Microsoft’s Xbox Series X/S (& probably PC) games will increase in price to $70 starting in 2023

[bear]

https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/microsoft-says-first-party-xbox-series-x-s-games-will-cost-70-starting-in-2023/

 

Quote

Microsoft has confirmed plans to raise the price of major first-party Xbox Series X/S releases to $70 beginning in 2023.

Starting next year, the likes of Forza Motorsport, Redfall, and Starfield will cost $69.99 at launch in the US.

 

The full statement is in the linked article. Its a little odd that the article frames it as a console thing but considering how their first party stuff is crossbuy now it seems safe to say that prices will also increase for PC gamers. 

 

So, a precursor to Gamepass getting more expensive or is the plan to make that service look even better value by making it cost less than two first party games each year?

 

 

I know this has been mentioned in the megathread but I felt it was worth its own topic. 

[deerokus]

Every other big publisher did it and no one baulked.

[JoeK]

At the end of the day, all the prices go down after a couple of weeks, so it's not much of a big thing - Ragnarok was selling for £40 at CDKeys during Black Friday. It'll just prolong the inevitable pain I go through each time I do buy something day one and don't play the fucker until six months later.  

[Siri]

By the time my Gamepass subscription runs out in 2025, either prices will normalise or the heat death of the universe will occur, so I'm not that bothered.

Ultimately though, the actual end result of such price increases across the board is that I'll buy less games at RRP. So - as @JoeK says - that's just not buying games at launch, which is pretty much a daft practice already.

[Flub]

All those games I get as part of Gamepass are going to cost other people $70? yeah. Allright.

[footle]

Gamepass will go up in price soon. They just need their first party (large) games to start launching.

[Stanley]

I think people would be willing to pay even more than that if it meant they actually got one of their games out the gate. 

[dumpster]

Games are not worth £70.  Time to download some more PS2 games.

[TehStu]

$70 for a game? $20 for the eventual GOTY edition in the sales, more like.

[CrichStand]

Hate to say I told you so but.......I told you so! 🤣

 

And I bought Tomb Raider 2 for a grand total of 2p yesterday and it’s about a million times better than most modern games. Next game being bought - Broken Sword 2 for a couple of quid. 😁

[SuperFamiTom]

I’ve already got too many games spread across too many platforms that I’ve not played to care. 
 

Just like with the PS5 once Xbox games are £70 each I’ll just not buy any new games at all rather than than one or two I might have been tempted for at the current level. Anything I want I’ll wait until it’s sub £20 in a sale. And while I’ve got GamePass at the moment I won’t be resubscribing due to my play time being so thinly spread across multiple platforms.  

[BitterToad]

Wouldn’t they uhh… wouldn’t they have to… guys gather round I’ve got a good one…

 

Wouldn’t they have to release some games to charge £70 for them?

[JPL]

15 minutes ago, CrichStand said:

Hate to say I told you so but.......I told you so! 🤣

 

And I bought Tomb Raider 2 for a grand total of 2p yesterday and it’s about a million times better than most modern games. Next game being bought - Broken Sword 2 for a couple of quid. 😁

It’s been inevitable for a while. Phil Spencer said a few weeks back that they’ll be raising prices at some point, so this looks like how they’re doing it.

[Siri]

2 minutes ago, BitterToad said:

Wouldn’t they uhh… wouldn’t they have to… guys gather round I’ve got a good one…

 

Wouldn’t they have to release some games to charge £70 for them?

 

I'll spend £70 for a complete game, devoid of nickle and dimed DLC and not requiring x months of patches to bring it to an acceptable standard, that's for sure.

 

Unfortunately, I don't think big game studios don't want to do that. As a result, I don't think I'll be buying from big game studios.

 

Spoiler

Steam Deck wins again, obv

 

[CrichStand]

21 minutes ago, JPL said:

It’s been inevitable for a while. Phil Spencer said a few weeks back that they’ll be raising prices at some point, so this looks like how they’re doing it.

Yep, it’s been obvious they would do this since the start of the generation. Which is why I found all the “Sony’s first party game prices lol” stuff pretty weird. Gamepass will go up significantly next year too, as will the S/X themselves. 

[Sarlaccfood]

28 minutes ago, SuperFamiTom said:

Just like with the PS5 once Xbox games are £70 each I’ll just not buy any new games at all rather than than one or two I might have been tempted for at the current level. Anything I want I’ll wait until it’s sub £20 in a sale. 

Yeah good thing about holding off is you only have to do it once then you’re forever in catch-up (aka bargain) mode.

[Stanley]

22 minutes ago, Siri said:

 

I'll spend £70 for a complete game, devoid of nickle and dimed DLC and not requiring x months of patches to bring it to an acceptable standard, that's for sure.

 

Unfortunately, I don't think big game studios don't want to do that. As a result, I don't think I'll be buying from big game studios.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

Steam Deck wins again, obv

 

To be fair the Sony games at this price point are complete experiences, sure there will be some bollocks you get with deluxe versions and what have you, but generally speaking it’s the full package. 

[Harsin]

I’m thinking of picking up the new God of War as I have a few days to myself. After months of GamePass it was a rude reminder that holy fuck of course they want seventy quid for a new game nowadays.

 

It also highlights how screwed up the value proposition of buying games digitally versus physical still is. £70 on PSN for the digital version. The disc version can be had for around £60 at various places and I see CEX are offering £40 for used copies. For a game that I’ll only ever play through the once it’s a real no brainer.

[Kayin Amoh]

19 minutes ago, Harsin said:

I’m thinking of picking up the new God of War as I have a few days to myself.

 

Ragnarok's not great and lasts about five million years. I'd be careful about dropping full bones on it.

[bear]

2 hours ago, footle said:

Gamepass will go up in price soon. They just need their first party (large) games to start launching.

I feel they need to establish a decent track record in terms of delivery quality games on a consistent basis before they can up the price of Gamepass. 

[rafaqat]

1 hour ago, CrichStand said:

Yep, it’s been obvious they would do this since the start of the generation. Which is why I found all the “Sony’s first party game prices lol” stuff pretty weird. Gamepass will go up significantly next year too, as will the S/X themselves. 

 

It's precisely because Sony nobs carried on buying at that price that MS have decided that we all like a good fucking with no complaining and decided to join in. 

[dumpster]

Before I go to sleep... It's long been said that video gaming is as popular as the cinema or whatever by comparing customer spend.  But there's always been the caveat that a cinema ticket was a fiver and a game was £45, So as gaming became more mainstream,.Lara Croft on the cover of The Face, Wipeout attracting the nightclub crowd, there was still that discrepancy that a game was nine times the price of a cinema ticket so it wasn't the fair comparison.

 

But it is 2022 now, soon to be 2023 and we can compare where we were with where we are.  Firstly, products are priced at what the market will bear. Manufacturing costs, developer costs play a part, sure they do, but gaming today really is mass market. A game can easily sell a million copies worldwide. Triple A titles can sell tens of millions. Divide the dev costs by quantity sold and it can be pennies.  Likewise there's no box these days. No manuals.  No disk duplication. No shops. No product recalls. All replaced by the cost of a server and an online store.  No retailer to take a 30% margin. No shipping. No distributer.  Now it's just you and Sony dealing direct. Costs slashed.

 

Then you have the world of DLC, extra packs, subscriptions, online worlds, in app purchases, all money generating, extra revenue.  Half the time this content was in the game all along, hidden behind a paywall.  I've bought Resident Evil 2 and 3 remakes 2 times each now and when I bought them the second time I paid extra to unlock the weapons pack I'd earned on PS4 because I didn't want to start over. So much DLC used to be in the game as standard. Compare Resident evil 8 with Resident Evil 4.  RE8 has me paying £16 for a third person view, whilst speed runners complete the game in 90 minutes. RE4 had Mercenaries, Operation Ada, Seperate Ways, a whole menu of extras after you have completed the 14 hour main game.

 

 

so why are games £70? It's because people have shown they will pay it.  Simple as that. 

 

Video gaming is mass market.  If James Cameron can make Titanic for 180 million quid and sell it on DVD for £14.99 then reduce it to £9.99 until it end up in a garage forecourt basket for £2.99 while HMV sell a collector's pack with T Shirt, Mug, photos, a fake heart of the ocean necklace and a photo of Billy Zane cuddling a sealion for £49 there's simply no reason for GTA 6 to be £70.  Fortnite proves you can release an online game for free and smash all sales records. 

 

 

 

[CrichStand]

2 hours ago, rafaqat said:

 

It's precisely because Sony nobs carried on buying at that price that MS have decided that we all like a good fucking with no complaining and decided to join in. 

Nah, it’s precisely because they all want to just make as much money as possible.
 

Microsoft’s prices have been lower because they’ve tried everything they can to gain more of the market. Cheaper games, cheap Gamepass, Microsoft Rewards, selling their hardware at a massive loss. None of its worked, so instead of pissing more money up the wall they’ve been forced to put their prices up by their shareholders.
 

Personally, I think Sony’s big AAA games seem about right, priced at £70. I’ve paid around £50-£60 and they all have huge amounts of content with incredible production values, plus you get the 3D Audio and DualSense Haptics etc. Microsoft selling stuff like Halo 3, Forza 5 etc at the same price? Er......no. They’re now going to have to up the quality and content of their first party games considerably.

 

Anyway, popped into Tesco for a Pizza the other day. £6 for a shitty little frozen pizza! Took 5mins to eat. 10 of those provide 50mins of entertainment at a value of £60. Returnal cost that and I’ve played it for 200hrs  so far. Think on.

[SMD]

2 hours ago, dumpster said:

Before I go to sleep... It's long been said that video gaming is as popular as the cinema or whatever by comparing customer spend.  But there's always been the caveat that a cinema ticket was a fiver and a game was £45, So as gaming became more mainstream,.Lara Croft on the cover of The Face, Wipeout attracting the nightclub crowd, there was still that discrepancy that a game was nine times the price of a cinema ticket so it wasn't the fair comparison.

 

But it is 2022 now, soon to be 2023 and we can compare where we were with where we are.  Firstly, products are priced at what the market will bear. Manufacturing costs, developer costs play a part, sure they do, but gaming today really is mass market. A game can easily sell a million copies worldwide. Triple A titles can sell tens of millions. Divide the dev costs by quantity sold and it can be pennies.  Likewise there's no box these days. No manuals.  No disk duplication. No shops. No product recalls. All replaced by the cost of a server and an online store.  No retailer to take a 30% margin. No shipping. No distributer.  Now it's just you and Sony dealing direct. Costs slashed.

 

Then you have the world of DLC, extra packs, subscriptions, online worlds, in app purchases, all money generating, extra revenue.  Half the time this content was in the game all along, hidden behind a paywall.  I've bought Resident Evil 2 and 3 remakes 2 times each now and when I bought them the second time I paid extra to unlock the weapons pack I'd earned on PS4 because I didn't want to start over. So much DLC used to be in the game as standard. Compare Resident evil 8 with Resident Evil 4.  RE8 has me paying £16 for a third person view, whilst speed runners complete the game in 90 minutes. RE4 had Mercenaries, Operation Ada, Seperate Ways, a whole menu of extras after you have completed the 14 hour main game.

 

 

so why are games £70? It's because people have shown they will pay it.  Simple as that. 

 

Video gaming is mass market.  If James Cameron can make Titanic for 180 million quid and sell it on DVD for £14.99 then reduce it to £9.99 until it end up in a garage forecourt basket for £2.99 while HMV sell a collector's pack with T Shirt, Mug, photos, a fake heart of the ocean necklace and a photo of Billy Zane cuddling a sealion for £49 there's simply no reason for GTA 6 to be £70.  Fortnite proves you can release an online game for free and smash all sales records. 

 

 

 

 

Just to be clear, you're saying that games are cheap to make now because they sell more? 

[carlospie]

They'd have to release some firstly to charge 69.99

[dumpster]

3 hours ago, SMD said:

 

Just to be clear, you're saying that games are cheap to make now because they sell more? 

No.

 

Stuff is priced at what the market will pay.  Many people think development costs and manufacture have a correlation but they don't.  Bob Mortimer, Garth Marenghi, Stephen King and Pinch of Nom all have books out for Xmas this year, they are hardbacks and all the same price. In six months they will become paperbacks and be cheaper.   Does Garth Marenghi get paid the same as Stephen King? Does a hardback book cost twice the price to print as a softback? Does it cost more to go to the cinema to see The Batman than to see an indie film? Does it cost more to make a Blu-ray than a DVD? 

 

In a world where Grand Theft Auto cost millions to make you might feel justified in saying it's worth £70.  But the game has been selling steadily for years and now has online play with a monthly subscription. Games also sell in larger numbers than ever before.  They are raking it in.  Activision made billions in profits, EA the same.  It defies all logic that a brand new release 4K BluRay of a movie that cost 200 million to make sells for £15 and yet somehow games are £70. 

 

Once, when you had cartridges, manufacturing costs, shops, distribution, Nintendo's licensing agreement, packaging, shipping, and memory chip prices it was acceptable.  But now you have a direct purchase from the console manufacturer, no-one else takes a cut. There's no physical product. the pricing is completely unjustifiable.  

 

But, like when the 360 launched with £60 games, all you have to do is not buy them. They will soon sink back to £50 because they always do.

[MattyP]

The price of games really only has an impact if you are a "must have it on day one" type buyer that follows all the hype for a game etc. 

 

From my perspective they can charge what they want for games however if they don't represent value for me I won't buy and play them simple as that. I'll pay what I think they are worth to me.

 

These days happy to just play the long game and let others pick up the initial release costs because I'm happy to wait.  Usually once the initial hype has gone away you get a more balanced view of what experience they offer. Quite like reading through topics on the latest releases as you can see the hype reach fever pitch before release and then as time goes on the niggles and frustrations come to light and the bugs etc. Then the game passes into almost insignificance as the next big thing gets a release and the cycle continues..:) 

 

Needless to say "AAA" gaming isn't my scene anymore really. 

[SMD]

59 minutes ago, dumpster said:

No.

 

Stuff is priced at what the market will pay.  Many people think development costs and manufacture have a correlation but they don't.  Bob Mortimer, Garth Marenghi, Stephen King and Pinch of Nom all have books out for Xmas this year, they are hardbacks and all the same price. In six months they will become paperbacks and be cheaper.   Does Garth Marenghi get paid the same as Stephen King? Does a hardback book cost twice the price to print as a softback? Does it cost more to go to the cinema to see The Batman than to see an indie film? Does it cost more to make a Blu-ray than a DVD? 

 

In a world where Grand Theft Auto cost millions to make you might feel justified in saying it's worth £70.  But the game has been selling steadily for years and now has online play with a monthly subscription. Games also sell in larger numbers than ever before.  They are raking it in.  Activision made billions in profits, EA the same.  It defies all logic that a brand new release 4K BluRay of a movie that cost 200 million to make sells for £15 and yet somehow games are £70. 

 

Once, when you had cartridges, manufacturing costs, shops, distribution, Nintendo's licensing agreement, packaging, shipping, and memory chip prices it was acceptable.  But now you have a direct purchase from the console manufacturer, no-one else takes a cut. There's no physical product. the pricing is completely unjustifiable.  

 

But, like when the 360 launched with £60 games, all you have to do is not buy them. They will soon sink back to £50 because they always do.

 

you can't divorce the costs of creating media, marketing that media and the costs of literally every employee who contribute to the process just because a paperback is cheaper to produce than a hardback or pressing a bluray doesn't cost much

 

the concept of paying market price is only a small factor in what the industry does - hence the different ways of monetising products

 

movies cost 200m to make in the same way that amazon don't make a profit.

[thesnwmn]

The movie vs games comparison is all a bit tedious but when thinking about "it's this way because people will pay" it's easy to see that games, for the most part are longer than a movie.

 

£5-10 for a two hours at the cinema.

£5-20 for a two hour film on Blu-ray.

£70 for 10-50 hours of gameplay.

[SMD]

1 minute ago, thesnwmn said:

The movie vs games comparison is all a bit tedious but when thinking about "it's this way because people will pay" it's easy to see that games, for the most part are longer than a movie.

 

£5-10 for a two hours at the cinema.

£5-20 for a two hour film on Blu-ray.

£70 for 10-50 hours of gameplay.

 

going to the cinema is an outing or experience, it's like going out for a coffee instead of drinking it at home - the implication is that you're not going simply because that's where the film is

 

people buy films and rewatch them, it's less of an investment than game, no one ever had to get good to finish watching a film. multiple people can watch a film at the same time and have exactly the same experience.

 

it's 2022 (for a little while longer), c'mon i thought we were past this