By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

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 5.77%
 
I'm ok with it 26 25.00%
 
Don't like it, but will tolerate it 30 28.85%
 
Completely against it, won't tolerate it 42 40.38%
 
Total:104
JWeinCom said:
Inflation is a thing that happens. Prices have gone up on most products, so I don't know why games should be any different. As always though, people can vote with their wallets.

Exactly. $49.99 was the standard for most console video games from the NES through the sixth generation. I get that Wii games were still $49.99, but that's because the hardware was far weaker than the other seventh-gen consoles.

And with the replacement cycle of Xbox and PlayStation taking longer than it used to be, it makes sense that we would only go 2 generations with $59.99 as the standard. After all, the Xbox 360 launched about 15 years ago at this point.

I don't like the price going up, but it's inevitable. 



Lifetime Sales Predictions 

Switch: 151 million (was 73, then 96, then 113 million, then 125 million, then 144 million)

PS5: 115 million (was 105 million) Xbox Series S/X: 57 million (was 60 million, then 67 million)

PS4: 120 mil (was 100 then 130 million, then 122 million) Xbox One: 51 mil (was 50 then 55 mil)

3DS: 75.5 mil (was 73, then 77 million)

"Let go your earthly tether, enter the void, empty and become wind." - Guru Laghima

Around the Network



Ok with it. That’s the cost of inflation and really $10 more is not that bad all things considered. Game development costs are substantially more than they were - but just as long as they keep producing great quality games I can live with this.



Inflation alone makes this unavoidable, im surprised we werent talking about it a couple of months ago when it was a looming event.

I dont know if I care for it, because I dont usually buy games on release date since I dont feel they are worth it - for the most part. I dont feel Trials of Mana was worth the $50 I payed for it and I dont feel the new Shantae game is worth $30, so I wont pay for it. Sometimes price tags take a backseat to value. That said, value is subjective and I can think of a couple of games I will absolutely want on release date and will pay $70 for it if must. So all in all I can quite say this will change they way I decide which games I buy or how many games I buy.



JWeinCom said:
Inflation is a thing that happens. Prices have gone up on most products, so I don't know why games should be any different. As always though, people can vote with their wallets.

That along with the fact that production budgets have gone up significantly in the last 15 years. If it costs more to make something than its obviously going to cost more to buy it.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Around the Network
Barozi said:
javi741 said:

Games this gen are also selling far better now then they were in the year 2000. Many franchises at the time like GTA were extremely young and didn't have an established brand or foothold in the market yet as it takes years for games to become extremely popular. The gaming industry has also grown exponentially since the PS2 era and will only keep growing.

GTA sales this gen obviously are killing the sales of the older GTA games right now, the COD franchise is more popular than ever, even Nintendo games are selling the best in their respective franchises on the Switch. Many other franchises like Uncharted, Witcher 3, NBA 2K and more are selling better than ever this gen, so that kinda makes up for the higher development cost of games over time, also there's DLC, Microt-transactions, digital distribution that cuts out the middle man, making more money for these developers.

"Games this gen are also selling far better now then they were in the year 2000."

Nowadays games are also far more expensive to develop than games in the 2000s. PS2 games only had a budget of a few millions. You'd need at least a million or two in extra sales to break even on 7th and 8th gen games. For EVERY SINGLE game.

"COD franchise is more popular than ever"

Where did you get that from? The best selling CoD games were from the PS3/360 era.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/321374/global-all-time-unit-sales-call-of-duty-games/
NPD source: https://www.shacknews.com/article/115860/call-of-duty-games-were-10-of-the-top-15-best-selling-titles-of-the-decade

"Many other franchises like Uncharted, Witcher 3, NBA 2K and more are selling better than ever this gen"

I can list several franchises that are in decline: Just Dance, Gran Turismo, Battlefield etc. What's your point again?

"The gaming industry has also grown exponentially since the PS2 era and will only keep growing."

The gaming industry as a whole - yes, but the console market has NOT grown exponentially.

50% of the revenue comes from smartphone-, tablet- and casual browser games. How does that help the devs and publishers of console and PC games again?

"also there's DLC, Microt-transactions, digital distribution that cuts out the middle man, making more money for these developers."

Which was exactly the reason why the $10 raise didn't come earlier.

1.I'm acknowledging that game development has risen significantly since the PS2 era, my point is that the increased AAA game sales,DLC, and micro-transactions more than makes up for these rising development costs.

2.Modern Warfare 2019 is on pace to become the bestselling game of the series, plus Activison also gets revenue from Micro-transactions in the game.

3.The amount of franchises growing this gen is far exceeding the ones on a decline. Plus even if they're on a decline, they're still more than profitable for these developers. And why in the world does a relatively small budget game Just dance needs a price hike? The game's budget is barely increasing if at all since it doesn't have to deal with creating worlds or environments, using Just Dance's decline is an extremely bad example.

4.Console gaming is growing, total console sales been growing gen after gen and also console revenue. Market share revenue for consoles does not show it growing because it's slighty losing market share to the other game platforms since the others are growing faster. It doesn't mean that console gaming is not growing, it just means console gaming isn't growing quite as fast as the others.

5.Why should it come now if developers are doing more than fine with DLC & Micro-transactions?



UK high street prices usually remove some of that value, Games are meant to be £55 here now (PS3 era it was £50) but most can be got for £45 or lower if you buy physical. The issue comes from online stores where there's no competition. They fix prices really, New games will be £60, no other option. You get the HD only PS5, expect to pay more for games, even though there's no packaging, shipping costs or resale value. :P



Hmm, pie.

Bobby Kotick's 26th Ferrari is not gonna pay itself...



B O I

V-r0cK said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

Do you think this is only Take 2 doing the price increase or do you think it is industry wide?  The most influential company industry wide is Sony.  If this price becomes the standard on their system then they are definitely responsible.  It's their system.  They are responsible for what happens on their system.

As for the bolded, so you're saying that Sony is responsible for pricing of all Xbox and Nintendo games too? haha this has got to be a joke.  Do you think Apple dictates the pricing of all android phones too?

Each publisher is responsible for their own pricing of games (ie. like how some remaster are cheaper than new games at launched full price etc.) and like how Nintendo can keep their games full priced for years.  Sony hasn't even released the pricing of their games yet you're pointing at them for this increase. For all we know Sony can keep their game prices at $59 and will make 2K look bad as a money grubbing company for jacking up their price. 

If anything 2K being the first to release the price of $69 for next gen games have opened up doors for other publishers to allow their games to also be released at $69 as well.

But whatever you're thinking, this isn't Sony's fault.  Sony only has pricing control over it's own system and it's own games.

Actually what I was originally saying is that PS5 is repeating the same mistakes as the PS3 including an increased cost in games.  But you may be right.  Maybe it's not Sony's fault.  When the PS5 ends up selling like the PS3, then they can always blame their third party partners.



I just checked in my allknowing excel file, which were the most expensive games I ever bought... there weren't very many for more than €50:

And most of them included some valuable physical extras (PSVR AIM-controller, a €40 PS3-headset, a solid Big Daddy statue, a huge ME:C box with an awesome Faith-statue, a pretty steelbook or a guitar controller:

Others were more expensive because of import costs of uncut versions (the German versions of Hellgate: London, Resident Evil 4 and CoD: Modern Warfare were cut)... and yeah: buying Hellgate: London wasn't my best decision.

My most expensive digital version ever is Half-Life: Alyx, followed by "The Orange Box" (including HL2, Portal + TF2).

Any other digital version I ever bought was under €30:

I also found my oldest receipt of a video game: in June 1992 I bought Monkey Island 2 for 70 DM (~36 Euros), my first pre-order game ever. It was "day one" for the Amiga version, the PC version was released half a year earlier:

A few years ago, Ron Gilbert signed my MI2-box, and the code-wheels of MI1 + MI2:

Last edited by Conina - on 04 July 2020