• EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    2 days ago

    This is greed, pure and simple. At $60, the industry was more profitable than Hollywood, and they raised the base price of games to $70 just a few years ago before immediately talking about raising prices again.

    • accideath@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      Not solely. If you paid $60 for a game in 2010, that‘d be almost $88 today, simply due to inflation. It’s a wonder the prices haven’t skyrocketed any sooner.

      Not that I want that, I‘d prefer games being affordable but it was kinda inevitable considering the way the economy is going…

      Also, I‘d personally rather pay $90 once than have a cheap game with a shitload of micro transactions. Of course, developers/publishers that ask $90 for a game and still include a bunch of micro transactions can fuck right of.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Also, people seem to forget that we’ve been paying $60 for new games for like 40 years. NES games cost $60. That would be like $200 today.

      • DNS@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        “I rAtHeR pAy $420.69 once for an incomplete game then extra $69 for each DLC” - You. Seriously, go back to Nintendo you gooba

        • accideath@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          I don’t own a Nintendo console older than a Wii and I don’t plan on changing that.

          I also don’t plan on playing games that try to make me pay for it tenfold by enticing me to buy various in-game currencies.