Honored Contributor

Question

When did Pc games creep up to $59.99

19 replies
2922 views

Just lately I'm starting to see more Pc games getting priced at $59.99. I hope VR games don't start edging towards that price. I wouldn't mind but some of the game are absolute pants. I'm not talking about games like your GTA ...etc. Are they doing this so that when these games are on sale for say $39.99, then everyone will think it's a bargain? I've just been looking at the DCS modules aswell and see there's some jets going for $69.99 and above..

T

Techy111

Honored Contributor

Check out some prices for addon aircraft for p3d fsx and xplane. Scary prices but I suppose a lot more works goes into them?

A PC with lots of gadgets inside and a thing to see in 3D that you put on your head.

A

Anonymous

Average game price for a new game up here in Canada is $80 which is what it was about 15 years ago. There was a brief period where our dollar was on par with the USD and for a while even a little higher - the price was about $60 around that time. I miss those days - LOL

Major releases have been around $60usd for a long time - I rarely buy games for full price or at release (Far Cry 5 and SkyrimVR are the first two games I have bought since Watch Dogs and Bioshock Infinite for full price at release). Normally I wait for at least a 50% sale sometimes more.

B

BeastyBaiter

Inspiring

$60 has been the industry accepted price for about 15 years for major titles. There is currently a big push to move beyond that due to increased development costs though. Hence all the micro transactions and frequent appearance of $75-$80 games.

C

cybereality

Inspiring

This article is a few years old, but the premise should stand. Games have never been cheaper (adjust for inflation).
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/06/why-retail-console-games-have-never-been-cheaper-historically/

A

Anonymous

RedRizla said:

Just lately I'm starting to see more Pc games getting priced at $59.99.

Just lately? I remember that being a fairly standard price in the 90s. How old are you that 20 years ago was "Just lately"?

That's pretty average for a AAA game on release day, but there are a lot less than that with steam sales, indy games, alpha games etc. It's cheaper than it's ever been now.

Zenbane

Honored Contributor

If we want more developers cranking out more quality games, then keeping the price between $40-$60 is in everyone's best interest. Only the best games will float to the top; so we don't have to worry about garbage games trying to cash in at inflated prices. Especially with public reviews and refund policies.

We get what we pay for, right?
:)

A

Anonymous

The thing is most games companies do really need to push for higher prices as wages, inflation, and cost to make said games look more real life continue to chop away at the 60$ price point. In a way, yes games never been more cheaper in the fact - but at what cost to what we can already be doing I wonder?

I almost say they should double the price to 120$ for an AAA title if they can really show off what the effect at that price point can pull off, but I am sure there will be a bunch of back lash at that point. Yet, if they could create a RPG with in VR that out classes any RPG before it (like Log Horizon or Sword Art Online detail of a game like they are in the anime) then would people really backlash then? Would 60$ games seem "cheap" and "shows their effect" of game production just like 20 or 30$ games are today?

I really have high hopes:) but I know about the chicken and the egg work up. If CV2 can really sell VR by then and really out classes todays HMD with a real jump - would content also need to really jump with it as well or should we only focus on keeping what we have to keep cost low instead?

Personally, I feel we are hitting a growth limit of what 60$ can really give you. Even if public game engines do a lot for a lower cost of production - you still need a large number of devs and graphic artist to keep that stuff at high qulity year after year and still supply support of any ground breaking bugs (where bugs before we just over look for the most part) as games continue to get bigger and bigger in terms of what is going on in said "open world". Granted this is for AAA titles - there is still lots of room for low and mid range games to still grow have price points between the 15 to 60$ mark that can be fill by them. Then again, backing a BIG title really does help sell your "console" if people do really prefer that said game.

Zenbane

Honored Contributor

Mradr said:

The thing is most games companies do really need to push for higher prices as wages, inflation, and cost to make said games look more real life continue to chop away at the 60$ price point. In a way, yes games never been more cheaper in the fact - but at what cost to what we can already be doing I wonder?

I almost say they should double the price to 120$ for an AAA title if they can really show off what the effect at that price point can pull off, but I am sure there will be a bunch of back lash at that point. Yet, if they could create a RPG with in VR that out classes any RPG before it (like Log Horizon or Sword Art Online detail of a game like they are in the anime) then would people really backlash then? Would 60$ games seem "cheap" and "shows their effect" of game production just like 20 or 30$ games are today?

I really have high hopes:) but I know about the chicken and the egg work up. If CV2 can really sell VR by then and really out classes todays HMD with a real jump - would content also need to really jump with it as well or should we only focus on keeping what we have to keep cost low instead?

Personally, I feel we are hitting a growth limit of what 60$ can really give you. Even if public game engines do a lot for a lower cost of production - you still need a large number of devs and graphic artist to keep that stuff at high qulity year after year and still supply support of any ground breaking bugs (where bugs before we just over look for the most part) as games continue to get bigger and bigger in terms of what is going on in said "open world". Granted this is for AAA titles - there is still lots of room for low and mid range games to still grow have price points between the 15 to 60$ mark that can be fill by them. Then again, backing a BIG title really does help sell your "console" if people do really prefer that said game.

B

bigmike20vt

Honored Contributor

RedRizla said:

Just lately I'm starting to see more Pc games getting priced at $59.99. I hope VR games don't start edging towards that price. I wouldn't mind but some of the game are absolute pants. I'm not talking about games like your GTA ...etc. Are they doing this so that when these games are on sale for say $39.99, then everyone will think it's a bargain? I've just been looking at the DCS modules aswell and see there's some jets going for $69.99 and above..

To be honest i have no problem with the RRP of games going up.... indeed like for like the initial cost of games is cheaper now than it used to be due to inflation and what not despite production costs skyrocketing (some of it being completely avoidable - games don’t need kiefer southerland or kevin spacey headlining them imo) but some of it just being because there is so much more detail in them.

what I DO take umbrage with is the fact that out of the gate you are generally paying for often less than half a game.... THAT is what pisses me off.. and indeed it does not even work on me because i almost invariably wait until a "goty/ultimate" edition releases usually for a fraction of the initial launch price and get that instead.

so imo, let the RRP of the base game go up to £50 - £60 (which would be $75 - $90), that is ok imo, but, that should be for a complete product with a decent amount of content OR if they want to release in dribs and drabs then charge accordingly... one or the other imo.

it is like F2P games... i dont mind F2P mechanics in games.... when the game is F2P!!! however dont charge me £50, then release a season pass ***AND have paid lootboxes in the fecking thing.

*** season passes i can also live with, i just add it onto the price of the game and look at that being the cost of the game... however a season pass needs to have ALL the content of the game in it (Borderlands 2 / Destiny I am talking about you!!!)

Fiat Coupe, gone. 350Z gone. Dirty nappies, no sleep & practical transport incoming. Thank goodness for VR :)

A

Anonymous

Agree with bigmike there - but here is the thing - I don't mind paying for added content - but that added content really needs to have a better value over all. It really does feel they are being forced to split their time frames up so they can release on time and cover some of the production so they can continue to finish the other half of the game. Sadly, the other half the game they still charge for and often isn't really adding that much more real time game play and or story. .

I don't mean leveling areas or grinding spots for game play time here - but real events and game play that involves a player in what is going on. Added content really needs to be hours long (depending on the price) and offer something even more to the over all story. In a way - it needs to be it's own game in some ways. Like another telling of the same story put from another person view point.

Some of that can be fix with a price noch increase as you can hire more devs and what not that results in getting the game done faster in said time frame, but with knowing there will be a 60$ hard cap - it does make investors a bit wizzy to bank the money for production because they know it'll take that many more sells to get their money back at the end of the day. With that said, most of your games are really just short time investments to see how much of a buck you can make off production of a product. Most time frames are around 5 year investment (from start to end).

As for F2P, P2P, etc that is a topic for another thread xD I could rant and rant on that all day long.

Show more replies

Get Help

Sign up

Login with SSO

Login to the community

Login with SSO