I can’t remember the last game I paid full price for, but I can guarantee you it wasn’t a AAA game.
In the 2000s, before Steam or other online stores were a thing, and while I still bothered with a console, I was hitting up used game sections at various local stores. Main difference between that era and now to me is that there’s a better selection online, and prices are indeed cheaper if you don’t care about playing AAA games. I don’t understand how anybody “struggle[s] to find new games” as the article claims.
There used to be an online store called GoGamer.com that sold nothing but physical copies of games. I have sooo many games boxes on my gaming shelf from them.
Elden Ring, good gake but my least favorite from soft game. Should have got it on sale.
You know what, that was the last game I paid full price for as well, but I was buying it as gift for my nephew & didn’t think about that until you mentioned it.
I’ve never even played it.
YSK https://isthereanydeal.com/ lets you create a waitlist, set a price you’re willing to pay for each game, and notifies you when its on sale for ≤ that amount.
You should only pay full price if the release quality is great. And even then, there’s a reason why #patientgamers is a trend. You save on hardware cost, game cost & get better quality games with extra post release content
I spend as much as I did on console, the difference is that more projects get a share of the pie.
IMO it’s healthier for the industry if my 120 eurobucks, instead of going to just one or two AAA, go something like 40 to an AAA, 30 to another, 20 to a high profile sure thing indie, 10 for a risky experimental indie puchase, 15 for an old but deserving back catalog title, and 5 for someone’s crude low budget personal project. The lower prices across the board allow that.
Just a friendly reminder from an old fart that used to save their allowance to buy catridges:
Gaming is insanely cheap and accessible right now. You kids have no idea how good you have it, we used to go get our games twenty miles away, uphill both ways.
But no, seriously, that piece is a terrible take from somebody that either doesn’t understand how games are made and sold or is too young to understand why they’re so fundamentally wrong. Probably both. This comes to mind: https://indieweb.social/@emilygorcenski/111533761630028005
I dunno man, I started gaming with the Atari, C64 and NES, and I never paid full price back then either. Rentals, used games, piracy… that was a good 95%+ of my gaming experience.
The only time I got full price games was maybe a birthday or Christmas, but even that was rare for a major AAA release like Mario 3 or E.T.
Maybe your memory is just one person’s experience and not an absolute truth.
No, you and I are saying the same thing. The article (not just the headline) is a screed about how people buying on sales is a result of games becoming more expensive and game publishers becoming greedy. Except it’s not, people always dug for sales because games used to be way more expensive than they are now.
I may misremember many things about last century, but I don’t misremember the way I spent 90% of my spare time or how I acquired the games I played during that time.
While I agree with your statement about the cost of games, I think the link you provided is incorrect.
While it’s often true that young people will be wrong on a topic they are passionate about, that is true of everybody. It’s also true that the human memory is extremely fallible so just because we experienced something doesn’t mean we have the facts of the event correct in our own head.
The reason I agree with you on the first of game cartridges, though is that info is verifiable. Cartridges didn’t provide consistency in manufacturing costs because they were all different inside. Many SNES games were over 60 dollars.
I’m not here to defend the meme link I provided, but in its defense, it explicitly refers to verifiable facts.
Like, you know, the price of games adjusted for inflation.
I used to buy full price games pretty often… But I can’t afford it anymore. To the point I’m mostly playing free to play games or things I already own.
I think that’s true for a lot of people too.The price is right. See Price Discrimination: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/price_discrimination.asp
To summarize for people who don’t want to click in, different gamers are willing to pay different amounts for the same game. If you keep the price high then you earn a lot per customer but on a small customer base. Set the price low and you earn a little per customer but on more customers.
Price discrimination is basically finding ways to charge each customer the most they’ll pay - that way you earn a lot for the customers willing to pay the inflated amount while not losing the customers looking to save money.
There are a variety of ways businesses do this - sales are one way. Grocery stores often use coupons, as higher income consumers often won’t bother to deal with clipping coupons. Sometimes the exact same manufacturer will make both a brand name product and then the generic brand with a small tweak. For business to business sales, some companies do pricing per customer based literally on the most they’ll pay.
That’s it? The article seems to end abruptly, anyway, I’d bet it works for publishers and most of the revenue comes from those who bought the game at full price
I preorder Pokemon games so end up paying full price. Playing along with the hype farm online helps the experience.
Otherwise yeah. Why pay 60+ for a recent game when I can spend hours enjoying a $5 title from ten years ago?
i think this is the way it is on every platform, not just pc. the last games i bought at full price were god of war ragnarok, and before that rdr2
Praise be to St. Gaben, our Lord and Saviour!
I think the only games I paid full price for this year are BG3, and Jedi Survivor. And I bought a ton of games this year.