The latest gaming generation has introduced a number of features, but with all the new and shiny things comes a higher price tag. Some AAA game publishers have used this new generation as a springboard to increase the prices of games from $60 to $70. One of the companies leading the charge is Take-Two, who released NBA 2K21 for $70 on PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X|S. During a conference call that took place earlier this week, Take-Two's CEO Strauss Zelnick reiterated the point of the price increase for major games going forward, saying, "our review was that we're offering an array of extraordinary experiences, lots of replayability, and the last time there was a frontline price increase in the US was 2005/2006, so we think consumers were ready for it."

While Take-Two seems to think that players are ready to accept the new MSRP for games, he also mentioned that the $70 price point won't apply to all future games published by the studio, as they plan to, "make announcements on a title-by-title basis" and that they "want to always deliver more value than what [they] charge."

Source: Morgan Stanley Technology Media & Telecom Conference (transcribed by VGC)

 

[Deleted User]

LMFAO

 

[rotteldastation]

Even $60 is too much for NBA 2K21... $70? I wouldn't play it for free.

 

[CTR640]

Lol, Take-Two and all the other publishers can simply fuck off. I'll never buy any game for €70.

 

[TheNerdWIzard]

Wtf, they are either extremely out of touch, extremely greedy, or both, lol.

 

[Seliph]

More like ready for "free" games. No way I'm paying 70 bucks for a game but I'll still play it some way

 

[RedoLane]

No, we are not. Far from it.

 

[ZoNtendo]

I'd be willing to pay 70$ for something like GTA6, but 70$ for a shitty basketball game or fifa/call of ect...

just fuck off

 

[Chary]

The sports games are the WORST ones to use as an example for a price increase...they're the laziest games on the market.

That being said, if we adjust for inflation and everything, I'm more than willing to pay $70 for really solidly made games. Just...not NBA2K...never.

 

[x65943]

lots of replayability

Has this man ever played one of his studio's games?

 

[linuxares]

Yes I am Take Two if you remove your fucking Microtransactions. Else go and suck on a rusty exhaust pipe.

 

[Plasmaster09]

View attachment 250786​

The latest gaming generation has introduced a number of features, but with all the new and shiny things comes a higher price tag. Some AAA game publishers have used this new generation as a springboard to increase the prices of games from $60 to $70. One of the companies leading the charge is Take-Two, who released NBA 2K21 for $70 on PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X|S. During a conference call that took place earlier this week, Take-Two's CEO Strauss Zelnick reiterated the point of the price increase for major games going forward, saying, "our review was that we're offering an array of extraordinary experiences, lots of replayability, and the last time there was a frontline price increase in the US was 2005/2006, so we think consumers were ready for it."

While Take-Two seems to think that players are ready to accept the new MSRP for games, he also mentioned that the $70 price point won't apply to all future games published by the studio, as they plan to, "make announcements on a title-by-title basis" and that they "want to always deliver more value than what [they] charge."

Source: Morgan Stanley Technology Media & Telecom Conference (transcribed by VGC)

gotta love how the companies willing to make the first move and ramp up prices to $70 before most others... are those producing games nobody in their right mind would even pay $40 for anymore considering sports games are basically just the same damn thing over and over at this point

 

[SkittleDash]

For developers who put love and care into their games? Yes. For developers that put little to no effort in their games? No.

 

[RyRyIV]

Nothing I love more than being asked to pay $70 for a game that hits the clearance bin within a year.

I'm interested to see how the $70 price point competes with things like GamePass and other "games as a service" options. With the GamePass example, you can pay less than the price of two full priced games a year and get access to infinitely more, typically higher quality, play options.

 

[Dimensional]

I'd pay $70 for a Complete Game, not one where everything is behind micro transactions, loot boxes, DLC, Timed Exclusives, etc. If it is a 100% complete game where Everything is included. All the DLC, all the items, quests, etc where I get it all for 1 simple price. Any 'live' games with content that requires paying extra can go to way of Atari's ET.

 

[shaunj66]

Even in previous generations I rarely bought games brand new / on release. I certainly don't see that changing this gen. It's a mugs game unless you're massively invested in the franchise.

It's almost always worth waiting for the inevitable price drops mere months later or the GOTY/complete editions. The Cyberpunk fiasco is a perfect example of this.

When release date trailers drop just do a mental add of +1 to the year and train yourself to believe it

 

[gamesquest1]

now if only the masses would be ready to tell them to go F themselves and not buy any more of this trash until the price drops to $20 which is all a crappy paint job game like sports titles deserve at this point, especially when they still pack micro transactions etc into the game, they should be giving the game away for free to their junkies, but honestly I genuinely think sports games in general especially the yearly released titles should just release a yearly DLC that just slaps the new kit designs on the old game because thats effectively all the updates tend to do

there are very few games that I would ever consider paying $70 for, not saying its impossible, but alas the market decides and if enough kids get their mom to rush out and buy every crappy sports title every year thats exactly what will drive up prices

only game I recently bought for full price at launch was half life Alyx simply because I needed some more VR content and I wanted to experience the story free from potential spoilers which would be impossible to miss if you waited even a week after release

 

[Deleted User]

I remember before Dreamcast came out I was talking to a guy at one of the chains not Gamestop can't remember what it was called. But he said "NBA 2K and NFL 2K will have automatic updates that you can download the entire rosters every year for free" of course that never happened and here they are charging $70.

That was when Sega had the rights to the 2K games Sega also released NFL 2K5 on PS2/Xbox for $20 brand new in stores before EA was like "oh fuck" and bought the NFL license to make NFL games exclusively forever to make sure they couldn't do that.

If it was under Sega then and I would have given it a better chance of the free roster updates happening, but with Take Two they use it to RAISE THE PRICE OF GAMES OVERALL.

 

[Veho]

If the game pricing followed the inflation, games would cost $80 today. The $60 price tag for AAA titles was introduced in 2006 with the launch of the PS3/X360. Adjusted for inflation that's $80 today. $70 is a jump, but it's still not as bad as it could be.
And that's just recent history. SNES games cost the equivalent of $120, and so on.
Here's an article: https://techraptor.net/gaming/features/cost-of-gaming-since-1970s

That being said, most games do not justify a $60 price tag today, let alone $70.

 

[Rabbid4240]

no no no nO NO NO NO WHAT ARE YOU DOING STOP NO PLEASE GOD WHY