If it were a "perfect" game with a lot of content and I wouldn't have anything other fun to play instead... why not?

But in reality I have sooooo many great games still in my backlog, GTA6 is probably in the bargain bin when I have time for it.

No. It's just a game and I'm not THAT stupid.

But you'd be voting against your own self interests when other publishers raise their prices to that degree. 

Yeah, I get ya. I'd pay a 1000 to be able to play The Witcher 3 if it was the sole copy left of the game but I regret paying full price for Metaphor refantazio, that game with it's ps3 graphics, smaller budget, smaller team, cheaply produced etc does not feel like a 70 euro game, it feels like it should be in the Robocop Rogue city AA type pricing at 50 euro. 

Yep, I agree with your last sentence, they wouldn't make up the difference of the people who wait for sales... but, they could get the whales first and then drop the price to 70 and people who wait for sales might end up becoming what we consider day one pricing to be. 

I have no interest in the new GTA game, but I'm not against paying the bigger bucks for premium gaming content. I simply buy what I like and avoid what I do not like. I'm more interested in increasing the quality and differences between games than to keep games cheap. But then again, very few games are worth that premium price point and to me GTA is not worth that since it is not my type of game.

100 would be way too much and justifying the price with inflation isnt working either, because it's not inflation you have to look at but real income.
If there's 5% inflation per year, but the but salaries only grew by 3.5% per year, then over the course of 25 years, people would lose around 30% purchasing power.
And if 100$ is what a 90s game would cost today, then 100$ - 100$ x 30% = 70$, the price we have right now.

These numbers are only an example, but the point should be clear. However, according to chatGPT, the US did experience a loss in purchasing power in the range of 30 to 40% since the 1990s.

Overall I can say, that 100$ would be a massive, unjustified price hike. It will not lead to growth. People will merely purchase less games with the same amount of money.
This will inevitably lead to some studios going bankrupt and will only accelerate the transition to "few big corps own everything"

^There's only one game from last year I think was worth 100 and that's stellar Blade, I bought the DLC cause I wanted to support them at Shift Up nut I never dived into it and it's one of just 7 games I've paid full price for since 2020 when games made the jump to 70 or 80 euro in some cases, hell there were games releasing here on PS5 for 89.99 (I seen a standard edition gameN can't remember what it was for 109 euro) back then so they got close to implementing this but have pulled back on it since, I still see the odd release at 89.99 but most games are back to 69.99/79.99, so they must have realized gamers wouldn't pay. There are games I would pay over 100 for and games I have done so like Final Fantasy 14 online where I paid to be hamster on a wheel on a monthly basis and paid for each new expansion (the first three anyway) and never felt ripped off, the value was simply greater than the cost. I bought an ultimate edition once of Project CARS 2 because the first was so great and gave me 250 hours I was sure the next one would be and it wasn't, it was such a disapointment. So...

I wish they would do this if they really want to continue the way they are and need more money to do so, first add in some ads on the start screen in the menu, nothing intrusive and nothing in the actual game unless it makes sense like in sports games or sim racers, I don't think that would go badly, the backlash would be there but no one would really give a shit about it after the first few big releases do it. However if they really want to secure more money, keep prices at the 8th gen standard 69.99 euro max (AA games no matter their popularity like Atlus games should be 49.99) as they'll sell more copies this way early on and then at certain milestones of hours past prompt and ask the player...

"we see you've enjoyed playing our game as much as we enjoyed crafting it for you, thank you so very much, would you be interested in supporting our effort on our next title to make it the best it can be? Here are some cosmetics you can earn in game for a fee while we are adding some additional content for free to the game, you may like and we at Dev X would be grateful if you would support us in our future endeavours."

...Or something like that. Let's say every 20 hours or so and have cosmetics DLC at vary in prices from cheap 4.99 right up to something ridiculous liek 39.99 or more and be prompted also after the credits roll "would you like to pay for this enhanced version of NG+ which has some additional content" while again thanking the player and reminding them they have spent many hours in game and that they are going to try to make the next project, a sequel or not, the best it can be.. I think many would buy just like the Stellar Blade DLC where they did just that without the prompt needed, gamers just went and bought it to supoort the game, I paid 10 euro for Neir Automata DLC take is basically just a treasure hunt for some cosmetics just cause I was so impressed with their work, I have yet to pursue the content. Even games that are really cheap like Vampire survivors, I bought all DLC and didn't even have intention to go near it cause I was spent 65 hours in that game and I felt like I needed to support them. No need to try and cohere the player into MTX by scummy means, or use physiology to do so, simple ask. Marvel Rivals is the perfect example, people will pay for cosmetics if you put them in and make them look cool, of their own accord but just ask them and thank them for playing and they will most definetly do it in single player games and all. This practice would keep the dynamic between player and publisher in good standing and publishers would be more inclined to actually listen to what gamers want and be more civil even if it's fake, devs having melt downs attacking gamers on social media would be fired, publishers would ease on crunch to gain favour and go out of their way to do so in other areas to and it would end hamefisted, weird and out of place social messaging in games and all.

I do this all the time for games I think are great and I enjoyed my time, most recently I bought the Alan wake DLC after buying the game in a half price sale. Even though I thought Metaphor was an 8/10, when they thanked me at the end for playing I was actually appreciative. If they had asked me to buy DLC at that point, I easily would have had without a second thought. This is different than ultimate editions which are a scummy way of whale hunting and using fomo, it's also, I would reckon a more lucrative method. I hope to see it implemented before 100 euro games cause I'll go straight back to playing old games, there are well and many I have not tried that would keep me gaming for years into the future and I'd get them dirt cheap and there are plenty of indie games that would keep me rationed while I wait for half price sales and more finished and polished products. They have already forced me from a day one gamer to a sale gamer and I'll never look back cause I can afford more games now and broaden my horizons, once they force most people into this same spot and they come to the realisation that they don't need to do midnight releases of games or buy day one to still have as much fun and they can play more games then there is no turning back and the AAA landscape will be desolate.

I think my solution would bring us better more polished games at release and in turn remove the God awful relationship between customers and devs/publishers these days. In fact, I know it works cause of Patreon, a little tiny company like Last Stand Media can rake in millions a year just on good will and some light incentives.

I would (barring negative fan reviews/word of mouth for the game itself), but it's one of only a handful of games I'd be prepared to pay that much for, so if the industry as a whole thinks "well, GTA can get away with it, so can we", then a lot of publishers are going to be disappointed.

Guys GTAVI will be 80$ max! Mark my words! You really think Rockstar wants bad word of mouth and bad press? Like most games today there will be bugs day 1 and if there is just one pixel wrong, people gonna trash the game. The fanbase will be split into hardcore fanboys who would eat shit no matter what and dissapointed gamers who just payed 100$ for a broken mess.