• accideath@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    On the one hand, with rising inflation and skyrocketing development costs, I can totally understand why game prices are getting dangerously close to the triple digits. Games rn are cheaper that they ever were yeet yet development is not.

    However, that’s still a lot of money and I really wouldn’t wanna pay that.

    • rockSlayer@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      61
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      The money isn’t going to developers, and these are billion dollar companies. It’s not about development, but unadulterated greed.

      • accideath@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        Doesn’t change that $60 in 2010 are almost $90 today. Devs/publishers aren’t any more greedy than they were 15 years ago.

        • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          28
          ·
          1 day ago

          Devs/publishers aren’t any more greedy than they were 15 years ago.

          Looks at the dozens of live service games that have come out in the past decade, with their multiple currencies and premium battle passes

          • accideath@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            Touché. But that’s a different problem. They don’t even need to raise the base price though, many of them are free to play anyways. And those that both have microtransactions and are full price should be avoided anyways.

        • nuko147@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          They are not more greedy, but they think they got an opportunity now. Games industry is bigger than Film industry. They earn an amazing amount of money due to how many more are playing games now than in 2010 did. Revenue of 2024 was 10 times higher than of 2010…

          • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 hours ago

            It’s absolutely incredible how big the gaming industry is now. Where 20 years ago it was extremely male, and mostly limited to 20-30 year olds now it’s everyone! Children and retirees, men and women and everything inbetween or further out to the fringes! And I’m not just talking phone games (which is a gigantic market on its own) at the MSP I work at we’ve had retired folks bring in gaming computers for service or just drop off older gaming computers for recycling

          • accideath@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            The do have an opportunity now. People will complain but they won’t stop buying games.

            • nuko147@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 day ago

              We will see. If they lose a big share of the Switch 1 owners without many new members buying the console, it is a loss for them.

      • lobut@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        Is that the same in Japan? I know Japan has a horrible work culture in general.

    • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      This is greed, pure and simple. At $60, the industry was more profitable than Hollywood, and they raised the base price of games to $70 just a few years ago before immediately talking about raising prices again.

      • accideath@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        Not solely. If you paid $60 for a game in 2010, that‘d be almost $88 today, simply due to inflation. It’s a wonder the prices haven’t skyrocketed any sooner.

        Not that I want that, I‘d prefer games being affordable but it was kinda inevitable considering the way the economy is going…

        Also, I‘d personally rather pay $90 once than have a cheap game with a shitload of micro transactions. Of course, developers/publishers that ask $90 for a game and still include a bunch of micro transactions can fuck right of.

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Also, people seem to forget that we’ve been paying $60 for new games for like 40 years. NES games cost $60. That would be like $200 today.

        • DNS@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          “I rAtHeR pAy $420.69 once for an incomplete game then extra $69 for each DLC” - You. Seriously, go back to Nintendo you gooba

          • accideath@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            I don’t own a Nintendo console older than a Wii and I don’t plan on changing that.

            I also don’t plan on playing games that try to make me pay for it tenfold by enticing me to buy various in-game currencies.

    • atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      I would be a lot more willing to accept the inflation argument if salaries at these companies were going up at inflation rates too.

      In this case though we all know they are not and additionally digital releases not needing to be physically transported and the lack of printed manuals in physical games, for instance, also cuts down on what it costs to make and ship a game today.

      • AnjunaSouls@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        24 hours ago

        I would be a lot more willing to accept the inflation argument if salaries at these companies were going up at inflation rates too.

        Not unless you’re an executive, that is…

    • alekwithak@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Oh absolutely, my heart bleeds for the selfless video game CEOs bravely sacrificing their third yacht to keep game prices only $70. Imagine the hardship of cutting executive bonuses down to just eight figures, all so we can enjoy our digital horse armor without paying $99.99.

      These modern saints really are holding the line for the little guy. If only we could all aspire to such noble self-denial.

      • accideath@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        I never said the CEOs are saints. They’re just not worse than they were 15 years ago. At least for devs/publishers that don’t put micro transactions in full price games.

    • L3ft_F13ld!@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      yeet development is not.

      Yeah I would imagine yeeting the things you’re developing could get expensive.

      Or do you mean developing new kinds of yeets? Probably still expensive.

    • Farid@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      But the sale numbers are probably much higher nowadays, so it would be feasible to sell games for cheaper. But why would they? People are gonna buy them anyway. Those who won’t will get them on a sale later.

      • spooky2092@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        Those who won’t will get them on a sale later.

        /C/patientgamers represent!

        I’ll gladly wait 3-5 years to play a $90 retail game for $10-20. There are already too many games in my library to play, I don’t need to piss away $100 on a game I’ll be bored with in 2 months.