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

[thesnwmn]

2 minutes ago, SMD said:

 

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

 

Past what? Reasons people might accept £50, £60 or £70 for a game. We are adults we don't have to beg people to not mention things that might influence people.

 

Of course you're right that the cinema is more than just those two hours. In both the good and bad ways. I agree you're paying for more than the film though.

 

As for rewatching stuff. Well you can replay a game or have multiple people play that (to a much lesser degree I admit on that later one).

 

As for "get good". Are you saying harder games should be cheaper? I mean I think all games should offer a level select or invincibility mode at the start because you paid for the product and I don't think it harms the art of these things. Charge people extortionate amounts of money and let them see everything even if they're bad at it. (Not saying that have to, these are creators and they can do what the fuck they want).

 

In the end many people will and do pay it. Without blinking. For whatever reasons. Value. Pre-conceived expectations. Peer pressure. Escapism. Loyalty. G

FOMO.

 

Personally I've not bought a game over about £40/50 myself in a very long time but that's because I'm lucky enough to be only really interested in Nintendo's first party output on release, use Game Pass for MS stuff and the otherwise play non-AAA stuff.

[Broker]

11 hours ago, deerokus said:

Every other big publisher did it and no one baulked.

I guess this is the downside of their “Phil is your mate, he’s just like you, he’s wearing a shirt with a retro game on it, he wants crossplay” branding strategy. They’ve successfully convinced a bunch of their evangelists that they’re the nice massive gaming corporation, so when they act like a corporation there will be more pushback. I’m sure one of their fans will be along any second to somehow blame evil Sony and their dumb fans for Microsoft choosing to price their games higher, because this tribal identity based bullshit really works…..

 

8 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. 

 

[SMD]

1 minute ago, thesnwmn said:

 

Past what? Reasons people might accept £50, £60 or £70 for a game. We are adults we don't have to beg people to not mention things that might influence people.

 

Of course you're right that the cinema is more than just those two hours. In both the good and bad ways. I agree you're paying for more than the film though.

 

As for rewatching stuff. Well you can replay a game or have multiple people play that (to a much lesser degree I admit on that later one).

 

As for "get good". Are you saying harder games should be cheaper? I mean I think all games should offer a level select or invincibility mode at the start because you paid for the product and I don't think it harms the art of these things. Charge people extortionate amounts of money and let them see everything even if they're bad at it. (Not saying that have to, these are creators and they can do what the fuck they want).

 

In the end many people will and do pay it. Without blinking. For whatever reasons. Value. Pre-conceived expectations. Peer pressure. Escapism. Loyalty. G

FOMO.

 

Personally I've not bought a game over about £40/50 myself in a very long time but that's because I'm lucky enough to be only really interested in Nintendo's first party output on release, use Game Pass for MS stuff and the otherwise play non-AAA stuff.

 

i'm not making any kind of judgement, i don't like paying full price for most games because they drop in price so quickly. at a push i'll get nintendo first party and the odd niche title that may not have a generous print run (some you win, some you lose).

 

i don't think any of this should cost as much as it does when the majority of profits go to shareholders and not to the creators/workers. but trying to frame first party titles or digital games as being obscene because of the delivery method is just a weird argument. digital should be cheaper for lots of reasons and won't for the simple fact that console online stores are walled gardens.

 

lots of people pay simply because they don't care, they don't think like consumers. either they're at one end of the spectrum where they buy everything or they're at the other end where they might buy one or two new games a year and that's it.

 

watching films and tv shows will always be more popular because they're immediately accessible compared to other media. you don't need to be literate, you don't need to be dextrous, you don't need to be smart. you can sit and absorb as long as you have eyes and ears are mostly functional.

[Giddas]

8 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. 

Bloody $ony, forcing the benevolent Microsoft to up their prices

[Broker]

18 minutes ago, thesnwmn said:

 

 

As for rewatching stuff. Well you can replay a game or have multiple people play that (to a much lesser degree I admit on that later one).

Most games I buy get played by at least two people. Some of them get played by four people. Off the top of my head, paying for Hollow Knight, Bloodborne, Shovel Knight and Super Meat Boy has gotten me full playthroughs for all of the four people I live with. 

[rafaqat]

24 minutes ago, Giddas said:

Bloody $ony, forcing the benevolent Microsoft to up their prices

 

31 minutes ago, Broker said:

I guess this is the downside of their “Phil is your mate, he’s just like you, he’s wearing a shirt with a retro game on it, he wants crossplay” branding strategy. They’ve successfully convinced a bunch of their evangelists that they’re the nice massive gaming corporation, so when they act like a corporation there will be more pushback. I’m sure one of their fans will be along any second to somehow blame evil Sony and their dumb fans for Microsoft choosing to price their games higher, because this tribal identity based bullshit really works…..

 

 

It’s more like one big corp decided to fuck you all over.  You all said. Mmm well I guess I’ll make an excuse to pretend that this is ok.  Then the other big corps thought “hey those people over there seem to have no problem being shafted. Let’s shaft them too”
 

 And instead of railing against it you all decided to have a go at anyone that said

“We’re here because you let it happen”. 
 

well done. 

[David Kenny]

1 hour ago, rafaqat said:

 

It’s more like one big corp decided to fuck you all over.  You all said. Mmm well I guess I’ll make an excuse to pretend that this is ok.  Then the other big corps thought “hey those people over there seem to have no problem being shafted. Let’s shaft them too”
 

 And instead of railing against it you all decided to have a go at anyone that said

“We’re here because you let it happen”. 
 

well done. 

Who are you talking to? I don't remember anybody cheering about Sony raising the price of their games. Although they probably didn't think of it as being fucked over either. You make a choice whether it now represents enough value for you and act accordingly. (I think I've bought one game at launch since they did it (GT7) and it was definitely worth the price I paid). Now we'll have to make the same judgement about Microsoft's games. When they release some! Am I right?!

 

Obviously this could be a clever ploy to make Gamepass more attractive when they stop the Gold Ultimate upgrade cheat. A "free" 70 quid game is better than a "free" 60 quid game.

[rgraves]

10 hours ago, bear said:

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. 

 

Have you got GP? I honetly can''t see how anyone could possibly argue it does not provide a decent selection of games on a monthly basis. First-party titles might be slim, but I don't honestly care where they come from as long as games keep popping up - and they do. It's crazy value even at full fat £11 a month really. <insert annecdote about cost of coffee here>.

[Broker]

1 hour ago, rafaqat said:

 

It’s more like one big corp decided to fuck you all over.  You all said. Mmm well I guess I’ll make an excuse to pretend that this is ok.  Then the other big corps thought “hey those people over there seem to have no problem being shafted. Let’s shaft them too”
 

 And instead of railing against it you all decided to have a go at anyone that said

“We’re here because you let it happen”. 
 

well done. 

Jesus Christ man, that’s the worst sentence structure I’ve ever seen. 

[moosegrinder]

Holy fuck, Game Pass has been the stupidest, hilariously best value for money in gaming since you could buy 2.99 games for the Spectrum from Boots. I genuinely have no idea how many hours I've had out of Game Pass games. It has to be mid/high hundreds, if not 4 figures. Dead By Daylight alone got me a few hundred hours before I bought it.

 

I've no idea what @bear means by quality. It might be bereft of AAA balls out bangers but there's no lack of quality titles.

 

[thesnwmn]

11 minutes ago, rgraves said:

 

Have you got GP? I honetly can''t see how anyone could possibly argue it does not provide a decent selection of games on a monthly basis. First-party titles might be slim, but I don't honestly care where they come from as long as games keep popping up - and they do. It's crazy value even at full fat £11 a month really. <insert annecdote about cost of coffee here>.

 

Have you read this forum? People frequently state why it's bad value for them. They only like big meaty first party titles. They don't like all the choice. They only play one game at a time for months on end. Etc.

[MattyP]

If anything gaming has actually got cheaper over the years taking inflation into account.

 

A say £50 N64 game released in 1998 if you index to inflation would be £88 now. Switch games are what ~£50 now?

 

Gamepass at £10.99 pcm is insane value. Even if you just play and finish one game a month. There is such variety on there of enjoyable titles.

 

TBH as gamers we have never had it so good in terms of price points and options something for everyone.

 

[SMD]

those 50 quid n64 games were massive rip offs though, same with brand new ps1 and ps2 titles.

[MattyP]

3 minutes ago, SMD said:

those 50 quid n64 games were massive rip offs though, same with brand new ps1 and ps2 titles.

Again that was the RRP though as is the £70 price point now. "Rip off" is dependent on what you value? I would say that most £70 games at the moment don't offer value to me.. however do to others. Only full price game I personally bought this gen is GT7 and had plenty of value out of that. 

[SMD]

2 minutes ago, MattyP said:

Again that was the RRP though as is the £70 price point now. "Rip off" is dependent on what you value? I would say that most £70 games at the moment don't offer value to me.. however do to others. Only full price game I personally bought this gen is GT7 and had plenty of value out of that. 

 

i mean the jump in the price of games from 8-bit through to 16-bit to 32-bit

[MattyP]

8 minutes ago, SMD said:

 

i mean the jump in the price of games from 8-bit through to 16-bit to 32-bit

Not sure how much were NES games? £40? SNES £45? N64 £50? Not sure have a fuzzy memory as I only started console gaming around SNES times (then to only play SF2 really as I was playing/using an Amiga most of the time). Sure PS games were actually cheaper than Nintendo/Sega carts though? £30-35?

 

Just saying I don't think the price of a high calibre/profile AAA game at £70 is unreasonable these days. I personally would only buy something at that price on exception. Thinking about my buying habits over the last few years only bought a few Nintendo Switch titles (at RRP) and GT7 at full price. Rest has mainly been Steam, odd online sale items and just subbing to GamePass. 

[bear]

28 minutes ago, moosegrinder said:

Holy fuck, Game Pass has been the stupidest, hilariously best value for money in gaming since you could buy 2.99 games for the Spectrum from Boots. I genuinely have no idea how many hours I've had out of Game Pass games. It has to be mid/high hundreds, if not 4 figures. Dead By Daylight alone got me a few hundred hours before I bought it.

 

I've no idea what @bear means by quality. It might be bereft of AAA balls out bangers but there's no lack of quality titles.

 

Might as well clarify this. 

 

I meant specifically their first party output which hasn't been great this generation, especially when you compare it directly to what Sony have managed to put out since the release of PS5. 

 

Their first party output is supposed to be the bedrock Gamepass is built upon and while it's great getting smaller stuff like Grounded and Pentiment it's also hard to think of a platform holder with a weaker set of releases in a calendar year than MSs lineup for 2022. 

[Harsin]

Wow, did we really manage to get to page 2 before someone started regaling us with tales of how much they paid for Street Fighter 2 as defence for giving mega corporations more of their money. New record?

[Fry Crayola]

23 minutes ago, MattyP said:

Even if you just play and finish one game a month.

 

Ah, therein lies the problem.

[MattyP]

6 minutes ago, Harsin said:

Wow, did we really manage to get to page 2 before someone started regaling us with tales of how much they paid for Street Fighter 2 as defence for giving mega corporations more of their money this time. New record?

Don't know have they? Got a SNES and SF2 packed in...  If you look at inflation etc we are technically giving them less... 

[rgraves]

36 minutes ago, thesnwmn said:

 

Have you read this forum? People frequently state why it's bad value for them.

 

But he wasn't saying it was bad value as such, he was saying it lacked "delivery quality games on a consistent basis" - which is just, well, a lie.

 

Even if you pay full price (£11 a month) and never even pick up a single reward point, the maximum cost is less than the cost of two full price titles this gen. NOBODY on this forum is playing less than two games a year, and that's a hill I'll die a grisly, messy, blood-soaked death on.

[Siri]

I always did find it odd how people stated subscription services as "bad value" - Nobody's putting a gun to your head to keep subscribing as soon as you've had your fill, as if it's a minimum term broadband contact.

 

Subbing to EA Play for a month just to 'experience' Anthem at launch month was worth the tenner in sheer comedy value. And that was a shit game. I was going to do the same for Skull & Bones before it got delayed forever.

 

If the Game Pass' conversion method didn't exist, I'd still be subbing for a month or two to have a crack at the games I'm interested in at launch. It's not different to when game rentals were a thing in the late 90s, and probably cost just as much to rent one game for a couple of weeks.

 

If course, not all publishers offer that, so for those I'd just wait for them to be on offer or lock in a preorder price if I'm gagging to play X game. Most of the time, though, I'm not as enthusiastic about big budget games as I am with indie games on PC.

[Ry]

Basically another reason why it's daft not to have gamepass 

 

[LaveDisco]

My issue with Gamepass/PS+++ is that looking at what I've played this year, I've purchased the majority outright. 

 

I'm fortunate enough to not have to wait/hope for games like Elden Ring to hit the services, so then the service becomes primarily a place for games I wasn't willing to buy on release, which isn't a great selling point.

 

Stray and Petinant and Immortality have been games I would have bought Day 1, but they may leave, and then I'm back to square one. The collection aspect is important to me, I'm regularly playing old games. 

They are great value and with the deals, I'll keep both for the moment, but once they expire, I'll seriously consider just dropping a month when something hits. 

[rgraves]

7 minutes ago, LaveDisco said:

so then the service becomes primarily a place for games I wasn't willing to buy on release, which isn't a great selling point.

 

To me, it's THE selling point.

 

I knew Elden Ring was going to be good so I bought that - but there are LOADS of titles on GP that I never would have actually purchased, that it turned out were great and I really liked. GP basically lets me discover and play and enjoy things I'd probably never get to if I had to pay for them outright.

[David Kenny]

2 minutes ago, rgraves said:

 

To me, it's THE selling point.

 

I knew Elden Ring was going to be good so I bought that - but there are LOADS of titles on GP that I never would have actually purchased, that it turned out were great and I really liked. GP basically lets me discover and play and enjoy things I'd probably never get to if I had to pay for them outright.

My experience tends to be the opposite. Most of the games I've tried on Gamepass, I ended up being relieved I hadn't paid for them. Which I guess is a positive in itself.

 

Quite a few of these were very well received here as well. I've recently tried Tinykin, Vampire Survivors, Art of Rally, Lonely Mountain Downhill and probably a couple of others based on their reception on here, and not been taken by any of them. So Gamepass might not be delivering the games for me, but it is stopping me filling up my library with games I don't want!

[MattyP]

12 minutes ago, rgraves said:

 

To me, it's THE selling point.

 

I knew Elden Ring was going to be good so I bought that - but there are LOADS of titles on GP that I never would have actually purchased, that it turned out were great and I really liked. GP basically lets me discover and play and enjoy things I'd probably never get to if I had to pay for them outright.

Yep... I just see it as any other sub service. If I wanted to see a film for example that I really wanted to see I'd go to the cinema. Most other times I'd find something to enjoy on Netflix. 

 

I won't "wait" until something comes onto GP just enjoy what is there. In the end it doesn't have to work for everyone- its not mandatory that you need to enjoy it or use it... however I think its a great service to have around and personally getting lots of value from it. I actually play more games because of it - I was in a lull not wanting to try anything as I they might end up on my unplayed pile. WIth GP if I don't like something I move onto something that I might. No money wasted or disk to try and sell on etc. 

[Giddas]

Who actually pays £70 anyway, be surprised if it was anyone on here who is savvy enough to check hotukdeals.

[Eighthours]

£70 is too expensive for games, but even a bit below that is too. Midnight Suns lost a sale at the weekend when I checked out the store, and hidden among the ridiculous versions was its cheapest one: £64.99. NOPE.

[moosegrinder]

2 minutes ago, Giddas said:

Who actually pays £70 anyway, be surprised if it was anyone on here who is savvy enough to check hotukdeals.

 

People who aren't tethered to physical games any more. I'd hazard Sony are entirely justified in their price tag because of people who don't want the grief of discs and want games day one.