Is it me or are games becoming way too expensive for what they are?

[Grantorino]

Edit: I don't care about this thread anymore so just let it fade away please. Thank you.

[crunchyfrog]

引用自 cinedine：

引用自 Naota：

There have always been a handful of people here, pretending to make points, when what they're actually doing is trying to be obnoxious while they defend anti-consumer , big corporations.

Frankly, I have stopped to care. I'll still call them out on this. But it's hard to shame a company for doing something that the market proves them right on.
You can lambast companies all you want, but in the end it's the consumers who support such behaviour - and in some cases actively encrourage them to deploy some.

The infamous horse armor DLC got its most sales *after* a price hike. IIRC they even doubled the price. That was more than ten years ago. That was the point the ship had sailed.
You can be against microtransactions all you want. As long as e.g. EA is making a cool billion off it, it won't go. You can complain about lootboxes and support the movement to classify them as gambling. There will be people complaining when they've gone or they can't buy them any longer on the market. When 2K (?) tried to mobilize "fans" against the classification it looks absurd. But the fact is, there will always be people willing to die on any hill for their favorite games and companies. And these actions sadly speak louder than the words of the other side. Always remember 99.99 % of video gamers aren't playing your game anyway.

Excellent summary.

That's what it boils down to. You can rail against what you don't like, but if you're a company and the sales are popular, then what are they going to do?

[Brian9824]

引用自 crunchyfrog：

引用自 cinedine：

Frankly, I have stopped to care. I'll still call them out on this. But it's hard to shame a company for doing something that the market proves them right on.
You can lambast companies all you want, but in the end it's the consumers who support such behaviour - and in some cases actively encrourage them to deploy some.

The infamous horse armor DLC got its most sales *after* a price hike. IIRC they even doubled the price. That was more than ten years ago. That was the point the ship had sailed.
You can be against microtransactions all you want. As long as e.g. EA is making a cool billion off it, it won't go. You can complain about lootboxes and support the movement to classify them as gambling. There will be people complaining when they've gone or they can't buy them any longer on the market. When 2K (?) tried to mobilize "fans" against the classification it looks absurd. But the fact is, there will always be people willing to die on any hill for their favorite games and companies. And these actions sadly speak louder than the words of the other side. Always remember 99.99 % of video gamers aren't playing your game anyway.

Excellent summary.

That's what it boils down to. You can rail against what you don't like, but if you're a company and the sales are popular, then what are they going to do?

Or just don't buy it or wait for sales. For instance Borderlands games, I just wait for a GOTY version.

[Crazy Tiger]

引用自 Naota：

There have always been a handful of people here, pretending to make points, when what they're actually doing is trying to be obnoxious while they defend anti-consumer , big corporations.

Nobody defends them. People merely point out that the only reason these practises exist, is because gamers purchase these things. Understanding how things work is not the same as defending them.

Like, for example, the guy who deleted his posts. He complained about additional story DLCs for AC Odyssey, but he still purchased them. He proved the publishers right, he further enables the practises he considered bad. That's what was being made clear to him and which he didn't want to understand.

引用自 Naota：

There's too many great devs out there , for me to waste my time and money with these con games, like day one dlc, and charging full price for a game that's only worth $29.99..

Exactly, all we can do is vote with the wallet, which is why I said this to him:

引用自 Crazy Tiger：

There are choices and they are very simple choices. You don;t buy the things that *you* don't like. Don't like horse armor? Don't buy it. Don't like that more story DLC comes out and you feel it should have been one game? Don't buy the game and the DLC. Vote with your wallet. Once the companies get hit in the wallet, they learn to do things different.
It doesn't happen, though. And that's cause plenty of people don't mind the various sorts of DLC and the stuff that internet people like to complain about. They're minority issues, no matter how much it hurts to hear that.

DLC practises exist because people purchase them. As said, understanding how things work isn't defending it. I don't purchase the things I consider nonsense. I won't purchase Horse armor DLCs, other cosmetic DLCS and avoid games that are Pay 2 Win and have lootboxes. It won't change the industry, unfortunately, not until enough people do the same.

[crunchyfrog]

引用自 Crazy Tiger：

引用自 Naota：

There have always been a handful of people here, pretending to make points, when what they're actually doing is trying to be obnoxious while they defend anti-consumer , big corporations.

Nobody defends them. People merely point out that the only reason these practises exist, is because gamers purchase these things. Understanding how things work is not the same as defending them.

Like, for example, the guy who deleted his posts. He complained about additional story DLCs for AC Odyssey, but he still purchased them. He proved the publishers right, he further enables the practises he considered bad. That's what was being made clear to him and which he didn't want to understand.

Lol, good catch.

And that's the sort of thing I rail against - not being honest with YOURSELF.

Like admitting when you're wrong, for some reason that seems a lost art these days.

[Start_Running]

引用自 Crazy Tiger：

DLC practises exist because people purchase them. As said, understanding how things work isn't defending it. I don't purchase the things I consider nonsense. I won't purchase Horse armor DLCs, other cosmetic DLCS and avoid games that are Pay 2 Win and have lootboxes. It won't change the industry, unfortunately, not until enough people do the same.

And considering that there's a beneficial side to this whole DLC thing... I mean sure you get the gcrap DLC but then you have the simple fact that the ability to add and sell DLC keeps companies interested in a game for much longer.

[󠀡󠀡]

And they will keep going up, same thing happening with the GPUs and stuff.
The whole "I want it,I want it now!!!" mentality is allowing them to do it. Enjoy paying 150 for an indie game in 3 years.

[nullable]

引用自 󠀡󠀡：

And they will keep going up, same thing happening with the GPUs and stuff.
The whole "I want it,I want it now!!!" mentality is allowing them to do it. Enjoy paying 150 for an indie game in 3 years.

Because human behavior has changed recently? Or the industry just figured it out? And you predict it will explode exponentially? And is somehow tied to or related to GPU manufacturing costs and R&D costs?

Sometimes prices aren't a scam and just reflect the costs, supply and demand.

[Start_Running]

引用自 󠀡󠀡：

And they will keep going up, same thing happening with the GPUs and stuff.
The whole "I want it,I want it now!!!" mentality is allowing them to do it. Enjoy paying 150 for an indie game in 3 years.

GPU's went up because the tech keeps improving. Same with Games. The games you're paying $60 for now are light years ahead of the games you paid $60 for 20 years ago.

[The nameless Gamer]

引用自 Start_Running：

GPU's went up because the tech keeps improving.

Not entirely related but didn't GPU prices skyrocket because CryptoMiners bought them by the bunch?

[Overseer]

What is so surprising about capitalism? It's the full package of good and bad things that we experience in the gaming industry now. We have simply left the territory where a couple thousand dollars are enough to pay the bills. Sure some are greedy. But others struggle. Surviving as a developer or even publisher isn't easy.
Right now i think the best way to make money is with cheap mobile games for smartphones. Those can be developed for really cheap and bring in millions. But i doubt that's what we Steam users want as focus. And those big investments where to make a game costs 20+ million has a lot of risks attached.
And then there are the players who willingly pay for unlock-DLCs or expensive cosmetics. Should they be denied to spend large amounts of money on something they like?
We have already had shifts in the industry. Day-1 DLC comes to mind. So it's as always complicated.

[Brian9824]

引用自 󠀡󠀡：

And they will keep going up, same thing happening with the GPUs and stuff.
The whole "I want it,I want it now!!!" mentality is allowing them to do it. Enjoy paying 150 for an indie game in 3 years.

That argument doesn't really hold much logic, prices for any brand new tech are always sky high and drops as they become more mass produced and they start to get out dated. I mean the first bluray player cost $1,000 retail when it was first introduced, and now you can get one for like $50. That is how tech and early adoption works.

Games however haven't really changed in price at all in the last 20 years.

In fact i've yet to see someone actually show these so called games that keep increasing. If anything they are dropping in price faster, often hitting 30-50% off within months of release as they have to compete with newer games that keep coming out.

[Brian9824]

引用自 ;2974027084085242416：

We have already had shifts in the industry. Day-1 DLC comes to mind. So it's as always complicated.

That's less to do with a shift in the industry and more to do with the tech. A game goes gold MONTHS before its released because they need the time to produce units, distribute copies to the stores, etc.

That gives them time to work on DLC and other features as they can no push it to customers over the internet where as 20 years ago the game was dead and nothing could be added to it.

Those DLC like anything else also go on sale pretty fast

[The nameless Gamer]

引用自 Overseer：

What is so surprising about capitalism? It's the full package of good and bad things that we experience in the gaming industry now. We have simply left the territory where a couple thousand dollars are enough to pay the bills. Sure some are greedy. But others struggle. Surviving as a developer or even publisher isn't easy.
Right now i think the best way to make money is with cheap mobile games for smartphones. Those can be developed for really cheap and bring in millions. But i doubt that's what we Steam users want as focus. And those big investments where to make a game costs 20+ million has a lot of risks attached.
And then there are the players who willingly pay for unlock-DLCs or expensive cosmetics. Should they be denied to spend large amounts of money on something they like?
We have already had shifts in the industry. Day-1 DLC comes to mind. So it's as always complicated.

There is one part of the picture that is concerning. Investors/shareholders are like a black hole. The more you give them, the more they demand next year. They don't understand that a market is eventually saturated as well as that the purchasing power of the customers has a limit. Capitalism is a system which needs constant growth and expansion, but the space for that is finite. There has to be a business model for these "flatline" times as well. Let's assume people will keep spending more and more on games despite their purchasing power not rising. Eventually however, the costs for gaming will start eating into bare necessities. And all of a sudden, the number of customers plummets, and so does the revenue, because the amount of people spending has drastically decreased.

[Naota]

^Exactly

And the market isn't just saturated with current games
Here at Steam, there's thousands of AA and AAA games, spanning decades, that can be had for a very low price during sales, and devs with integrity, that release updates for free.

That's why charging 60 dollars for a game, and then another $40 to $80 for dlc, or minor updates, , is just ridiculous.
There's literally no reason to waste my time or my money with them.

Devs have to work to earn my money. Otherwise, they are ignored

[Tito Shivan]

引用自 cinedine：

Frankly, I have stopped to care. I'll still call them out on this. But it's hard to shame a company for doing something that the market proves them right on.
You can lambast companies all you want, but in the end it's the consumers who support such behaviour - and in some cases actively encrourage them to deploy some.

That's why I keep saying wallets speak louder than words.

引用自 Naota：

There's literally no reason to waste my time or my money with them.

Devs have to work to earn my money. Otherwise, they are ignored

Have you considered those devs may not be after your money?
There's a lot of fish out there and not every customer is worth attracting.

One thing I've noticed over the years is how there's a certain subset of people who react negatively to discovering they're not the ones in the spotlight. They're not the target demographic anymore of product X and the product is no longer catering to their tastes.

Kind of like the old recalcitrant fan being bitter all around how his favourite band 'went commercial' and 'have changed' but in videogame version.