PS4, Xbox Games to cost $70 - says the respected analyst Michael Pachter

[KingVamp]

Cats can't throw darts. They don't have imposable thumbs. Not even Hemingway cats.

Spoiler

I think that will give usefulness to this thread.

 

[McHaggis]

How the hell is Pachter even in a position where he is a source for things?

Really, though, you've got to admire Pachter. Not many people can make a successful living out of trolling. I don't think it would be a stretch for me to believe that he has a real deep down hatred for video games and gamers and all his predictions are just wishful thinking.

 

[Ergo]

But we don't have free healthcare.

Neither do they, unless you really stretch the definition of "free" so, yeah, spoiled and proud of it.

 

[Scuba156]

So $130-$150 for Australia?
I'll be sticking with my gaming PC 'til the price is right and there are a bunch of exclusive titles that I'm interested in.

Where are you pulling that price from? Games at the moment range from $69 to around $85 at release compared to two years ago where they were between $90 and $110. It's never been cheaper for Australian gamers.

 

[DinohScene]

Hello 2nd hand games.
Hello last gen games.
Hello old school games.

Hello Internet.


If games will cost 70 quid then meh, I'll still buy the limited collectors editions.
They will always be expensive.

 

[WiiUBricker]

But we don't have free healthcare.

Neither have we.

 

[Eerpow]

Apparently $60 in 2005 (when the Xbox 360 launched with $60 games) is equivalent to $72 today.

So if games were around $70 for the next gen it'd be about the same cost as the beginning of the last gen. Boohoo.

But if they're $60 then they'll be what, $10 cheaper adjusting for inflation?

I still think it's a bad pricing decision for their own business sake, in the naïve mind of the consumer things just don't work that way, even if you indeed are correct.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

I still think it's a bad pricing decision for their own business sake, in the naïve mind of the consumer things just don't work that way, even if you indeed are correct.

Well, that's if Microsoft prices their games that way. PC games are still steadily at $60, Wii U games are $60, PS4 games are announced to be $60 tops. Microsoft would just be an extreme outlier if they priced their games at $70.

 

[emigre]

Ever considered the fact that we've been through an economical crisis and the value of the U.S. Dollar greatly decreased? What was $60 a few years ago may very well be worth $70 today - everything depends on how weak/strong the dollar is in relation to other currencies (especially the Yen).

That said, as it was mentioned before, PS4 games were announced to cost $60 new, so there.

Like GBAtemp understands fucking economics.

 

[Arras]

Haven't new, big budget PS3 titles always been 70 bucks? At least, that's what I seem to remember, and I think AC3 is 70 bucks as well.

 

[FAST6191]

I have long contended games should be of a price with CDs and DVDs. I see the argument about inflation and would also contend that rising potential customer pools should offset that though I fully admit to not having hard numbers here. I will save debunking the "games cost more to make" nonsense for another day (inflation aside they don't, you just choose to spend more).

@Ergo though it varies across Europe that seems somewhat misguided- the only medical costs most people will face with anything else being optional is however much of a hit they take for being off work and direct costs in the way of a standardised prescription fee (about £8 a round or less than the price of a lunch with all sorts of things being otherwise free and there being workarounds for a lot more http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/Healthcosts/Pages/Prescriptioncosts.aspx ) and glasses. Dentists are frequently private but NHS ones exist too.

 

[ShadowSoldier]

But we don't have free healthcare.

So... us spoiled Canadians then?

Really, though, you've got to admire Pachter.

No you don't, and you shouldn't.

Not many people can make a successful living out of trolling.

I can't imagine he's doing as good as we think he is, especially if he has to put videos on GameTrailers...

I don't think it would be a stretch for me to believe that he has a real deep down hatred for video games and gamers and all his predictions are just wishful thinking.

He actually doesn't hate video games, at all. He's just wrong about everything. If anything, he's the one who's leading the charge in "Nintendo is doomed" brigade. I'm gonna sound like a Nintendo Fanboy here, but when he spouts statements that are blatantly wrong, as fact, it's dumb. He says Satoru Iwata of Nintendo is a poor CEO, despite the fact that Nintendo has generated a crap ton of money off of the DS, and Wii. And 5 months into the life of the WiiU, he said on his last episode, that he doesn't do things new, he sticks to the old stuff. But the thing is it's worked.

Like he has it out big time for Nintendo. No idea why.

When the PS3 was still new, within the first few years where the PS3 was bleeding money, and Sony was doing everything wrong, Pachter didn't speak up. He hasn't spoken up about Microsoft and the things they're doing. Again, going to use Nintendo here because he speaks a lot about them, but when it comes to Nintendo, he leaves facts out to show he's right. And people just eat it up.

And it's not even that, pretty much anything involving games he's wrong about. Remember the whole "There's no way The Walking Dead will get Game of the Year. It's impossible. If it does, I'll eat my hat" statement he said before the VGA's?

 

[Guild McCommunist]

Haven't new, big budget PS3 titles always been 70 bucks? At least, that's what I seem to remember, and I think AC3 is 70 bucks as well.

Nope, they've always been $60. The Last of Us is $60, God of War: Ascension is $60, Assassin's Creed 3 was $60 (I got it on sale on the PSN Store though for $35).

 

[duffmmann]

Michael Pitcher is wrong more often than he is right. (I don't know who employs him or why they continue to, he's a terrible analyst), I highly doubt new games will cost more than $60.

 

[McHaggis]

some stuff

Damn, did I forget the <sarcasm></sarcasm> tags again?

 

[Guild McCommunist]

Michael Pitcher is wrong more often than he is right. (I don't know who employs him or why they continue to, he's a terrible analyst), I highly doubt new games will cost more than $60.

His predictions make good headlines, good headlines sell news. Hence why he is hired.

 

[duffmmann]

His predictions make good headlines, good headlines sell news. Hence why he is hired.

Ah, the good ole Fox News model, that makes sense.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

Ah, the good ole Fox News model, that makes sense.

Well to be fair all news is guilty of this. News is a business first and foremost. You'll see the same shit on thousands of news sites from IGN to Huffington Post.

 

[Hyro-Sama]

Why is the "ANAL" in analyst capitalized?

 

[Arras]

Nope, they've always been $60. The Last of Us is $60, God of War: Ascension is $60, Assassin's Creed 3 was $60 (I got it on sale on the PSN Store though for $35).

...In that case the difference between the US and Europe is bigger than just the price conversion because I know I have seen several 70€ games here.
From the official PC PSN store:

Even Mass Effect 3 is 70 bucks there.