Game publishers don't understand how inflation works

[biesoid]

Inflation doesn't mean people have more money to spend on games, it means cost of food, electricity, gas etc. rises, so people have less money to spend on entertainment and they will eventually give up and quit the hobby.

[biesoid]

Escrito originalmente por Nebsun:

Escrito originalmente por biesoid:

Inflation doesn't mean people have more money to spend

Inflation means the value of money decreases - and since the value of everything else remains the same, the monetary price for everything across the board increases.

If you earn $2000 you still earn $2000 even when there's inflation. After paying bills and buying food you have less money to waste on games.

[Crazy Tiger]

Escrito originalmente por biesoid:

There is no such thing as microtransactions anymore, it's MACROtransactions, if one skin costs 1/6 or 1/7 of game's price it's not micro.

People need to start using proper terms.

What game has that? A fresh new game is 70 bucks, so that would make one skin 10 bucks. Never heard of that.

Might be regional and currency depending, though.

[Muppet among Puppets]

Escrito originalmente por Crazy Tiger:

Escrito originalmente por biesoid:

There is no such thing as microtransactions anymore, it's MACROtransactions, if one skin costs 1/6 or 1/7 of game's price it's not micro.

People need to start using proper terms.

What game has that? A fresh new game is 70 bucks, so that would make one skin 10 bucks. Never heard of that.

Might be regional and currency depending, though.

Hunt showdown wants 10 for a skin. And it costs 29.

Cod wants 24 for things.

I would not call them macrotransaction. They are pay mechanics :D


But the "1 $ for reload", before i read that someone really said that, i would have thought of it as a joke. That is so absurd and stupid. And someone got paid a lot and came up with this.

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

Escrito originalmente por Crazy Tiger:

Escrito originalmente por biesoid:

There is no such thing as microtransactions anymore, it's MACROtransactions, if one skin costs 1/6 or 1/7 of game's price it's not micro.

People need to start using proper terms.

What game has that? A fresh new game is 70 bucks, so that would make one skin 10 bucks. Never heard of that.

Might be regional and currency depending, though.

OP always talks about CoD. And they charge quite a penny (CoD Points) for pixels.

[Crazy Tiger]

What the hell?

Though Activision being money hungry isn't new, of course.

[cSg|mc-Hotsauce]

Escrito originalmente por Crazy Tiger:

What the hell? :lunar2019deadpanpig:

Though Activision being money hungry isn't new, of course.

Gotta get that new Nicki Minaj bundle for $20 before I get picked on by my friends that have the Thunder Front skin bundle that costs 3000 CoD Points, the equivalent of $30 for being poor...

[alumlovescake]

when a game has made 1000x its budget and is years old it should only ever go down and down

[Boblin the Goblin]

Escrito originalmente por alumlovescake:

when a game has made 1000x its budget and is years old it should only ever go down and down

That's for the dev or publisher to decide.

[Mad Scientist]

Escrito originalmente por alumlovescake:

when a game has made 1000x its budget and is years old it should only ever go down and down

While it's recommended, it is their business and is their decision. If a game is selling strongly at full price even years later, this can help fund future Development. Depending on any contracts as well, this can keep someone having an income thus paying their bills.

It's always a choice to purchase something or not. It could even be inflation as the reason to not put it on sale thus guaranteeing desired income if again, it's selling well. Overall, their product - their decision.

[Yzal]

Escrito originalmente por alumlovescake:

when a game has made 1000x its budget and is years old it should only ever go down and down

Tell us your reaction when you boss goes "you've been working here for 10 years so i'm gonna reduce your salary".

[Tito Shivan]

Escrito originalmente por alumlovescake:

when a game has made 1000x its budget and is years old it should only ever go down and down

However, keeping it at a high price despite all the years can make new players decide to buy the latest one instead, keeping your last iteration populated instead of having people grasping at a 10 year old gamer multiplayer.

Businesses being businesses and all that.

[Muppet among Puppets]

Escrito originalmente por Lazy Dog:

Escrito originalmente por alumlovescake:

when a game has made 1000x its budget and is years old it should only ever go down and down

Tell us your reaction when you boss goes "you've been working here for 10 years so i'm gonna reduce your salary".

Thats not the same.

[Walach]

I believe it's because of the simple reason of: People are not reducing prices for their games because they don't have to.
I might not like it, but that how it is, I think.

If everyone suddenly stopped buying games at the current prices, as by magic, then I'm 100% sure the price of games we see today will decrease until, magically again, people start buying games again. :P

To fix this, we just need the "everyone" part to start…to stop…to buy games until the prices are sane again… Wow, that sentence could have been written a lot better, oh well. :P

[Paratech2008]

Patience is a virtue. Wait 6 months and some games drop 50% or more. There are few benefits to buying games day one.

Bundles are cheap and there are other options to legally buy games cheap.

[biesoid]

Sony stopped reporting number of subscribers few months ago, because they planned to raise subscription prices, so they know they will be losing users, they're still doing this hoping customers will stop eating to pay $80 for a privilege of playing multiplayer in their $70 games.