• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

GTA 6 costing $100 could help the industry rebound??

Revolutionary

Revolutionary

Member
go away gtfo GIF
 
C

chakadave

Member
A huge peercentage of gamers ie Switch and PC would never play it. They either would not be motivated to buy new hardware to get it or have the hardware to get it and would play something else.

It would be a hit on the big boy consoles but thats it. And then by the time it realeases on PC maybe it has a bit of a second wind.

Dacvak said:
Games no longer taking half a decade or longer to develop would also help the industry rebound.
Click to expand...

I think 5 years is ok.
 
Last edited:
Ramiro_Rodriguez

Ramiro_Rodriguez

Neo Member
How, when many games faces huge discounts after a few weeks or months?
When you aren't Nintendo, are you happy to sell in the first weeks enough units, till the price drops.
Hard to believe that it will be better, when the games are more expensiv than today.
Sure, GTA VI will sell millions, even when it costs 90 $, but how many of the GTA V units were sold for a "budget price"?
 
EDMIX

EDMIX

Writes a lot, says very little
With inflation, $100 is actually around what a game should be costing soooooooooooooooooooooooo


From 2006 at $60, that is basically $97 or so in todays money

So yea, I think it would help the industry rebound big time. Prices increase all over, as what you are paying for Netflix, Amazon Prime, a Big Mac, Eggs, Milk, a Movie ticket etc isn't the same from 2006, why the fuck would the price of such an expensive medium magically say the same with zero repercussions?

Yet some of you fucking wonder and cry and bitch about GAAS and MTX in games? lol

Increase the price, if you broke get a better job, let the games that fail, FAIL and let the games that make sense, get the reward and wait for a sale for everything else or something.

That $100 makes more sense then many care to admit.
 
Last edited:
MiguelItUp

MiguelItUp

Member
If we're gonna be reaching a point where games are $100 per, they better be worth it. With how a lot of AAA releases have been, it's a mixed bag that isn't worth that price tag per.
 
Grildon Tundy

Grildon Tundy

Member
At $100, they could make the same revenue if they sell 30% fewer units vs at $70.

Would at least 70% of people who would have bought at $70 still buy it at $100? For GTA VI, maybe, but for Ubislop? Not so sure.
 
Wolves hunt in packs

Wolves hunt in packs

Banned
EDMIX said:
With inflation, $100 is actually around what a game should be costing soooooooooooooooooooooooo


From 2006 at $60, that is basically $97 or so in todays money

So yea, I think it would help the industry rebound big time. Prices increase all over, as what you are paying for Netflix, Amazon Prime, a Big Mac, Eggs, Milk, a Movie ticket etc isn't the same from 2006, why the fuck would the price of such an expensive medium magically say the same with zero repercussions?

Yet some of you fucking wonder and cry and bitch about GAAS and MTX in games? lol

Increase the price, if you broke get a better job, let the games that fail, FAIL and let the games that make sense, get the reward and wait for a sale for everything else or something.

That $100 makes more sense then many care to admit.
Click to expand...

It makes zero sense, unless you want gaming to be rich people hobby, take notice that in my currency it's more then $70 right now, and i can't justify even that, so sorry i'm not rich enough but will be glad to keep gaming. :)
 
Majima Everywhere System

Majima Everywhere System

Member
EDMIX said:
With inflation, $100 is actually around what a game should be costing soooooooooooooooooooooooo


From 2006 at $60, that is basically $97 or so in todays money

So yea, I think it would help the industry rebound big time. Prices increase all over, as what you are paying for Netflix, Amazon Prime, a Big Mac, Eggs, Milk, a Movie ticket etc isn't the same from 2006, why the fuck would the price of such an expensive medium magically say the same with zero repercussions?

Yet some of you fucking wonder and cry and bitch about GAAS and MTX in games? lol

Increase the price, if you broke get a better job, let the games that fail, FAIL and let the games that make sense, get the reward and wait for a sale for everything else or something.

That $100 makes more sense then many care to admit.
Click to expand...

Who give a fuck about developers. If Slop VII can’t make it at $70, the revenue will be lower at $100.

I grew up with GTA 1-3, and for $100 I will have moved on. Sure the GTA V teens would find the dough, but that they are limited to that market with how that title grew.

The industry needs more people taking a chance with more titles, and $70 is already heralding a level of pickiness the industry was not ready for. Why pay $70 when you can call it woke, feel like you missed nothing, and play solid game from 7 years ago. Or say it has no end game, or not balanced, or balanced for esports, or has bad monetization, not enough choices, stutters, unoptimized, made in _____ engine, and on and on these days. This circle is a result of $50 being the sweet spot that dictated the right sized teams with minimal corporate meddling and consumers who picked up a few titles on a Tuesday.

McDonald’s sales tanked when their price was disconnected with costs and a tier of food that drove a behavior.

Good riddance to this industry though, charge $100. It will be fun to see.
 
Guardian Monkey

Guardian Monkey

Member
What happens if it flops in a matter of speaking? Won’t this have to recoup a couple billion dollars. The people who play GTA are old now. I mean half of Fortnite’s audience wasn’t even alive when the last GTA came out. They are going to pay $100 for a game in a ftp world? There is already pushback on game lengths as it is. The game needs to launch hard if it’s going to keep an online audience and have the game stay around probably for another decade.
 
Last edited:
T4keD0wN

T4keD0wN

Member
EDMIX said:
With inflation, $100 is actually around what a game should be costing soooooooooooooooooooooooo

From 2006 at $60, that is basically $97 or so in todays money

So yea, I think it would help the industry rebound big time. Prices increase all over, as what you are paying for Netflix, Amazon Prime, a Big Mac, Eggs, Milk, a Movie ticket etc isn't the same from 2006, why the fuck would the price of such an expensive medium magically say the same with zero repercussions?

That $100 makes more sense then many care to admit.
Click to expand...
Games are a digital product.

What you say makes zero sense, digital products arent impacted by inflation like food or cars, they arent paying more for material nor transportation per piece produced, there isnt any limited capacity, they develop a piece of software once and thats it. Their costs arent tied to anything that isnt purely in their control aside from paying a fee to a platform holder which offers better conditions now.

The only real cost increase is in employees, that increase is purely by choice, which i would argue has been overcompensated for by having not only a much larger audience, but especially by physical media declining to <1% on PC and as much as it sucks for consumers consoles are slowly getting close.

Studios/publishers set their own budgets without external factors affecting it (they obviously take competitors into account), the same as always, software is not really tied to inflation in a way like most other industries are.

Anyway, prices will be determined by what companies think the customers are willing/capable to spend, if we look at increase in wages and increase in cost of living then its entirely possible that some customers might even have less spending money for luxury good now and some more.
 
Last edited:
FeralEcho

FeralEcho

Member
Rebound from what? Too much success? Too greedy executives? Not nickle and diming consumers enough?

What a fucking joke!

The industry is doing better than ever with all the ways companies have found to take money from us while depriving us of manuals,physical media and now even ownership and frankly what it needs is a big shakeup at the very core of it which is why I'm so glad to see companies create bomb after bomb in their attempt to please the mythical "modern audience" while their actual core audience that they forgot to pander to gives them the middle finger. And that's a good thing as the greatest of lessons is failure.
 
Verchod

Verchod

Member
There are very few games I would ever spend that on, and I wouldn't include GTA as one of them either.

I don't think this would work either. I think fewer people would spend that and just wait for some sort of reduction.
 
EDMIX

EDMIX

Writes a lot, says very little
Wolves hunt in packs said:
It makes zero sense, unless you want gaming to be rich people hobby,
Click to expand...

$60 in 2006 is $96 today in 2025.......sooooooo that makes sense based on inflation


Wolves hunt in packs said:
so sorry i'm not rich enough
Click to expand...
ok, but that is like saying you were not rich enough in 2006 either lol

That sounds like a you issue then...

T4keD0wN said:
Games are a digital product.

What you say makes zero sense, digital products arent impacted by inflation
Click to expand...

I have no clue where you heard any of that shit from lol

The things needed to create those products like actual production cost, paying developer etc very much goes up. Being digital doesn't actually change that, it doesn't magically make everything 1 price or something, thats like saying Netflix should be the same price cause its digital lol

The cost to do any of that doesn't stand still cause its digital.

Sorry folks, the fucking price for those games should have always kept up with inflation. If you broke, just say so lol Get a better job, cause other industries raise their prices to keep up with inflation and gaming should have been no different, especially a fucking hobby as expensive as this to create titles. Some of you asking for free DLC for life, 8K graphics, hundreds of different RPG paths, but shit, can't pay for said advancements, but expect the whole industry to keep flipping the bill

but wait, gets shocked at a push for GAAS? The deepest of LOLz You will pay one way or the other, by the industry avoiding paying that 100, they just paid for it in longer development time, many studios closing down, push for MTX and GAAS etc. To save for that difference, you are just having corners cut else where.
 
Warablo

Warablo

Member
The problem is the horrible online balancing that will milk even more people out of shark cards and still cost $100 to purchase.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Call Of Duty: Black Ops 6 - Analyst Says Game Pass Didn't Hurt Numbers
28
2K
twilo99 replied
Avowed Not Being Open-World Is A Good Thing, Devs Say
2
59
4K
Mister Wolf replied
  • Locked
GTA 6 On Xbox Series S: "I'm Not Really Worried," Take-Two Boss Says
News Hardware
22
3K
Mod of War replied
(IGN) Take-Two Boss Unconcerned by Plummeting PS5 and Xbox Sales, Insists GTA 6 Will Cause 'A Meaningful Uptick in Console Sales' in 2025
3 4 5 6 7
331
15K
thicc_girls_are_teh_best replied
For The First Time In A Decade, Xbox Is Call Of Duty's Most Popular Platform
2 3
136
8K
sainraja replied
Top Bottom