Be honest, would you buy GTA6 for $100?

[CopiousX]

who will be the first brave soul to lie?

Its going to be that price by default once you consider season passes and expansions.

I would orefer to pay that price upfront, than be released half a game and get the rest in installments and microtransactions.

The bigger issue is the Ubisofts and EA’s of the world upping their price for their yearly mediocrity.

With GTA VI, Rockstar can get away with it with how anticipated this game is.

Oh sht, you just reminded me to cancel my ubisoft subscription. I think they auto charged me this weekend

 

[Microfracture]

Thats kind of how it should be, the games that try and “sneak“ to $100 would fail just like they are now at $70.

the biggest most expensive games on the planet deserve to charge 100 imo. I also think more games should be 50, 40, and 30 dollars. The market will let you know how much your game is worth just like they do with Ubisofts, when they drop the price to half off after a month.

That's the thing though once the price threshold is crossed it never goes back down. $100 becomes the new normal at launch, discounts and sales bring the prices down to the old retail mark, and a few years from now we're all pretending like this shyt is acceptable

 

[Rekkapryde]

Take Two were also the first to price games at 70 dollars this gen

 

[Gizmo_Duck]

That's the thing though once the price threshold is crossed it never goes back down. $100 becomes the new normal at launch, discounts and sales bring the prices down to the old retail mark, and a few years from now we're all pretending like this shyt is acceptable

Thats what people said about $70, then a few early gen games bombed and now it’s far more fluid pricing now.

for example, Returnal and Rift Apart was 70 dollars year one. Now in year 5 sony released Astro Bot and Lego Horizon for $60 again. Helldivers 2 was 40 dollars, Stellar Blade was $70.

the pricing structure all around the board has become more spread out. I think if you are releasing a full single player game thats like 30+ hours long with no DLC and MTX or season passes, i think you should be able to charge more money upfront. Just like Nintendo did with Tears of The Kingdom vs their other games. They said, ”listen, this game took us 6 fukking years, and cost the most money we’ve ever spent developing a game, we’re gonna charge an extra 10 dollars” and almost no one had an issue with it.

Nintendo's Doug Bowser Says Tears of the Kingdom's $70 Price Reflects Its 'Full, Deeply Immersive Experience' - IGN

The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom is Nintendo's first $70 game, and Nintendo of America president Doug Bowser has shared why Nintendo chose to raise the price of this specific Nintendo Switch title.

www.ign.com

now why would someone have an issue with GTA6 costing 30 more dollars by that same rationale? It probably cost over a billion dollars to develop.

 

[winb83]

That's the thing though once the price threshold is crossed it never goes back down. $100 becomes the new normal at launch, discounts and sales bring the prices down to the old retail mark, and a few years from now we're all pretending like this shyt is acceptable

$70 isn’t really acceptable. I only buy maybe 3 games a year at that price if that. I refuse to pay that for the average game.

I’ve found that once you wait past the initial hype release on a game it’s easy to ignore it almost indefinitely. I just got both Spider-Man 2 and Alan Wake 2 for $30 each and spend $25 on God of War Ragnarok. All three of those games someone here probably spent $210 combined on and I spent $75 on.

 

[Roid Jones]

Yes, day 1 cop at any price

 

[Jaguar93]

 

[987654321]

My first thought was probably not, but if it was guaranteed extra story content like Witcher 3 or cyberpunk I might pull the trigger on that.

Edit: only for GTA 6. Maybe if Larian announced something, because they always drop heat too.

 

[GambinoMakeItWork]

How about they actually release some story DLC down the line if they really want $100 in total.

Elden Ring + Shadow of the Erdtree was absolutely worth the $60+$40.

 

[KBtheKey]

I would love to see other devs/publishers roll that shyt back after they try and fail, especially Activision.

GTA getting copped. Dope single player plus potentially years of online content that you don't have to buy mtx to have fun with? Ain't nobody else doing that

 

[Gizmo_Duck]

Elden Ring + Shadow of the Erdtree was absolutely worth the $60+$40.

 

[Microfracture]

Thats what people said about $70, then a few early gen games bombed and now it’s far more fluid pricing now.

for example, Returnal and Rift Apart was 70 dollars year one. Now in year 5 sony released Astro Bot and Lego Horizon for $60 again. Helldivers 2 was 40 dollars, Stellar Blade was $70.

the pricing structure all around the board has become more spread out. I think if you are releasing a full single player game thats like 30+ hours long with no DLC and MTX or season passes, i think you should be able to charge more money upfront. Just like Nintendo did with Tears of The Kingdom vs their other games. They said, ”listen, this game took us 6 fukking years, and cost the most money we’ve ever spent developing a game, we’re gonna charge an extra 10 dollars” and almost no one had an issue with it.

Nintendo's Doug Bowser Says Tears of the Kingdom's $70 Price Reflects Its 'Full, Deeply Immersive Experience' - IGN

The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom is Nintendo's first $70 game, and Nintendo of America president Doug Bowser has shared why Nintendo chose to raise the price of this specific Nintendo Switch title.

www.ign.com

now why would someone have an issue with GTA6 costing 30 more dollars by that same rationale? It probably cost over a billion dollars to develop.

I hear you and some studios may stick to a reasonable pricing structure but if Rockstar is out here setting the top of the scale to $100 for standard edition are we sure the ones charging $50 now won't proportionally raise their rate? Because in comparison it's still "value" relative to what the new cost is.

I say this as someone who buys games I want day one because I have the money and the time...this is gonna price people out of gaming as a hobby which ain't a good thing imo

 

[MeachTheMonster]

The business model can’t just be drive up the cost of production and drive up the price for the end user. Price increases in perpetuity is never a sustainable business model.

Game prices have actually gone down over time

While every other form of entertainment has gotten more expensive over time.

Gaming has increased the price of production which has resulted in the longer deeper richer experiences people expect from AAA games but they have not increased the price, and that’s the problem.

Eventually people will exit the market and explore other alternatives. People have been shifting to different games. Free to play games like Fortnite in part because of that sort of stuff. Customers don’t want $100 games.

NCESC - Discovering Employment Paths and Travel Experiences

Explore a diverse knowledge hub offering expert insights on careers, shopping, money-making, lifestyle, and travel. Join our community today.

www.ncesc.com

Fortnight players on average spend more on the game than it cost for a AAA game.

 

[Gizmo_Duck]

I hear you and some studios may stick to a reasonable pricing structure but if Rockstar is out here setting the top of the scale to $100 for standard edition are we sure the ones charging $50 now won't proportionally raise their rate?

It’s up to the market to decide if their games are worth it and it will be left the publishers to decide if they want to take that risk. They are already squeezing people for 100 dollars anyway, a big AAA game is 70 dollars and the DLC is usually 30 dollars, sure you can say it’s “extra content” but by what metric? If BG3 is 70 bucks, and everything they add is free thats 100’s of hours of content Already.

early access, DLC, MTX, special Editions with digital artbooks, etc. these are all just trying to upsell you to 100 dollars anyways.

Thats why I prefer something like Helldivers 2 for 40 bucks that either lets you completely avoid season passes or doesn’t really emphasize in-game spending. They got their payment upfront, And the mtx is the icing on the cake. I wish most multiplAyer games were like this but the market decided they’d rather have F2P And $25 skins

people are spending 100’s of dollars on fortnite and genshin every week and the “hardcore” “enthusiast” gamers scoff at paying just 70 for the exact kind of games they say they don’t get enough of. Which is why all these publishers are crashing out to make Fortnite’s and not more Alan Wakes and Prince Of Persia’s.

 

[winb83]

How about they actually release some story DLC down the line if they really want $100 in total.

Elden Ring + Shadow of the Erdtree was absolutely worth the $60+$40.

It’s a waste of their resources to do story DLC when online DLC will make them way more money.

Game prices have actually gone down over time

While every other form of entertainment has gotten more expensive over time.

Gaming has increased the price of production which has resulted in the longer deeper richer experiences people expect from AAA games but they have not increased the price, and that’s the problem.

NCESC - Discovering Employment Paths and Travel Experiences

Explore a diverse knowledge hub offering expert insights on careers, shopping, money-making, lifestyle, and travel. Join our community today.

www.ncesc.com

Fortnight players on average spend more on the game than it cost for a AAA game.

Movies don’t have DLC and micro transactions. The business model for games changed a long time ago. Sure you have some that are single player no DLC or anything but those are not the majority.