Will Games Go Above $70 Eventually?

[Moonface]

Back at the start of the current generation of consoles, I asked everyone if they would be willing to pay $70 for games which since then has now become the standard cost of most AAA games from all of the major publishers.

My question to you all now is do you think that $70 will remain the standard for a long time much like how $60 did, or do you think now that the band-aid has been ripped off that games will surpass the $70 mark sooner than later? If you do think the price will eventually go up again, what do you think it would go to or perhaps even max out at as the standard that will never be surpassed?


Personally I hope games don't go up in price any more than $70, especially since I've had more disappointments with games since paying $70 for them compared to when they were $60 to the point I'm not currently willing to buy any game at launch until I know for certain it isn't going to drop the ball somewhere during the experience (something I'm glad I did for Star Wars Jedi: Survivor after what I've seen of it). I also doubt they would go up further just because I think it'll push more players to waiting for price drops or pirating the games, unless the price increase happens a few generations from now where it might be easier to slide it in compared to trying to do a price increase within the next decade when this recent one is still going to be really fresh and such.

[queenzelda]

I technically did buy TotK due to my buying the Nintendo Switch Game vouchers. I saved back enough for it and ended up with Skyward Sword and reserved LoZ: TotK both of which cost me a total of $50 each, saving $30 total in the end. Sometimes with having an online connection depending on the console you can either get the game: for free or way cheaper then in the store. Yea, I'm not getting a physical copy but eh, whatever is my feeling atmo.

I will say that for some games it depends on if I want it day one or not if I think it's worth the $70 and with some games, atmo.. I'm not willing to be some dev's *ahem* game/bug tester.

[Moonface]

I technically did buy TotK due to my buying the Nintendo Switch Game vouchers. I saved back enough for it and ended up with Skyward Sword and reserved LoZ: TotK both of which cost me a total of $50 each, saving $30 total in the end. Sometimes with having an online connection depending on the console you can either get the game: for free or way cheaper then in the store. Yea, I'm not getting a physical copy but eh, whatever is my feeling atmo.

I will say that for some games it depends on if I want it day one or not if I think it's worth the $70 and with some games, atmo.. I'm not willing to be some dev's *ahem* game/bug tester.

Although I feel your reply is more about the "would you pay $70" topic that came before this one, going for deals is definitely the way especially with prices of games going up while the launch quality doesn't necessarily go up with it.

Do you think games would go higher than $70 eventually though queen?

[queenzelda]

Do you think games would go higher than $70 eventually though queen?

Yes because triple A game devs are greedy m.fers. According to a lot of arguments I've seen online about this very topic games should be costing $100 with inflation.

My argument though is: why are movie's still priced $20 to $30 when they release by comparison though? Both some have argued are entertainment. Just one is a movie while the other is just a movie where you control the character. Idk, just some stuff to consider. All I know is if video games release at $100 a pop I'm going to have to reconsider my gaming habit I guess.

[Moonface]

My argument though is: why are movie's still priced $20 to $30 when they release by comparison though? Both some have argued are entertainment. Just one is a movie while the other is just a movie where you control the character. Idk, just some stuff to consider. All I know is if video games release at $100 a pop I'm going to have to reconsider my gaming habit I guess.

My guess is movies are priced cheaper because it's a much wider net being cast. The US alone has over 330 million people, but the best selling home consoles from each of the big three is PS2 at 155 million, Switch at 122 million, and Xbox 360 at 84 million. That only comes out to 30 million or so more units sold than the population of the US at present. If you look at sales of games, Minecraft, GTA V and Tetris are the only three to have broken 100 million copies sold. Movies are going to see way higher numbers of people and there are also multiple revenue streams for them; you've got the initial theater releases, and then home releases, while games are pretty much a buy it once and you're done type of deal unless you double/triple/etc. dip on it.

Although, at this point in my post I decided to go see how much money GTA V made in sales versus the highest grossing movies, and it basically made more than double of Avatar. Even Mario Kart 8 has made more money than it, assuming every copy of it has sold for $60. So now I actually don't know why movies can sell for cheaper than games since they clearly make their money back. I guess it just comes down to the fact a movie would never sell at $60 while a game always will because it's either always been the standard since the 80's and/or we've all been conditioned to view games as much more valuable experiences.

[Mr EliteL]

Yes I think games will go up in price, hopefully not sooner than the last increase was, especially with games continued to be worked on past the initial release date nowadays. Yes even with DLC pricing on top later, they're bound to still increase launch price regardless. I'm not buying many games much anymore, but it'll still be slightly annoying looking at a £80-£100 game.

[Moonface]

Welp, looks like Embracer's CEO would love to rise the price of their games but fortunately, they lack the balls to do it before someone else does it first: IGN | Embracer Boss Mulls Increasing the Price of Video Games Beyond $70

I'm not saying you can't increase the price. But the reality is no one has tried it. If you create an enormous role-playing game, for example, with 100 or 150 hours of gameplay, very polished, and a unique experience, would the consumer be willing to pay more? If they would, they would have more products potentially coming to market. But no one tried it.

It's something we have been discussing, but we are currently sticking to the practice of the industry. Would it be that one [company] one day that tries to increase pricing? That remains to be see.

I think the industry is facing the same problem as all other industries, with inflation and rising costs of game development. And it's been hard to increase pricing [in] premium PC/console. The pricing of those products has been the same for many years, which means that the margin to succeed is less, and on top of that, there is a higher cost of capital. Ultimately when you make big investments or games, you need to play with teams you are very confident in, or with IPs you own or control, and have the full financial income.

On top of that, the consumers have more content than ever to choose from. They love to engage in established IPs they've been playing before, which means it's harder to have them trying out new things or new IPs. It's just something we're all facing. It's a reality which we have been adapting to over the past year, and we will continue to adapt to that reality.

The IGN article also brings up that Take-Two's boss views prices as being very low compared to what you're getting, and IGN speculates whether they would use GTA 6 as a game to push a price above $70 due to the sheer power that game has.

---

If GTA 6 doesn't do it, I can't see any other company trying to do it within the next decade or at least not managing to do it with success. Embracer clearly knows rising the price of games would be controversial and blow up on them which is why they want someone else to be the guinea pig. Even if GTA 6 went above $70 though it's a game that will sell well even if it was $100, but there's no way any other game could pull it off because it just doesn't have the power behind it. Anyone else who tries it would just end up with worse sales than the underwhelming sales they'd probably already get from the game being sold at $70 (see, Embracer having multiple poor selling games at $70 and yet think raising the price would actually help them).