Setting an $80 standard for games just means nintendo and MS are telling gamers if they want to play on release, AAA game publishers have their blessing to charge more… Not that they couldnt before.
I really feel like nothing will change. Companies like EA and Ubisoft will continue to tier off content until a full game actually costs $120 on release. They’ve been doing that for years at this point. Sure that includes dlc thats released after launch, but these games are essentially released before they are feature complete, with the DLC beginning development before the game even releases. This content is intentionally tiered off to create the system that seemingly justifies charging $120+ for all of the game’s content.
Games that are feature complete can justify whatever price with whatever their perceived value is. The market levels itself out this way, and games will eventually be on sale for their actual value. Example - Ubisofts Avatar complete edition game is on sale for $20 a year or 2 after release.
Patient gamers here will always benefit, although it is possible we might feel the price floor rise slightly along with the ceiling. That alone is enough to be irritated about…
But at the end of the day, what you will hear everyone say is the same thing we have heard 1000 times: vote with your wallet.
Anyone care to share a summary of the vid?
He does not agree with the narrative that game prices needs to increase. With logical reasons like publishers doesn’t compete at retail stores with physical media anymore. Instead of competing for views at game events, you have xbox-direct, nintendo-direct, and so on. Also brings up why inflation should not increase the price as much as it has, because of the very large increase of humans witch do buy games compared to 50€ mario in 1985.
Increased price should mean increased size and scope of the games in question.
No online game with microtransactions should cost more than $20 at launch.
