$80 for Borderlands 4 too costly? Randy Pitchford says, "If you're a real fan, you'll find a way to make it happen"
-
I don’t believe that’s what I said, or at least it wasn’t my intention. I was more trying to highlight that wealthy people (which are not in the way to being poor) will be protected by the people that stand to gain from that protection, not simply for being rich.
I also explicitly said that the justice system does favour the rich, not in a malicious way but more because we have a system that means rich folk can afford more man hours which translates to a better defence.
I want to be clear I’m not defending rich folk here, just being a pedant I guess.
Ah yeah we are all pedants here and such while I understand and mostly agree with your comment I now must include.
Uhh, actually we don't have a justice system, we have a legal system.
-
Ah yeah we are all pedants here and such while I understand and mostly agree with your comment I now must include.
Uhh, actually we don't have a justice system, we have a legal system.
Haha how dare you out pedant me.
-
Weinstein? Diddy? Epstein?
I think the more apt description would be that when you’re got something that makes other people money, then you will be protected. When that ends you’re fair game.
I also agree that the more money you have the better defence you can get, but I don’t believe laws only apply to the poor. That’s hyperbole.
Weinstein? Diddy? Epstein?
All three of those examples got away with it for literal decades.
Both Weinstein and Diddy were known dangers in their industry.
They took Epstein out because you know he had compromat on Trump. Best friends.
Or - the Cosby shit was an open secret. No one cared until Hannibal Buress started pointing it out.
-
Im always thrown off as a Canadian when I see these headlines because we’ve been paying $80 for games for decades.
Video games haven’t risen in cost with inflation and they’re much better and bigger now so I’m not super upset, but they are now at the point where I won’t buy a game at release or full price. I think the new price here is $93 cause that’s what the new Indiana jones is going for
What I hate most is that the game actually costs $150 and they split it and give you a stripped version for $80. I think gta 4 was the last game i truly felt made sense, game releases, we buy it, story dlc comes out later we get it, transaction over. No online bullshit that tries to keep you paying money into the game without end. Not a game split into little chunks and sold as tiers at release
No one is asking them to grow x50 for every successful game they sell. Sure they have more expenses but how is it in any way relevant to the consumer? There's no shortage of studios increasing budget massively and then shitting the bed when it comes to quality and actual gameplay. They are literally doing that to themselves.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Pitchford gives off some strong “do you guys not have phones” energy. He’s so out of touch it’s astounding.
-
Weinstein? Diddy? Epstein?
All three of those examples got away with it for literal decades.
Both Weinstein and Diddy were known dangers in their industry.
They took Epstein out because you know he had compromat on Trump. Best friends.
Or - the Cosby shit was an open secret. No one cared until Hannibal Buress started pointing it out.
All three of those examples got away with it for literal decades.
Literally what I’m saying. They got away with it because they had utility for other people and when they no longer did that’s when they get indicted, cause people stop running cover.
-
I didn’t pay anywhere near $80 for Borderlands 1-3+ all the DLC…. So um. No. I’m in no hurry.
This isn’t all the games but it goes on for like another 2 screens worth for all the DLC…
I bought the full collection last year for like $50. $20 for the first three and all DLC, and like $30 for the complete Borderlands 3 (I had gotten the other ones so decided to just get the full series).
Then I actually went and got Wonderlands and had an actual blast playing it.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on last edited by [email protected]
Idk. I think gamers are overly upset about $80 games. While I am sympathetic to not wanting the price to go up, the fact of the matter is that brand new video games cost pretty much the same as they did 30 years ago, while the cost of everything else has basically doubled in that time. I know it's probably not what is going to happen but if $80 video games are what it takes to get us away from shitty microtransactions in full price games, then I'm all for it. I know the crowd on Lemmy will just say they should make less profit and do neither but that's just not how the world works right now and nobody is going to do that.
Food for thought- here are some prices in 1996 and today
New video game: 1996- $67 (Super Mario 64), 2025- $70
McDonald's Big Mac meal: 1996- $2.45, 2025-$9.29
Base package Honda Civic: 1996- $10,360, 2025-$24,250
Average apartment - 1996- $550/mo, 2025- $1,540/mo
Median annual income- 1996- $20,109, 2025- $50,200
Doesn't one of these stand out?
-
Idk. I think gamers are overly upset about $80 games. While I am sympathetic to not wanting the price to go up, the fact of the matter is that brand new video games cost pretty much the same as they did 30 years ago, while the cost of everything else has basically doubled in that time. I know it's probably not what is going to happen but if $80 video games are what it takes to get us away from shitty microtransactions in full price games, then I'm all for it. I know the crowd on Lemmy will just say they should make less profit and do neither but that's just not how the world works right now and nobody is going to do that.
Food for thought- here are some prices in 1996 and today
New video game: 1996- $67 (Super Mario 64), 2025- $70
McDonald's Big Mac meal: 1996- $2.45, 2025-$9.29
Base package Honda Civic: 1996- $10,360, 2025-$24,250
Average apartment - 1996- $550/mo, 2025- $1,540/mo
Median annual income- 1996- $20,109, 2025- $50,200
Doesn't one of these stand out?
And let's take this outside of the myopic view of only looking at inflation.
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/video-game-industry-revenues-by-platform/
Console gaming revenue: 1996 - 7 billion, 2022 - 30 billion
Let's look at specifically Nintendo here since we're talking about Super Mario 64
https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/pdf/2001/011121e.pdf
2001, 664 million in profit, adjusted for inflation in 2022 dollars, 1 billion.
2022, 1.7 billion dollars in profit.
You forget that in 1996 the gaming pool was also magnitudes smaller compared to today and despite all of the whining about increased development costs, which I also think is bullshit but that's a different conversation, profits have increased to keep up.
So my opinion, no there's absolutely no justification for a 80 dollar price point when you look at the over all picture.
-
Game development should not be a gig economy. It is often treated as such so studio execs can pocket more money by dropping staff at release to pad their own wallets. There are plenty of game companies, and millions of companies in other sectors, that reinvest that capital into the company.
But what about other forms of entertainment? Movies! Books! Music!
Royalties. This would be another solution.
Tagging @[email protected] because they might find the thought of royalties vs continued Dev interesting.
I do find it interesting...I don't think it addresses the problem, but it sounds like a great idea
Realistically, how much are companies going to pay out in royalties? As little as they can get away with
Let's say it's 2% of a game that made $100M - you're looking at tens of thousands each when it's all split up. Which is great, maybe even life changing for some of them, but it's not financial security kind of money
And then let's say the game flops or gets cancelled... Well that's not going to help much, so you can't really rely on it
So I think the idea is great, but it's still just fiddling with the knobs of capitalism
