• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Raigor

Member
May 14, 2020
15,147
This week, video game publishers will press ahead with an industry-wide effort to raise the standard price to $70. The move coincides with the debut of two new game consoles from Microsoft Corp. and Sony Corp., a generational change that comes every seven years or so. There's one complicating factor: an economic crisis that had doubled unemployment in the U.S. from levels before the coronavirus pandemic.


Inside publishing houses, a price hike has been plotted and dissected by executives for years. They point to inflation, as well as the ballooning cost to develop triple-A games, as justification. At one point, Sony discussed going even higher before settling on $70. Many of the game executives requested anonymity, apparently because they recognize the move is unpopular. In many cases, companies won't acknowledge the fee increase, saying only that prices will vary by title.

The fact is unavoidable, though, when browsing inventory on digital store shelves. The new Call of Duty, Demon's Souls, Godfall, NBA 2K21: Each one will cost $70.


In the 90s, Nintendo Co. rode the popularity of its game machines to set the price of some cartridges at $60. It was Sony that helped drive costs down with the 1994 introduction of the PlayStation and its games printed on compact disc, which were less expensive to produce. That ushered in the era of the $50 game, which continued with Microsoft's Xbox in 2001. They went back to $60 in the next console generation, a move that happened to coincide with an economic boom in the mid-2000s that continued for another three years. And that's where prices have stood.

Capcom CFO on next-gen pricing

Capcom Co., the Japanese publisher of Resident Evil and Street Fighter, won't release software for the new systems until next year. But like other companies, Capcom said it's taking a "title-by-title" approach. "We believe game software's price should be determined by how much money consumers are willing to pay for the quality, not by how much money we spend to make that game," said Kenkichi Nomura, the chief financial officer.

More here https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...es-go-up-to-70-the-first-increase-in-15-years
 

Tiago Rodrigues

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Nov 15, 2018
5,244
We believe game software's price should be determined by how much money consumers are willing to pay for the quality, not by how much money we spend to make that game,

Ultimately this is the key factor that ERA fails to think when we discuss these things.
These companies aren't our friends nor do they want us to not spend too much money.

They have people paid to research these things, and their goal is one: make the most money out of us without losing us as customers.
This isn't just Sony. MS and Nintendo as well.
 

Magnus

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,373
"Sony discussed going even higher before settling on $70."

lol, and that'll be the quote that triggers everyone and gets repeated for a year.
 

Kouriozan

Member
Oct 25, 2017
21,125
So they went for $92 in Europe /s
Honestly at this point I would have been fine with 70€, but it was already that price for some games.
Gamers are going to accept it so it's not going to change, just like DLC and MTX were.
 

Streusel

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Dec 28, 2017
2,408
why not go to 100€? i think enough people would be willing to pay that for Demon's Souls
 

nib95

Contains No Misinformation on Philly Cheesesteaks
Banned
Oct 28, 2017
18,498
Good luck with that. And that quote from Capcoms CFO. Oof. Let's rinse them for as much as we can basically.
 

Jeffram

Member
Oct 29, 2017
3,924
I mean, that's part of the ideation process isn't it?

They likely have a demand model that maps out all potential price points
 

asd202

Enlightened
Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,559
$70 dollars is actually cheap compared to what they are charging in other regions. They are killing the market they build in ROTW.
 

RedHeat

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,690
I mean, they're not wrong. If the consumer is willing to pay more so why not charge more? Especially when a lot people are here are still under the assumption that it's because dev costs have gone up.
 

Alexandros

Member
Oct 26, 2017
17,815
Ultimately this is the key factor that ERA fails to think when we discuss these things.
These companies aren't our friends nor do they want us to not spend too much money.

Surely this goes both ways. We aren't their friends either and we don't like spending too much of our money, therefore we are free to criticize them and apply pressure to them to drop their prices.
 
Aug 10, 2019
2,053
giphy.gif
 

Sanctuary

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,233
as well as the ballooning cost to develop triple-A games, as justification.
200.gif


How about stop trying to make 80+ hour games where over half of that is nothing but filler then?

Please gamers. Don't fall for it. Just be patient and don't pay those prices.

The only time I ever pay the default prices are when I am buying a console exclusive game. Otherwise, I just buy all third party on PC. Even with the price hike, it will still cost less there even at launch. Game Pass and other such subscription services will see a lot more use too, which eventually the Publishers will bitch about needing to raise prices again to combat lost profits from such services...
 

Alienhated

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,549
I think people will be fine with paying those 70$/80$ for their 90+ MC AAA prestige games, but everything else is going to suffer very badly.
 
OP
OP

Raigor

Member
May 14, 2020
15,147
I mean, they're not wrong. If the consumer is willing to pay more so why not charge more? Especially when a lot people are here are still under the assumption that it's because dev costs have gone up.

Dev costs going up is true, there's no way to deny it, but at the same time, all publishers are making more profits and revenue than even thanks to MTX, DLCs and in Sony and MS case they sell consoles and they take a cut from digital, physical sales and MTX.
 

MrBob

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,670
What better way to make the price hike look good than to say "we heavily considered going even higher!".
 

Deleted member 79058

Account closed at user request
Banned
Aug 25, 2020
2,912
Ultimately this is the key factor that ERA fails to think when we discuss these things.
These companies aren't our friends nor do they want us to not spend too much money.

They have people paid to research these things, and their goal is one: make the most money out of us without losing us as customers.
This isn't just Sony. MS and Nintendo as well.

I agree.

If we don't buy US$70 games then the price will drop.
Don't buy US$70 games people, please.
 

GamingCJ

Member
Apr 14, 2019
1,907
Bloomberg knows how to do clickbaity FUD articles regarding Sony.

Of course some Playstation people have at some point discussed various price points, including staying at $59. But that would obviously not be enough drama.
 

Nameless

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,363
Still would've been less egregious than Nintendo's pricing considering what you're getting.
 

mtel

Member
Oct 29, 2017
347
As much as Sony argue they have a cohesive pricing strategy, to go from trying to launch Destruction Allstars for $70 to giving it away free with PS+ says otherwise.

As they amass a decent brand of AAA exclusives, I am surprised they haven't tried to go the Nintendo model of having games that stick at $60 for longer, rather than launching at $70 and then inevitably reducing the price some months later.
 

Diogo Arez

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 20, 2020
17,664
As much as Sony argue they have a cohesive pricing strategy, to go from trying to launch Destruction Allstars for $70 to giving it away free with PS+ says otherwise.

As they amass a decent brand of AAA exclusives, I am surprised they haven't tried to go the Nintendo model of having games that stick at $60 for longer, rather than launching at $70 and then inevitably reducing the price some months later.
Hope not, I barely buy games on Switch due to how expensive they still are x years later
 

Dizastah

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,124
This thread is going to go places. Who cares about what a bunch of executives in a boardroom were discussing, when all we need to worry about is the final result.
I'm sure there where pitches for price points all over the place.
 

R dott B

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,136
This is why I prefer subscription services.

I def won't be buying many PS5 games at 69.99.
 

Amnixia

▲ Legend ▲
The Fallen
Jan 25, 2018
10,427
200.gif


How about stop trying to make 80+ hour games where over half of that is nothing but filler then?

Not just that, the profits of many publishers have gone up year on year. The whole "we needed to raise the prices" is bullshit lol.

Remember how MTX were needed to prevent this? A gen later and we get both lmao
 

Crono

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,478
Keep raising the price and I'll just purchase less and less and just wait until they are free on ps plus or just stick with pc.
 

Skulldead

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,452
We still haven't reach Snes day... so i'm still fine with price... or i'll just buy less game...
 

Yu Narukami

Unshakable Resolve
Member
Oct 26, 2017
5,152
Is Bloomberg even reliable lately? Wasn't that other article proofed to be wrong?