13 votes

Would you support an increase in price of games ($80-$100 standard) in exchange for no microtransactions and free DLC?

In other words, just having the game be complete, with expansions. Games have gotten more expensive to make over the years, but the price has largely remained the same. This is what has caused microtransactions to become so widespread.

34 comments

  1. [4]
    Hypersapien
    Link
    No. Games used to be around $60 with no microtransactions or DLC. If anything, extra things to buy should lower the price to $30 or $40, if not even less.

    No. Games used to be around $60 with no microtransactions or DLC. If anything, extra things to buy should lower the price to $30 or $40, if not even less.

    24 votes
    1. [3]
      Mathias
      Link Parent
      To be fair, Inflation also plays a role in this.

      To be fair, Inflation also plays a role in this.

      15 votes
      1. [3]
        Comment deleted by author
        Link Parent
        1. [2]
          Duke_Paul
          Link Parent
          Is that compounded? Not that compounding would make it that much more expensive.

          Is that compounded? Not that compounding would make it that much more expensive.

          1 vote
          1. havoc
            Link Parent
            Yes. OP didn't set the months right, so the number is even only $70. But that is not how inflation works anyway. It doesn't affect all products equally. Also, the reasoning Extra Credits...

            Yes. OP didn't set the months right, so the number is even only $70.

            But that is not how inflation works anyway. It doesn't affect all products equally.

            Also, the reasoning Extra Credits offered--which is what many people rely on--is in many ways flawed. What they said about the costs of production has some merit, but the inclusion of micro-transactions is by no means primarily based on higher investment costs. Game production simply became a profitable market since WoW and Call of Duty, and accordingly business behaves.

            1 vote
  2. [2]
    NamelessThirteenth
    Link
    No. I don't even buy games for $60. I always wait for a price drop aside from very few exceptions.

    No. I don't even buy games for $60. I always wait for a price drop aside from very few exceptions.

    21 votes
    1. Hypersapien
      Link Parent
      Yeah. I don't even remember the last time I paid full price for a game. Although these days, most of the games I buy are inexpensive indie games.

      Yeah. I don't even remember the last time I paid full price for a game.

      Although these days, most of the games I buy are inexpensive indie games.

      3 votes
  3. compiler
    Link
    Games have also become half-arsed over the years. More focus is put on marketing instead of gameplay. Good graphics is not an excuse for a game with no "soul" in it.Some AAA games that make a 2...

    Games have gotten more expensive to make over the years, but the price has largely remained the same

    Games have also become half-arsed over the years. More focus is put on marketing instead of gameplay. Good graphics is not an excuse for a game with no "soul" in it.Some AAA games that make a 2 hours campaign cost 60$ now which is ridiculous.

    If anything the price should drop as it is now.

    12 votes
  4. [13]
    Dot
    Link
    Yes. The gaming community needs to start understanding the sheer monetary investment that a lot of these AAA games take to make, and so in order to have a world without loot boxes and the like, we...

    Yes. The gaming community needs to start understanding the sheer monetary investment that a lot of these AAA games take to make, and so in order to have a world without loot boxes and the like, we need to get used to games being more expensive.

    8 votes
    1. [4]
      abbenm
      (edited )
      Link Parent
      We don't owe our money to anybody. If developers are going to invest their time and resources in things that I don't feel warrant the increased price, I'm not going to subsidize it just because I...

      We don't owe our money to anybody. If developers are going to invest their time and resources in things that I don't feel warrant the increased price, I'm not going to subsidize it just because I feel bad for them. I decide whether a game is worth $60 to me, not them.

      11 votes
      1. [3]
        Dot
        Link Parent
        Great, that's your choice. It doesn't make a difference in a company making back the cost of the game and then allowing it to create a foundation of stability for the developer to have time to...

        Great, that's your choice. It doesn't make a difference in a company making back the cost of the game and then allowing it to create a foundation of stability for the developer to have time to create a new game. I wish to make the critical point that your "boycott" of games until they are of your desired price will not yield the best results for the industry, and will lead to more dlc, more loot boxes, more etc.

        1. [2]
          abbenm
          Link Parent
          I would love nothing more than for the AAA-or-bust industry to collapse, and I hope it does as soon as possible so I can dance on it's grave. For one, the AAA-or-bust model is not the only model,...

          I would love nothing more than for the AAA-or-bust industry to collapse, and I hope it does as soon as possible so I can dance on it's grave. For one, the AAA-or-bust model is not the only model, and the notion that I have to subsidize a model I don't even want to exist in the first place comes from a place of assuming we have to accept the industry on its own terms, which we don't.

          I could happily play FTL or Stardew Valley or Don't Starve or Pillars of Eternity for as long as I ever play games, and games that subvert that AAA-or-bust model will likely continue to come out on a regular basis from now until the end of time. Somehow, there's a value proposition there that works for both them and me. And I didn't mention anything about a boycott, and I don't care about more dlc & loot boxes since I don't play those kinds of games, and will continue not to play them.

          10 votes
    2. [2]
      Crespyl
      Link Parent
      I suspect that even raising the price to three digits per copy would still actually be a significant loss of profit compared to the continuous stream publishers get with endless DLC and...

      I suspect that even raising the price to three digits per copy would still actually be a significant loss of profit compared to the continuous stream publishers get with endless DLC and microtransactions (and allows for whales). The difference in psychology/spending behavior when dealing with one big purchase compared to many small "forgettable" ones still applies.

      I certainly wouldn't buy a AAA game at >$60, but then I already don't buy AAA games at $60 now, in fact I mostly don't even buy those games at all (the smaller studios are consistently much more interesting to me, and more reasonably priced), and when I do buy one it's always on sale.

      2 votes
      1. Dot
        Link Parent
        It would be a massive loss, you are certainly right. I think, however, laws and regulations of lootboxes have become more common, and for that reason prices of games will rise. But with that,...

        It would be a massive loss, you are certainly right. I think, however, laws and regulations of lootboxes have become more common, and for that reason prices of games will rise. But with that, there is a price ceiling as consumers can only spend so much, and I don't believe for many gamers that 80$ for their favorite AAA title is too much.

    3. [4]
      Whom
      Link Parent
      Well you're right that in order to support AAA budgets, more money has to come in from somewhere. If you ask me, though, that's exactly why I want the AAA games industry to collapse and stop...

      Well you're right that in order to support AAA budgets, more money has to come in from somewhere.

      If you ask me, though, that's exactly why I want the AAA games industry to collapse and stop existing. Not to say that AAA games are bad across the board, but higher budgets aren't being leveraged to make innovative and new games. It's for bigger marketing campaigns, more impressive art assets, and other reasons that make games flashier but not necessarily better.

      One thing I think is cool about right now is that we're seeing a bit of return to games by studios that are big enough to make something clearly broader in scope than indies are typically able to do but without going the ridiculous AAA route. If you look through gaming history, a lot of the best stuff ended up in that space and was often made by Japanese devs willing to take creative risks, but it kinda died out as budgets exploded last gen. I'm more than willing to continue to return to that and watch the AAA industry starve.

      1 vote
      1. [3]
        Dot
        Link Parent
        I agree, and what you say is true. The reemergence of Japanese games in popular culture is kinda ironic because, after the initial Nintendo success, the game design "innovation" in Japanese games...

        I agree, and what you say is true. The reemergence of Japanese games in popular culture is kinda ironic because, after the initial Nintendo success, the game design "innovation" in Japanese games totally collapsed into "grindfests." It's only recently that we've seen a resurgence, and I think we will see the same from the western AAA industry as they will have to compete again in the spaces that really matter (game design). Additionally, I feel that us discussing the AAA industry as one big thing is a little wrong. And the "collapse" of the whole thing would be extremely terrible (not considering the loss of jobs), but I love games like the Witcher, I loved the newest DOOM, I enjoy Titanfall. These are examples of AAA industry games that are at very least appreciated for what they are, and it should be upsetting that large scale games like these could no longer be made because there isn't a market for them.

        1. [2]
          Whom
          Link Parent
          Games of value certainly come out of the AAA industry, I don't mean to act like it's a wasteland, but I would personally see it as a more than worthwhile trade-off. However if there were a way to...

          Games of value certainly come out of the AAA industry, I don't mean to act like it's a wasteland, but I would personally see it as a more than worthwhile trade-off.

          However if there were a way to recreate the balance we had during the PS2 era but also with room for Indies, that would be great to me too. I just don't see how it'll ever get to that again without some big crash from them pushing so far.

          1. Dot
            Link Parent
            This may be a bit extreme because I don't like government messing with markets, but I'd be more than happy to have harsher monopoly laws in regard to entertainment and media (this includes, news,...

            This may be a bit extreme because I don't like government messing with markets, but I'd be more than happy to have harsher monopoly laws in regard to entertainment and media (this includes, news, movies, tv, etc.). I just think that game developers have all congregated under and been bought by a few publishers, and there needs to be more variety and more market competition. However, this is very romantic because it doesn't take into account just how risky any entertainment investment or project is, which is why you see these large companies growing either through mergers and acquisitions, its because they need the diversity to reduce risk.

    4. [2]
      Catt
      Link Parent
      I actually don't think it's the monetary investment that's driving loot boxes and DLCs. I believe that due to a lot more choice out there now, that it's more of a race to market. It's more...

      I actually don't think it's the monetary investment that's driving loot boxes and DLCs. I believe that due to a lot more choice out there now, that it's more of a race to market. It's more important to have something released, then to get it right, so we're getting half games.

      As for loot boxes, and general transactions, it's gambling. It's unregulated and the pay off is so high.

      1. Dot
        Link Parent
        Very true, rushed game development deadlines have killed more than a few AAA franchises. And loot boxes / DLC help alleviate that fail rate or at least make back more money more consistently.

        Very true, rushed game development deadlines have killed more than a few AAA franchises. And loot boxes / DLC help alleviate that fail rate or at least make back more money more consistently.

  5. Catt
    Link
    I almost always wait for both to drop in price, or get bundled up. Definitely not willing to pay more.

    I almost always wait for both to drop in price, or get bundled up. Definitely not willing to pay more.

    5 votes
  6. Lovich
    Link
    Microtransactions have become so widespread because they make more money than any other model, because they are tapping into the same sort psychological tricks that cause people to become addicted...

    Microtransactions have become so widespread because they make more money than any other model, because they are tapping into the same sort psychological tricks that cause people to become addicted to gambling. Game companies are never going to give up microtransactions now without legislation/regulation because there are always going to be children, addicts, and people with large amounts of disposable income who will end up paying more in total than if all customers were paying 80 dollars for a game

    4 votes
  7. Social
    Link
    No. I rarely get DLCs. The base game is enough for me and I'd like to decide self if I want some dlc or not.

    No. I rarely get DLCs. The base game is enough for me and I'd like to decide self if I want some dlc or not.

    2 votes
  8. [3]
    zac
    Link
    I don't know enough about the economics behind the gaming industry to support a flat increase. I would rather be able to see how my funds are being allocated. For example, if 25% of sales are...

    I don't know enough about the economics behind the gaming industry to support a flat increase. I would rather be able to see how my funds are being allocated. For example, if 25% of sales are being reinvested into hiring, stability, and core development vs. making loot crates and weapon skins.

    2 votes
    1. [2]
      Neverland
      Link Parent
      One tidbit on the economics of micro transactions in gaming I’ve heard is that 90%+ of users don’t matter to a surprising degree. It’s the whales who can spend thousands per year that make the...

      One tidbit on the economics of micro transactions in gaming I’ve heard is that 90%+ of users don’t matter to a surprising degree. It’s the whales who can spend thousands per year that make the games so much money.

      Whales are a game’s top spending players, with the top 10 percent of an app’s spenders being responsible for 70 percent of its revenue from in-app purchases, and 59 percent of its total revenue.

      source

      3 votes
      1. zac
        Link Parent
        Interesting -- thx for that! Makes me wonder if there are any correlated demographic or psychographic qualities in the whale group. I imagine they're "whale" spenders outside of apps/gaming as well.

        Interesting -- thx for that! Makes me wonder if there are any correlated demographic or psychographic qualities in the whale group. I imagine they're "whale" spenders outside of apps/gaming as well.

  9. BBBence1111
    Link
    If I buy a game, it's at a discount. 60$, or the local equivalent is simply way too much for me to afford, especally if the devs want to finish the game with paid DLC. Also, the argument that...

    If I buy a game, it's at a discount. 60$, or the local equivalent is simply way too much for me to afford, especally if the devs want to finish the game with paid DLC.

    Also, the argument that making games costs more is irrelevant, considering the fact how much the gaming community has grown over the years.

    2 votes
  10. Teskeria
    Link
    Don't we already do that with some of the AAA titles? For example, Battlefield titles usually run $60, and then you can buy a $20 or $30 'season pass' that let's you download all the DLC for free....

    Don't we already do that with some of the AAA titles? For example, Battlefield titles usually run $60, and then you can buy a $20 or $30 'season pass' that let's you download all the DLC for free. Basically the same thing, just in two different transactions. Which helps, by the way. People can save up sixty bucks for a game and then can decide when they have the extra money for the DLC, as opposed to being forced to pay it all at once.

    For the record, I don't like paying full price for games and I avoid it as much as possible.

    2 votes
  11. crius
    Link
    Games are not more expensive. It just that marketing leeches find their way into it.

    Games are not more expensive. It just that marketing leeches find their way into it.

    1 vote
  12. crius
    Link
    Games are not more expensive. It just that marketing leeches find their way into it.

    Games are not more expensive. It just that marketing leeches find their way into it.

    1 vote
  13. [2]
    miketypeguy
    Link
    Back in the old days (90s), games on PC used to get expansion packs (thinking half-life and other titles) where were DLC but just packaged and you still had to have the original disk. I don't...

    Back in the old days (90s), games on PC used to get expansion packs (thinking half-life and other titles) where were DLC but just packaged and you still had to have the original disk. I don't think of DLC as too much different however QA was generally higher when you had to release a game without the possibility of bug fixes. I'm okay with DLC if it's fairly large in scope as it reminds me of these old expansion packs.

    However if you're going to have microtransactions, just make the game free in my opinion. Lots of the free games make lots of money just on cosmetics these days. To be fair they are quite large games with AAA studios.

    1. crius
      Link Parent
      Sure, let's compare StarCraft: Brood wars, Warcraft 3: the frozen throne or Baldur's gate: Tales of the sword coast with the new downloadable hero for <insert random recent game> plus 1 extra...

      Sure, let's compare StarCraft: Brood wars, Warcraft 3: the frozen throne or Baldur's gate: Tales of the sword coast with the new downloadable hero for <insert random recent game> plus 1 extra mission to unlock it.

      Totally the same thing /s

      Those were expansions, like recently The Witcher 3: Blood and Wine was.
      The other ones are DLC. They don't use the existing content to add a substantial value. They just add a minor extra that in the end don't give me anything special.

      With some notable exceptions, DLC are piece of the original content stripped away and sold for extra.

  14. Bear
    Link
    Sorry, but $100 is way off the mark. For example, the last game that I bought at launch was Fallout 4, on PC. Even though I got it shortly before release day, I never paid full price. Back then, I...

    Sorry, but $100 is way off the mark.

    For example, the last game that I bought at launch was Fallout 4, on PC.

    Even though I got it shortly before release day, I never paid full price. Back then, I think the MSRP was $40, and the season pass was $25. Through an approved key re-seller (GreenManGaming), I got both for 20% off, so $52.

    And as much as I did enjoy the game, I feel like I overpaid.

    I know that everyone involved with the production of content needs to make a living, but perhaps the way forward is to improve the quality of the content so that it's really good so that gamers flock to it, and are loyal.

  15. giesse
    Link
    No, I'd rather buy games that didn't cost an insane amount of money to be made. I also seriously doubt that the reason for microtransactions and all that is that they are unable to make a profit...

    No, I'd rather buy games that didn't cost an insane amount of money to be made.

    I also seriously doubt that the reason for microtransactions and all that is that they are unable to make a profit with just selling the game.