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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Dear PlayStation Fans: Trickle-Down Economics Isn't Real!

Azzanation said:
SvennoJ said:

That's some nice mental gymnastics. MTs give you extra content, err no. MTs hold back content which you can re-enable by paying up small amounts of money or to skip the grind. How do you know you get nothing in return for the higher game price. It's not a luxury tax, it goes straight into the budget for the game, allowing a bigger more polished game than one that costs less. The difference between a 20, 40 and 60 dollar game is obvious, the difference between 60 and 70 is smaller but not nothing...

The PS3 and 360 era didn't cost them billions because of exchange rates and inflation. The PS3 was very expensive to produce because of adding blu-ray which had a big shortage in blue laser diodes at the time. Standalone blu-ray players cost over $1000 when the PS3 launched! The 360 lost billions because of RROD, pushing a faulty console out the door.

Today we're dealing with increasing hardware price, a situation that hasn't happened on this scale before. A perfect storm of diminishing returns, global pandemic, and further destabilizing markets from Russia's war mongering.

Anyway vote with your wallet, don't buy a new GPU. Stick with game pass, ignore Season passes, DLC and MTX. It's all overpriced compared to what we had 2 generations ago.


Thats absolutely nonsense. Not all MTs are the same. Some MTs actually release after the game was launched and some $60 games also offer a wealth of content while also offering MTs. Yes, you have games that offer bad MTs like where they purposely extend grinds or actually remove content from the games. However you are just generalizing the MT system.

I'll give you a perfect exactly. I've played WoW since 2005. Over the years Blizzard added some MTs like Store Mounts and Pets, stuff that wouldn't exist 15 years ago. They cost as much as the $10 price tag that current games are raised to, and id argue that WoW has more content than any game you can point out that cost $70 today. No game this gen has justified the extra $10. Nothing we haven't seen last gen or even the gen before that, so far. 

Also the PS3 and 360 was billions on hardware and they couldn't recoup that, Xbox might have, with its Subscription service, but no figures are out and we can only do our own maths on it.

PS5 and XSX are not systems in the same situation. This inflation crap is nothing Sony, Nintendo and Xbox cannot just eat up, as they are making more money than they ever have with Subs, software and overall sales. They are just making excuses to justify the price hike. They are multi-billion dollar profitable companies. They just want to please their share holder pockets and making you pay more for literally nothing extra.

You're defending MTs with a subscription based MMORPG ??? Charge $15 a month and then still charge more for a 'pet' ?
Playing WoW from 2005 would have cost you $2,710 dollars by now, initial game plus 6 month subscription plan since 2005.

Keep on believing you're getting nothing extra. Either you get less, or you pay more. No matter how much you would like companies to just eat up inflation, they won't. Either budgets get adjusted down, or revenue needs to be raised back to where it was somehow.

As I already showed before, Sony isn't making more money than ever, revenue declined. Inflation adjusted revenue is shrinking even more.

MS is up, but also short of inflation atm

Revenues up 6% to $3.74bn in Xbox's best non-holiday quarter to date
Content and services, including Xbox Game Pass, grew 4% to £3.02 billion, but fell short of expectations

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/revenues-up-6-percent-to-usd3-74bn-in-xboxs-best-non-holiday-quarter-to-date

Definitely not enough to cover a 70 billion dollar acquisition!



Around the Network
SvennoJ said:
Azzanation said:

Thats absolutely nonsense. Not all MTs are the same. Some MTs actually release after the game was launched and some $60 games also offer a wealth of content while also offering MTs. Yes, you have games that offer bad MTs like where they purposely extend grinds or actually remove content from the games. However you are just generalizing the MT system.

I'll give you a perfect exactly. I've played WoW since 2005. Over the years Blizzard added some MTs like Store Mounts and Pets, stuff that wouldn't exist 15 years ago. They cost as much as the $10 price tag that current games are raised to, and id argue that WoW has more content than any game you can point out that cost $70 today. No game this gen has justified the extra $10. Nothing we haven't seen last gen or even the gen before that, so far. 

Also the PS3 and 360 was billions on hardware and they couldn't recoup that, Xbox might have, with its Subscription service, but no figures are out and we can only do our own maths on it.

PS5 and XSX are not systems in the same situation. This inflation crap is nothing Sony, Nintendo and Xbox cannot just eat up, as they are making more money than they ever have with Subs, software and overall sales. They are just making excuses to justify the price hike. They are multi-billion dollar profitable companies. They just want to please their share holder pockets and making you pay more for literally nothing extra.

You're defending MTs with a subscription based MMORPG ??? Charge $15 a month and then still charge more for a 'pet' ?
Playing WoW from 2005 would have cost you $2,710 dollars by now, initial game plus 6 month subscription plan since 2005.

Keep on believing you're getting nothing extra. Either you get less, or you pay more. No matter how much you would like companies to just eat up inflation, they won't. Either budgets get adjusted down, or revenue needs to be raised back to where it was somehow.

As I already showed before, Sony isn't making more money than ever, revenue declined. Inflation adjusted revenue is shrinking even more.

MS is up, but also short of inflation atm

Revenues up 6% to $3.74bn in Xbox's best non-holiday quarter to date
Content and services, including Xbox Game Pass, grew 4% to £3.02 billion, but fell short of expectations

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/revenues-up-6-percent-to-usd3-74bn-in-xboxs-best-non-holiday-quarter-to-date

Definitely not enough to cover a 70 billion dollar acquisition!

Putting it short. For any company to invest money they need to reach a certain minimum on ROI. And if you already on a certain profit rate, if that rate is going to go down you are pressured to take measures to keep it (so if revenue goes down, cost need to go down to compensate - unless it is something temporary that you believe mitigations are enough to take without other compromises).



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

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari said:

New stuff can be added through DLC instead of MTX, so there is nothing MTX really add except of money rolling through pubs pocket.

Sure companies can eat the cost. But if you look for the sources that were already given in this thread, PS revenue and profit have dropped on the past year or two, so they aren't making more money they are making less, so now is it justified?

DLC and MTX are practically the same thing. You pay money and receive content. 

Sony are still making billions upon billions, it's as simple as what Jim Sterling always says about the AAA industry. "They don't just want to make money, they want to make all the money in the world" and listening to Corp PR to justify the price hikes is a bad move.

SvennoJ said:

You're defending MTs with a subscription based MMORPG ??? Charge $15 a month and then still charge more for a 'pet' ?
Playing WoW from 2005 would have cost you $2,710 dollars by now, initial game plus 6 month subscription plan since 2005.

Keep on believing you're getting nothing extra. Either you get less, or you pay more. No matter how much you would like companies to just eat up inflation, they won't. Either budgets get adjusted down, or revenue needs to be raised back to where it was somehow.

As I already showed before, Sony isn't making more money than ever, revenue declined. Inflation adjusted revenue is shrinking even more.

MS is up, but also short of inflation atm

Revenues up 6% to $3.74bn in Xbox's best non-holiday quarter to date
Content and services, including Xbox Game Pass, grew 4% to £3.02 billion, but fell short of expectations

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/revenues-up-6-percent-to-usd3-74bn-in-xboxs-best-non-holiday-quarter-to-date

Definitely not enough to cover a 70 billion dollar acquisition!

WoW being a subscription-based game is a separate issue altogether.

The point here is that not all MTs are bad. Example: Plenty of game have seasonal MTs, such as Halloween or Xmas items, stuff that wouldn't have been created at launch. We also have charity MTs where all profits go to a charity etc.

Just because a game has MTs does not justify a game that has zero MTs to raise its prices by $10. What game have you played this gen that justifies the $10 increase compared to any game you have played in the past?

These companies aren't going bankrupt and not profiting, they are still profiting, just not as much as last gen... yet. That extra $10 on games is nothing more than you filling greedy suit pockets. Same can be said for Sony increasing Hardware prices. They want you to pay off Sony's investment of Bungie quicker even though they can clearly afford it. This is how the Rich continue to get Richer and the Poor just accept whatever excuses they make.



Azzanation said:
DonFerrari said:

New stuff can be added through DLC instead of MTX, so there is nothing MTX really add except of money rolling through pubs pocket.

Sure companies can eat the cost. But if you look for the sources that were already given in this thread, PS revenue and profit have dropped on the past year or two, so they aren't making more money they are making less, so now is it justified?

DLC and MTX are practically the same thing. You pay money and receive content. 

Sony are still making billions upon billions, it's as simple as what Jim Sterling always says about the AAA industry. "They don't just want to make money, they want to make all the money in the world" and listening to Corp PR to justify the price hikes is a bad move.

SvennoJ said:

You're defending MTs with a subscription based MMORPG ??? Charge $15 a month and then still charge more for a 'pet' ?
Playing WoW from 2005 would have cost you $2,710 dollars by now, initial game plus 6 month subscription plan since 2005.

Keep on believing you're getting nothing extra. Either you get less, or you pay more. No matter how much you would like companies to just eat up inflation, they won't. Either budgets get adjusted down, or revenue needs to be raised back to where it was somehow.

As I already showed before, Sony isn't making more money than ever, revenue declined. Inflation adjusted revenue is shrinking even more.

MS is up, but also short of inflation atm

Revenues up 6% to $3.74bn in Xbox's best non-holiday quarter to date
Content and services, including Xbox Game Pass, grew 4% to £3.02 billion, but fell short of expectations

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/revenues-up-6-percent-to-usd3-74bn-in-xboxs-best-non-holiday-quarter-to-date

Definitely not enough to cover a 70 billion dollar acquisition!

WoW being a subscription-based game is a separate issue altogether.

The point here is that not all MTs are bad. Example: Plenty of game have seasonal MTs, such as Halloween or Xmas items, stuff that wouldn't have been created at launch. We also have charity MTs where all profits go to a charity etc.

Just because a game has MTs does not justify a game that has zero MTs to raise its prices by $10. What game have you played this gen that justifies the $10 increase compared to any game you have played in the past?

These companies aren't going bankrupt and not profiting, they are still profiting, just not as much as last gen... yet. That extra $10 on games is nothing more than you filling greedy suit pockets. Same can be said for Sony increasing Hardware prices. They want you to pay off Sony's investment of Bungie quicker even though they can clearly afford it. This is how the Rich continue to get Richer and the Poor just accept whatever excuses they make.

Sorry, but saying single pay DLC is nowhere similar to MTX that is repetitive by nature.

No one denied Sony is making billion in profits, but you claimed profits is rising, which was proved wrong but you are ignoring it.



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

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Azzanation said:
DonFerrari said:

New stuff can be added through DLC instead of MTX, so there is nothing MTX really add except of money rolling through pubs pocket.

Sure companies can eat the cost. But if you look for the sources that were already given in this thread, PS revenue and profit have dropped on the past year or two, so they aren't making more money they are making less, so now is it justified?

DLC and MTX are practically the same thing. You pay money and receive content. 

Sony are still making billions upon billions, it's as simple as what Jim Sterling always says about the AAA industry. "They don't just want to make money, they want to make all the money in the world" and listening to Corp PR to justify the price hikes is a bad move.

SvennoJ said:

You're defending MTs with a subscription based MMORPG ??? Charge $15 a month and then still charge more for a 'pet' ?
Playing WoW from 2005 would have cost you $2,710 dollars by now, initial game plus 6 month subscription plan since 2005.

Keep on believing you're getting nothing extra. Either you get less, or you pay more. No matter how much you would like companies to just eat up inflation, they won't. Either budgets get adjusted down, or revenue needs to be raised back to where it was somehow.

As I already showed before, Sony isn't making more money than ever, revenue declined. Inflation adjusted revenue is shrinking even more.

MS is up, but also short of inflation atm

Revenues up 6% to $3.74bn in Xbox's best non-holiday quarter to date
Content and services, including Xbox Game Pass, grew 4% to £3.02 billion, but fell short of expectations

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/revenues-up-6-percent-to-usd3-74bn-in-xboxs-best-non-holiday-quarter-to-date

Definitely not enough to cover a 70 billion dollar acquisition!

WoW being a subscription-based game is a separate issue altogether.

The point here is that not all MTs are bad. Example: Plenty of game have seasonal MTs, such as Halloween or Xmas items, stuff that wouldn't have been created at launch. We also have charity MTs where all profits go to a charity etc.

Just because a game has MTs does not justify a game that has zero MTs to raise its prices by $10. What game have you played this gen that justifies the $10 increase compared to any game you have played in the past?

These companies aren't going bankrupt and not profiting, they are still profiting, just not as much as last gen... yet. That extra $10 on games is nothing more than you filling greedy suit pockets. Same can be said for Sony increasing Hardware prices. They want you to pay off Sony's investment of Bungie quicker even though they can clearly afford it. This is how the Rich continue to get Richer and the Poor just accept whatever excuses they make.

Oh God no.  DLC in games like Mario Kart 8 and Souls Series isn't absolutely not the same as the nickel/dime pay to win crap.  Getting tons of new courses in Mario Kart 8 isn't the same as Tales being a grind fest for hours...  unless one pays extra for more experience.  One is simply new content, the other is broken games that require additional money to be good.  Imagine BotW 2 selling heart containers instead of the player finding them in the game, that is MTX.



Around the Network
Azzanation said:
SvennoJ said:

You're defending MTs with a subscription based MMORPG ??? Charge $15 a month and then still charge more for a 'pet' ?
Playing WoW from 2005 would have cost you $2,710 dollars by now, initial game plus 6 month subscription plan since 2005.

Keep on believing you're getting nothing extra. Either you get less, or you pay more. No matter how much you would like companies to just eat up inflation, they won't. Either budgets get adjusted down, or revenue needs to be raised back to where it was somehow.

As I already showed before, Sony isn't making more money than ever, revenue declined. Inflation adjusted revenue is shrinking even more.

MS is up, but also short of inflation atm

Revenues up 6% to $3.74bn in Xbox's best non-holiday quarter to date
Content and services, including Xbox Game Pass, grew 4% to £3.02 billion, but fell short of expectations

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/revenues-up-6-percent-to-usd3-74bn-in-xboxs-best-non-holiday-quarter-to-date

Definitely not enough to cover a 70 billion dollar acquisition!

WoW being a subscription-based game is a separate issue altogether.

The point here is that not all MTs are bad. Example: Plenty of game have seasonal MTs, such as Halloween or Xmas items, stuff that wouldn't have been created at launch. We also have charity MTs where all profits go to a charity etc.

Just because a game has MTs does not justify a game that has zero MTs to raise its prices by $10. What game have you played this gen that justifies the $10 increase compared to any game you have played in the past?

These companies aren't going bankrupt and not profiting, they are still profiting, just not as much as last gen... yet. That extra $10 on games is nothing more than you filling greedy suit pockets. Same can be said for Sony increasing Hardware prices. They want you to pay off Sony's investment of Bungie quicker even though they can clearly afford it. This is how the Rich continue to get Richer and the Poor just accept whatever excuses they make.

Oh that's easy. Horizon FW, worth more than $70 imo. Absolutely amazing production values, quality from start to finish. It did have issues with the 60 fps mode but they did rewrite their upscaling methods and fixed it in the end. Story, characters, world building, all perfection for the 100+ hours I played it.

Ratchet and Clank was also more than worth the admission price, not a single glitch encountered. Polished to perfection.

Both games a big step up from their previous gen outings.

GT7 however, a lazy cash grab that continues to be a disappointment. It looks great though. It's still better than Halo Infinite, but not by much. PD and 343 really need to be held to account at this point. FS2020 can be thrown on that pile as well at this point. Sure they add a lot of content all the time, but refuse to fix the basics and actually make it a worthy flight sim.

The rich continue to get richer by allowing giant mergers stifling competition. Not by adjusting prices to reflect the reality of exchange rates and inflation. Comparing Sony's 3.6 billion acquisition of Bungie to 69 Billion acquisition of an entire segment of the industry, lol.



DonFerrari said:

Sorry, but saying single pay DLC is nowhere similar to MTX that is repetitive by nature.

No one denied Sony is making billion in profits, but you claimed profits is rising, which was proved wrong but you are ignoring it.

What's the difference between buying a Character in Smash Bros and buying a car in GT7?

Chrkeller said:

Oh God no.  DLC in games like Mario Kart 8 and Souls Series isn't absolutely not the same as the nickel/dime pay to win crap.  Getting tons of new courses in Mario Kart 8 isn't the same as Tales being a grind fest for hours...  unless one pays extra for more experience.  One is simply new content, the other is broken games that require additional money to be good.  Imagine BotW 2 selling heart containers instead of the player finding them in the game, that is MTX.

What's the difference between buying a Character in Smash Bros and buying a car in GT7?

SvennoJ said:

Oh that's easy. Horizon FW, worth more than $70 imo. Absolutely amazing production values, quality from start to finish. It did have issues with the 60 fps mode but they did rewrite their upscaling methods and fixed it in the end. Story, characters, world building, all perfection for the 100+ hours I played it.

Ratchet and Clank was also more than worth the admission price, not a single glitch encountered. Polished to perfection.

Both games a big step up from their previous gen outings.

GT7 however, a lazy cash grab that continues to be a disappointment. It looks great though. It's still better than Halo Infinite, but not by much. PD and 343 really need to be held to account at this point. FS2020 can be thrown on that pile as well at this point. Sure they add a lot of content all the time, but refuse to fix the basics and actually make it a worthy flight sim.

The rich continue to get richer by allowing giant mergers stifling competition. Not by adjusting prices to reflect the reality of exchange rates and inflation. Comparing Sony's 3.6 billion acquisition of Bungie to 69 Billion acquisition of an entire segment of the industry, lol.

You believe the games you mention deserved to be sold at an extra $10 over their own predecessor? Not one of those games mentioned are considered better than their previous games.. Unless Visuals is all you are looking for. 

With your very own logic, the next gen after this one, games should be raised again by another $10 based on visual improvements.

This game below is NOT worth $61.64 US let alone $70 US. You continue to support price hikes, we will continue to see ridicules prices on all games.

Crazy that you bring up MS's purchase of Acti/Blizzard. Ironic that MS spent $69B and have zero reason to raise their hardware prices yet Sony's small purchase of $3.6B of Bungie, we are seeing $50 Price hikes of PS5s around the world and Sony being one of the front runners of $70 games. Interesting right.

I agree to disagree.

Last edited by Azzanation - 2 days ago

Azzanation said:
DonFerrari said:

Sorry, but saying single pay DLC is nowhere similar to MTX that is repetitive by nature.

No one denied Sony is making billion in profits, but you claimed profits is rising, which was proved wrong but you are ignoring it.

What's the difference between buying a Character in Smash Bros and buying a car in GT7?

Chrkeller said:

Oh God no.  DLC in games like Mario Kart 8 and Souls Series isn't absolutely not the same as the nickel/dime pay to win crap.  Getting tons of new courses in Mario Kart 8 isn't the same as Tales being a grind fest for hours...  unless one pays extra for more experience.  One is simply new content, the other is broken games that require additional money to be good.  Imagine BotW 2 selling heart containers instead of the player finding them in the game, that is MTX.

What's the difference between buying a Character in Smash Bros and buying a car in GT7?

SvennoJ said:

Oh that's easy. Horizon FW, worth more than $70 imo. Absolutely amazing production values, quality from start to finish. It did have issues with the 60 fps mode but they did rewrite their upscaling methods and fixed it in the end. Story, characters, world building, all perfection for the 100+ hours I played it.

Ratchet and Clank was also more than worth the admission price, not a single glitch encountered. Polished to perfection.

Both games a big step up from their previous gen outings.

GT7 however, a lazy cash grab that continues to be a disappointment. It looks great though. It's still better than Halo Infinite, but not by much. PD and 343 really need to be held to account at this point. FS2020 can be thrown on that pile as well at this point. Sure they add a lot of content all the time, but refuse to fix the basics and actually make it a worthy flight sim.

The rich continue to get richer by allowing giant mergers stifling competition. Not by adjusting prices to reflect the reality of exchange rates and inflation. Comparing Sony's 3.6 billion acquisition of Bungie to 69 Billion acquisition of an entire segment of the industry, lol.

You believe the games you mention deserved to be sold at an extra $10 over their own predecessor? Not one of those games mentioned are considered better than their previous games.. Unless Visuals is all you are looking for. 

With your very own logic, the next gen after this one, games should be raised again by another $10 based on visual improvements.

This game below is NOT worth $61.64 US let alone $70 US. You continue to support price hikes, we will continue to see ridicules prices on all games.

Crazy that you bring up MS's purchase of Acti/Blizzard. Ironic that MS spent $69B and have zero reason to raise their hardware prices yet Sony's small purchase of $3.6B of Bungie, we are seeing $50 Price hikes of PS5s around the world and Sony being one of the front runners of $70 games. Interesting right.

I agree to disagree.

No idea, I don't own GT7 and thus have zero idea how the game is structured.  I also haven't bought anything for Smash.  But if your question is what is the difference between between DLC and MTX, pay structure and intent.  

DLC: Intent is to expand the game post completion and is a one time price.  In the case of Dark Souls 3, DLC includes new areas, new bosses, new spells, new weapons, new armour, new items and new NPCs.  All in one package.

MTX: stands for "micro" transaction, meaning small.  The intent is to constantly sell little units of the game for small dollar mounts.  The reason for this is based on many consumers not viewing a $1 as much money, thus not thinking about how he/she has paid $1 to upgrade their game 100 times over 2 years.  The intent of MTX is to get consumers to spend large sums of money over time in small increments. 

Staying with the Dark Souls 3 example.  It was a full package at $15, thus DLC.  If it were MTX they would have taken the 40 different new features and sold them at $2 a piece, hoping the consumer over a year would drop $80 on their $60 game.      

Perhaps the poster child is Dead or Alive 5 (I think).  DoA used to be my favorite fighting game but now I won't touch it.  I think all the extra content makes the game over $1,000.  That is just insane.  Minecraft is equally as bad, especially since it is aimed at kids.  



Azzanation said:
DonFerrari said:

Sorry, but saying single pay DLC is nowhere similar to MTX that is repetitive by nature.

No one denied Sony is making billion in profits, but you claimed profits is rising, which was proved wrong but you are ignoring it.

What's the difference between buying a Character in Smash Bros and buying a car in GT7?

Chrkeller said:

Oh God no.  DLC in games like Mario Kart 8 and Souls Series isn't absolutely not the same as the nickel/dime pay to win crap.  Getting tons of new courses in Mario Kart 8 isn't the same as Tales being a grind fest for hours...  unless one pays extra for more experience.  One is simply new content, the other is broken games that require additional money to be good.  Imagine BotW 2 selling heart containers instead of the player finding them in the game, that is MTX.

What's the difference between buying a Character in Smash Bros and buying a car in GT7?

SvennoJ said:

Oh that's easy. Horizon FW, worth more than $70 imo. Absolutely amazing production values, quality from start to finish. It did have issues with the 60 fps mode but they did rewrite their upscaling methods and fixed it in the end. Story, characters, world building, all perfection for the 100+ hours I played it.

Ratchet and Clank was also more than worth the admission price, not a single glitch encountered. Polished to perfection.

Both games a big step up from their previous gen outings.

GT7 however, a lazy cash grab that continues to be a disappointment. It looks great though. It's still better than Halo Infinite, but not by much. PD and 343 really need to be held to account at this point. FS2020 can be thrown on that pile as well at this point. Sure they add a lot of content all the time, but refuse to fix the basics and actually make it a worthy flight sim.

The rich continue to get richer by allowing giant mergers stifling competition. Not by adjusting prices to reflect the reality of exchange rates and inflation. Comparing Sony's 3.6 billion acquisition of Bungie to 69 Billion acquisition of an entire segment of the industry, lol.

You believe the games you mention deserved to be sold at an extra $10 over their own predecessor? Not one of those games mentioned are considered better than their previous games.. Unless Visuals is all you are looking for. 

With your very own logic, the next gen after this one, games should be raised again by another $10 based on visual improvements.

This game below is NOT worth $61.64 US let alone $70 US. You continue to support price hikes, we will continue to see ridicules prices on all games.

Crazy that you bring up MS's purchase of Acti/Blizzard. Ironic that MS spent $69B and have zero reason to raise their hardware prices yet Sony's small purchase of $3.6B of Bungie, we are seeing $50 Price hikes of PS5s around the world and Sony being one of the front runners of $70 games. Interesting right.

I agree to disagree.

As far as I know you don't buy cars in GT with MTX or DLC. All the cars are available in the game with free DLC. What you can do is buy credits with MTX and use it to buy cars if you want. Foreign concept I'm sure it is hard to understand.



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

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Chrkeller said:

No idea, I don't own GT7 and thus have zero idea how the game is structured.  I also haven't bought anything for Smash.  But if your question is what is the difference between between DLC and MTX, pay structure and intent.  

DLC: Intent is to expand the game post completion and is a one time price.  In the case of Dark Souls 3, DLC includes new areas, new bosses, new spells, new weapons, new armour, new items and new NPCs.  All in one package.

MTX: stands for "micro" transaction, meaning small.  The intent is to constantly sell little units of the game for small dollar mounts.  The reason for this is based on many consumers not viewing a $1 as much money, thus not thinking about how he/she has paid $1 to upgrade their game 100 times over 2 years.  The intent of MTX is to get consumers to spend large sums of money over time in small increments. 

Staying with the Dark Souls 3 example.  It was a full package at $15, thus DLC.  If it were MTX they would have taken the 40 different new features and sold them at $2 a piece, hoping the consumer over a year would drop $80 on their $60 game.      

Perhaps the poster child is Dead or Alive 5 (I think).  DoA used to be my favorite fighting game but now I won't touch it.  I think all the extra content makes the game over $1,000.  That is just insane.  Minecraft is equally as bad, especially since it is aimed at kids.  

MTs also offer content, such as seasonal rewards like in WoW, gaining mounts and Pets or in Sea of Thieves which sometimes offer Charity MTs for those that want a unique skin and donates all causes to charity etc. 

Not all games do it evil. Overwatch (1) Lootbox system was done really well and wasn't predatory until EA took the idea and Activision etc. 

There is nothing wrong with offering MTs in a game aslong as it's done right. DLC can also be sold as small portions like selling a character in DOA. Destiny sold DLC which chopped up the campaign in 3 different parts. There is Good and Bad DLC and MTs.

DonFerrari said:

As far as I know you don't buy cars in GT with MTX or DLC. All the cars are available in the game with free DLC. What you can do is buy credits with MTX and use it to buy cars if you want. Foreign concept I'm sure it is hard to understand.

And what do you think those credits are? MTX. GT7 sold as a full price game and also offered MTX and Sony want to continue to push the $70 narrative while offering some of the worse MTX this gen and destroying GT7 at the same time. But Sony want that extra $10 per game purchase moving forward. Foreign concept I know.