Forums - Gaming Discussion - Thoughts on 69.99$ games for Next Gen Consoles?

Thoughts on 70$ games next gen?

I'm happy with it, more money=better value 6 5.83%
 
I'm ok with it 26 25.24%
 
Don't like it, but will tolerate it 29 28.16%
 
Completely against it, won't tolerate it 42 40.78%
 
Total:103
The_Liquid_Laser said:

Again.  Maybe you are right.  Maybe none of this is Sony's fault.  The PS3 lost Sony tons of money, but at least it wasn't their fault, right?  The PS5 can lose tons of money too, but hey, at least it won't be their fault.  Game prices go up and it's never Sony's fault, but they still bear all of the consequences.  

I'm not sure why you think it matters so much whose fault it is.  If their system fails again like the PS3, then blaming other companies won't magically make them succeed.

lol you're trolling me right?? 

I think you desperately need a lesson in how business and economics work.

But ya im done talking to you.  Like I said before, nothing you say makes any sense with no proof that game price increase is Sony's fault.  

You gotta be pretty 'special' to think Sony has control over the game prices for the entire video game industry *facepalm



Around the Network
V-r0cK said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

Again.  Maybe you are right.  Maybe none of this is Sony's fault.  The PS3 lost Sony tons of money, but at least it wasn't their fault, right?  The PS5 can lose tons of money too, but hey, at least it won't be their fault.  Game prices go up and it's never Sony's fault, but they still bear all of the consequences.  

I'm not sure why you think it matters so much whose fault it is.  If their system fails again like the PS3, then blaming other companies won't magically make them succeed.

lol you're trolling me right?? 

I think you desperately need a lesson in how business and economics work.

But ya im done talking to you.  Like I said before, nothing you say makes any sense with no proof that game price increase is Sony's fault.  

You gotta be pretty 'special' to think Sony has control over the game prices for the entire video game industry *facepalm

Sony must be the one that mandate Nintendo doesn't drop the price of their games sometimes for over 5 years.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

The_Liquid_Laser said:
V-r0cK said:

The Xbox360 came a year before the PS3 and games were already priced before the PS3 was released so how was the increased cost in games the PS3's fault?

"When the PS5 ends up selling like the PS3"?

Nothing you say makes any sense and your last sentence seems like you're already dead set on believing that the PS5 somehow is following in the same footsteps as the PS3 with absolutely no shred of proof.

Again.  Maybe you are right.  Maybe none of this is Sony's fault.  The PS3 lost Sony tons of money, but at least it wasn't their fault, right?  The PS5 can lose tons of money too, but hey, at least it won't be their fault.  Game prices go up and it's never Sony's fault, but they still bear all of the consequences.  

I'm not sure why you think it matters so much whose fault it is.  If their system fails again like the PS3, then blaming other companies won't magically make them succeed.

Well you thought it mattered enough to bring up whose fault it is.

It's fine to defend your argument, but when the majority of your post isn't arguing the point, but coming up with new things to bicker about, then that's not ok.



I think if it were to prevent mandatory practices like day one DLC and microtransactions it would be OK. But since this is not going to be the case... If we consider that nowadays the "finished" version of a game can lack important story chapters (for single player mode) and a Season Pass can cost up to 40 dollars, we are virtually paying 100 usd for a game.

And for multi-player, even worse than selling X weapon for Y amount of in game mine that converts to 10 usd and give the player an unfair advantage against others, it's the loot boxes that are a gamble mechanism.



How can they have the balls to increase the prices of games when the current pricing is already unfair? Look at the PS Store prices. Digital games should be way cheaper for obvious reasons, yet they are exactly the same. They don't want to lower the prices in order to make even more money out of them. And now they want to increase the price even more on both physical and digital? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

I find incredibly funny how people are trying to defend this bullshit with inflation, increased developement costs etc... when the truth is that gaming companies never play fair with customers and they always try to milk us in every way they can invent and imagine. This right here is nothing new: it's just them seeing if they can tighten the rope a little more. But I think this is the drop that fills the glass.



Around the Network

As long as Ninty doesn't start charging $70 for 720p titles, I'm cool. Already dealt with the steep N64 price tags back in the day. I understand that the cost of making games has increased greatly since the early 00s.



Retro Tech Select - My Youtube channel. Covers throwback consumer electronics with a focus on "vid'ya games."

Latest Video: Make Your Switch Games Sharper! Improve Picture Quality without Hacks or Mods – Bit Sized, Episode 4

StuOhQ said:
As long as Ninty doesn't start charging $70 for 720p titles, I'm cool. Already dealt with the steep N64 price tags back in the day. I understand that the cost of making games has increased greatly since the early 00s.

The difference is the cartridge itself. Manufacturing them and putting games inside them were more expensive than on cd. 



Prices here already scalated from 200 to 280.

It should raised alot again if that happens.

Probably to 350.



BraLoD said:

Prices here already scalated from 200 to 280.

It should raised alot again if that happens.

Probably to 350.

Dolar exchange ratio have been a bitch.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

All the games i buy are worth more than retail price. If a AAA is great, i'd pay easily up to a $100 and get my moneys worth. Some games are so good the devs deserve more money, more money to them/publishers might mean more games.