That’s not true. I’ve been a developer for 18 years on big AAA and small indie games. Most people I’ve worked with very much cared about pricing. When you work on a game and put years of hard work into it, you want it to be a success. If the game is not profitable, you might lose your job so of course you care when management shows up with a pricing strategy that doesn’t make sense to you. Sure, passion is a big part of making games but it’s also our job and we’re not oblivious to what the game we’re working on is worth.
Oh and yes, we do get bonuses based on the performance of the game.
I’m loving the balls on studios. Yesterday we had “experts” suggesting it might cost 100 bux, and today it’s already the beggining of a trend. And the game isn’t even out. In fact, we only have the trailer for the game and they’re already predicting prices.
My prediction is yes, they’ll ask 100$ and more, and yes, people will pay it.
But the nerve, I swear. “Yeah, our games have gotten sloppier every year. And yes, we fired tens of thousands solely for profit reasons. But line must go up, so you better start paying”
To be honest, they could launch the game as a 1 MB file that brings you to a black screen that says get fucked, and they would still make their money’s worth just out of the people who will blindly buy the game because they’ve been waiting for GTA 6 for so long that they bought it release day.
And then they could just move back to GTA V pretending nothing happened because the same people that would have impulse purchased GTA 6 with zero research are also the people who play GTA V religiously spending money on the micro transactions there and that isn’t going to cut their addiction
Honestly this could all be a campaign from Rockstar to get ahead of higher pricing. They throw out $100 to some random people and let them run with it, so when they announce a $80/$90 price tag everyone bregurdingly goes along with it.
You’re clearly not the target audience. Every slightly popular game has its whales. Something as popular as GTA? They’ll sell it at $100 and laugh all the way to the bank.
Look at Pokémon games, they sell like pancakes with barely an attempt at a story, minor gameplay improvements and barely running in their native hardware, their target audience will spend whatever they are told and defend the price no matter what.
Same thing here.
I don’t know though you’ve got to consider your target audience and their income method. The income method for the target audience of pokemon games is asking their parents.
I’d love to get some numbers on this because I could believe it’s something like MLP:FiM, the target audience being kids but the main buyers being adults who enjoyed the show (or grew up with the games, in the case of Pokémon), anyway most parents just shell out money if it gets their kids off their back for a couple hours (examples are everywhere) and they don’t even care if it’s appropriate for their kids so I wouldn’t doubt they (or any publisher at this point) could just pump the prices for a mediocre game and sell just as much as they have so far.
They can try, but it might not work. GTA VI has been in development for like more than a decade and will probably have loads of content. I could see $100 being justified. But not every other AAA game would be the same. Most wouldn’t in fact.
That said, video games have been $50-60 for the last 25 years. If they’d kept up with inflation, they’d be close to $110. So, I get it.
It’ll push a shit ton of new pirates, thus creating more headaches for them if $100 games become the new normal. It’s almost like they love shooting themselves in the feet with a shotgun and then blaming everyone else as to why they can’t walk like they used to.
I think there is maybe 1 game that I would consider spending 100 for the base game. And that’s because I love the series and it is very much a long term game for me, Street Fighter.
But that would be a very tough sell, it would have to be something really special to part with that much, even though I know I would get 1000s of hours out of it
You already spend more than 100 for Street Fighter and always have. The full roster for SF6 is currently 100/110 bucks. Not counting MTX and extra cosmetics.
Sure, you didn’t pay it all at once, but that’s no different than me buying SF2 and then Super SF2 the following year, each for seventy-ish bucks.
And the natural conclusion of that is why have the up front charge at all. You do the 2XKO thing or the Multiversus thing and just let people play and charge for the characters. Of course that may mean being online for purchase authentication, right?
I don’t like where that goes.
I think SF in particular is pretty sure it can pull a decent chunk of cash up front and not impact sales too much, so that’s better for them, since they’re monetizing all the casual players, but sitll. It’s a dynamic that’s in play and I don’t like it.
I think that’s missing a lot of the content. If SF6 was free to play, if wouldn’t have the single player portion. And would have had a couple of free characters.
2XKO is going to launch with something like 9 characters(might be missing remembering the number), Maybe they add more before release but it is a tiny roster for a tag game.
There is also massive changes between games, and they don’t disappear, so you can still have those tournaments. If it goes free to play, I feel like they kinda get stuck with the game and systems and no easy way to move onwards, with a bit of a PR nightmare(abandoning the game and all that).
I feel like there is pros and cons to both methods, but don’t really think f2p Street Fighter is a good move. I do think sf7 whenever that is released will be another paid game, and will be more expensive upfront.
Yeah, I have a love(like… tolerate)/hate relationship with the battle pass. I don’t mind it, cause it is cheap, pointless and you get your money back, and it is super easy to complete it.
But also, it can fuck off, battle passes suck in their timed implementation, it is pointless, you have to get premium currency to get it which is obviously not purchasable at the exact amount.
Only thing I think was good is that it bought in the emulated game catalogue.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Why do they always say developers instead of publishers?
Because they want you to complain about the developers and not their corporate overlords.
Management are NOT DEVELOPERS.
Executives are NOT DEVELOPERS.
Shareholders are NOT DEVELOPERS.
Yeah, I guarantee you not a single developer gives two shits about how much the game costs. It’s not going into their pockets regardless.
That’s not true. I’ve been a developer for 18 years on big AAA and small indie games. Most people I’ve worked with very much cared about pricing. When you work on a game and put years of hard work into it, you want it to be a success. If the game is not profitable, you might lose your job so of course you care when management shows up with a pricing strategy that doesn’t make sense to you. Sure, passion is a big part of making games but it’s also our job and we’re not oblivious to what the game we’re working on is worth.
Oh and yes, we do get bonuses based on the performance of the game.
I’m loving the balls on studios. Yesterday we had “experts” suggesting it might cost 100 bux, and today it’s already the beggining of a trend. And the game isn’t even out. In fact, we only have the trailer for the game and they’re already predicting prices.
My prediction is yes, they’ll ask 100$ and more, and yes, people will pay it.
But the nerve, I swear. “Yeah, our games have gotten sloppier every year. And yes, we fired tens of thousands solely for profit reasons. But line must go up, so you better start paying”
Well the game could be disastrous and sell poorly after the first week.
To be honest, they could launch the game as a 1 MB file that brings you to a black screen that says get fucked, and they would still make their money’s worth just out of the people who will blindly buy the game because they’ve been waiting for GTA 6 for so long that they bought it release day.
And then they could just move back to GTA V pretending nothing happened because the same people that would have impulse purchased GTA 6 with zero research are also the people who play GTA V religiously spending money on the micro transactions there and that isn’t going to cut their addiction
Honestly this could all be a campaign from Rockstar to get ahead of higher pricing. They throw out $100 to some random people and let them run with it, so when they announce a $80/$90 price tag everyone bregurdingly goes along with it.
That’s what I’m thinking. Get the fanbase used to seeing 100+, and then suddenly an 80$ game will feel like a bargain lol
I honestly believe it, these test the water kind of leaks, more like intentionally invisible marketing to see the reactions
Do you really think people will buy it? I’ve played most of the GTAs, but I’m not about to spend 100 dollars on a video game.
You’re clearly not the target audience. Every slightly popular game has its whales. Something as popular as GTA? They’ll sell it at $100 and laugh all the way to the bank.
Something to consider. With conversion, new games are usually $80-$100 in Canada.
People still buy them.
Meaning this game will be MORE THAN $100 Canadian and still sell like hotcakes.
Look at Pokémon games, they sell like pancakes with barely an attempt at a story, minor gameplay improvements and barely running in their native hardware, their target audience will spend whatever they are told and defend the price no matter what.
Same thing here.
Yeah but they don’t cost $100
Not yet, might follow after this stunt faces no lash back and results in profits.
I don’t know though you’ve got to consider your target audience and their income method. The income method for the target audience of pokemon games is asking their parents.
I’d love to get some numbers on this because I could believe it’s something like MLP:FiM, the target audience being kids but the main buyers being adults who enjoyed the show (or grew up with the games, in the case of Pokémon), anyway most parents just shell out money if it gets their kids off their back for a couple hours (examples are everywhere) and they don’t even care if it’s appropriate for their kids so I wouldn’t doubt they (or any publisher at this point) could just pump the prices for a mediocre game and sell just as much as they have so far.
I think rumours about the price tag were already going before the trailer even came out lol.
And this is precicely why I mostly play indie titles made by individuals or small teams that are sold for under 10 bucks. Fuck this noise.
They can try, but it might not work. GTA VI has been in development for like more than a decade and will probably have loads of content. I could see $100 being justified. But not every other AAA game would be the same. Most wouldn’t in fact.
That said, video games have been $50-60 for the last 25 years. If they’d kept up with inflation, they’d be close to $110. So, I get it.
They can price them at €200 for all I care. I’ll only will buy them when they are at €20 anyway.
It’ll push a shit ton of new pirates, thus creating more headaches for them if $100 games become the new normal. It’s almost like they love shooting themselves in the feet with a shotgun and then blaming everyone else as to why they can’t walk like they used to.
If they do it, it would unfortunately still sell like hotcakes, being one of the most anticipated games of the past decade.
GTA players are genuinely dumbasses & just insane (but then so are most gamers)
GTA players haven’t spent any money since 2013
Except the hundreds of millions they have spent year after year since then.
Well, someone’s paying half a billion in microtransactions in GTA Online every year.
Fuck you.
Looks like PatientGamers’ membership numbers will be on the rise soon.
I never pay full price for a game.
Isthereanydeal.com
Humblebundle.com
Gog.com
Always running sales. If they aren’t just check history or set an alert on isthereanydeal and wait a bit.
This is the way.
Thank you for the first link, kind stranger.
how incredibly american to phrase learning they can get away with fleecing people for $40 more as being “inspired”.
It might inspire me to continue not wasting my money, and buying everything on sale, if it’s worth it at all
For $100, it better have a strip club achievement that comes with a coupon for a free actual lap dance.
Ubisoft I’ve just had an idea to win players back
I don’t even buy a game when it’s 70…
At 80 there is no fucking way…
90, are they crazy? Never!
100? Lulz, go fuck yourself lunatic
I think there is maybe 1 game that I would consider spending 100 for the base game. And that’s because I love the series and it is very much a long term game for me, Street Fighter.
But that would be a very tough sell, it would have to be something really special to part with that much, even though I know I would get 1000s of hours out of it
You already spend more than 100 for Street Fighter and always have. The full roster for SF6 is currently 100/110 bucks. Not counting MTX and extra cosmetics.
Sure, you didn’t pay it all at once, but that’s no different than me buying SF2 and then Super SF2 the following year, each for seventy-ish bucks.
While true, the base game is still only 60.
If I had to spend an additional 40 for just the base game(not the 2 seasons of characters), that would be a much harder sell.
Sure.
And the natural conclusion of that is why have the up front charge at all. You do the 2XKO thing or the Multiversus thing and just let people play and charge for the characters. Of course that may mean being online for purchase authentication, right?
I don’t like where that goes.
I think SF in particular is pretty sure it can pull a decent chunk of cash up front and not impact sales too much, so that’s better for them, since they’re monetizing all the casual players, but sitll. It’s a dynamic that’s in play and I don’t like it.
I think that’s missing a lot of the content. If SF6 was free to play, if wouldn’t have the single player portion. And would have had a couple of free characters.
2XKO is going to launch with something like 9 characters(might be missing remembering the number), Maybe they add more before release but it is a tiny roster for a tag game.
There is also massive changes between games, and they don’t disappear, so you can still have those tournaments. If it goes free to play, I feel like they kinda get stuck with the game and systems and no easy way to move onwards, with a bit of a PR nightmare(abandoning the game and all that).
I feel like there is pros and cons to both methods, but don’t really think f2p Street Fighter is a good move. I do think sf7 whenever that is released will be another paid game, and will be more expensive upfront.
I do think fighting games are a special case because the DLC is so obvious that the seasonal microtransaction stuff is not as much of a focus.
But hey, SF6 did add a battlepass, so… it’s moving in that direction. We’ll see.
Yeah, I have a love(like… tolerate)/hate relationship with the battle pass. I don’t mind it, cause it is cheap, pointless and you get your money back, and it is super easy to complete it.
But also, it can fuck off, battle passes suck in their timed implementation, it is pointless, you have to get premium currency to get it which is obviously not purchasable at the exact amount.
Only thing I think was good is that it bought in the emulated game catalogue.