Xbox controversially raised the base price of its mainline games to $80 in an announcement a few weeks ago. Now, it seems to be backtracking. Good, I say.
We were already seeing this at $70: the market is largely unwilling to support games getting any more expensive right now. And even though we had $90 SNES games back in the mid-90s, without adjusting for inflation, I think we can also say quite definitively that the market expanded exponentially as prices got lower, relative to inflation and in absolute terms, in subsequent years. Increasing prices further is pricing out those people. Plus, we’ve got tons of low-cost options that can often be higher quality than the games charging $70+.
Consoles are a walled garden - the only reason they can do what they do is because of the lack of options for the customer to use their hardware.
PCs are the only gaming platform (apart from perhaps smartphones) that have an open framework untouchable by publishers or game platforms. You don’t have to publish with Sony and Microsoft, and the majority don’t.
Unless your console has homebrew, you will always be screwed by the platform holder.
open framework untouchable by publishers or game platforms
Splitting hairs here, but Steam is a pseudo monopoly at this point. Sure, one can not publish a game there, but that’s hard. And on multi-store releases, I don’t think publishers are allowed to undercut it on other platforms.
Which is fine since (even though 30% is not cheap) Steam is behaving and working well…
And then the next storefront or launcher will come along. Or GOG/Epic start making moves that appeal to a wider demographic. Or indies publish on their own sites (Vintage Story). Or someone releases a simplistic cracking tool for Steam’s DRM.
There’s a lot more options than you think for those who aren’t happy with the status quo. Going back full circle, on consoles, you are SOL in that situation. PC never had that issue.
Sorry, I’m not following the A-to-B on your comment in relation to this topic. Sony isn’t charging $80 for games, and even $70 games regardless of consoles aren’t doing so hot. Microsoft hasn’t done console exclusives for a decade.
I’m referring to that consoles can set the price period. You don’t have another marketplace (except for the used physical market, if you console supports it) to acquire first or third party games. Therefore, those who own the market can set the price as high as they’d like.
I remember when console prices were standardized at 60 USD during the 7th generation. On steam I’ve never paid more than 40, with the majority of my library costing under 20.
But this game is on Steam, and $80 is a price point companies are flirting with regardless of their ownership of the storefront, like Grand Theft Auto, for instance.
I bought the outer worlds for $10 on a steam summer sale. The original list price and the price a customer pays tends to be much lower on PC (many wishlist and wait), and piracy is an option.
But people forget about the DLC that is expected of the consumer to buy for the “full experience”. Some games don’t have a complete story if you don’t buy the DLC or you can’t access all the features without DLC, such as multiplayer games that don’t let you play with your friends if you don’t have that specific DLC pack.
So not only is it a $70 price up front, they also want you to spend, at least, an extra $30 on the new DLC season pass or buy the DLC separately at a slightly higher cost over time. Also not including the special edition packs with extras, either physical or digital, that add to that initial $70. Ubisoft is the biggest asshole in this space, going as high as $120 for a day 1 release.
I don’t doubt that game studio business models have gotten scummier, but I never liked the phrase “The full experience”.
There’s a few Bioware games I can cite where it was a terrible setup that added story-critical quests through DLC, but most often, a “special edition” or even the season passes tend to add very optional, often-ugly, costumes to games that already offer a number of costumes with the base game.
Saying it often makes people picture that they don’t get an ending to their story, or are locked out of abilities. There are live service games with that issue - the “hero model” being a frequent offender, but in the best of those games, the game’s base price is low and even the guide authors will acknowledge few people should feel the need to buy every character.
I think they only expect a subset of their consumers to get the DLC; most people don’t care if they got the full experience. If you’re playing with your friends, they’ve got the option to play with you DLC-less in every case I can think of. In something like a fighting game, they’ve just got a character that you don’t, or in something like Civilization, if they know they’re playing with you, they host the version of the game that doesn’t include the DLC you don’t have. The entry price exists because they know nowhere near everyone will go for their most expensive edition.
Game prices have been higher before, but the economy is kind of fucked right now (personally, as a Brazilian, buying foreign games was already fucked, but still).
How’s Brazilian regional pricing doing so far? I heard some countries are getting the short end of the stick now because of some users VPN routing to another country for deals.
We were already seeing this at $70: the market is largely unwilling to support games getting any more expensive right now. And even though we had $90 SNES games back in the mid-90s, without adjusting for inflation, I think we can also say quite definitively that the market expanded exponentially as prices got lower, relative to inflation and in absolute terms, in subsequent years. Increasing prices further is pricing out those people. Plus, we’ve got tons of low-cost options that can often be higher quality than the games charging $70+.
Consoles are a walled garden - the only reason they can do what they do is because of the lack of options for the customer to use their hardware.
PCs are the only gaming platform (apart from perhaps smartphones) that have an open framework untouchable by publishers or game platforms. You don’t have to publish with Sony and Microsoft, and the majority don’t.
Unless your console has homebrew, you will always be screwed by the platform holder.
Splitting hairs here, but Steam is a pseudo monopoly at this point. Sure, one can not publish a game there, but that’s hard. And on multi-store releases, I don’t think publishers are allowed to undercut it on other platforms.
Which is fine since (even though 30% is not cheap) Steam is behaving and working well…
For now.
and steam is going to keep behaving well because they are very aware that they are replaceable if they dont, cant replace sony on my ps5 tho
Are they?
They crushed other storefronts pretty good. They have a loyal following.
Maybe they won’t go full GFWL, but I fear they could enshittify substantially with the critical mass they have now.
And then the next storefront or launcher will come along. Or GOG/Epic start making moves that appeal to a wider demographic. Or indies publish on their own sites (Vintage Story). Or someone releases a simplistic cracking tool for Steam’s DRM.
There’s a lot more options than you think for those who aren’t happy with the status quo. Going back full circle, on consoles, you are SOL in that situation. PC never had that issue.
Sorry, I’m not following the A-to-B on your comment in relation to this topic. Sony isn’t charging $80 for games, and even $70 games regardless of consoles aren’t doing so hot. Microsoft hasn’t done console exclusives for a decade.
I’m referring to that consoles can set the price period. You don’t have another marketplace (except for the used physical market, if you console supports it) to acquire first or third party games. Therefore, those who own the market can set the price as high as they’d like.
I remember when console prices were standardized at 60 USD during the 7th generation. On steam I’ve never paid more than 40, with the majority of my library costing under 20.
But this game is on Steam, and $80 is a price point companies are flirting with regardless of their ownership of the storefront, like Grand Theft Auto, for instance.
I bought the outer worlds for $10 on a steam summer sale. The original list price and the price a customer pays tends to be much lower on PC (many wishlist and wait), and piracy is an option.
But people forget about the DLC that is expected of the consumer to buy for the “full experience”. Some games don’t have a complete story if you don’t buy the DLC or you can’t access all the features without DLC, such as multiplayer games that don’t let you play with your friends if you don’t have that specific DLC pack.
So not only is it a $70 price up front, they also want you to spend, at least, an extra $30 on the new DLC season pass or buy the DLC separately at a slightly higher cost over time. Also not including the special edition packs with extras, either physical or digital, that add to that initial $70. Ubisoft is the biggest asshole in this space, going as high as $120 for a day 1 release.
I don’t doubt that game studio business models have gotten scummier, but I never liked the phrase “The full experience”.
There’s a few Bioware games I can cite where it was a terrible setup that added story-critical quests through DLC, but most often, a “special edition” or even the season passes tend to add very optional, often-ugly, costumes to games that already offer a number of costumes with the base game.
Saying it often makes people picture that they don’t get an ending to their story, or are locked out of abilities. There are live service games with that issue - the “hero model” being a frequent offender, but in the best of those games, the game’s base price is low and even the guide authors will acknowledge few people should feel the need to buy every character.
I think they only expect a subset of their consumers to get the DLC; most people don’t care if they got the full experience. If you’re playing with your friends, they’ve got the option to play with you DLC-less in every case I can think of. In something like a fighting game, they’ve just got a character that you don’t, or in something like Civilization, if they know they’re playing with you, they host the version of the game that doesn’t include the DLC you don’t have. The entry price exists because they know nowhere near everyone will go for their most expensive edition.
Game prices have been higher before, but the economy is kind of fucked right now (personally, as a Brazilian, buying foreign games was already fucked, but still).
How’s Brazilian regional pricing doing so far? I heard some countries are getting the short end of the stick now because of some users VPN routing to another country for deals.
Games are between 350-450 reais in my experience, which isn’t that outrageous but it’s not good either.