Publishers looking to make next gen games $70

“Not every game should garner the $69.99 price point on next-gen, but flagship AAAs such as NBA 2K merit this pricing more than others.”

Lol the game that microtransacts the heck out of you? If a game like NBA 2k a yearly sports franchise gets away with it I can’t see other publishers not doing it.

We probably are still looking at a price increase and looks like I’m waiting quite a bit to buy systems then.

1 Like

70 dollar games? SOLD

No Micro-transactions, no subs, no DLC, no special editions, no Pre-order promos, no exclusives timed or otherwise.

Thank you.

ORRRRRR, or, make a game that is within your budget to produce. Mmmkay?

1 Like

Oh how bold of you to think that they’ll stop doing microtransactions at that price.


70 bucks for games. This was something that was bound to happen and I’m honestly fine with it.

70 bucks for games that has microtransactions? Fuck that shit all the fuck down. If a game has microtransactions they need to be free. NBA2K22 can literally be produced by the money NBA2K21 gets on MTs alone.

Well hopefully they show me why its worth it. Maybe when I see games using unreal engine 5 seriously I’ll think differently.

You know games are going to have Microtransactions at $70 still.


Publishers should create within their means. They’re just greedy and want all the money ever.

I look at a game like No Man’s Sky and it has largely reinvented itself, had one of the worst launches ever and still stayed away thus far from Micro-transactions. Compare that with Destiny and Destiny 2 which had hype on top of hype and money to spare. They still want micro-transactions and still can’t make a product that is consistently worth a damn.

Make good games, but put actual effort into them and you could easily charge 100 bucks per game. Keep pushing textures and poly counts, huge empty maps, broken multiplayer and microtransactions? You’re going to charge 70 bucks for exactly what we’re getting now.

Nothing will change, except things will get worse by 1. Stagnating as they are or 2. More transactions of the micro kind, AND gambling.

The ones that actually need the money aren’t the ones with the terrible business practices.

Need is a strong word.

They’ll just charge more and keep the microtransactions/lootboxes coming. They’re not looking to be bastions of morality, they’re looking to squeeze as much profit out of our hobby as they can.

There’s reasonable ways to do that and then there’s messed up ways to do that.

A good way for example is to sell reasonable DLC or expansion packs.

Games have been $60 for almost 15 years. Even at $70 they would cost less then 360 launch games. On top of that, game development costs have only gotten higher. Complain all you want though. I certainly wouldn’t advise for rolling over and letting companies charge an arm and a leg just cause they can.

This would make sense

if the minimum wage had followed along with the inflation in the past fifteen years.

I don’t see how that’s relevant. More people making less money is certainly incentive to keep prices down, but minimum wage doesn’t have any affect on how much money is being made on game sales.

doesnt matter to me. blabla inflation and they’ll be like $20 in1-2 years or PS Plus free

1 Like

If its such a bad deal for game development why do a bunch of them keep pushing for games that cost more and more.

1 Like

Exactly, why are they not controlling their costs?

Someone living outside their means can’t reasonably argue “I need a raise because I’m spending too much”.

Meanwhile, Indie games have been crushing it on a shoestring budget.

I would be ok with just No DLC

I actually want games to have DLC/Expansions. Done properly its a benefit to the game.

The problem is when shitty business practices come into play.

For example Smash Bros besides the cost has had great stuff.


For lots of reasons. Because there is bigger investment in advertising as gaming becomes more popular. Because Horizon Forbidden West and Spiderman Miles Morales aren’t going to sale PS5s if they look exactly like a PS4 game. Because graphics have not gotten to the point where it would take too long to develop a AAA game for it to be profitable. Because developers are driven to push the limits of the tools they are given. Because there are consumers that appreciate ambition: better graphics, bigger world, more characters on screen, better AI. (Even though ambition does not equate to quality)

Why are we not pushing frame rate?

Why are we not pushing physics?

Why are we not pushing atmosphere?

Why are we not pushing AI? (You mentioned AI but early reports of newer games like say Cyberpunk have said the AI is lacking).

Why are we not pushing agency?

Why are we not pushing story telling?

Why are we not pushing innovation in actual game play?

We get larger maps, more plant life, more buildings that look like buildings. AAA fails because their games are made by a group with no singular vision. They only get done what the group can collectively agree upon. Which is larger maps, RNG, procedural generation, textures and resolution. The only reason you’re seeing ray tracing is it’s a new way to make things look pretty.

The problem is, games are interactive as a medium. But those that make AAA want them to be movies. Passive, 30fps, beautiful sit down and strap in theme park rides.

I disagree that AAA is pushing boundaries outside of those few things. What they are pushing, is something cosmetically appealing enough to get mass market sales.

Demon’s Souls was considered and absolute flop, a failure. UNTIL people picked it up and tried it, saw how quirky and fucking shit janky it was and liked it.

THEN it became a AAA Dark Souls franchise.

EA, Ubisoft, Activision and the other big AAA people are just masturbating.