They're already charging way more than that when you count all the DLC.
ampersandrew@lemmy.world
on 30 Jul 03:58
nextcollapse
The base price increase would still raise the total with DLC. Not including the DLC is still worth talking about, since there are plenty of ways to enjoy a game without it.
I don’t understand looking at Sims 4 as an example. The game has had progressive additions for a long time; it’s basically a live service game, and now comes free.
It’s rare for anyone to feel they want all the DLC - usually it would just be a few things they want and have fun with.
LettyWhiterock@lemmy.world
on 31 Jul 16:02
nextcollapse
I actually do want all the DLC in a game like that. The fact it’s prohibitively expensive just means I’ve never actually bought any and stick to the Sims 3, a game where I do have all the expansions.
True, but iirc sims 4 also released in a more cut-down state than sims 3 - in fact it was one of the pioneers of “paradoxification” of games and victim of other bullshit that EA was trying to pull, just like with simcity.
Anyway, my point was that with EA the up-front price they charge is not awfully relevant, because you have lootboxes, p2w, mtx, gambling, dlc of varying dollar value etc. so you might end up paying a crapload, live service or not.
well DLC has always cost money on top of the base game so i’m not sure what your point is.
edit:
you’re ignoring that if you buy all DLCs you get much more content compared to old $60 games. If you want to look at this fairly you need to come up with some way of quantifying the content involved which is not easy to do.
I do agree that some DLCs are clearly designed as money grabs (like most premium/gold launch editions). But i disagree with lumping all DLC into that category, especially bigger expansions that release a year or more later.
Lemminary@lemmy.world
on 30 Jul 07:47
nextcollapse
That the game is broken up into parts to charge more instead of, you know, making the game feature-rich in the first place.
The ones by big publishers? No, they’re feature complete at best for the sake of the game loop but sell the rest in overpriced DLCs. The base game is the hook, that’s why Epic keeps giving some away for free or are sold at a heavy discount on Steam. You only need to scroll down to notice.
agree to disagree i guess. i don’t find base games to be any less feature complete than they ever were. they fact that DLCs are sold on top of the base game does not change that.
I don’t think one ever came out. Microsoft closed their studio to make them.
RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world
on 30 Jul 16:29
collapse
Skull & Bones was the first AAAA game to release. Ubisoft was very proud to announce this.
absquatulate@lemmy.world
on 30 Jul 04:17
nextcollapse
Love how fast they all dial back after seeing the reaction on nintendo’s 80$ approach. But seriously EA I don’t care for those extra 10 bucks upfronf if your games are still the mtx and gambling infested shit they currently are.
actionjbone@sh.itjust.works
on 30 Jul 05:00
nextcollapse
A broken asshole is still right twice a day.
Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 30 Jul 07:51
collapse
I’m afraid most proctologists would disagree with you on that…
RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world
on 30 Jul 08:18
nextcollapse
No $80, theyre going to stick with $70.
Fools stupid people into thinking theyre being generous. Same tactic gas companies keep doing in California to raise gas prices. Price goes up almost $2 per gallon, and then back down only $1.
At least with video games we don’t have to buy them to live.
threaded - newest
They're already charging way more than that when you count all the DLC.
The base price increase would still raise the total with DLC. Not including the DLC is still worth talking about, since there are plenty of ways to enjoy a game without it.
Ya like being a patient gamer haha.
I have such a backlog of stuff I wanna play that I just wishlist it and when the price feels right down the line I’ll buy it for the backlog.
Or be risky and go indie. I got Valheim long ago, prices always go up.
Yeah, wasn’t sims 4 with all dlc like 1 grand just a couple yeara ago?
Some of those were not even worth buying. All the Stuff packs seem like a scam.
I don’t understand looking at Sims 4 as an example. The game has had progressive additions for a long time; it’s basically a live service game, and now comes free.
It’s rare for anyone to feel they want all the DLC - usually it would just be a few things they want and have fun with.
I actually do want all the DLC in a game like that. The fact it’s prohibitively expensive just means I’ve never actually bought any and stick to the Sims 3, a game where I do have all the expansions.
True, but iirc sims 4 also released in a more cut-down state than sims 3 - in fact it was one of the pioneers of “paradoxification” of games and victim of other bullshit that EA was trying to pull, just like with simcity.
Anyway, my point was that with EA the up-front price they charge is not awfully relevant, because you have lootboxes, p2w, mtx, gambling, dlc of varying dollar value etc. so you might end up paying a crapload, live service or not.
well DLC has always cost money on top of the base game so i’m not sure what your point is.
edit:
you’re ignoring that if you buy all DLCs you get much more content compared to old $60 games. If you want to look at this fairly you need to come up with some way of quantifying the content involved which is not easy to do.
I do agree that some DLCs are clearly designed as money grabs (like most premium/gold launch editions). But i disagree with lumping all DLC into that category, especially bigger expansions that release a year or more later.
That the game is broken up into parts to charge more instead of, you know, making the game feature-rich in the first place.
do you not agree most games ARE feature rich in the first place? I mean compared to old $60 games.
The ones by big publishers? No, they’re feature complete at best for the sake of the game loop but sell the rest in overpriced DLCs. The base game is the hook, that’s why Epic keeps giving some away for free or are sold at a heavy discount on Steam. You only need to scroll down to notice.
agree to disagree i guess. i don’t find base games to be any less feature complete than they ever were. they fact that DLCs are sold on top of the base game does not change that.
The point is that AAA games already cost well above $80.
which is a disingenuous way of framing the issue. if you’re including DLC you’re also getting much more content than old $60 games.
Did we stop making AAAA games?
Yep, we are on to AAAAA games now.
Screaming at the state of mainstream gaming? Yeah, that checks out.
I don’t think one ever came out. Microsoft closed their studio to make them.
Skull & Bones was the first AAAA game to release. Ubisoft was very proud to announce this.
Love how fast they all dial back after seeing the reaction on nintendo’s 80$ approach. But seriously EA I don’t care for those extra 10 bucks upfronf if your games are still the mtx and gambling infested shit they currently are.
A broken asshole is still right twice a day.
I’m afraid most proctologists would disagree with you on that…
No $80, theyre going to stick with $70.
Fools stupid people into thinking theyre being generous. Same tactic gas companies keep doing in California to raise gas prices. Price goes up almost $2 per gallon, and then back down only $1.
At least with video games we don’t have to buy them to live.
Speak for yourself
Fuck EA. If they dont offer appropriate support, I will never buy any games from them again.
Multimillion Dollar company but 0,0% real, human support. If you can’t log into your account, you’re fucked. Your account is gone.
Not enough sales data from Nintendo’s little experiment yet. Don’t hold your breath, ‘this stage’ won’t last.
*Sony’s little experiment, wild that people keep forgetting that TLoU Part 1 did this first.
For a remaster no less.
I did not forget this, I never knew about it to begin with :D
No! $80 for now!