this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2025
1056 points (98.0% liked)

PC Master Race

16311 readers
155 users here now

A community for PC Master Race.

Rules:

  1. No bigotry: Including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia. Code of Conduct.
  2. Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
  3. No NSFW content.
  4. No Ads / Spamming.
  5. Be thoughtful and helpful: even with ‘stupid’ questions. The world won’t be made better or worse by snarky comments schooling naive newcomers on Lemmy.

Notes:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] accideath@lemmy.world 31 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (6 children)

On the one hand, with rising inflation and skyrocketing development costs, I can totally understand why game prices are getting dangerously close to the triple digits. Games rn are cheaper that they ever were ~~yeet~~ yet development is not.

However, that’s still a lot of money and I really wouldn’t wanna pay that.

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.blahaj.zone 60 points 2 days ago (2 children)

The money isn't going to developers, and these are billion dollar companies. It's not about development, but unadulterated greed.

[–] accideath@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Doesn’t change that $60 in 2010 are almost $90 today. Devs/publishers aren’t any more greedy than they were 15 years ago.

[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 28 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Devs/publishers aren’t any more greedy than they were 15 years ago.

Looks at the dozens of live service games that have come out in the past decade, with their multiple currencies and premium battle passes

[–] accideath@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Touché. But that’s a different problem. They don’t even need to raise the base price though, many of them are free to play anyways. And those that both have microtransactions and are full price should be avoided anyways.

[–] nuko147@lemm.ee 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

They are not more greedy, but they think they got an opportunity now. Games industry is bigger than Film industry. They earn an amazing amount of money due to how many more are playing games now than in 2010 did. Revenue of 2024 was 10 times higher than of 2010....

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 2 points 1 day ago

It's absolutely incredible how big the gaming industry is now. Where 20 years ago it was extremely male, and mostly limited to 20-30 year olds now it's everyone! Children and retirees, men and women and everything inbetween or further out to the fringes! And I'm not just talking phone games (which is a gigantic market on its own) at the MSP I work at we've had retired folks bring in gaming computers for service or just drop off older gaming computers for recycling

[–] accideath@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The do have an opportunity now. People will complain but they won’t stop buying games.

[–] nuko147@lemm.ee 3 points 2 days ago

We will see. If they lose a big share of the Switch 1 owners without many new members buying the console, it is a loss for them.

[–] lobut@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 days ago

Is that the same in Japan? I know Japan has a horrible work culture in general.

[–] EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This is greed, pure and simple. At $60, the industry was more profitable than Hollywood, and they raised the base price of games to $70 just a few years ago before immediately talking about raising prices again.

[–] accideath@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Not solely. If you paid $60 for a game in 2010, that‘d be almost $88 today, simply due to inflation. It’s a wonder the prices haven’t skyrocketed any sooner.

Not that I want that, I‘d prefer games being affordable but it was kinda inevitable considering the way the economy is going…

Also, I‘d personally rather pay $90 once than have a cheap game with a shitload of micro transactions. Of course, developers/publishers that ask $90 for a game and still include a bunch of micro transactions can fuck right of.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Also, people seem to forget that we've been paying $60 for new games for like 40 years. NES games cost $60. That would be like $200 today.

[–] DNS@discuss.online -3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

"I rAtHeR pAy $420.69 once for an incomplete game then extra $69 for each DLC" - You. Seriously, go back to Nintendo you gooba

[–] accideath@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

I don’t own a Nintendo console older than a Wii and I don’t plan on changing that.

I also don’t plan on playing games that try to make me pay for it tenfold by enticing me to buy various in-game currencies.

[–] atomicbocks@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I would be a lot more willing to accept the inflation argument if salaries at these companies were going up at inflation rates too.

In this case though we all know they are not and additionally digital releases not needing to be physically transported and the lack of printed manuals in physical games, for instance, also cuts down on what it costs to make and ship a game today.

[–] AnjunaSouls@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

I would be a lot more willing to accept the inflation argument if salaries at these companies were going up at inflation rates too.

Not unless you're an executive, that is...

[–] reseller_pledge609@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

yeet development is not.

Yeah I would imagine yeeting the things you're developing could get expensive.

Or do you mean developing new kinds of yeets? Probably still expensive.

[–] alekwithak@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Oh absolutely, my heart bleeds for the selfless video game CEOs bravely sacrificing their third yacht to keep game prices only $70. Imagine the hardship of cutting executive bonuses down to just eight figures, all so we can enjoy our digital horse armor without paying $99.99.

These modern saints really are holding the line for the little guy. If only we could all aspire to such noble self-denial.

[–] accideath@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

I never said the CEOs are saints. They’re just not worse than they were 15 years ago. At least for devs/publishers that don’t put micro transactions in full price games.

[–] abfarid@startrek.website 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

But the sale numbers are probably much higher nowadays, so it would be feasible to sell games for cheaper. But why would they? People are gonna buy them anyway. Those who won't will get them on a sale later.

[–] spooky2092@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Those who won't will get them on a sale later.

/C/patientgamers represent!

I'll gladly wait 3-5 years to play a $90 retail game for $10-20. There are already too many games in my library to play, I don't need to piss away $100 on a game I'll be bored with in 2 months.

[–] falidorn@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

Except Nintendo first party titles never get close to that price.

[–] samus12345@lemm.ee 3 points 2 days ago

You can't even buy first party Switch 1 games from 2017 at that price.