Or when Sony increased the price of games, and nobody really made a fuss about it. If people complained like they did now, something could have changed there too. I think Sony would have listened too.
Either way, for me, this all stuff is done and there is no point lamenting about it now that they reversed. They screwed up, people complained, they issued an apology publicly ( they could have stayed silent) and reversed the price hike. They also finally announced Gold free for F2P. I don’t think people realize that not that many companies go back on their words so quickly like that, even after a backlash.
So for me, it is over, people did the right thing and they listened, and it is good. What’s more, it will serve them as a reminder not to do something like that again. So, it’s all good for me.
Not to say you can’t market gamepass as is, with the absurd amount of content present in the service, and what’s regularly being added, but I feel like the marketing machine for gamepass really doesn’t start until the massive triple A games start to drop.
I expect a massive marketing machine behind both the service and Halo infinite later this year, and I think the marketing of both a game and the service as a whole will push a lot of subscribers.
The big one on my mind that I think will really up subscriber counts is going to be Starfield.
Never really understood this take on the industry, it comes across as you believing that game companies somehow owe you a lifetime guarantee as a consumer for buying their product. In reality it’s the same as any other business, they build products that offer a value proposition and you decide as a customer whether to buy or not. When they change it you decide if the new offering is worth it to you. Making it sound like some big con or conspiracy just looks like entitled gamer to me.
Yes but some businesses/industries/sectors can be more pro consumer friendly than others. And believe it or not have better or worse ethics. Its not unreasonable for consumers to call for improvements. Not all businesses are the same regardless of a share holder craving for dividends.
I would hate to be the guy who tries to give a trillion (nearly 2 trillion now) dollar company business advice, so I can only speak from the perspective of a consumer
I think if MS ditched gold entirely they would end up with more Game Pass subs because now that you aren’t paying for gold you have 10 bucks to spend on something else.
Also think about not having the gold paywall and how it would basically be a kick to the balls to Sony and Nintendo who will likely continue charging
MS can buy tropical islands on a daily basis now so I can’t imagine why gold would be so valuable to them that they wouldn’t be willing to drop it. It might have been a much better way to ease people into GP then simply pricing them out of gold and looking like money grubbing assholes.
Yea I agree, but the comment I quoted was saying the opposite of that, that all companies are evil and we must be vigilant at all times so that they don’t raid our bank accounts and steal our dogs.
Seems to me game pass unlimited is pretty much a no brainer for the majority of xbox owners who currently only sub to gold. The only exception are those must have physical disk weirdos ;).
Lol @ physical disk weirdos. Funny enough back in the early days of Steam, I totally resented the idea of things going digital. Yet now, I would never dream of buying a physical disc game. Funny ole thing progression.
It’ll be interesting to see where everyone is on it all when all of our 3 year cheap transfer deals end. Mass exodus in 2024 from GPU? Maybe MS’s response will be “quick double the cost of GP, so everyone remembers what great value for money GPU is”. Now that would be funny.
I don’t think there is any way to sell the idea to someone of getting the same games for 10$ more unless said person is brainwashed; anyone with an ounce of logic would see through the PR speak just like people did with the Gold price hike.
So I’m brainwashed because I think the unavoidable hike in production costs justifies a mere $10 price increase?
If by same game you mean between platforms of the same generation, I can see how that complicates things and makes publishers like MS look like the good guys. However if you’re talking about different generations, I don’t entirely agree. Games are already insanely expensive to make now and those costs will only go up considerably this coming generation. Sure we have cross gen games like black ops and I agree it’s harder to defend Activision’s prices outside of pure greed but there are other cross gen games that show considerable leaps on the new consoles.
I somehow highly doubt a game like Demon’s Soul is costing a lot more than before and yet they are charging 10$ more for it. It’s just companies trying to squeeze more money out of their customers than before, there is no other way to rationalize it.
Game prices went up many years ago. All they’ve done is repackage it differently. Ultimate Edition of AC Valhalla £99.99 with in game microtransactions on top multiplied by huge volume increase potential from an ever growing customer base. With no refunds accepted. What’s not to like?
Yes I did, although you somehow forgot to prove how production costs will be going up this gen or how AAA devs are not making enough profit and need that extra 10$ to survive.
Teams are larger, there is more engineering in AAA games creating game-exclusive systems (many of which don’t exist yet in games software), and inflation and competition causes salaries to go up.
It’s not a matter of survival though, it’s about maintaining profit margins. They could probably “survive” selling TLOU2 for $39.99. Rather it’s about generating a profit and when costs go up you want to maintain the same margins that have caused your business to flourish and made investors/shareholders happy.
This is an interesting topic that deserves it's own thread...
… but prices will inevitably go up due to inflation and it’s interesting to see how this will affect people in various regions of the world. In my province, min wage is $15, contrasted to games that cost $69.99 CAN. In the States, min wage is $7.25 or so in some places, right? Contrast that to $59.99 USD games. Then there’s median income to factor in, which like min wage will vary by State.
Well production costs are definitely going up this gen just as it is for every new generation, those visuals that we all want come at a price you know…and that doesn’t include the rest of the development/work that it must be done for a game to be an interesting and polished experience. I agree with Kage and nrXic on this.
I can see how a game like the next big Santa Monica game can justify the 10 dollars/euros price increase, what I think is quite fishy though is seeing games like Demon’s Souls (I got the SotC remake for 40 euros at day one) and Returnal being 80 freakin’ euros here in Europe, wouldn’t 50 or even 60 euros be enough for those titles? Returnal may be a great game like Nex Machina was before it but it definitely doesn’t look like a game that can justify a AAA (or AAAA in Europe) price.
I guess their exclusive games are selling the most at the 20-30 euros price point range and the plan is to get the most out of the day one purchases or to be honest milk the people who support their games at day one. In other words I can understand why they will sell Horizon 2 at 80 euros but it’s definitely weird to ask the same price for a AA game like Returnal…and again I am not trying to say that AA or indie games are less good or deserve less praise than the AAA big releases it’s just hard to accept that the development costs excuse applies for a AA game or a remake.
