On 5/3/2025 8:03 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

but let's face it, games have been
underpriced for too long.

Speak for yourself there buddy!!

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, 03 May 2025 11:03:02 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

People are just so used to being squeezed by corporations
that they'll just quietly accept this latest indignity... and probably
buy fewer games because of it.

I don't feel squeezed at all. There's been a major period of global
inflation, and games have been $60 forever.

(*Python accent*) "Grr. They should never raise prices! I'm being
oppressed!" Lol. 1st world problems.

Besides, I was talking about willingly paying $120 for a CRPG 10 years
ago because of all the effort that goes into them and the sheer number of
hours you get out of them. The $60 price point had, IMO, literally harmed
the genre. And I explicitly quoted that price point as *before* DLC.

People can and should accept this price increase.

--
Zag

This is csipg.rpg - reality is off topic. ...G. Quinn ('08)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 03/05/2025 17:19, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

I don't personally want the price of games to go up either, but the
fact is that video games prices have stagnated for decades. We've been
lucky enough that games have been in the $40-60USD range for almost
twenty years, even though prior to that (in the 80s and 90s), new game
prices were regularly in the $70-80 range (taking into account
inflation, a $70 game in 1996 would be $140 today). Even budget titles
of that era would sell for the 2025 equivalent of $70-90.

I feel that misses an important point in that when you're looking at the
price of a game you aren't just comparing it to what they used to cost
but also comparing it to all the other games that are available to you.
Why would I want to spend £70 on a brand new release (especially as it
will probably start off as a shit show) when I can pick up something in
a sale for say £5-£20 or indeed a medium budget game on release at maybe £30.

The cost proposition of triple-A titles no longer makes any real sense
to me. It of course doesn't help when you look at it and think, isn't
this pretty much the same as the last game you released just with better graphics that I need a £1,500 GPU to get the most out of anyway?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 03/05/2025 18:47, Zaghadka wrote:

On Sat, 03 May 2025 11:03:02 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

People are just so used to being squeezed by corporations
that they'll just quietly accept this latest indignity... and probably
buy fewer games because of it.

I don't feel squeezed at all. There's been a major period of global inflation, and games have been $60 forever.

(*Python accent*) "Grr. They should never raise prices! I'm being
oppressed!" Lol. 1st world problems.

Besides, I was talking about willingly paying $120 for a CRPG 10 years
ago because of all the effort that goes into them and the sheer number of hours you get out of them. The $60 price point had, IMO, literally harmed
the genre. And I explicitly quoted that price point as *before* DLC.

People can and should accept this price increase.

The problem I find is that a lot of that content just isn't that
interesting to me and also, depending on the game, I tend to get to
twenty hours or so and feel that I've pretty much seen all the game has
to offer so I want to move on to something new.

Saying that, none of this really matters to me personally as I just
don't buy the big budget titles any more.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, 03 May 2025 11:03:02 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

Expect to see more big-name publishers announce that
$80-is-the-new-black in the future. As predicted, Nintendo's
announcement was the catalyst.

I don't think this is going to affect me personally. I don't buy
Triple-A games. I buy only indie titles, and even then, only when they
are on sale.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 4 May 2025 09:40:13 +0100, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, JAB
wrote:

Saying that, none of this really matters to me personally as I just
don't buy the big budget titles any more.

^This

You always have the option of not spending anything. Certainly not on
Call of Duty LIV.

--
Zag

This is csipg.rpg - reality is off topic. ...G. Quinn ('08)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 05/05/2025 02:45, Zaghadka wrote:

On Sun, 4 May 2025 09:40:13 +0100, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, JAB wrote:

Saying that, none of this really matters to me personally as I just
don't buy the big budget titles any more.

^This

You always have the option of not spending anything. Certainly not on
Call of Duty LIV.

I tend to agree, there's lots of great games out there that cost far
less money and aren't just recycling the same old IP and rather tired
openworld format. If people want to spend (and lots of them do) £80 on a
game then that's their call.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 05/05/2025 15:21, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

And regardless of all of that, there are a huge number of gamers --the majority, in fact-- who are quite happy to pay full price for triple-A
games. I mean, I don't get the fascination with "Call of Duty: Modern Advanced Ghosts Infinite Black Warfare XXIII" either, but that series
sells. And if those are the games which can push an $80 pricetag
(while more esoteric titles struggle even at $60), you can bet the
publishers -whether Indie or Triple-A or anywhere in between-- are
more likely to focus on that sort of gameplay.

That is one of the worries I have with the game industry as a whole. The
middle could end up being squeezed between those at the top end and
those at the bottom end. The result they may start aping big budget
games not just in terms of gameplay but also the likes of MTX and
cutting would should be the base game into sellable chucks. I'm far less concerned about them bumping up the price a bit as generally I still
feel I get my monies worth in the £25-£35 games range.

Indie games I don't think will do that as I believe it's quite a
different marketplace and, well they are to busy copying each other's
ideas already.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)