of the best open world games I ever played. Even now, more than 10 years since I played it, I remember the main characters and even some secondary ones and part of the story (even though I only played it once). If anything, I think the GTA5 model is what all “service” games should be – excellent story and single player campaign and…whatever that online thing is. Frankly, I’ve never touched the online part in GTA5 but I hear it’s quite successful.
Regarding the price, I would personally probably pay a bit more for a really really good game. I don’t think the very good games selling for a premium are the problem, but the unfinished, reskinned and shitty games selling for 60-70. Like, how is Elden Ring released at the same price as Skull and Bones or FIFA <current-year>? Those should be 10-20 bucks, not the good games (assuming GTA6 will keep the quality bar up).
ICastFist@programming.dev
on 20 Jan 11:34
nextcollapse
Frankly, I’ve never touched the online part in GTA5 but I hear it’s quite successful.
The microtransactions kept a very steady flow of hundreds of millions of dollars per quarter to Rockstar, so yeah, it’s absurdly successful
I’m glad you enjoy it and my opinion of it doesn’t negate your feeling, however i should say i find the middle part of the story to be very bland and the ending is forgettable. We’re also sold on the idea of heist but we only have the grand total of 5, which again, i find it very forgettable and bland.
In fact i still can remember a lot of San Andreas, but i can’t remember much about gta5.
Not a big fan of the idea of spreading the story focus amongst the trio too, i think i’d enjoy more if it’s just focus on Franklin.
The post game is also pretty empty, not much side story to do because they put their effort on online mode.
Overall it’s a pretty mid game to me.
thermal_shock@lemmy.world
on 20 Jan 14:34
collapse
can’t play online without hacks unfortunately. sad state of affairs. but overall, game wasn’t bad except for the money grab with sharkbucks
This is my ideology as well, not the piracy part but the I refuse to buy a game for more than $30 and that game better have rocked the internet in terms of how amazing it was. For prospective the last game that I purchased for $30 was Elden ring when it went on sale a few months back and the last one prior to that was satisfactory when it launched on epic games
absquatulate@lemmy.world
on 20 Jan 10:43
nextcollapse
I’m loving the balls on studios. Yesterday we had “experts” suggesting it might cost 100 bux, and today it’s already the beggining of a trend. And the game isn’t even out. In fact, we only have the trailer for the game and they’re already predicting prices.
My prediction is yes, they’ll ask 100$ and more, and yes, people will pay it.
But the nerve, I swear. “Yeah, our games have gotten sloppier every year. And yes, we fired tens of thousands solely for profit reasons. But line must go up, so you better start paying”
Frozengyro@lemmy.world
on 20 Jan 13:00
nextcollapse
Do you really think people will buy it? I’ve played most of the GTAs, but I’m not about to spend 100 dollars on a video game.
reseller_pledge609@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 20 Jan 14:08
nextcollapse
You’re clearly not the target audience. Every slightly popular game has its whales. Something as popular as GTA? They’ll sell it at $100 and laugh all the way to the bank.
caseofthematts@lemmy.world
on 20 Jan 14:39
collapse
Something to consider. With conversion, new games are usually $80-$100 in Canada.
People still buy them.
reseller_pledge609@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 20 Jan 14:48
collapse
Meaning this game will be MORE THAN $100 Canadian and still sell like hotcakes.
I don’t know though you’ve got to consider your target audience and their income method. The income method for the target audience of pokemon games is asking their parents.
noobdoomguy8658@feddit.org
on 22 Jan 06:26
collapse
There’s enough people in what I assume to be big gaming communities, like active and paying and stuff, that are defending this, citing that other stuff got more expensive, too… and somehow not many agree that incomes have not risen proportionally. Them temporarily embarrassed millionaires.
Somehow I think that most people defending this kind of crap are too young to actually have a first-hand feeling of how much prices for everything have risen.
To be honest, they could launch the game as a 1 MB file that brings you to a black screen that says get fucked, and they would still make their money’s worth just out of the people who will blindly buy the game because they’ve been waiting for GTA 6 for so long that they bought it release day.
And then they could just move back to GTA V pretending nothing happened because the same people that would have impulse purchased GTA 6 with zero research are also the people who play GTA V religiously spending money on the micro transactions there and that isn’t going to cut their addiction
Ghoelian@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 20 Jan 17:20
nextcollapse
I think rumours about the price tag were already going before the trailer even came out lol.
Honestly this could all be a campaign from Rockstar to get ahead of higher pricing. They throw out $100 to some random people and let them run with it, so when they announce a $80/$90 price tag everyone bregurdingly goes along with it.
absquatulate@lemmy.world
on 21 Jan 05:40
nextcollapse
That’s what I’m thinking. Get the fanbase used to seeing 100+, and then suddenly an 80$ game will feel like a bargain lol
Hot take, a very few games are actually worth the 100$ pricetag. The wrong studios believe their games are worth that much tho. I can see myself buying gta6 for 100 but id probably wait for a good sale lol
ampersandrew@lemmy.world
on 20 Jan 14:28
nextcollapse
I’ve definitely found games that I thought were worth $100, and they often refuse to even go as high as $70. Probably the only one that I thought was worth $100 and charged that much for it was Street Fighter 6.
Yea id vote with my money, can’t see myself paying for something while second guessing myself -before- the deed is even done. My fucking dogshit mmo elder scrolls online has a premium subscription even tho its a PAYED GAME, and some aspects literally feel like extortion… Inventory space is insanely limited for a game that has thousands of items, HUNDREDS of different materials. Thought ab buying it a couple times but naahh ain’t nobody extorting me into buying in game subscription bs lol.
FigMcLargeHuge@sh.itjust.works
on 21 Jan 07:29
collapse
Well that’s a ripe take on this. Evidently you don’t know anyone who runs Linux and played GTA V online. Rockstar can fuck right off for what they pulled. Definitely didn’t earn any trust, and Windows users should be wary as well since they did that with no notice and no fucks given to a portion of their paid users.
ampersandrew@lemmy.world
on 22 Jan 02:30
nextcollapse
I’m a Linux user, and I’m at the point where I treat any online component as though it doesn’t exist if there’s no offline alternative like LAN. If GTA VI has a campaign as good as the previous two games, it’s still worth it, because I’m not touching the online mode.
FigMcLargeHuge@sh.itjust.works
on 23 Jan 19:32
collapse
I guess the real pisser here was that the online component worked just fine. They made an active decision to just cut off linux players which was a real dick move.
plant_based_monero@lemm.ee
on 23 Jan 15:03
collapse
To be honest, rockstar has one of the worst multiplayer’s in all videogames. I said what I said because RDR2 was one of my favorite games but even with that I never ever opened the online. So I will buy the next gta first day, play the history, explore the world and eventually uninstall just to never see it again. The good thing is that everyone has something they hate, and everyone has a wallet to vote.
FigMcLargeHuge@sh.itjust.works
on 23 Jan 19:30
collapse
I played GTA V online with three of my friends, and had about 900 hours of play. Then one day, bam, they literally cut anyone using Linux off from being able to connect to the servers. It just leaves a real bad taste in my mouth, because I would have probably gone to RDR2 next, and might have even bought RDR on my Switch. Voting with my wallet is all I can do, and at this point it feels like voting for a president. My tiny little vote won’t really amount to much, but hey at least I can feel good about standing on my principals. Like someone else said, they have 30 year backlog of games, and I have similar. So not playing either GTA V online anymore or buying GTA VI won’t really affect me in the long run as far as hindering my enjoyment of other games so there’s that…
I decided to go all out with Monster Hunter Wilds and got the ultimate digital deluxe or whatever. Does it smart? Yes. But the amount of hours I’ve put into World and Rise would make you blush and yell at me to go touch grass. It’s one of the few things I absolutely will not play Patient Gamer with.
GTA VI is another such game. The amount of time I’ve put into V since it dirst came out to PS360, you don’t even want to know.
Unless you do. Then I’ll go look it up.
FangedWyvern42@lemmy.world
on 21 Jan 08:54
collapse
What? Don’t you want to make it your second job? The live service game experience? /s
TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.world
on 20 Jan 16:33
nextcollapse
AAA games are already $90CAD here with deluxe/special editions going for $120-$160. I can’t remember the last time I actually bought one of those games because most of them are trash designed to exploit the player as much as possible. There are a lot of other hobbies I’d rather drop that kind of money on that respect my time heaps more than modern games.
I think Tiny Glade is the only game I play regularly that is an actual new release. Everything else is 5+ years old because I got them on sale for good prices. Also means they’re already patched up and usually perform better instead of having people pay $90+ to beta test broken garbage.
I imagine there will be a premium version that’s $100 plus but I can’t imagine that they’ll risk trying to sell it at that price for the base version. People aren’t exactly running around with disposable income right now, at least in the US.
I still don’t understand the appeal for GTA V either. For a game called Grand Theft Auto, the game sure likes to stop you from committing much crime for quite a large amount of time in game, at least to the point I dropped it at least.
Oh I’m sure it can be fun for people but I just can’t see what’s the fun in it. Maybe I’m too used to Saints Row that drops you into the action immediately.
Just a reminder that no one’s forcing you to spend $100 on the game. If enough people refuse to do so the base cost of the game will go down again. Icarus is my most recent for example, I’ve had it on my wish list for almost a year and a half now, because I wasn’t willing to spend $35 on what that game provided. It’s currently on sale on Steam for $9.
God of War 2018 is currently $20 on PSN
I got Elden ring for $30 a few months back despite the fact that it’s still selling full price at 60.
If y’all are patient and wait they stopped making money on the game which means that they lower the cost to try to incentivize people to buy it.
Plus the first year of sale of a game is The Game’s most important release window, because companies generally will use the first year to decide how popular it was. If enough people refuse to buy the game at their original price point it will destroy their sales metric for the first year which will make it harder on the studio to justify to their parent company that it’s worth making another game, which means that they’re more incentivized to lower the base cost of the game within the first year of launch.
The rate of this is significantly slowed down if everyone is just like oh okay I guess it’s $100 now and then buys it anyway, have patience and hold out, especially a game like GTA 6 where they’re going to gain more money off microtransactions then people actually buying the game. Honestly GTA 6 probably should have just been sold as a free to play because they operate like one
The thing is, universal action like this, even on a fraction of the scale necessary to make a dent and ultimately change things, just doesn’t work because people will always bow to capitalism. They’ll kick the dirt and grumble under their breath as they pull out their wallets.
I know you’re saying just wait until it’s on sale, but the power of “keeping up with the joneses” is unfortunately a tried a true way of capitalism. When people are talking about the game in the first weeks and posting memes and making in-jokes, people that were trying to hold out will cave like a poorly managed mining operation.
icecreamtaco@lemmy.world
on 20 Jan 18:49
nextcollapse
This seems fine given the scale of the game and assuming it’s not bad, but it’s more worrying how it will lead to $100 shovelware five years from now. We already had Zelda at $70 (also worth it) so i could see a trend forming.
I wonder… Will Grand Theft Auto VI be the next “AAAA” game? Or have we ditched that term now since the utter failure of the first game that dared wear that title?
HotsauceHurricane@lemmy.one
on 21 Jan 03:12
nextcollapse
Im not spening $100 on a fucking video game. I dont care what game ,i don’t care what edition.
DarkMetatron@feddit.org
on 21 Jan 05:45
nextcollapse
I still have a huge backlog of games released in the last 30 years, so I can really easy wait for every game to go into sale.
There is absolutely no need or urge for me to buy any game on release.
aesthelete@lemmy.world
on 21 Jan 07:43
nextcollapse
It’ll inspire me to never buy it…until of course it goes on sale for $20 a year later.
I always wait for the prices to drop before buying any game, and never ever pre-buy them. The only exception is early access from indie devs, I’ll help them along if they show promise.
My jolly roger has been stuffed in a trunk somewhere for years, but looks like it might be coming out…
Lol, I’ll just wait until it’s on sale for 5 bucks. I’m patient enough.
FunnyUsername@lemmy.world
on 21 Jan 13:24
nextcollapse
I spent 20$ on the last game i played, and put over 140 hours into it. Just saying.
wesley@yall.theatl.social
on 21 Jan 13:50
nextcollapse
For $15 you can have endless hours or fun with Balatro
BradleyUffner@lemmy.world
on 21 Jan 17:07
collapse
I wish I could, but it’s just not for me.
pishadoot@sh.itjust.works
on 21 Jan 18:39
collapse
It wasn’t for me either at first but I gave it another shot and it got its hook into me.
What helped me was looking up a scoring/basic strategy guide that helped me figure out what super rookie mistakes I was making - this gave me a better eye for strategy when I was playing, which in turn translated to me enjoying the deck building aspect (which is a mechanic I know I enjoy).
The game is good, and really great to pick up and put down in busts if you don’t have a lot of time.
Hope you end up liking it eventually! I LOVE poker of all types, rogue likes, and deck builders so I thought this was a smash hit when I heard about it, but yeah, took a while to love it.
Regrettable_incident@lemmy.world
on 22 Jan 17:06
collapse
I keep seeing people comment that they really like it, I’m wondering if it’s completely inaccessible for someone who has never played poker?
pishadoot@sh.itjust.works
on 23 Jan 03:13
collapse
You need zero poker experience to play it. It’s not a poker game at all, just uses poker hands for scoring, and if you don’t know them they’re all displayed if you hit esc.
Etterra@discuss.online
on 21 Jan 14:56
nextcollapse
GTA 6 Devs: look at our amazing story and open world!
YouTubers: I’ma drive an alligator up off this ramp, skip off the tallest building, and then land on a blimp!
Idk what an open world is for if not the alligator-building-blimp strat.
Mini_Moonpie@sh.itjust.works
on 21 Jan 17:29
nextcollapse
It will be funny if they make it free to play because they think maximizing player count will translate into more shark card money than box price + shark cards. Not that I think that is likely, just a funny possibility.
CrowAirbrush@lemmy.world
on 21 Jan 18:07
nextcollapse
Heck make them $250, i’m not buying them even at $70.
If a game is over $30 it needs to be damn good to get me to buy it.
I think the last two games I bought at some high premium launch price were GTAV and Cyberpunk 2077.
That second one still stings. I played it longer than I should’ve probably because of the price, and I’ve not bothered with the DLC, even though people said it fixed the game. The price just left a bad taste in my mouth.
fsxylo@sh.itjust.works
on 21 Jan 18:18
nextcollapse
AAA developers will inspire me to not buy their shit.
NastyNative@mander.xyz
on 21 Jan 18:54
nextcollapse
Rockstar I would say is one of the few that can demand that price. I would pay $100.00 bucks cause Im going to play it for the next decade. We could be on GTA15 but rockstar dont roll that way.
Regrettable_incident@lemmy.world
on 22 Jan 17:09
collapse
Yeah, and we have inflation going on, prices are going to increase. That’s not a crazy price for a game you’ll enjoy for years - if it’s not broken when it’s released. If you pay that money and have to wait for months of patches you’d prob be a bit pissed off.
businessfish@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 21 Jan 21:38
nextcollapse
how incredibly american to phrase learning they can get away with fleecing people for $40 more as being “inspired”.
SuperSaiyanSwag@lemmy.zip
on 22 Jan 03:28
nextcollapse
Why do they always say developers instead of publishers?
And this is precicely why I mostly play indie titles made by individuals or small teams that are sold for under 10 bucks. Fuck this noise.
MolecularCactus1324@lemmy.world
on 22 Jan 04:20
nextcollapse
They can try, but it might not work. GTA VI has been in development for like more than a decade and will probably have loads of content. I could see $100 being justified. But not every other AAA game would be the same. Most wouldn’t in fact.
That said, video games have been $50-60 for the last 25 years. If they’d kept up with inflation, they’d be close to $110. So, I get it.
It’ll push a shit ton of new pirates, thus creating more headaches for them if $100 games become the new normal. It’s almost like they love shooting themselves in the feet with a shotgun and then blaming everyone else as to why they can’t walk like they used to.
threaded - newest
Ubisoft I’ve just had an idea to win players back
Remember when Apple released the $1000 phone and it was a big thing?
Eventually this will be the normal.
Game budgets are crazy. In order to get the profits shareholders want they’ll charge as much as they can get away with.
Indies are actually performing well, so we might see a shift like we saw with film in the 90s.
I can tell you right now I’m not paying AUD$160 for a new game in the near future
www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8ju_10NkGY
Why pirate shitty AAA games when you can spend your time getting a better experience by supporting indie devs financially and in word of mouth?
i.kym-cdn.com/…/Screenshot_2024-02-29_at_3.58.47 …
Word of mouth provided by pirates is still great for the AAA games industry, regardless of what they’ll tell you, and only helps perpetuate these bad practices you’re pirating to get away from. 99.9% of users are unwilling to pirate games, and thus when you reference them, say you played or enjoyed them, talk about pirating them, etc., it’s essentially just free advertising for those games to people who would in all likelihood just purchase them if they wanted them.
Meanwhile, playing indie games gives those devs some cash flow to keep developing and gives free, word of mouth advertising to other people through references, recommendations, etc. The more successful indie games with good practices are, the better the games industry as a whole. It’s not a zero-sum game, but there is some tradeoff involved.
I mean... yeah, give it a long enough time and it will be. Kinda how inflation works. "Eventually" is a pretty expansive word.
I’m pretty sure most major games have MSRPd for $60 since the 90s
Sorta kinda. We moved to 69.99 for major releases a while ago. Late 2000s in some territories, later in others.
In the US it was 59.99 for the CD era, but it was higher before when cart costs were a massive chunk of the retail price. I bought games that launched at 100 (or its local equivalent) in the 90s, particularly on SNES and N64.
But it's true that prices have been super stable while moving from expensive carts to cheap CDs and then trivially expensive digital releases. Now there's no way to cut costs on distribution (you're already subsidizing storage, it's just down to bandwidth, which is paid by the retailer anyway). So now inflation is catching up, since none of the money is going to making boxes, stamping CDs or shipping games in trucks. Now when inflation hits there's no longer a way to hide the pricing impact, so it goes to sticker price.
And people are so used to that stability that they immediately rage on the Internet, if this thread is anything to go by, so the only answer is to hide more of the cost in MTX and dump the sticker price altogether.
Kinda argued against myself there. The real answer isn't prices will "evenutally" go up, it's that they will go down to zero and traditional gaming will become mobile gaming. That's probably more likely.
Fuck you.
I have paid full price for a game in 10 years and GTA6 will be late to the PC party anyway. Looks like I won’t be playing it until 2035.
"According to Matthew Ball's The State of Video Gaming in 2025 presentation, first spotted by VGC, some developers "hope" the next installment in the GTA franchise will be priced at $80–$100, fully capitalizing on its status as the most anticipated game on the market. This increase, the report suggests, would allow studios to raise the price of their own new games by at least $10 to offset declining player numbers and inflation while justifying the change by pointing to GTA VI's example."
Who the hell are the developers clamoring for this?
No, what's going to happen is that, with so many game sales happening every week, people are largely going to wait for the sales axe to come down on GTA VI until it's affordable. The only people who'd happily buy GTA VI at that price point, are gullible FOMO-pearl-clutching "gamurs", gaming "journalists", benchmark nerds and egotistical Day-1 flaunters. That's about it.
The moment GTA VI hits a single sale, then most will jump on it.
Wonder how much they’ll raise it next when they lose additional sales to absurd prices.
Gonna guess the tens of thousands getting laid off who are anxiously waiting for money to come back to the business so they can get hired again.
VERY educated guess, there.
If these hypothetical developers are waiting for cash infusions to “fix” the finances of thesw disastrously managed companies, then they’re pretty naïve. Successful games are making multi-millions, even middling franchise games can pull that. More than enough to sustain a normal sized development team.
I imagine maintaining a reasonable team would result in fewer unemployed developers than overbloating the team thinking “more is biggerer is more money” and then cutting tens of thousands of positions for “costs.”
While I wish you were right, something tells me that even with an 80-100$ pricetag it’ll still be one of the most successful games ever released.
Look at diablo4, for example. 70$ base game, 90 for deluxe, and 100 for ultimate plus mtx in the store at stupid prices. And apparently it’s sold over 6 million copies and made over 600 mil in revenue in the first week. And it’s not even a good game, in my opinion.
I'll shamefully admit that I would've bought Diablo IV at launch. But the dealbreaker for me was when they made it online-only, like Diablo III. Good preventative measure.
I mean, I’d be pissed but I’d probably still buy it, providing it was fully playable offline and the content reflected the price. I play GTA when it releases, beat it, fool around a bit and never touch it again. The last time I spent money on gta was when V released on 360, more than 10 years ago.
I rarely spend more than 15 eurodollars on a game, but realistically for the average cough console cough player the difference between 60 and 80 is a few beers with your pals, and you spend way more time playing GTA than drinking those few beers.
Looks like PatientGamers’ membership numbers will be on the rise soon.
I never pay full price for a game.
Isthereanydeal.com
Humblebundle.com
Gog.com
Always running sales. If they aren’t just check history or set an alert on isthereanydeal and wait a bit.
This is the way.
Thank you for the first link, kind stranger.
I don’t even buy a game when it’s 70…
At 80 there is no fucking way…
90, are they crazy? Never!
100? Lulz, go fuck yourself lunatic
I think there is maybe 1 game that I would consider spending 100 for the base game. And that’s because I love the series and it is very much a long term game for me, Street Fighter.
But that would be a very tough sell, it would have to be something really special to part with that much, even though I know I would get 1000s of hours out of it
You already spend more than 100 for Street Fighter and always have. The full roster for SF6 is currently 100/110 bucks. Not counting MTX and extra cosmetics.
Sure, you didn't pay it all at once, but that's no different than me buying SF2 and then Super SF2 the following year, each for seventy-ish bucks.
While true, the base game is still only 60.
If I had to spend an additional 40 for just the base game(not the 2 seasons of characters), that would be a much harder sell.
Sure.
And the natural conclusion of that is why have the up front charge at all. You do the 2XKO thing or the Multiversus thing and just let people play and charge for the characters. Of course that may mean being online for purchase authentication, right?
I don't like where that goes.
I think SF in particular is pretty sure it can pull a decent chunk of cash up front and not impact sales too much, so that's better for them, since they're monetizing all the casual players, but sitll. It's a dynamic that's in play and I don't like it.
I think that’s missing a lot of the content. If SF6 was free to play, if wouldn’t have the single player portion. And would have had a couple of free characters.
2XKO is going to launch with something like 9 characters(might be missing remembering the number), Maybe they add more before release but it is a tiny roster for a tag game.
There is also massive changes between games, and they don’t disappear, so you can still have those tournaments. If it goes free to play, I feel like they kinda get stuck with the game and systems and no easy way to move onwards, with a bit of a PR nightmare(abandoning the game and all that).
I feel like there is pros and cons to both methods, but don’t really think f2p Street Fighter is a good move. I do think sf7 whenever that is released will be another paid game, and will be more expensive upfront.
I do think fighting games are a special case because the DLC is so obvious that the seasonal microtransaction stuff is not as much of a focus.
But hey, SF6 did add a battlepass, so... it's moving in that direction. We'll see.
Yeah, I have a love(like… tolerate)/hate relationship with the battle pass. I don’t mind it, cause it is cheap, pointless and you get your money back, and it is super easy to complete it.
But also, it can fuck off, battle passes suck in their timed implementation, it is pointless, you have to get premium currency to get it which is obviously not purchasable at the exact amount.
Only thing I think was good is that it bought in the emulated game catalogue.
Management are NOT DEVELOPERS.
Executives are NOT DEVELOPERS.
Shareholders are NOT DEVELOPERS.
Yeah, I guarantee you not a single developer gives two shits about how much the game costs. It’s not going into their pockets regardless.
That’s not true. I’ve been a developer for 18 years on big AAA and small indie games. Most people I’ve worked with very much cared about pricing. When you work on a game and put years of hard work into it, you want it to be a success. If the game is not profitable, you might lose your job so of course you care when management shows up with a pricing strategy that doesn’t make sense to you. Sure, passion is a big part of making games but it’s also our job and we’re not oblivious to what the game we’re working on is worth.
Oh and yes, we do get bonuses based on the performance of the game.
Opinions on that one time Microsoft closed Arkane and the studio behind HiFi Rush, despite the latter’s success and the fact the former made Redfall a slop because of total mismanagement? I’m curious in how nervous that makes you as a developer and how common this bullshit is as seem from within; from outside, it’s basically all I remember about AAA because I don’t often interact wit the scene apart from reading.
if it’s higher than $60, R* can lick my taint.
in fact, if the online is as ridden with issues as 5’s online has been, I’ll probably just pirate it. Why would I want to pay $60+ just so I can get squeezed for even more money via microtransactions; and having to pay even more for a mod menu, just to exist in a server without being hassled? Fuck that with a rusty fork.
FTFY
This is some weird reporting.
For one thing, I'm not American, baseline game prices here took a similar hike during the PS4 era, so I'd be curious to see if or when US game prices adjust and whether that comes with a local price bump. Although looking at recent releases maybe they already did.
For another, it is kind of insane how much lower the baseline price of what used to be called "retail packaged goods" games has gotten, adjusted for inlfation. As I write this, Civ 7 is the best selling full price game on Steam, going for 69,99USD. That's 48-ish USD in 2010 money, the Internet tells me. The previous release to even get close to the best sellers list at that price (and it sold pretty terribly, as far as I can tell, at least on Steam), was Indiana Jones, for the same price. Everything else is much, much, much cheaper, with the list being dominated by games anywhere between free to play and thirty bucks.
That's two conflicting pushes. Games are dirt cheap now. You can't even sell them at the sticker price that was normal in the 2010s anymore, and even if you did, that's 30% less inflation-adjusted money than before. The average game developer salary has gone from high 90K to 115K in 2025 in that period as, again, the Internet tells me.
So basically GTA or no, I don't see how you get anything BUT GTA sequels and Call of Dutys going forward. It's MTX-fests or nothing. It's pretty messed up, IMO. I like splashy, good-looking AAA games and would take them any day over, say, a Marvel Rivals. But spoiler alert, Marvel Rivals is going to make all the money and you'll be lucky if you ever see a Ratchet sequel again, let alone a third party big single player game.
So... pick your poison, I suppose.
It’s surprising that games are getting cheaper compared to the cost of living. If you take into consideration the fact that games are becoming more expensive to produce, I really don’t understand it.
Gaming is way cheaper for me than it was during the ps2 or ps3 era.
We still have a ways to go before reaching the inflation-adjusted, $150-per-game peak of mass market games in the 1990’s. A key difference is games back then had way higher marginal cost (it’s near zero now).
The interesting thing is that the market is becoming a lot more like it was back then, full of people that only buy one or two games a year and only play those. Of course now, the model is retaining players with DLC and MTX, whereas in 1995 it was more because people could only afford one or two games a year.
Playing lots of RPGs and Jrpgs has trained my Patience. I never buy a game at full price, regardless of how much I want it. I simply wait for a sale until it’s below 35 euro.
People pay $1200 for an iPhone. I’m sure they’ll pay the $100 for a game. How? I’m not sure but they always seem to.
Personally, I don’t but I am never the trend setter.
They offer payment plans for a cell phones I’m waiting for the day that they start offering payment plans to purchase video games. They’ve already trialled with it with the hardware with the Xbox Series X launch with their all access pass, which don’t get me wrong was a great deal but, eventually we are going to hit the point where the everyday person if they want to buy a video game is going to have to do one of those by now pay later plans through like affirm or something, which is a scary thought. As is if it gets much higher than $100 it will qualify for paypals 6-month equal financing deal if you have their credit card, if this change had been just 6 months prior it would have already been qualified for it because they just recently raised their minimum so I think it’s like $120 or $140
I’m not paying if its not below $30, why would i pay for $100? GTA 5 is already disappointing i’m pretty sure they chop even more thing up and make most content online only. $100 is already rm450 in my country and that’s almost 1/3 of minimum wages, I’ll continue to be stingy and spend my money on better stuff.
They deserve piracy.
How is GTA5 disappointing? I remember playing it a couple of years after release and it still is one of the best open world games I ever played. Even now, more than 10 years since I played it, I remember the main characters and even some secondary ones and part of the story (even though I only played it once). If anything, I think the GTA5 model is what all “service” games should be – excellent story and single player campaign and…whatever that online thing is. Frankly, I’ve never touched the online part in GTA5 but I hear it’s quite successful.
Regarding the price, I would personally probably pay a bit more for a really really good game. I don’t think the very good games selling for a premium are the problem, but the unfinished, reskinned and shitty games selling for 60-70. Like, how is Elden Ring released at the same price as Skull and Bones or FIFA <current-year>? Those should be 10-20 bucks, not the good games (assuming GTA6 will keep the quality bar up).
The microtransactions kept a very steady flow of hundreds of millions of dollars per quarter to Rockstar, so yeah, it’s absurdly successful
I’m glad you enjoy it and my opinion of it doesn’t negate your feeling, however i should say i find the middle part of the story to be very bland and the ending is forgettable. We’re also sold on the idea of heist but we only have the grand total of 5, which again, i find it very forgettable and bland.
In fact i still can remember a lot of San Andreas, but i can’t remember much about gta5.
Not a big fan of the idea of spreading the story focus amongst the trio too, i think i’d enjoy more if it’s just focus on Franklin.
The post game is also pretty empty, not much side story to do because they put their effort on online mode.
Overall it’s a pretty mid game to me.
can’t play online without hacks unfortunately. sad state of affairs. but overall, game wasn’t bad except for the money grab with sharkbucks
This is my ideology as well, not the piracy part but the I refuse to buy a game for more than $30 and that game better have rocked the internet in terms of how amazing it was. For prospective the last game that I purchased for $30 was Elden ring when it went on sale a few months back and the last one prior to that was satisfactory when it launched on epic games
I’m loving the balls on studios. Yesterday we had “experts” suggesting it might cost 100 bux, and today it’s already the beggining of a trend. And the game isn’t even out. In fact, we only have the trailer for the game and they’re already predicting prices.
My prediction is yes, they’ll ask 100$ and more, and yes, people will pay it.
But the nerve, I swear. “Yeah, our games have gotten sloppier every year. And yes, we fired tens of thousands solely for profit reasons. But line must go up, so you better start paying”
Do you really think people will buy it? I’ve played most of the GTAs, but I’m not about to spend 100 dollars on a video game.
You’re clearly not the target audience. Every slightly popular game has its whales. Something as popular as GTA? They’ll sell it at $100 and laugh all the way to the bank.
Something to consider. With conversion, new games are usually $80-$100 in Canada.
People still buy them.
Meaning this game will be MORE THAN $100 Canadian and still sell like hotcakes.
.
Yeah but they don’t cost $100
Not yet, might follow after this stunt faces no lash back and results in profits.
I don’t know though you’ve got to consider your target audience and their income method. The income method for the target audience of pokemon games is asking their parents.
.
There’s enough people in what I assume to be big gaming communities, like active and paying and stuff, that are defending this, citing that other stuff got more expensive, too… and somehow not many agree that incomes have not risen proportionally. Them temporarily embarrassed millionaires.
Somehow I think that most people defending this kind of crap are too young to actually have a first-hand feeling of how much prices for everything have risen.
Well the game could be disastrous and sell poorly after the first week.
To be honest, they could launch the game as a 1 MB file that brings you to a black screen that says get fucked, and they would still make their money’s worth just out of the people who will blindly buy the game because they’ve been waiting for GTA 6 for so long that they bought it release day.
And then they could just move back to GTA V pretending nothing happened because the same people that would have impulse purchased GTA 6 with zero research are also the people who play GTA V religiously spending money on the micro transactions there and that isn’t going to cut their addiction
I think rumours about the price tag were already going before the trailer even came out lol.
Honestly this could all be a campaign from Rockstar to get ahead of higher pricing. They throw out $100 to some random people and let them run with it, so when they announce a $80/$90 price tag everyone bregurdingly goes along with it.
That’s what I’m thinking. Get the fanbase used to seeing 100+, and then suddenly an 80$ game will feel like a bargain lol
I honestly believe it, these test the water kind of leaks, more like intentionally invisible marketing to see the reactions
Thats a no from me dawg
It'll make calculating steam sale prices quite easy, won't it?
Yeah, they won’t appear cuz they’re all ignored 😂
They can price them at €200 for all I care. I’ll only will buy them when they are at €20 anyway.
Hot take, a very few games are actually worth the 100$ pricetag. The wrong studios believe their games are worth that much tho. I can see myself buying gta6 for 100 but id probably wait for a good sale lol
I’ve definitely found games that I thought were worth $100, and they often refuse to even go as high as $70. Probably the only one that I thought was worth $100 and charged that much for it was Street Fighter 6.
Id much rather pay 100$ for an mmo and get all the nonsense battlepasses they do ‘for life’, feels better to ‘own’ it
I’ll pay 100 dolars for gta vi blindly, but studios dont realize that trust is earned.
Well that’s weird because they completely obliterated that trust with the whole GTA online thing.
What happened to all of the expansion content on the single player they promised?
Yea id vote with my money, can’t see myself paying for something while second guessing myself -before- the deed is even done. My fucking dogshit mmo elder scrolls online has a premium subscription even tho its a PAYED GAME, and some aspects literally feel like extortion… Inventory space is insanely limited for a game that has thousands of items, HUNDREDS of different materials. Thought ab buying it a couple times but naahh ain’t nobody extorting me into buying in game subscription bs lol.
People didn’t want to pay for it.
Well that’s a ripe take on this. Evidently you don’t know anyone who runs Linux and played GTA V online. Rockstar can fuck right off for what they pulled. Definitely didn’t earn any trust, and Windows users should be wary as well since they did that with no notice and no fucks given to a portion of their paid users.
I’m a Linux user, and I’m at the point where I treat any online component as though it doesn’t exist if there’s no offline alternative like LAN. If GTA VI has a campaign as good as the previous two games, it’s still worth it, because I’m not touching the online mode.
I guess the real pisser here was that the online component worked just fine. They made an active decision to just cut off linux players which was a real dick move.
To be honest, rockstar has one of the worst multiplayer’s in all videogames. I said what I said because RDR2 was one of my favorite games but even with that I never ever opened the online. So I will buy the next gta first day, play the history, explore the world and eventually uninstall just to never see it again. The good thing is that everyone has something they hate, and everyone has a wallet to vote.
I played GTA V online with three of my friends, and had about 900 hours of play. Then one day, bam, they literally cut anyone using Linux off from being able to connect to the servers. It just leaves a real bad taste in my mouth, because I would have probably gone to RDR2 next, and might have even bought RDR on my Switch. Voting with my wallet is all I can do, and at this point it feels like voting for a president. My tiny little vote won’t really amount to much, but hey at least I can feel good about standing on my principals. Like someone else said, they have 30 year backlog of games, and I have similar. So not playing either GTA V online anymore or buying GTA VI won’t really affect me in the long run as far as hindering my enjoyment of other games so there’s that…
I decided to go all out with Monster Hunter Wilds and got the ultimate digital deluxe or whatever. Does it smart? Yes. But the amount of hours I’ve put into World and Rise would make you blush and yell at me to go touch grass. It’s one of the few things I absolutely will not play Patient Gamer with.
GTA VI is another such game. The amount of time I’ve put into V since it dirst came out to PS360, you don’t even want to know.
Unless you do. Then I’ll go look it up.
No game is worth that price point.
Exactly. Even a game like Elden Ring or Baldur’s Gate 3 isn’t worth 100$ and those are really great fucking games.
I got games i have 1k+ hours in, id pay a hunnid fir that nuch entrmertainment.
AAA games can go suck my cock and balls. I’m not playing games anymore. I got no time. No energy. No money.
What? Don’t you want to make it your second job? The live service game experience? /s
AAA games are already $90CAD here with deluxe/special editions going for $120-$160. I can’t remember the last time I actually bought one of those games because most of them are trash designed to exploit the player as much as possible. There are a lot of other hobbies I’d rather drop that kind of money on that respect my time heaps more than modern games.
I think Tiny Glade is the only game I play regularly that is an actual new release. Everything else is 5+ years old because I got them on sale for good prices. Also means they’re already patched up and usually perform better instead of having people pay $90+ to beta test broken garbage.
If GTA6 is $100 for the basic copy I hope absolutely nobody buys it.
I imagine there will be a premium version that’s $100 plus but I can’t imagine that they’ll risk trying to sell it at that price for the base version. People aren’t exactly running around with disposable income right now, at least in the US.
Just a reminder that you can play AAA titles until you die and never pay more than $15 per game, if you wait for a couple years and a sale.
Patient gaming ftw, I was able to get GTAV for free from epic games (only reason to have that stupid app)
Hell, I got GTA V for free (legally, yes). It was the first GTA game I played, and I think its launch reviews were massively overrated.
I doubt I’ll find a free deal for GTA VI, but I ain’t buying it new.
I still don’t understand the appeal for GTA V either. For a game called Grand Theft Auto, the game sure likes to stop you from committing much crime for quite a large amount of time in game, at least to the point I dropped it at least.
Nah, the game is actually pretty fun. I still think San Andreas was the best part but GTA V is far away from being a bad game.
Oh I’m sure it can be fun for people but I just can’t see what’s the fun in it. Maybe I’m too used to Saints Row that drops you into the action immediately.
Just a reminder that no one’s forcing you to spend $100 on the game. If enough people refuse to do so the base cost of the game will go down again. Icarus is my most recent for example, I’ve had it on my wish list for almost a year and a half now, because I wasn’t willing to spend $35 on what that game provided. It’s currently on sale on Steam for $9.
God of War 2018 is currently $20 on PSN
I got Elden ring for $30 a few months back despite the fact that it’s still selling full price at 60.
If y’all are patient and wait they stopped making money on the game which means that they lower the cost to try to incentivize people to buy it.
Plus the first year of sale of a game is The Game’s most important release window, because companies generally will use the first year to decide how popular it was. If enough people refuse to buy the game at their original price point it will destroy their sales metric for the first year which will make it harder on the studio to justify to their parent company that it’s worth making another game, which means that they’re more incentivized to lower the base cost of the game within the first year of launch.
The rate of this is significantly slowed down if everyone is just like oh okay I guess it’s $100 now and then buys it anyway, have patience and hold out, especially a game like GTA 6 where they’re going to gain more money off microtransactions then people actually buying the game. Honestly GTA 6 probably should have just been sold as a free to play because they operate like one
The thing is, universal action like this, even on a fraction of the scale necessary to make a dent and ultimately change things, just doesn’t work because people will always bow to capitalism. They’ll kick the dirt and grumble under their breath as they pull out their wallets.
I know you’re saying just wait until it’s on sale, but the power of “keeping up with the joneses” is unfortunately a tried a true way of capitalism. When people are talking about the game in the first weeks and posting memes and making in-jokes, people that were trying to hold out will cave like a poorly managed mining operation.
Arrrr, alexa play despacito
This seems fine given the scale of the game and assuming it’s not bad, but it’s more worrying how it will lead to $100 shovelware five years from now. We already had Zelda at $70 (also worth it) so i could see a trend forming.
Yeah. Super Mario Bros. 3 cost $50 on launch. This inflation in game price is horrible!
I know prices are static, all those 90s games cost me $60 too. Part of the reason why i can’t blame them that much
But are the devs going to take in the extra money or the ceo publishers?
This just in: rich people want to get richer by charging more for the same product.
That’s why I pirste first and pay later when it’s on sale for $20
It might inspire me to continue not wasting my money, and buying everything on sale, if it’s worth it at all
For $100, it better have a strip club achievement that comes with a coupon for a free actual lap dance.
I wonder… Will Grand Theft Auto VI be the next “AAAA” game? Or have we ditched that term now since the utter failure of the first game that dared wear that title?
Im not spening $100 on a fucking video game. I dont care what game ,i don’t care what edition.
I still have a huge backlog of games released in the last 30 years, so I can really easy wait for every game to go into sale. There is absolutely no need or urge for me to buy any game on release.
It’ll inspire me to never buy it…until of course it goes on sale for $20 a year later.
This is the way.
I always wait for the prices to drop before buying any game, and never ever pre-buy them. The only exception is early access from indie devs, I’ll help them along if they show promise.
My jolly roger has been stuffed in a trunk somewhere for years, but looks like it might be coming out…
Nowadays it takes like a year or 2 for devs to fix all the bugs anyway. People who buy on day one or pre-order are suckers.
Not fucking happening. I wouldn’t pay £100 for any game.
If they do it, it would unfortunately still sell like hotcakes, being one of the most anticipated games of the past decade.
GTA players are genuinely dumbasses & just insane (but then so are most gamers)
GTA players haven’t spent any money since 2013
Well, someone’s paying half a billion in microtransactions in GTA Online every year.
Except the hundreds of millions they have spent year after year since then.
Lol, I’ll just wait until it’s on sale for 5 bucks. I’m patient enough.
I spent 20$ on the last game i played, and put over 140 hours into it. Just saying.
For $15 you can have endless hours or fun with Balatro
I wish I could, but it’s just not for me.
It wasn’t for me either at first but I gave it another shot and it got its hook into me.
What helped me was looking up a scoring/basic strategy guide that helped me figure out what super rookie mistakes I was making - this gave me a better eye for strategy when I was playing, which in turn translated to me enjoying the deck building aspect (which is a mechanic I know I enjoy).
The game is good, and really great to pick up and put down in busts if you don’t have a lot of time.
Hope you end up liking it eventually! I LOVE poker of all types, rogue likes, and deck builders so I thought this was a smash hit when I heard about it, but yeah, took a while to love it.
I keep seeing people comment that they really like it, I’m wondering if it’s completely inaccessible for someone who has never played poker?
You need zero poker experience to play it. It’s not a poker game at all, just uses poker hands for scoring, and if you don’t know them they’re all displayed if you hit esc.
GTA 6 Devs: look at our amazing story and open world!
YouTubers: I’ma drive an alligator up off this ramp, skip off the tallest building, and then land on a blimp!
Idk what an open world is for if not the alligator-building-blimp strat.
It will be funny if they make it free to play because they think maximizing player count will translate into more shark card money than box price + shark cards. Not that I think that is likely, just a funny possibility.
Heck make them $250, i’m not buying them even at $70.
If a game is over $30 it needs to be damn good to get me to buy it.
I think the last two games I bought at some high premium launch price were GTAV and Cyberpunk 2077.
That second one still stings. I played it longer than I should’ve probably because of the price, and I’ve not bothered with the DLC, even though people said it fixed the game. The price just left a bad taste in my mouth.
AAA developers will inspire me to not buy their shit.
Rockstar I would say is one of the few that can demand that price. I would pay $100.00 bucks cause Im going to play it for the next decade. We could be on GTA15 but rockstar dont roll that way.
Yeah, and we have inflation going on, prices are going to increase. That’s not a crazy price for a game you’ll enjoy for years - if it’s not broken when it’s released. If you pay that money and have to wait for months of patches you’d prob be a bit pissed off.
how incredibly american to phrase learning they can get away with fleecing people for $40 more as being “inspired”.
Why do they always say developers instead of publishers?
Because they want you to complain about the developers and not their corporate overlords.
And this is precicely why I mostly play indie titles made by individuals or small teams that are sold for under 10 bucks. Fuck this noise.
They can try, but it might not work. GTA VI has been in development for like more than a decade and will probably have loads of content. I could see $100 being justified. But not every other AAA game would be the same. Most wouldn’t in fact.
That said, video games have been $50-60 for the last 25 years. If they’d kept up with inflation, they’d be close to $110. So, I get it.
It’ll push a shit ton of new pirates, thus creating more headaches for them if $100 games become the new normal. It’s almost like they love shooting themselves in the feet with a shotgun and then blaming everyone else as to why they can’t walk like they used to.