Support NeoGAF

[Men_in_Boxes]

I don't understand the pushback against higher prices in games.

I used to value mountain bikes as a kid so instead of buying a $100 dollar Huffy, I saved my money and bought a $500 dollar Trek. I loved that Trek.

The Cybertruck, Enzo, and Mercedez Benz Gullwing couldn't exist without variable pricing. The automobile industry is healthier and more innovative because companies aren't locked into selling $30k dollar economy vehicles. Car enthusiasts would never support a price ceiling mandate on their favorite industry.

Led Zeppelin, Celine Dion, and Muddy Waters wouldn't exist without instruments advancing past two sticks and a couple of rocks. Expensive, enthusiast equipment was required for these artists to make the best music on earth.

There isn't an enthusiast industry out there that would benefit from an industry standard price cap, and yet gamers (arguably the worst people on earth) constantly meltdown at the thought of giving creatives more freedom to charge for their craft.

 

[Success]

Men_in_Boxes

"Snake Oil Salesman"

Better luck next time Falco.

 

[Sgt. Pinback]

Because I want the lowest possible prices for me. Because I don't give a fuck about extremely wealthy corporations using 'b-b-but support the widdle devs' as meat shields for when they want to sodomise me via my wallet. Thankfully, they have the OP to step in and defend them.

 

[GreatnessRD]

Because them and their prices, that's why!

 

[Von Hugh]

The Cybertruck, Enzo, and Mercedez Benz Gullwing couldn't exist without variable pricing.

Comparing +100K USD products that only 1 % of people in the whole world can afford to video games that millions of people buy? What the fuck?

 

[QLQ]

Ask chatgpt

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Because I want the lowest possible prices for me.

I want the best, most innovative, most interesting possible games for me.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Comparing +100K USD products that only 1 % of people in the whole world can afford to video games that millions of people buy? What the fuck?

Most people don't value mountain bikes enough to buy the Trek either. The bike industry is better with Trek in it.

 

[Glass Joe]

Celine Dion makes the best music on Earth?

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

I want the best, most innovative, most interesting possible games for me.

Missed you bub

 

[Hyet]

I don't understand the pushback against higher prices in games.

That's nice to know. Since you think prices going up isn't an issue but I do I think it would be mutually beneficial if you subsidize the fraction of the price of my videogame purchases that exceed 60€. See, we both win: I don't pay more for games and you prove your point.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Celine Dion makes the best music on Earth?

 

[Robb]

I don't think the concept itself is horrible, but when all other products on the market have a standard pricing model and you come in and price your product higher based on some internal mumbojumbo you've come up with as justification, that's obviously not going to fly.

 

[SweetTooth]

If we apply "fair" flexible pricing then most Nintendo games shouldn't be a dime higher than $30

 

[Sgt. Pinback]

I want the best, most innovative, most interesting possible games for me.

And you think that the video game industry doesn't currently make enough money to provide you with that?

Are you retarded?

 

[Hollowpoint5557]

Because record profits. They are making this money off the back of those who enjoy the hobby during tough economic times.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

I don't think the concept itself is horrible, but when all other products on the market have a standard pricing model and you come in and price your product higher based on some internal mumbojumbo you've come up with as justification, that's obviously not going to fly.

It's not based on "internal jumbo jumbo". It's based on external interest.

Nintendo (allegedly) makes some of the best games on earth because they're not forced to charge a low price for their games. If there was a 30 dollar cap on all games, we'd get worse games.

Do you guys like games or not?

 

[PeteBull]

Switch2 games 80usd asking price is like 35yo baby mama with 3 different baby daddies demanding exclusivity from a 6figures earner- ofc possibility of finding such a simp is there, but is it likely? Maybe only in the US

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

And you think that the video game industry doesn't currently make enough money to provide you with that?

No. The AAA, full price product industry has been devoid of innovative excellence. NeoGAF complains about this all the time.

All the innovation in this industry over the last 20 years has come from companies taking advantage of variable pricing. That's where the excitement comes from.

 

[StueyDuck]

I don't understand the pushback against higher prices in games.

I used to value mountain bikes as a kid so instead of buying a $100 dollar Huffy, I saved my money and bought a $500 dollar Trek. I loved that Trek.

The Cybertruck, Enzo, and Mercedez Benz Gullwing couldn't exist without variable pricing. The automobile industry is healthier and more innovative because companies aren't locked into selling $30k dollar economy vehicles. Car enthusiasts would never support a price ceiling mandate on their favorite industry.

Led Zeppelin, Celine Dion, and Muddy Waters wouldn't exist without instruments advancing past two sticks and a couple of rocks. Expensive, enthusiast equipment was required for these artists to make the best music on earth.

There isn't an enthusiast industry out there that would benefit from an industry standard price cap, and yet gamers (arguably the worst people on earth) constantly meltdown at the thought of giving creatives more freedom to charge for their craft.

Steam and keyresellers prove it's a good thing.

I have the biggest library on my PC and it's mostly because games become dirt cheap over time or the flexible pricing and keys are worthwhile to make the purchase.

I struggle to justify a day 1 purchase these days for the majority of slop that comes out the industry.

 

[Guilty_AI]

I want the best, most innovative, most interesting possible games for me.

and nothing says "best, most innovative, most interesting possible" like more GAAS slop

 

[Robb]

It's not based on "internal jumbo jumbo". It's based on external interest.

No it's not, they've sat down internally and decided on this price based on factors they've subjectively decided matter in their pricing model.

[Nintendo will] look at each individual game and determine what is the experience, and what's the content, and what's the value?

Price based on "external interest" is what we will get once we know if people are willing to spend $80 on it, otherwise it'll go lower.

 

[calistan]

I don't understand the pushback against higher prices in games.

I used to value mountain bikes as a kid so instead of buying a $100 dollar Huffy, I saved my money and bought a $500 dollar Trek. I loved that Trek.

The Cybertruck, Enzo, and Mercedez Benz Gullwing couldn't exist without variable pricing. The automobile industry is healthier and more innovative because companies aren't locked into selling $30k dollar economy vehicles. Car enthusiasts would never support a price ceiling mandate on their favorite industry.

Led Zeppelin, Celine Dion, and Muddy Waters wouldn't exist without instruments advancing past two sticks and a couple of rocks. Expensive, enthusiast equipment was required for these artists to make the best music on earth.

There isn't an enthusiast industry out there that would benefit from an industry standard price cap, and yet gamers (arguably the worst people on earth) constantly meltdown at the thought of giving creatives more freedom to charge for their craft.

You have fairly standard pricing for things like movies and music, though. In fact those have got a lot cheaper over time, and more accessible because of it.

Raising the baseline price risks squeezing out your customers.

 

[Shockwave_Fox]

Because most of these games arent actually worth any higher prices nowadays.

 

[Laptop1991]

Because a lot of the newer games are not worth the extra money they keep charging more for and gamers are not getting value for money as well, sales data is proving that in recent times, why should gamers pay more for lower quality products, if the corpo's want a chance of more money, make better games that will sell more like they use to, plus you can't keep raising prices constantly, you will hit a ceiling eventually.

 

[Skifi28]

Because instead of meaning certain games can be cheaper than they used to, it only means certain games can be more expensive. If only the publisher benefits, it's not a good change.

 

[bitbydeath]

It can still be flexible at $60 or under.

 

[cormack12]

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

No it's not, they've sat down internally and decided on this price based on factors they've subjectively decided matter in their pricing model.

Price based on "external interest" is what we will get once we know if people are willing to spend $80 on it, otherwise it'll go lower.

Internal decisions stemming from data collected from external sources.

Because instead of meaning certain games can be cheaper than they used to, it only means certain games can be more expensive. If only the publisher benefits, it's not a good change.

What are fascinating, completely incorrect observation from someone who follows the industry.

Michael Pachter winces at how off this take it.

F2P, indie games, Steamsales...high quality games have never been cheaper than they are today.

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

Today, devs have better tools to make good games so budgets don't need to be higher. That's a big fallacy supported by people who justify bloated slop.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

It can still be flexible at $60 or under.

Just as the automobile industry can still be flexible with a $30k price cap.

While technically true...no f**king thank you.

 

[lordarchaon666]

Higher prices doesn't equate to a better product. Would indie games like undertale or hades be magically better if they charged Nintendo prices for them? Would AAA games like Elden Ring be better at $100? If rumours are to be believed and GTA6 is $100, is it automatically the best game ever? No, it wouldn't, because the product still needs to be good. There is not a game on the market today worth $100. Nintendo hasn't made a game worth their asking price since the Gamecube era. And gamers are burned on both the overall quality of the gaming industry as a whole and Nintendo's other decisions around the Switch 2 doing nothing to inspire trust that the new pricing will magically come with games to justify. Testing has already shown that it struggles to run the new Pokemon Legends FFS, so it already looks like its at the same quality the industry has been stuck with for years at this point, barring the occasional outlier. Once they show they can make good games again, then they can look at their pricing. The quality product needs to come first though, and so far its nowhere to be seen.

 

[Sgt. Pinback]

No. The AAA, full price product industry has been devoid of innovative excellence. NeoGAF complains about this all the time.

All the innovation in this industry over the last 20 years has come from companies taking advantage of variable pricing. That's where the excitement comes from.

So, your thesis is that video games would be better if we gave them more money?

Do you have any evidence beyond your feelings for that? Did it come to you in a vision?

 

[Skifi28]

What are fascinating, completely incorrect observation from someone who follows the industry.

Michael Pachter winces at how off this take it.

F2P, indie games, Steamsales...high quality games have never been cheaper than they are today.

Indie games have always had variable pricing. The discussion here is obviously triggered by Nintendo's new statement. A huge and known to be greedy publisher is not suddenly introducing variable pricing to give gamers better deals, prices are only going up.

 

[Robb]

Internal decisions stemming from data collected from external sources.

External sources that give them price data based on the size, content, and "experience" their in-house game(s) provide?

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

So, your thesis is that video games would be better if we gave them more money?

Would the bike industry be better without Trek?

Would the automobile industry be better without Ferrari?

Would the music industry be better without brass and woodwind instruments?

Higher prices lead to more interesting products that are generally embraced by enthusiasts in aforementioned industries. Why not gaming?

Please, attempt to respond to the thesis posed in the OP in good faith.

 

[Mownoc]

Flexible pricing is fine, and has been a limited thing for a while in the games industry with budget releases. Though there's long been a max price everyone sticks to.

The problem is now that suddenly we have games like the Switch 2 edition of Kirby at $80 nintendo now have to somehow justify that the game costs more than every other game in the entire industry.

Is their really anyway to sell that it's a fair price for $80 when games like Baldurs Gate 3 and Elden Ring aren't?

There isn't any way to charge more than everybody else and not get backlash.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Indie games have always had variable pricing. The discussion here is obviously triggered by Nintendo's new statement. A huge and known to be greedy publisher is not suddenly introducing variable pricing to give gamers better deals, prices are only going up.

Ferrari, Trek, and Celine Dion are all "greedy" entities. They also make world class products that enthusiasts love.

Why not gamers?

 

[calico]

Games are priced at what they think the optimal price point is. If they thought they could charge $100 without selling so many fewer copies that they would make less money, they would do that (and perhaps some will soon).

There's already a lot of price variation in new games on eg. Steam, with indie / smaller-in-scope games having a lower price point because they believe they'll make more money that way.

Also you have to remember that the variable cost per unit for games (especially digital) is tiny, so it's not really comparable to any of your examples. Expensive to create games can exist at relatively low prices because they can make their profit by selling a huge amount of volume. An expensive to produce bike cannot make profit at a price below what it costs to produce each bike.

 

[Skifi28]

Ferrari, Trek, and Celine Dion are all "greedy" entities. They also make world class products that enthusiasts love.

Why not gamers?

Ahh, you're the person that always advocates for publishers to fuck us in the ass and wanted GTA VI to be 100. Sorry, I didn't noice at first and tried to argue with you. Enjoy that Nintendo cock, I guess.

 

[nkarafo]

Rich people love having things others can't afford. It makes them feel good about themselves. I get it OP, i would also feel good if i was part of an exclusive club gatekeeped by any means.

 

[Sakura]

You're comparing cars, bikes, etc to games when you should be comparing them to consoles, which do have flexible pricing for the same reasons.
The average consumer isn't out there buying 10 cars.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Enjoy that Nintendo cock, I guess.

Tough to have an adult conversation about economic structure impacting game design when people have this level of maturity.

 

[Denton]

"I don't understand the pushback against higher prices"

Maybe you are a moron?

 

[vaibhavpisal]

Companies don't actually practice variable pricing.

They will have to sell half assed Pokemon or Fifa games for $10 instead of $70 if they did that.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

You're comparing cars, bikes, etc to games when you should be comparing them to consoles, which do have flexible pricing for the same reasons.
The average consumer isn't out there buying 10 cars.

You're missing my point.

Which enthusiast industry doesn't benefit from a high end pricing model?

You buy a cheap guitar to learn. You fall in love playing guitar. You buy a Les Paul.

Guitar enthusiasts appreciate luxury guitars. Why don't game enthusiasts appreciate luxury games?

You see the disconnect?

 

[cireza]

Nothing prevents them from doing it. Publishers can estimate the loss of sales and raise their prices if they want, and maybe still make a good profit. And people will decide whether it is worth the price or not.

There is no notion of "being fine". This is irrelevant. It is about which market you want to address, simply. Some people crying about some prices is irrelevant and pointless as well. If you don't think a product is worth the price then don't buy it. If you want to address only a smaller, richer market, then this is fine. Other publishers will address the market with less income.

 

[IDKFA]

Would the bike industry be better without Trek?

Would the automobile industry be better without Ferrari?

Would the music industry be better without brass and woodwind instruments?

Higher prices lead to more interesting products that are generally embraced by enthusiasts in aforementioned industries. Why not gaming?

Please, attempt to respond to the thesis posed in the OP in good faith.

I'm not shocked as you did compare extraction shooters with people watching the NFL.

This is more nonsense. Comparing luxury cars and bikes to video games? This doesn't make a lick of sense.

Why stop at video games? Why not films as well? The next Avengers film will cost more to make and is a "premium" experience, so the tickets to that film should cost £50 compared to the £10 of a generic romcom, right?

I shouldn't need to explain why this is a bad idea.

 

[Sakura]

You're missing my point.

Which enthusiast industry doesn't benefit from a high end pricing model?

You buy a cheap guitar to learn. You fall in love playing guitar. You buy a Les Paul.

Guitar enthusiasts appreciate luxury guitars. Why don't game enthusiasts appreciate luxury games?

You see the disconnect?

No, I don't. The business model is different.
You buy one guitar to use for years. You are choosing between which "tool" you are going to use, so there is lots of variability.
Video games are disposable entertainment. You're expected to go through many games throughout the lifespan of a given console. The average attach rate is like 9-10 games.
The gaming industry isn't an enthusiast industry.

I don't think you really have a point, I think you are just trolling to be honest.

 

[Toots]

You're missing my point.

Your missing your own point.
Ferrari type offer already exist in video gaming it is AAA game deluxe edition priced at a few hundred dollars, and a small car would be a 10$ independant game.
What you are advocating for is higher margins of profit for studios that already make tremendous profit.
You would not pay more for more quality, you would pay more for the same quality and the executives next sports car.