$70 games ‘will go the way of the dodo’, believes Saber CEO. The former interim Embracer COO believes developers will move to reduce risk and costs
$70 games ‘will go the way of the dodo’, believes Saber CEO | VGC
He told IGN that one of its upcoming titles, Space Marine 2, will retail for $70, but only because he’s concerned audiences would see a cheaper price as emblematic of poor quality.
Yipes. Saber should throw this minnow back in the water and cast that line out again for a bigger fish that knows anything about the videogame market.
When I see a $70 game my very first thought is an over-promised under-delivered mess barely beta quality that contains Denuvo or some other shitware that had higher priority to work at launch than the game itself. Not to mention a day one patch the size of the entire install, login servers that can't handle the load, graphical glitches, and constant framerate drops.
That $30 game is $70 because it's a hot genre and other no name shops a fraction of the size sold a million copies at $30 so this exec's massive studio with its executive team's millions of combined man-hours could sell it for $150 and gamers would buy it because the reputation alone is worth $100 per copy according to them.
man that's some dumb reasoning in an attempt to justify a $70 price tag. Just cause a games expensive doesn't make it automatic quality.
Yes. And it will be replaced by $80-100 games.
Hey, pass me some of that copium so I can be that delusionally optimistic!
Don't forget the heap of micro transactions thrown in!
So, make good games for lower price, where the graphics is secondary, is the way to go? Who would've guessed! Thing is, it's easier for suits to push all the money into graphics, than attracting and keeping passioned developers and iterate on a good concept. Hire and fire is easier for them.
It's about time they fall on the nose. Give me mid sized games, for lower price and release good expansion DLC. That does reduce the risk for publisher and ultimately gives more control to players as well. But it might not hit the next sales world record and so on paper it looks worse to them.
But hey, indie devs have gladly filled that hole.
But then how could poor Nvidia ever hope to sell any more gpus waaaay above MSRP??
Hearts in the right place but nVidia are the ones who set Manufacturers Suggested Retail Price, as they are the creator of the item (I think technically they're LSRP cuz they license the tech but same idea)
They just set it stupidly fucking high for a laugh
$70 games will go the way of the Dodo, not because $60 games will signal their demise, but because $80 games with seasonally expiring battlepasses and subscription based non-ownership models will.
Sad reality and one day our kids will watch some documentary and wonder how it was possible we were all owning those bloody games back then
They're getting rid of the shareholders?
IMO the issue is the fixation around a standard price point. The price should be correlated to the value a game offers.
What risk? FIFA, MADDEN etc get sequel after sequel, the only real risk is them trying to make shitty live service games to make a quick buck then inevitably giving up on it after it predictably fails.
'The way of the dodo' the fuck does that mean? 🤔
Go extinct. Like the dodo bird.
I don't share this dude's optimism though. I agree $70 games will cease to exist... But only because they'll go up to $80.
https://youtu.be/30hvJqFdH5o?si=SWjSIvMt5r5H2gD
It was a common phrase about 25 years ago.
Back when animals going extinct was more novel and shocking.
So going the way of the dodo has... Gone the way of the dodo?
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/30hvJqFdH5o?si=SWjSI_vMt5r5H2gD
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I would never pay that much for a game. I just wait a couple of years and buy them when they go on sale for under $20. I'm not going to pay a premium just to be a beta tester.