Sigh…you really can’t make this crap up.

  • sebinspace
    link
    fedilink
    3610 months ago

    I’ve come to the understanding that each A stands for how Ass the game is, so this just tells me the game is more Ass than triple A.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    Français
    2710 months ago

    Funny price tag from a company that recently told its player base that owning games is becoming obsolete.

  • LiveLM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    22
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    “Quadruple-A” lmao
    Just the other day there was an article with the previous creative director saying that they had to axe the Single-player campaign because they just didn’t have the team to do it

  • mommykink
    link
    fedilink
    1110 months ago

    While I don’t know enough about this specific title to say whether it’s right or wrong, I do think that eventually something’s got to give and people will need to accept prices higher than $60 or stop complaining about DLC. New game prices have been the same for decades at this point but game development costs have only grown. I’d happily pay $80 for a great game that didn’t need to rely on microtransactions to sustain itself

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      42
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Wild because games in the $20-$40 range have been killing it the last couple years.

      Maybe instead of charging more, big developers could spend less on overhead and bureaucracy. Palworld is made by 4 guys and has sold more in a few weeks than most AAA releases last year. Hifi Rush, cyberfunk bomb rush, subnautica if you want examples out of early access.

      Maybe instead of gamers getting used to higher prices, game publishers should get used to lower sales until they wise the fuck up.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      2510 months ago

      Problem is these aren’t great games but cash grabs with day one dlcs and micro transactions. And they keep asking for more.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1510 months ago

      Game development isn’t as expensive as made out, legal costs and marketing. But mostly greed and share holders are main issues in gaming right now

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1110 months ago

      I’d happily pay $80 for a great game that didn’t need to rely on microtransactions to sustain itself

      I’d be fine with this, but… They’d just add the mtx anyway, because why not? Gotta make ALL the money, not just a lot of money.

    • El Barto
      link
      fedilink
      810 months ago

      Weak argument.

      Overall game development is actually easier these days.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      510 months ago

      Hades, Risk of Rain, Captain of Industry, Against the Storm.

      Plenty of great games are under 40$. They just don’t get made by large companies with shareholders and executive and marketing overheads.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    3
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I’ll bet $200 this pile of shit game is dead as a doornail within 3 months of release.

  • Uriel238 [all pronouns]
    link
    fedilink
    210 months ago

    Ooh is this a sign of the Ubisoft end times? A year or two before it gets snatched up by Microsoft while its considering declaring bankruptcy?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    210 months ago

    Does anyone actually know what the model is? Is it like WoW with a monthly, or is it a bunch of micro transactions? I don’t see this mentioned anywhere.