We live in a world of $50 Game of the Year nominees and $80 biggest publisher in the world video games. It reminds me of the 90s where people paid $80 or more for Final Fantasy III while other games were $30 to $40. Good games, at that.
There's a lot to discuss around the value of games. Cost to develop, quality of output, and perceived value. Perceived value is an extremely hard one to argue considering it's purely subjective in nature. From those happy to pay for seasonal skins, those who pre-order deluxe editions, those who pay a subscription fee, and those who wait for annual Steam sales. Because of this, it's impossibly to truly get at the true value of such things when they vary so greatly.
But what about development costs? How often does more time and money spent on a game result in better? Are annual released games that cost $200m to develop truly a sign of these costs? What is that money being spent on when players experience the same content and same bugs from one to the next? Should we pay prime dollar for costs that are slightly altering experiences compared to new IP developed for a fraction of the cost?
We've all heard about how more expensive development is getting, but how do we then get things like Baldur's Gate III and Expedition 33: Clair Obscur? How are certain studios able to produce high quality content with less funding? And why are those who spend more to develop the ones who push for higher prices without outputting similar levels of quality, let alone new content? Is it merely players paying for the faults of poor management and design choices?
What are your thoughts on the subject? Do you feel that the games that are getting price increases truly represent an increase in development costs or just another focus on increased profit margins?
Microsoft announced its financial results for Q3 of fiscal year 2026, including an update on its gaming Xbox business and more.
Not looking good. Hopefully Asha Sharma is able to turn Phil’s disaster around.
To me it's still quite remarkable how they can cash-in 5.3bn in revenue in a single quarter, since their hardware is basically dead.
The stock mark is what makes Microsoft remarkable, They have convinced every institutional and retail investor to just keep piling money into them. Like many big tech giants they are just a big growing pyramid scheme. As long as people keep dropping money into ETF's that cover the market Microsoft will always be liquid. At the same time it is completely stifling innovation and competition. People need to start being more discreet in how they invest their money as it's killing the system.
Riiiiight because people will just flock back to them for one or two games per year.
15+ years of bad performance is what they call irreparable in business. It is time for them to sell off the assets and get out of entertainment.
These declines are on the back of extra revenue received from releasing games like Forza horizon 5 on PlayStation. So I’m being sarcastic here when I said they should go back to exclusives. Killing off a revenue stream from Ps5 sales will only make things worse
The charity event will be streamed live from Gamescom in August.
Thanks to the slip-up of an artist working on the title, we now have more evidence that a new Injustice game is in the works.
Depends on the game, I believe we as core gaming consumers now need to make more careful decisions on purchasing full priced games. Even with $60/$70 games I rarely bought day one. It needs to be a game I know for sure I would love to play and support the devs for. Are my friends playing it? Is it from a studio or IP I am a huge fan of? Is it well received from critics and the public? I always look at these first.
Otherwise I am completely fine with waiting for sales. And unfortunately Nintendo hardly ever does deep sales on their first party. I have plenty of games in my backlog.
Developers rely on hype and marketing to sell you day one, the reality is if you can have a shred of self control and resist the review hype and FOMO, you never have to pay full price.
It’s worth $80 to play day one if that’s what gets you going, otherwise, wait six months and buy 3 games that came out earlier in the year for the same $80
Only one or two games a year are actually worth it day 1. Some years it's more and some it's less. With all the micro transactions, tiers, live-service elements, cheap looking AI development, and bad art, $80 is a joke for most games. But if the games are quality, without being whale machine-level gating-casino-rentals, they would be worth it. $80 day 1 is more than a fair price for good art.
Remasters are a personal decision, as nothing about them justify the price-tag. On the other hand, remasters, like Demon Soul's, are worth it.
I'm not buying 'the development cost' excuse. There's a ton of money floating around not being used to make games.
Studios with smaller budgets that can develop high quality experiences are well managed and the talent is consistent from the top to the bottom.
People will still buy games for that, it will become the new norm and it will grow again, but no obsolutely not worth it, games are too monetised nowadays as well, i miss the old days of gaming
No game is going to be worth $80 at launch. I'm sorry. 69.99 was pushing it, but $79.99 for a base game? Gonna have to chip in on that $20 battle pass every 45 days too. I think my days of buying ANYTHING day one is over.