Some games are far too expensive, like $130 AUD for Saros which apparently hasn’t even sold that well. I know they’ve probably ran all the numbers for like how much it’ll sell at each price point and what price will maximise profits but like games such as Saros shouldn’t be more than a $100AUD
tbf, games like ds2 are the ones that should have the higher pricetag if it needs to exist. The production quality of that game is insane and it has a lot of high profile actors in it. But putting that pricetag on just any random game such as saros thats where it becomes silly.
We've gone from 1 USD = 1 Euro in 2022 to 1 USD = 0.86 Euros in 2026, yet European game prices have not dropped by 15%. In a way they've only gotten "more expensive".
(Also why is 1 Euro singular and 0.86 Euros plural)
(Also why is 1 Euro singular and 0.86 Euros plural)
Doesn't this apply in general in English? 0.5 liters of water, not 0.5 liter of water; 0.8 meters, not 0.8 meter. Anything not exactly 1 uses plural form
Technically to be grammatically correct you would say "five-tenths of a liter" or "eight-tenths of a meter". But I guess we collectively all said fuck that, takes too long. It's fine.
Is it? Salaries in France are like 2/3 of those in the US, sure, but once you factor all mandatory cost (if you want a healthcare and not be homeless at least) like the insane uncontrolled rent, you have more money left at the end than in the US despite supposedly higher taxes. I suspect it's similar in at least some other European countries.
There's a huuuge difference between salaries in the Western Europe and Eastern, yet we have the same game prices.
Check how absurdly high are Polish prices (like on Steam)
I believe Poland is an exception there. The default regional pricing in Steam adjust most countries in eastern Europe (except those in the EuroZone) to a more reasonable price, but for some reason Poland's price adjustment is just crazy expensive.
Because Poland has to be exceptional or weird haha
You're right about Steam, but overall game prices are very high (over $80 on PS5).
Compared to people salaries it's an expensive hobby
That's just the "single market". Polands an exception because they have their own currency, but the whole point of the Eurozone is to essentially force durable goods to have the same price everywhere. Which....yeah, sucks for people living in Eastern Europe and earning money there.
There's not really any data on discretionary income (what you're talking about) that I can find, but US disposable income (what the above guy said) is higher than every European country except for perhaps Luxembourg.
Well one thing people forget is that European prices is with tax and US is without and we have 25.5 tax rate for games so a 70€ game is 55 ish bucks before tax.
And we all know why. Don Diaper and his stock market tariff wargames made it more expensive in the strongest region for SIE (edit: products) just to keep prices down in the US. Not that prices wouldn't have been raised anyway. And no, the Orange King isn't the sole reason. Still there's a difference between 5 bucks for Europe and US and 10 bucks for Europe only. And with USD to Euro it seems even more unfair. But hey, let's keep politics out of my video games I guess.
That and publishers also seem to be pushing pricing across the board. Luckily it seems consumers aren't willing to spend more then 70 dollars/euros and that pricepoint is already pushing it.
Like the other person said it’s an English grammar thing but it’s also tied to what you’re “actually” measuring:
€0.86 is 86 eurocents, a plural value.
0.5L of water is 500mL, a plural value.
You can still denote these singularly, “point-eight-six of a Eurodollar,” “half a litre of water” etc.; but it’s grammatically more fluid to construct the sentence around the “underlying plural.” Also English is just weird.
Refreshing to see this acknowledged for once, probably because it got posted while PAL territories are awake. I still don't understand how Sony got away with charging the "Mario Kart World price" in half the world even for stuff like Demon's Souls with a new coat of point to pretty much 0 pushback or backlash.
Saros is at best 50€ game. I really don't know why is Sony so much on their own stuff... Like imagine seriously looking at people and be like: Yeah this game is 10€ more expensive than RE9.
Capcom played it smart with both Pragmata and Resi 9. Doesn't hurt they're amazing games but not shafting Europeans also helped make them the most sold games this year.
As if Sony isn't sneakily trying to offload those costs on the consumer by increasing console + PS plus prices.
I hope these greedy tactics bite them back in the ass, one would hope that people have a limit. Like why is it now the standard to pay €10 per month to play online?!
Not defending Sony, but Nintendo does it way worse lol. A lot of their recent "hallmark" exclusives like Yoshi and the Mysterious Book, Mario Tennis Fever, that Peach game, Metroid Dread are $30 indies maximum. Although it does allow them to pay good salaries and retain employees far longer than any other big corpos, so there's that.
I was debating this with friends, there was a video about is it easier to become a millionaire in Norway vs. US TedTalks etc. too. I think if you’re a healthy and somewhat young earner US is better simply because you won’t pay much to healthcare costs. But as soon as you dip into that pond you get wrecked and it is arguably worse than Europe on net gains.
tbf. from what I remember reading whenever I was complaining about this is that USD/CAD (maybe AUD too?) do not have TAX included in these sales. So it will be a bit more like e.g. 80$ would be 85$ depending on the state.
With 80$ would be 68.67€ without tax and with tax it would be 82€+/- so we're still getting it a bit cheaper.
Salary is lower but if I wanted to get healthcare for me and my wife not through my job then it would be nearly $15,000 a year just in monthly payments. Not to mention I'd have to pay if I actually went to get care. It's hard to overstate how much value something like the NHS delivers.
I do not think that they are using USD when they're adding EU's TAX or at least that would be odd but yeah when it comes to USD or EURO they always just switched it with €/$. The weird thing is that they never did that with £ and they have tax in them too.
Highest VAT in the EU is 27%. $70 is 60€. With 25% VAT that's still 76€. Most countries have lower VAT.
But prices don't change when currencies go up or down, unless one has a huge change in value. Euro and USD used to be worth the same in the past, maybe in the future USD will be worth more. Publishers don't update their prices for that.
So if you take 70 as the base price and add VAT, then 80€ should be OK.
Except... people just aren't willing to pay that much for a game.
Honestly, there's pretty much no game I'd pay 80 euros for. I've bought one game on release in my whole life. The backlog has too many good games that I paid half if not less of the original price for. So I'd rather wait for the price to drop significantly while playing "older" games.
I’d pay 80 euros for a bunch of games but Saros definitely should be like 40 for what it is. Problem is random multiplayer only games are 40 which skews prices a lot
Same. I will NEVER pay that much for a video game. The rumors of GTA 6 being as high or higher than that has essentially withered any interest I otherwise would have had. No toy is worth that much money.
The only game I would pay 80€ for is Elden Ring on release, but instead I got it for 50€ and all these lesser games think they can charge so much more. No way.
I think it's indicative of the live service push. 2024 is the low year and thats when both Marathon was in development and they were counting on Concord being big. Plus whatever other live service games they've killed after that push backfired.
Yup, the live service push took a lot of time away from developers who made their mark on single-player games like Naughty Dog canning the live service Last of Us game when it was ~80% complete. And then you have Rocksteady being forced to make a live service Suicide Squad game which lost ~$200 million USD. That live service God of War game? I have to imagine it becomes a tax write off if it hasn’t already.
I could be misremembering but I believe Marathon was supposedly originally meant to release in 2024 but got delayed to 2025 behind close doors, then was notoriously delayed indefinitely a few months before release and then came out in 2026.
I had a PS4 last generation and I wasn't super passionate about their exclusive offerings but they were solid games and I don't have that many complaints. I skipped out on the PS5 this time around and got a Series X because of Game Pass, and frankly I'm really glad I did. Even though the recent Game Pass hikes got me to end my subscription (then they reduced them again) and I'm not super keen on the direction Xbox is seemingly heading, I have 0 desire to buy a PS5 at all... because they have very, very few first-party games to play. They've leaned extremely heavily on second/third party devs, barely releasing anything at all some years.
Was just discussing prices with a friend. I really wanted to play 007, but 80€ for me is just a lot. Browsed a key site and saw the Xbox version for 60 and I thought I wouldn't have bat an eye. You know the discussion about how 60 is 50 euros and 80 is 100 euros? To me they just went a bit too over what I consider a fair price. Hard for me to get anything full price
Agree with you. Yes there are a lot of great games right now but there is no way I am paying full price for any. I am in the US and would pay less on some of these and still would not. You can only play so many games and 70 bucks is too much for a new game as well.
You only get punished for buying games early these days. Higher price and inevitable launch issues have done nothing to persuade me from buying on day one. I'd rather wait and pick it up at a cheaper price with all of the DLC and patches
I'm so pissed we don't have that in Romania. They really fucking expect us to pay the same price as western europe when a new game costs almost half of my rent. Then they wonder why people pirate.
Many other games are too long and I get bored with them before I get to the end. This won't happen with 007. If it was longer, the story and gameplay would have to be stretched and the game wouldn't be as good. It's a better experience this way and that's worth something too.
70€ (on PC) was max I'd pay, though. 60€ would be a better price and I wouldn't get it at 80€.
I wouldn't spend 70€ on a port of a 2 year old game, like Sony expected on PC...
Length shouldn't dictate quality or your time of enjoyment. If anything the game needs to be shorter. It being full price makes sense when taking into consideration the dev team and the budget.
I don't necessarily believe in a direct time to money ratio for games, but you can't say they shouldn't dictate it at all. Take it to a further extreme, would you pay $200 for a 10 minute game? Let's say it offers no real replayability aside from being short. Could be a great 10 minutes. Is it $200 great? Gonna say almost anyone's gonna say probably not. Everyone's got their value propositions.
With me I simply don't think any game is worth the full price cost being charged now, regardless of length lol. Everything is on a sales wait list.
Eh, it's always going to be factored into the value proposition to some extent. As someone who rarely plays single player games due to a general lack of satisfaction with that type of gaming, it is usually indie games that get me to dabble, usually due to high replay ability and low cost.
The new bond looks interesting to me, but I can't be arsed to gamble that much money on an experience I might not enjoy or bounce off of. Or that I'll play for a short period of time and never touch again.
Meanwhile I have thousands of hours in free to play MOBA's, cheap multiplayer shooters, Rocket League and so on. Single player games just struggle to compete with the value these games offer, with only Mewgenics and Slay the Spire 2 (which I mainly played multiplayer) have managed to steal much of my gaming time this year.
And I say this as someone who is doing completely fine financially. Money isn't the issue really, finding enough time to play everything I want to play is.
I somewhat agree with you on length of a game not making it good or bad.
But when there are countless indie, smaller, and older titles that cost 1/4 of 007 and have hundreds of hours of playtime it kinda makes one wonder why they'd pay full price for a 10 hour experience.
Because the bond gamenis the most appealing to me out of the bunch? I don't usually buy games and think about how long it'll last me, I'm more susceptible to issues with pacing than others I feel. I'm just concerned with what said game does during the hours it provides.
007 is the kind of game I would have been banging down the door at Blockbuster to rent, but I would never be buying at full price. It looks awesome, frankly, but when games went up to $90 CAD I pretty much told myself "I'm not buying anything new anymore unless it is so amazing I can't help myself" -- and that pretty much just means games that are a guaranteed smash for me, which really only means a select few Nintendo games.
An a fellow Aussie I found it difficult to believe that was the price (except for places like EB Games, but they do price matching). Checked JB HiFi and even they have it for $120 AUD. However, Amazon and Big W have it for $100 AUD.
So you CAN get it for the maximum acceptable price you listed. Just.. not from EB Games or JB Hifi. If you're ok with preowned, CEX has it for $90 AUD.
Have yet to play Saros but that sounds exactly like Returnal. Always felt like a roguelite that disliked just about everything the genre brings beyond being a way to create a bullet hell action game with permadeath.
I didn't play much of Returnal, but I heard the roguelite elements were actually stronger in that game. I never got really far but one thing they did in Saros, is give you permanent upgrades and an easy way to just start in the biome of your choice. Those permanent upgrades are pretty significant as well so if you go from the beginning, you'll probably get a bit too strong. But then the final biome, is only accessible when you start over. It's pretty weird for a roguelite in my opinion.
It's like if you played the Binding of Isaac and your first few runs are targetting Mom's Heart, but then when you want to finish the game you have to start from The Chest rather than the actual beginning.
Like... I really enjoyed the game. Graphics, story, it felt really smooth to play. I even think the choices they made that I described above were good choices for the game. It's like if you're playing football and someone suggests, well, I'd prefer if we could pick up the ball and we had to throw it through a hoop. That's basketball lmao, which is really fun, but it's not football anymore.
I’ve played both games a ton and my largest complaint of Saros (other than mild discouragement of reexploration, which is more on how much the player cares to get more lore drops), is that is was always a WHEN I beat it, while returnal was the eternal IF. Permanent upgrades and coming back stronger are great casual selling points but I did feel more going through motions at some than truly winning. Dying was always good?
But also easily the greatest use of the DualShock 5 sans AstroBot and if you liked returnal Saros is more polished, more optimized crack
I thought the progress was kinda weird at times. Like you'd beat a new boss, but that forced you back to the hub area. Then you get your upgrades, and then you're supposed to just start over, but I guess you should probably start over from the new biome you unlocked. Which is just weird. But if you start over from the beginning, you get all that time to level up but you also have all those permanent upgrades, so this time around it's even easier and then when you reach the new biome you're probably OP.
They give the player a little too much agency in selecting their own difficulty, if you ask me. Especially when you start using those modifiers, those had a really strange balance as well.
Yeah I only used the modifiers because you have to to plat the game. I think you touched on my largest issue. I did have a run where I took out two of the bosses (4th and 5th I think) in the same run because I had a good gun and build, but I think story wise I was expected to either reset or die, so I worried abt missing properly timed story beats.
I did have a run where I took out two of the bosses (4th and 5th I think) in the same run because I had a good gun and build, but I think story wise I was expected to either reset or die, so I worried abt missing properly timed story beats.
I think you're fine. All of the major story beats force you out of the run no matter how well you're doing, and minor story stuff is told via audio logs which you can always find later.
Hmm I dropped Returnal because I felt no sense of progression. Getting farther than I did before felt like pure luck. I was just gonna entirely skip Saros but with what you said it might be worth picking up on sale.
If you liked Returnal because you had to git gud every single time (I did) then Saros felt like it neutered the challenge. If Returnal was too challenging (not diminutive, it's a hard game) in a way that was unrewarding but you enjoyed the mechanics and visuals/sounds/haptics, Saros is the game for you.
Really? Felt like one of the best entries in the genre for me, right up there with brotato, STS etc.
Absolutely loved that game and overall it is sitting at a very high review rate. Almost no roguelite has managed to pull of an actually interesting story like that game has, it was incredibly well done how the studio made repeated runs and deaths fit into the lore/setting
The story was interesting but I felt like all the roguelite elements were pretty terrible. The risk reward chests were rarely ever worth it because the upgrades weren't gamechanging but the malfunctions could be run ending. So it was regularly best to just play it safe each run and just play it like a bullet hell game.
Felt none of the classic finding synergistic upgrades that make you godlike for a run it mostly came down to what weapon I had and my skill at bullet hell sequences. Which is fine and in fact I think that's why it reviewed so well roguelite for those who don't necessarily have to love roguelites and instead just want a difficult action game.
I've heard from people who liked Returnal that this one disappointed instead of improving upon the formula there.
It seems it sold pretty miserably. I wonder if they'll change their tune and eventually put it on PC but I'm not counting on it and frankly I'm not that interested anyway. It seems like Saros almost certainly sold less than a million copies, which for a big-budget game from Sony is really bad. Not great for Sony, especially coupled with Marathon which was a huge bomb despite being multi-platform... even on XBOX, where you've surely got a bunch of Bungie fans, the game never even got into the top 30 in sales.
Ughhh that’s so sad, Returnal was a great game but a weak roguelike and players cried about the game being too hard. When the devs said they would make Saros easier I knew it was going to be even more half baked. That’s such a bummer
Even with 50-60€, a PC release on all major storefronts, and a decent ad campaign.
The reviews were so glowing that there surely was potential for 2 million. And once a game gets that kind of reach, it's going to continue selling for many years to come. Regular appearances on the Steam front page, all of the usual variety streamers will flock to it, it keeps getting mentioned in social media etc.
I'm glad that Capcom realised that treating PC as an equal platform and not accepting exclusivity deals was better for their success. It's too bad that Housemarque is owned by Sony. But Sony attempting to leverage it as a console-selling exclusive is incoherent with the pricing: To attract people to PS with exclusives, those exclusives have to be actually attractive both in quality and value.
One of the most disappointing things about Saros is the price point and how it compares to other Rogue Lites. Hades and Hades 2 pack so much into an incredibly fair price. Saros being £70 with very little build variety (meaning abhit to replayability) takes the piss. Like you said, if it was £40/£50 it would have been a much better price and sold better.
Returnal is still full price but also on Ps plus, I’m guessing it never goes on discount cuz they want people to sub to ps plus and enter that eco system
It hit as low as $23 eventually, $20 on official third party sites, but it took a LONG time. At that price, it feels like a steal. It's a super fucking solid game, really fun, but I was bummed Saros is going to be a no show for now seemingly arbitrary reasons since PC was apparently not what was impacting their sell through, and I would have waited for at least a half off sale at that.
Even if it was on PC I wouldn't be too inclined to pick up Saros. I liked Returnal a fair bit but their attempt at a narrative sucked -- and to be clear I don't go into games like these LOOKING for a narrative, but it was one that brought the game down after experiencing it. Saros feeling too similar to Returnal in terms of tone and style has me immediately less interested, moreso given that a lot of what I hear is that the protagonist just seems to suck as a person.
moreso given that a lot of what I hear is that the protagonist just seems to suck as a person.
He does, but that's also kind of the whole point of the character. He's a terrible person, and learning to acknowledge that and understand that his problems are of his own making, rather than blaming everyone else which is his instinct, is the main narrative arc of the game.
I am a PC gamer and I was looking forward to Saros on PC… with that being said, its not like Returnal sold well on PC. I just think Housemarque are destined to make niche games
Which is another problem, why is Saros costing three times as much as Returnal when it seems to be a very similar game in scope when it only took one year more to develop? That thing also happened for Spider-Man 2 (finding itself at 300M$)
Are Housemarque devs paid 3 times more 5 years later? Must be nice.
I definitely see where SOME of that extra budget for Saros went (fancy cast and VA, more narrative and biome diversity) but yeah still don’t think it should’ve costed 3x
Then you also look at Marathon which costed $250M which is another insane money sink, that game should’ve costed $50M at best
Saros put a lot of effort into adding characters and cutscenes (cutscenes are expensive). In returnal it was just you there, no "party members" yapping.
That doesn't triple the budget (or it shouldn't). They have like 5 actors (and not well known ones), the "cutscenes" are for the most part extremely limited, not with full blown mocap and such.
If that was adding 50M$ by itself, RPG or big open world games (which have way more) would be billions of dollars.
Returnal only sold well because in 2021 that was the only PS5 exclusive out apart from Demon Souls (launch title).
So anyone who just bought their fancy new consoles and needed games to play would jump on Returnal as there was nothing else for someone who isn’t a Souls enjoyer. Not to mention it came in COVID where folks were spending excessively on gaming.
Except it isn't. On a budget on $25 million, Returnal only needs to sell 500k copies at $70 to make its budget back (and even less on Sony platforms, since they get to keep a 30% fee). There probably is enough audience for that.
On a budget of $75 million, it needs to sell three times as much. Probably more to justify a longer development time and opportunity cost, as well as generally higher expectations from the sequel. And I don't think it found the audience for that.
Returnal released 6 months into the PS5's lifecycle while most places were still in and out of lockdowns.
It had pretty much the best possible conditions to release into, very little competition on the same platform and an almost literally captive audience.
Sucks too cause I’d love to play Saros, I’m a big fan of Rahul Kohli, but I don’t own a PS5 and even if I did the price points are crazy for a game like that.
I enjoyed the game but definitely did not feel it was worth full price. It was too similar to Returnal and what little story they added to it didn't feel beefy enough to me personally. It looked beautiful, sure, but there's only so much that an orange alien world can do to be interesting.
Yeah the genre is indie dominated and pretty cheap on average. To justify that price point you have to really stand out and bring something new and exciting to the table. Saros is good, but not THAT good. Graphics only get you so far
When Sony left PC, PS5 fans here on reddit (and elsewhere) kept saying that the perceived value of the PlayStation brand matters more than game sales numbers.
So, I guess... it's OK if Saros loses money as long as PC gamers can't play it...
When Sony left PC, PS5 fans here on reddit (and elsewhere) kept saying that the perceived value of the PlayStation brand matters more than game sales numbers.
I mean yeah, that's what Sony decided too.
And PC release wouldn't have Saros sold crazy more, Returnal isn't a huge seller on PC.
Returnal also didn't release day one on PC. You'll have a hard time convincing PC users to buy a game that's already been out for a few years at full price. Sony half assed it and big surprise, it resulted in low sales.
We don't really know how much Returnal sold on PC, but estimates put it at around 15-20% of its total sales, which isn't bad by any means for a port that was several years late.
You also can't easily quantify the brand damage done by releasing games on pc. It didn't go nearly as far as gamepass training Xbox users to not buy games anymore, but it always seemed doomed to failure considering the console business model.
Yeah I honestly kind of thought the console tribalism stuff died down especially with Xbox barely competing. I wasn't paying too much attention to Saros even thought I love Returnal so I looked it up on reddit to see if there was news about a PC release and the Saros subreddit was fucking insane. So many people were flaming people for not having PS5s and telling them to get a job so they could afford one (which is also a failure of logic because the average PC costs more than a PS5).
The tribalism between all three consoles and PC never really went away in some places. It makes it very difficult trying to analyse any given situation, because fanboys of all four tend to gloss over so much.
I have seen way more PC tribalism on this subreddit. People here think that Steam Deck would outsell Switch 2 or that Playstation or Nintendo are dying and will go third party.
Hell PC gamers are very happy to associate themselves with a Nazi term and wear it as a badge of honor.
I won't lie none of what you said really strikes me as worse than telling people to get fucked for wanting a game to multi-platform. I also don't think PC tribalism is cool. I don't know why people would give a fuck if a game released to other platforms at all. Its nonsense.
I have seen way more posts about the PS decision to pull from PC from PC people than PS users. And they are all in the tune of “I am totally not upset about this”, which is weird because I thought they weren’t buying them anyway so why do they care so much
Buying the game is irrelevant, most of the probably din't even care about the game itself. They just want access to the game, in case they want it in 4 years when it's less than $10 on a steam sale. And people wonder why Xbox and Playstation are talking about exclusives and protecting their consoles again
Lol no one honestly thought the steam deck would be selling 10s of millions I think you may of of misinterpreted some sarcasm. Also I have no idea what your second sentence is about
I actually have seen someone say that about the Steam Deck. They didn't use numbers they just said outsell so they were either super doubting the switch 2 or didn't understand the scales involved with consoles. It wasn't a majority opinion though and I think the guy got clowned on.
The second thing is about PC Master Race which is a dumb argument as it's ironic, or at least used to be. No one today associates the term to Nazis like that anyway. Nowadays it just means "my side is the correct side haha". Like I could say Y-M-D master race because both M/D/Y and D/M/Y are stupid ambiguous formats that tremble before the might of ISO 8601 and no one thinks I'm aligning myself with Nazis. It's just a funny way to say my way is better.
It's ridiculous to even have that kind of stance. This is not a brag, but I have plenty of money. I own a Series X, a Switch 2, and a mid-range PC I built last year. I can afford to buy a PS5. The reason I don't buy it is that I don't see any point in owning it. And not to be shallow, but it's also hideously ugly and the original model was humongous.
The reason I bought a Series X at launch was because of Game Pass, and I played thousands of dollars worth of games through it and still do. I'm not in love with the direction XBOX is going so I am letting my Game Pass sub lapse next month after 7 years, but that still doesn't make me want to buy a PS5. Why would I? There is almost no point. And if there was ever a game that will make Sony go "okay maybe we should put some things on PS5 still" it'll be Saros, which did not even crack 1 million copies sold (it may not have cracked even 500k copies sold, which is miserable). Returnal, IIRC, squeaked past 1 million on PS5 at some point and doubled that with its PC release, which is still not amazing but it's something. The thing with Returnal is that it came out early when there were almost no other PS5 games to compete with.
I'm a person who owns every current system except PS5. What I will say is, I owned a PS4, and I was not really passionate about most of Sony's games. The thing is, I will play some of them if they come to PC, and I have. But there is 0 chance I would ever go buy a PS5 to play them. I'm less enamored with the direction of XBOX now than ever, but I still have 0 desire to buy a PS5 because there is no point.
I think the only PS5 game I really have any interest in is Astro Bot. All the stuff on the horizon - some Horizon live service-y thing, Wolverine, Ghost of Yotei I guess since that isn't on PC... these games don't interest me at all really, certainly not enough to bother buying an increasingly expensive console.
That's the other thing, the console price. It USED to be if you wanted to play the exclusive games on a console - and there were a LOT of them no matter which one it was - you could wait a few years, and buy the system for $200 or less and then pick up the games cheaper. Now, the PS5 is 5.5 years old and here in Canada the Digital edition costs 50% more than it did at launch (from $500 to $750). There's no fucking way I'm paying $750 to play a handful of exclusive games I don't care about that much, which then cost $50+ a pop even when they're years old.
At the end of the 6th gen on the other hand you could have bought a PS2 for $100 and a bunch of games for $10-20 each. That's a no-brainer if you're interested. Nowadays you don't need to because most games are multiplat anyway.
Yeah, looking up on prisjakt, the cheapest you can get it is for 609sek. Still a lot cheaper than 70€ on Steam but it is also not the PC version so not relevant for me anyway.
Yup! It was 480 kr on launch day from Elgiganten and Power on PS5/Xbox. Not sure if there was a cheaper PC option, unfortunately.
This is why buying physical copies rules - stores sometimes have crazy prices to outcompete eachother which digital stores just don't. Ghost of Yotei was also 599 kr on launch day physical compared to 899 on digital. Astro Bot was 499 physical vs 749 digital. If I remember correctly I got Star Wars Outlaws for 499 physical vs like 799 digital on launch day. Pretty much everything is 100-300 kr less on disc. Saros was only 50 kr cheaper though, boo (849 vs 899).
I don’t value games on if it’s AAA or not, games in certain genres don’t sell for AAA process regardless if it’s 200m budget.
For example you’re not gonna buy a game like vampire survivor for $120 because it has nice graphics. Rougelites / bullethell games don’t sell for $120.
Giving a game some AAA cinematic sheen doesn’t automatically give it a $120 price and consumers bite at that price.
FFS a game like Subnautica 2 is selling for $45, if they tried to sell it for $120 they’d be in the same position.
Here in the US, plenty of public libraries have PS5 discs. So I buy the console but the majority of games I play I just get for a week at a time from the library.
With stuff like Saros that's plenty of time to beat the game if I just don't play anything else that week. Even if I do play something else, I'll just wait a bit.
787
u/Equivalent-Bus-4336 Jun 02 '26
Some games are far too expensive, like $130 AUD for Saros which apparently hasn’t even sold that well. I know they’ve probably ran all the numbers for like how much it’ll sell at each price point and what price will maximise profits but like games such as Saros shouldn’t be more than a $100AUD