@mrbojangles25 said:
I am of two minds:
1. Games have, relative to other products, more or less remained at a steady price. In the 1990's I bought games for $50-60. This is physical, large box-and-manual stuff. Games now cost essentially the same. Conclusion? We are "due" for a cost increase as consumers. That's a hot take I admit but you know a Big Mac meal at McDonalds was like $6 20 years ago now you can't get out of McDonalds for less than $15, so...
2. AAA game quality has gone down hill pretty much across the board. Often to the point where not only is the game somewhat mediocre, but the technical aspects of it--how well it runs, how often does it crash, etc--is pretty bad that we ask (and receive!) refunds quite regularly. Refunds for digital kids up until a few years ago were quite rare until we had some bad releases, now it seems pretty standard. Conclusion: I don't think we should reward shoddy craftmanship and corrupt business practices with more money.
Game prices have gone up, it's just less noticable.
Think about it, you bought a SNES game in the 90s for 60 and it came with everything the game had to offer.
Now the game will split up its content on top of having deluxe, gold, complete editions.
If you want the base game that'll be 70 but that's far from the complete picture
Then there are even more things like buying advanced access
Sure, all of that stuff is not tempting for me (having to have extra content, or having the game earlier), but I fear they will just keep doing this until it is tempting.
I do understand game costs going up. GTA IV's city had more detail in it than GTA 3, and GTA VI's will have more detail going into it than GTA IV (night life is a big example).
But I just don't want to have the feeling that I'm just spending extra on eye candy, you know? If it was something more than that like also having deeper games than sure... Maybe I'd be tempted to spend $100
But not how the current industry is doing it.
Log in to comment