• herrcaptain@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    108
    ·
    10 months ago

    I mean, let them try? I, for one, basically stopped buying new games (with the occasional exception for an indie dev). By the time the worst bugs are fixed, it’ll be on sale for 50% off anyway.

    • dutchkimble@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      41
      ·
      10 months ago

      Yeah, I don’t see any reason to buy (or pre buy!) any game at all. At launch you’re paying double for a beta version basically. Like you said, wait for the actual game to be released a few months later at a good price.

    • m-p{3}@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      10 months ago

      My backlog contains way too many games, and most of the games I really want day 1 are produced by indie devs.

      Embracer won’t see me buying a game at full price, $70 or more.

  • fsxylo@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    10 months ago

    At this point I see anything above $40 as a red flag. Free games or $60 games and I’m almost guaranteed to be treated as the product instead of the other way around.

  • Gork@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    10 months ago

    Who do they think they are? An AAAA publisher? Only Ubisoft has that dubious claim.

  • DebatableRaccoon@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Corpo prick says “I’m considering milking making more money after fucking over thousands of employees, IPs and fans”.

    Consumers say “So what else is fucking new? See you in the discount bin”.

    World continues to melt into the over-manufactured cesspit the corpo pricks force it to be.

  • CaptPretentious@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    The more something costs the more I expect from it. Baldur’s Gate 3, was $60 on release. If you want that or more from me, my personal expectation is your game is if the same quality or better.

    I’m not even going to wait for a sale. Because by the time a decent sale comes around an indie developer has made a better game for cheaper, and I’ve already bought it, and I’m playing it. Your old, overpriced game means nothing to me. There is no shortage of entertainment and the hype for these games often dies so fast you’re really not missing out.

    • DerisionConsulting@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Basically buy any game that Tim Cain and/or Brian Fargo were involved with, and you’re set.

      They are older so they don’t rely on expensive hardware, they are usually replayable, they’ve usually won a lot of awards, and they are usually very cheap.

  • GBU_28@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    10 months ago

    Who cares? There’s 10’s of thousands of high quality gaming hours across every genre already created. You don’t need anything they are currently making, certainly not for years

    • overload@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      10 months ago

      I think the AAA industry is really struggling with this.

      Also, improved graphical fidelity isn’t really a big selling point like it was in the 2000’s AAA days.

  • nek0d3r@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    10 months ago

    One half of my mind wishes developers did make more money because these games are so much more effort than the games that were the same price decades ago, but the other half knows that devs don’t see a dime of that hiked price.

  • Zellith@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    10 months ago

    Do it. If people want to pay high prices for brand new video games, let them pay it. I’ll just do what I’ve always done; wait for a sale.

      • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        10 months ago

        You realize that sales come in varying magnitudes, right? Each individual decides what a game is worth to them, and if that means a 50% sale might have been sufficient for a $60 game, but that it’ll take a 65% sale to make an $80 game worth it, then so be it.

          • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            10 months ago

            There’s a fundamental disconnect here and I’m not sure where it is, so let me just explain my position and maybe you can tell me where you’re confused.

            Let’s take, for instance, a game which at full price is $40, a game that’s $60, and a game that’s $80.

            In all of these cases, let’s assume I have decided that I am willing to pay $20.

            In the first case, I will wait for a 50% sale, and buy the game.

            In the second case, I will wait for a 66% sale, and buy the game.

            In the third case, I will wait for a 75% sale, and buy the game.

            If that sale magnitude doesn’t happen, I won’t buy the game. Similarly, if I’ve lost interest in the game by the time that sale magnitude happens, I won’t buy the game.

            It’s very simple. Nobody is forcing you to pay $80 for a game, and nobody is forcing you to buy it just because it’s 50% off, if the 50% off price is not low enough that you feel it’s worth your money to buy it. It’s OK to just not ever buy a game.