Will the base price of games go up next gen?

[madmaltese★ 2,588]

This has been something that has been resisted for a very long time but has the time finally come? Will the bast price for games go up from $60 (to say $70) starting with next gen games?

 

 

[James Skywalker 528]

The price may go up but it’s an allusion.

 

It’s called “the American Dream” because you have to be asleep to believe it.

[Spicalicious 128]

 

Yhea.. It's the American dollar that makes me have to pay $80 and $90 with tax for newly released games.   So no please no. lol

[Mr. House 3,371]

Don't give them ideas.

[James Skywalker 528]

16 minutes ago, Ramza said:

Don't give them ideas.

I hate the guy who came up with the idea that you need I.D.

[Playstation Tablet 1,732]

No. Look at Ubi their games cost nothing in a few months, but all the DLC costs a fortune.

[jehurey 3,273]

I think they have to. Go up to $70.

 

And the worst part is going to be the fucking indies thinking that they now have the opportunity to have their games climb over $30.

[kaz 2,440]

with more professional sjw victims in the making the base price will go down like BF5. 

[The Mother Fucker 26]

It probably will, I know one things for certain I'm never buying another video game console. There's is nothing interesting in this avenue for me now.  

Xbox One was the last straw, and it was mainly to see how Mass Effect Andromedia and a new gen version of WWE games would look compared to Xbox 360.   Totally not worth launch price, and I'm glad I didn't spend $500 on the system.  

 

 

My interest are now on the creative side, creating Music. 

[lynux3 2,119]

Probably not. With the amount of microtransactions, DLC and other streams of revenue flowing in from games I think they will continue to be $60 and obviously some for less. I foresee game development costs stagnating going into next generation since tooling, the use of AI and cinematic equipment/studios are becoming more and more established. So I don't think there's going to be these huge initial investments for the equipment. Just my thoughts and I could be totally wrong.

[DynamiteCop 2,087]

Games should be $100 USD right now, they have not followed inflation trends at all.

 

This is why microtransactions exist.

[lynux3 2,119]

1 minute ago, DynamiteCop! said:

Games should be $100 USD right now, they have not followed inflation trends at all.

 

This is why microtransactions exist.

I think $100 is gross exaggeration. It would be more like $75 if we start at the point of when disc based games were the norm. Regardless, microtransactions were always going to exist because it provides more revenue and profit than the inflation rate percentage ever could.

[McWicked 825]

I don't think so.  I think they'll continue doing what they've been doing and charge for post-game content that used to be included in the base game, and pad that with microtransactions and loot crates.

[DynamiteCop 2,087]

28 minutes ago, lynux3 said:

I think $100 is gross exaggeration. It would be more like $75 if we start at the point of when disc based games were the norm. Regardless, microtransactions were always going to exist because it provides more revenue and profit than the inflation rate percentage ever could.

Games prices were all over the place in the 90's, $39.99, $69.99, $59.99, $64.99, $49.99, I literally have price sheets in front of me from 1996. People seem to be under the impression that games were cheaper back in the day, they weren't, that's the mandela effect in full swing with a kids mind that wasn't paying for this stuff. If you averaged it all out between platforms games were pretty much $60 which is $100 now. 

Edited January 8, 2019 by DynamiteCop!

[lynux3 2,119]

3 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said:

Games prices were all over the place in the 90's, $39.99, $69.99, $59.99, $64.99, $49.99, I literally have price sheets in front of me from 1996. People seem to be under the impression that games were cheaper back in the day, they weren't, that's the mandela effect in full swing with a kids mind that wasn't paying for this stuff. If you averaged it all out between platforms games we pretty much $60 which is $100 now. 

It's better to look at disc based media instead of proprietary cartridges. I think starting with the cost of new PlayStation games in 1994 and then taking the inflation rate from then until now paints a more accurate picture.

[DynamiteCop 2,087]

3 minutes ago, lynux3 said:

It's better to look at disc based media instead of proprietary cartridges. I think starting with the cost of new PlayStation games in 1994 and then taking the inflation rate from then until now paints a more accurate picture.

I am, this is pre-N64 and not including Genesis or SNES. There was no standardization, it was just these companies charging whatever they want in a somewhat $20-$30 range of each other at the high and low end. I think the reality is our parent's were the ones largely shelling out the money and our concept of the prices was just totally wrong, then eventually $59.99 actually became a standard and we were old enough to take notice.

Edited January 8, 2019 by DynamiteCop!

[jehurey 3,273]

5 minutes ago, DynamiteCop! said:

I am, this is pre-N64 and not including Genesis or SNES. There was no standardization, it was just these companies charging whatever they want in a somewhat $20-$30 range of each other at the high and low end. I think the reality is our parent's were the ones largely shelling out the money and our concept of the prices was just totally wrong, then eventually $59.99 actually became a standard and we were old enough to take notice.

Except that looking at a specific period where one CD format was competing against cartridges is not a valid comparison.

 

During that time, Sony had the incentive to over price their CD-based games if they wanted to because they looked good against cartrdiges.  Its not exactly a stable market, back then.

 

Probably shouldn't base it until from 1998 onwards, when video games became a product you'd see in all brick and mortar retailers.

[DynamiteCop 2,087]

7 minutes ago, jehurey said:

Except that looking at a specific period where one CD format was competing against cartridges is not a valid comparison.

 

During that time, Sony had the incentive to over price their CD-based games if they wanted to because they looked good against cartrdiges.  Its not exactly a stable market, back then.

 

Probably shouldn't base it until from 1998 onwards, when video games became a product you'd see in all brick and mortar retailers.

But they were competing with a cartridge system well into the early 2000's so I don't know how that works out. I don't remember what games cost back then and I don't have any sheets for that point in time.

[jehurey 3,273]

1 minute ago, DynamiteCop! said:

But they were competing with a cartridge system well into the early 2000's so I don't know how that works out. I don't remember what games cost back then and I don't have any sheets for that point in time.

There's a reason why N64 games dried up after 97/98. They were pretty much only releasing first party games, because those were the only N64 games that could hold their $60-$70 price