• defunct_punk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    But I’d still argue the solution is to cut costs, not increase prices.

    This is the solution moving forward and is probably what most studios are doing right now (see: publishers shelving low-profit studios, massive layoffs, etc.), but the issue is that the games launching right now with $70-100 price tags have been in development for years. Their budgets were written under contract during the boom a few years ago, they can’t just “unspend” that money, but at the same time, they’re probably seeing that gamers are being a lot tighter with their wallets these days.

    I’m obviously never one to praise higher prices for the same thing, but I at least get why major releases are feeling justified to charge a higher door fee for the base game than to gamble on the freemium market (See: Concord).

    • ampersandrew@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      That boom also just led to a market with way more games in it every year. With more supply and less demand, you can’t spend as much making the game and expect to be a success unless you’ve got a sure thing. So the higher prices will only be afforded by the games that would have been a success charging less than $70.