Almost $200 for one single PS5 game.

[SaintChris777]

5 hours ago, Spaz said:

 

I think you are basing this on people who trophy hunt regularly here on PSNProfiles and people who have a thousand games on their Steam account. Of course it's expensive for them.

 

I can just glance over your list and see you've done more than the average person. And just because it is expensive in the long run, doesn't mean it's not very accessible. Gaming is more popular now than ever before, and that is because more people are getting into it as opposed to the old days when the medium mostly had a specific group of people who were interested in doing the hobby regularly.

 

The average person doesn't look at PS4 sales and Steam sales, sure. But the option is there, and they can start up a new account on Steam and play some awesome games. I've been gaming for a very long time, I'm not some kid who just stumbled onto a video game just the other day. Way to point out the obvious there.

Trophy hunters tend to play a game longer than the average gamer, because they try to complete it. So non trophy hunters get even less value out of their 60$ game (in theory!).

Gaming grew a lot in the recent years, that is true, but shouldn't prices go up even more because of that? Companies want to make profit, so they tend to get the maximum with the least amount of effort. No I don't want that games are getting even more expensive, just saying, that companies could do it. Simple supply and demand rule.

 

If a person doesn't look at sales it's their problem, not the companies fault. Sales are nothing that exist only in the video game market, they are everywhere.
So if you want to save money but ignore sales, that's a stupid move. Also if people are short on money they'll look for every sale possible, at least I'd do that.
I didn't want to point out, that you don't know anything about games. Looking at your profile you are well aware about gaming as a whole.

[Dreakon13]

6 minutes ago, starcrunch061 said:

 

I honestly think the industry has figured us out. They are now charging exorbitant prices for the people who buy day 1, to account for the growing number of people who will wait for deep discounts.

 

As someone who buys most games day one and intends to continue despite the price hike, as long as its feasible for me... I don't expect a 'thank you' or anything, but it'd be nice to not get my throat ripped out for being a "sucker" by people who think waiting for sales and not contributing to these launch windows is some industry loophole they were smart enough to figure out.

Edited October 25, 2020 by Dreakon13

[starcrunch061]

3 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

As someone who buys most games day one and intends to continue despite the price hike, as long as its feasible for me... I don't expect a 'thank you' or anything, but it'd be nice to not get my throat ripped out for being a "sucker" by people who think waiting for sales is some industry loophole they were smart enough to figure out.

 

As I've said many times, buzzards like me only exist because of eagles like you. I won't thank you, per se, but I do recognize your value.

 

Also, you're only a sucker if you think you're a sucker. To wit, I have friends who give me the business because I insist on buying new cars. "Wait a year", they say, and I'll get the same car for much, MUCH cheaper. They are absolutely correct. But I still buy new cars off the lot, because I want to.

 

I imagine the same is true for you and day one purchases.

Edited October 25, 2020 by starcrunch061

[SirPigFace]

The best thing to do is stop supporting these games on release and just wait for them to go on sale. I have done that for the last like 4 AC games and pretty much every other release that throw season passes and other stupid stuff behind Ultimate and Gold edition games where they expect people to pay over 80-90.

[kusuriuriPT]

4 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

 

As someone who buys most games day one and intends to continue despite the price hike, as long as its feasible for me... I don't expect a 'thank you' or anything, but it'd be nice to not get my throat ripped out for being a "sucker" by people who think waiting for sales and not contributing to these launch windows is some industry loophole they were smart enough to figure out.

 

 

I really dont get why people would have an issue with either side.

 

I never buy games day One simply because i dont have the disposable income to do that regularly.

 

People that give other explanation are just lying, who wouldnt buy everything day One if they could? I wait for sales and im ok with that. Im not buying a  ps5 day one either, waiting for more games to BE released so psn store start having discount sales.

[starcrunch061]

1 minute ago, kusuriuriPT said:

People that give other explanation are just lying, who wouldnt buy everything day One if they could? 

 

And you were doing so well!

[Dreakon13]

17 minutes ago, starcrunch061 said:

Also, you're only a sucker if you think you're a sucker. To wit, I have friends who give me the business because I insist on buying new cars. "Wait a year", they say, and I'll get the same car for much, MUCH cheaper. They are absolutely correct. But I still buy new cars off the lot, because I want to.

 

I imagine the same is true for you and day one purchases.

 

 Yeah, I was just being cute with the 'thank you' thing.  I buy games on release because I want to.  This day and age it's almost impossible to go into a game blind, whether it's the massive amount of coverage/marketing, positive or negative reviews bombarding you with opinions, streamers and let's plays with a relentless amount of gameplay footage, or people leaking story content intentionally... so this is as close as I can get to that old, fuzzy feeling of new game smell and seeing all of it for the first time for myself.

 

I'm not interested in the politics people come up with.

Edited October 25, 2020 by Dreakon13

[Elvick_]

2 hours ago, Dreakon13 said:

 

Studios/branches closing their doors due to poor sales:

 

"The industry makes lots of moneh, so give us some of that moneh!

 

Yes, those games selling terribly would've been saved with $10 tacked on top.

Battleborn would have been a raging success if only they got $10 more per unit sold.

Clown.

[Darling Baphomet]

1 hour ago, Elvick_ said:

Yes, those games selling terribly would've been saved with $10 tacked on top.

Battleborn would have been a raging success if only they got $10 more per unit sold.

Clown.

 

Money understander has logged into the chat to explain to us how getting more money wouldn't, in fact, save companies from bankruptcy.

 

[NoiizeR-]

18 hours ago, Quink666 said:

 

That thought have crossed my mind. Already have a US account but i'm just to lazy to buy the PSN cards needed.

 

You could save alot doing it. G2A recommended.

[AJ_Radio]

10 hours ago, Dreakon13 said:

New releases on Steam and digital PC storefronts are typically the same price as the consoles, and will likely follow suit with this new price hike once it settles in on console.  If you're making the argument that "sale prices are 95% off so why not launch prices"... it's because the launch window is where companies recoup most of their expenses in development.  That's money they need to pay their employees and keep their doors open.

From a production standpoint, charging $10 more for HD development and so forth is understandable. 
 

But when you still throw out forced DLC, microtransactions/lootboxes, season passes and “editions” (Gold, Deluxe, Ultimate) despite having that price increase, that reeks of greed. That new Assassins Creed game after Valhalla, probably have to pay well over $100 if I want everything. 
 

They don’t pay their employees shit. Cmon. Even you can admit how badly EA treats their workers, and how Blizzard employees are being constantly thrown under the bus ever since Activision took over. 
 

I’m not making this shit up. Do some research.

 

9 hours ago, Japanime_Gamer said:

I work in retail and i would say my experience is that the pandemic has not brought people together, it has not made us stronger, it has (in my experience) made many people more selfish and ruthless and more divisive and judgmental.

 

I can only speak for myself here but i have seen the best and the worst of humanity in the past 6 months.

Society can’t live on when people treat themselves this way. You don’t bring people to agree and make lasting change, you further the gap between people based mostly on their difference of opinion until the gaping hole becomes too big to patch up. 
 

America (and a couple other 1st world countries) are turning more and more into Nazi Germany and Soviet Union Russia. 
 

Why do we even bother with global warming and universal health care? Those discussions became muddled in politics so badly almost next to nothing has been done in the last 10 years. 
 

An absolute joke. 
 

9 hours ago, mvpeast said:

Stay safe out there my friend. Someone got killed near where I live yesterday. Yes the world has gone to shits.

 

What from COVID?

 

9 hours ago, Stardroid said:

I mean, you have been perpetuating this by being completely butthurt for half an hour now. Seems like I've struck a nerve. I don't have to be an excellent participant. You are making me a worse one though by looking for my attention. So I guess we'll stop that right now. 

When you find yourself talking to a brick wall, the best thing to do is to stop trying. 
 

9 hours ago, Dreakon13 said:

But yeah, I find the laziness in people spamming YouTube personalities in place of their own opinions grating.  Garbage in, garbage out as they say.  Don't think I'll honestly be able to convince you of anything though without having a certain number of subscribers buying into my shit so... I dunno, good luck with that.

Jesus Christ dude. 
 

You being a guy who buys into a lot of shit these corporations are pumping out definitely shows your stance of things. 
 

I don’t understand why you think posting a video or two of a popular Youtuber reeks of laziness, yet you post a video anyway of something that’s entirely irrelevant. 

Edited October 26, 2020 by Spaz

[Japanime_Gamer]

12 minutes ago, Spaz said:

 

 

I deliberately chose not to quote a specific part of your post but I like what you said and how you said it.

 

Just wanted to say that.

[Dreakon13]

27 minutes ago, Spaz said:

From a production standpoint, charging $10 more for HD development and so forth is understandable. 
 

But when you still throw out forced DLC, microtransactions/lootboxes, season passes and “editions” (Gold, Deluxe, Ultimate) despite having that price increase, that reeks of greed. That new Assassins Creed game after Valhalla, probably have to pay well over $100 if I want everything. 
 

They don’t pay their employees shit. Cmon. Even you can admit how badly EA treats their workers, and how Blizzard employees are being constantly thrown under the boss ever since Activision took over. 
 

I’m not making this shit up. Do some research.

 

My quote was pretty specifically directed towards your comment about Steam prices, which shouldn't be considered the standard for launch prices.  Don't know or care about the rest of this.  I'd guess most devs for big companies are making a decent buck, but I guess a decent buck is in the eye of the beholder.  As a software dev who probably makes half their paycheck and works "crunch time" hours year round because I like what I do... should I feel bad?

 

Besides, there are a lot of developers and publishers out there that aren't EA, Blizzard, Ubisoft, etc that don't deserve the malice you have towards the industry.

 

 

27 minutes ago, Spaz said:

Jesus Christ dude. 
 

You being a guy who buys into a lot of shit these corporations are pumping out definitely shows your stance of things. 
 

I don’t understand why you think posting a video or two of a popular Youtuber reeks of laziness, yet you post a video anyway of something that’s entirely irrelevant. 

 

I haven't bought a microtransaction in my life fwiw, and I think the only "shit" I buy into is purchasing games at release which...

a. Gets me the game ASAP, which is enjoyable to me and helps to avoid spoilers (thanks gaming community).

b. Supports good developers during critical launch window sales periods that may help keep them making more games and extending our favorite franchises in the future, far moreso than whatever trickles in from sales a year or two later.

c. Developers supported can continue making great games, that trickle down to you fine folks waiting for more complete editions at better prices.

 

Doesn't sound THAT bad to me, but I guess you'd know better.

 

I'll post funny little jokes from cartoons, sure... but call me out when I start dropping 15-25 minute propaganda films to preach my opinions for me.  Agree or disagree, at least my words are my own.

 

 

4 hours ago, Elvick_ said:

Yes, those games selling terribly would've been saved with $10 tacked on top.

Battleborn would have been a raging success if only they got $10 more per unit sold.

Clown.

 

Is that what I was saying?  I don't think that's what I was saying...

Edited October 25, 2020 by Dreakon13

[mvpeast]

1 hour ago, Spaz said:

From a production standpoint, charging $10 more for HD development and so forth is understandable. 
 

But when you still throw out forced DLC, microtransactions/lootboxes, season passes and “editions” (Gold, Deluxe, Ultimate) despite having that price increase, that reeks of greed. That new Assassins Creed game after Valhalla, probably have to pay well over $100 if I want everything. 
 

They don’t pay their employees shit. Cmon. Even you can admit how badly EA treats their workers, and how Blizzard employees are being constantly thrown under the boss ever since Activision took over. 
 

I’m not making this shit up. Do some research.

 

Society can’t live on when people treat themselves this way. You don’t bring people to agree and make lasting change, you further the gap between people based mostly on their difference of opinion until the gaping hole becomes too big to patch up. 
 

America (and a couple other 1st world countries) are turning more and more into Nazi Germany and Soviet Union Russia. 
 

Why do we even bother with global warming and universal health care? Those discussions became muddled in politics so badly almost next to nothing has been done in the last 10 years. 
 

An absolute joke. 
 

 

What from COVID?

 

When you find yourself talking to a brick wall, the best thing to do is to stop trying. 
 

Jesus Christ dude. 
 

You being a guy who buys into a lot of shit these corporations are pumping out definitely shows your stance of things. 
 

I don’t understand why you think posting a video or two of a popular Youtuber reeks of laziness, yet you post a video anyway of something that’s entirely irrelevant. 

Someone was shot dead near my neighborhood. It’s very bad.

Edited October 25, 2020 by mvpeast

[scemopagliaccioh]

2 hours ago, Dreakon13 said:

 

My quote was pretty specifically directed towards your comment about Steam prices, which shouldn't be considered the

Besides, there are a lot of developers and publishers out there that aren't EA, Blizzard, Ubisoft, etc that don't deserve the malice you have towards the industry.

 

 

 

 

Hah.

That's because they don't have a chance for it.

When you're a titan like EA you can act as carefree as you want, you're too big to fall  but smaller devs and publishers? Oh, there's more on the line.

Some example would be how the Yakuza series suddenly introduced the crappy ng+ as  paid dlc after the series became more famous on the West, or Capcom's recent surge, after half a decade of  disrespectable moves.

It's fine to hold some malice, I'd go as far as saying it's for their own good.

[Dreakon13]

22 minutes ago, scemopagliaccioh said:

Some example would be how the Yakuza series suddenly introduced the crappy ng+ as  paid dlc after the series became more famous on the West

 

Let's say you've been a fan of Yakuza through 6+ entries and almost two decades, you'd really be so resentful because of some New Game+ DLC?

Edited October 26, 2020 by Dreakon13

[kanzenchaos]

4 hours ago, Dreakon13 said:

 

Let's say you've been a fan of Yakuza through 6+ entries and almost two decades, you'd really be so resentful because of some New Game+ DLC?

The point is that NG+ was always included in every release up until Yakuza 7/Like A Dragon, and then they decided to make it part of a paid DLC.

[You]

I think I have bought one game full price in about 5 years. Unless the game is already pretty cheap from the get go. I have so many games on backlog that need finishing that I feel too fearful of buying new stuff over old stuff I have yet to finish. Plus it seems there is a sale all round now, it's so much easier to wait until the game you wants goes on sale and purchase it at half price or so and then play it later.

[Z1MZUM]

The new COD pre order cost me $150 

 

I may return to PC when PS5 is out, the specs aren't much different.

 

[scemopagliaccioh]

10 hours ago, Dreakon13 said:

 

Let's say you've been a fan of Yakuza through 6+ entries and almost two decades, you'd really be so resentful because of some New Game+ DLC?

I'm sorry but what kind of answer is this?

I'm not a die hard fan of the Yakuza series, my point is that being an hardcore fan is detrimental in the first place.

Of course I feel  displeased, your kind of logic is the same a slow burning frog has.

[Dreakon13]

1 hour ago, scemopagliaccioh said:

I'm sorry but what kind of answer is this?

I'm not a die hard fan of the Yakuza series, my point is that being an hardcore fan is detrimental in the first place.

Of course I feel  displeased, your kind of logic is the same a slow burning frog has.

 

So... your example was one $0.60 DLC from a series you don't really care about?  Got it.

 

Rational well-adjusted folks like yourself counter balance the crazy hardcore fans who might overlook or just not purchase these aggressive $0.60 upcharges... so the market will work itself out.  Don't worry about it so much.

Edited October 26, 2020 by Dreakon13

[scemopagliaccioh]

1 hour ago, Dreakon13 said:

 

So... your example was one $0.60 DLC from a series you don't really care about?  Got it.

 

Rational well-adjusted folks like yourself counter balance the crazy hardcore fans who might overlook or just not purchase these aggressive $0.60 upcharges... so the market will work itself out.  Don't worry about it so much.

My example had nothing to do with the price itself. I could go on about Final Fantasy, if you want a series I care about, but that hardly  helps you.

I'm not worried about the market, I mean, it's pretty much fucked as of now regardless, the reason I posted here is because   you said that not everyone is Ubisoft Activision EA etc,  and that's because they don't have the possibility as of yet, the two examples I brought up are just  that, recent examples that came to my mjnd, I don't need to be invested in the Yakuza series to have the priviledge of citing it, the question never was " is 0 60 what stopped you?' It is "why are they charging  now that the series is more famous?"

Which is why worshipping a person, or even worse, a company is always  dangerous, your answers themselves are a microcosm on why, as the thing, in this case a videogame series obtains  more notoriety a rabid fanbase grows, which excuses or minimizes every bad action said people working on it do, until it becomes a disaster like Fifa, every child knows the parable of the boiling frog, so don't give me the price thing, if a child knows it, an adult working on a company with a team of marketeers is perfectly aware of it, it is also something that can affect anyone, today it's EA, tomorrow could be CDPR,  it's not about lootboxes paid online and so on, those are symptoms  of a fanbase excusing anyone.

[Dreakon13]

59 minutes ago, scemopagliaccioh said:

it's not about lootboxes paid online and so on, those are symptoms  of a fanbase excusing anyone.

 

A $0.60 New Game+ DLC isn't a lootbox... but I digress.  Maybe pick one thing to talk about instead of moving the goal posts 3-4 times every post.

 

I'm doing my part by not buying any of these DLC's and lootboxes, and frankly not even buying most of these games that have them... besides my NHL games I guess, though in their defense I like those games and don't really like you very much.  So in that regard I guess EA wins.

 

Not buying them is all I'd really expect from people who dislike them, and that's all you should expect from me (if what I do actually is any business of yours).  I don't really care about whatever endorphins you get complaining about it online to strangers.

Edited October 26, 2020 by Dreakon13

[MatThaRiPP3R84]

i'll happily support devs and buy dlc. but game pricing is way different, the moment leadership shifted from shuhei to jim ryan we have rampant capitalist sony.

 

in the uk games are 70 GBP thats 92 USD orso, it should be 54.99, adjusting for currency exchange. and now their games are getting "gief moneys" edition like the 96 gbp digital deluxe of demon's souls it's just pathetic. the games aren't good enough to justify basically a week's rent for most people.

 

I wouldn't care if that 70 gbp included a season pass but it doesn't. games are cheaper to make now then they were years ago. the only difference between now and then, is that publisher greed has murdered the good will they had and their talent left. so we now have to pay more, to adjust for their incompetance and greed.

 

I presume sony wanted to get more aggressive, to buy more studios ms bought bethesda and sony got butthurt. game pricing + ToS new changes to firmware and webstore everything is designed, so that sony will financially benefit from it all substantially more over the long term.

[starcrunch061]

I find this argument humorous, mostly because, as a magnificently enlightened centrist, I agree with points on both sides.

 

On the one side, I'm a free market capitalist. I love games more than most, but this isn't like someone creating a water cartel. If prices go up, they go up. It's their product, and my money. If I don't like the price, I won't buy it. I haven't liked the price for some time. But I'm certainly not entitled to buy a game at $59.99, any more than the seller is entitled to sell it to me at $69.99. It's a price I'll pay, or I won't, and that's the end of the story. It's one of the reasons I've really soured on Jim Sterling. Between price increases, console exclusives, and the like, it's almost as if every company, by law, must produce exactly what I want, at the price I want, on the system I want. Ridiculous.

 

I get a kick out of the people who, on the one hand, bemoan the new price increase, but on the other, insist that they don't purchase games at full price. Yeah, I know there might be a slight trickle-down effect to discounts, though this is unknown. In fact, outside of the Squeenix digital example, this hasn't really materialized. Physical games have almost always dropped to a price point of $19.99, and held pretty fast there until stock sold out. This was true in the PS1, PS2, PS3 and PS4 days.

 

But whatever. Outside of this (very hypothetical) situation, if you don't buy Day 1, why do you care what the Day 1 price is? I sure don't. In fact, I'm actually quite happy that the price is high; I can silently judge other people who pay full price for the game I bought on the cheap 6 months later. Seems like a win/win to me.

 

HOWEVER, there is one thing that annoys me about the price increase (well, other than the people who attribute it to inflation, but that's a whole 'nother tale). I see price increases a lot in bills, and when they increase, there is always an explanation from the company. Whether or not I buy that explanation is another story, but it's there, and it's usually there in hard terms. For example, when garbage collection rates increase, there might be some statement about gas price increases, or worker compensation increasing, etc. It might be paired with some argle bargle about "doing their part" for the environment (this is always very vague), but there is some explanation. Further, when garbage collection prices increase in my town (Ames), this doesn't necessarily mean that garbage collection prices will increase in a nearby town or city. Ankeny and Des Moines don't see a rate hike when Ames gets one, and vice versa. (And in fact, garbage collection rates have actually decreased in Ames, while increasing in nearby Ankeny, due to companies getting together, but whatever.)

 

But this game price increase feels very different. It's like all or nothing - every company raises prices, or no company does. And I don't get this. Yes - I know they share a lot of the same labor and capital, but they don't share all of it. Moreover, I really feel that price point would be a great competitive tool in gaming. E.g., if Squeenix is setting its prices at $69.99, Namco could get the jump on them by setting their prices at $59.99. That seems like a good company tactic to generate more buzz and more sales (we certainly see it for consoles, e.g.). It's as if Square thinks (knows?) that Final Fantasy fans will always purchase Final Fantasy, at any price, regardless of relevant alternatives from competing companies. It's even more pronounced for full-price budget games like Hyperdimension Neptunia.

 

And that...feels like a sad indictment of the gaming community.

Edited October 26, 2020 by starcrunch061