Member
Member
They do it because it's a luxury item that you in no way need. How much it's worth is based solely on the consumers opinion of how much it's worth. It's no different than 50+ dollar concert T-shirts or any other over-priced swag that's a cheap product with a fancy name slapped on it. They will charge whatever they think people will pay and there is nothing wrong with it. If you think it's to expensive just don't buy it. If the majority of people think the prices are to high they won't buy it either and then they will get lowered.Originally Posted by Flaw3dGenius23 Go to original post
Member
What you are forgetting is that the market back then was tiny compared to now, the current target audience for a game is massive. Back then it was 200.000 people on an Amiga now its hunderds of millionns on PC / XBox / Playstation. The distribution costs have gone done as well as most sales are digital now. So yes it's still 60 dollars for a game as it was 30 years back, but now the number of sales a multiple of what it was back then. Ubisoft and others make a giant truckload of money from the game sales alone, its not like they are starving if they don't include transactions.Originally Posted by PewpyPants Go to original post
Why defend the bad practices of the industry ? I never got that, you are a consumer you are being short changed and liking it ??
Senior Member
Member
The market hasn't significantly grow in the last decade or so. It's not like it was in 1990-2000 where the market was exploding. That excuse is grasping at straws. Also the 60 dollar price hasn't been around for 30 years. In 1995 it was 49.99 and in the early 90s it was even less as back then they actually did adjust the base price to match the cost and market.Originally Posted by DutchMike64 Go to original post
Not starving? lol Why should a business not try to turn as much of a profit on their product as they reasonable can? Do you just not understand how businesses works? In big business you are either growing or your dying. Their sole objective to make not only a profit but more of one than last year so they can expand to make even more. It's their entire purpose for existing. As far as calling it "bad practices of the industry", that is literally nothing but your opinion and one the majority doesn't agree with considering how insanely well microtransactions and DLCs sell. They wouldn't have even gotten to where they are if it wasn't for the fact consumers ate them up and made them so profitable.
You can not like them all you want. No one is gonna force you to buy them. The majority however have no problem with them and the industry has made them a standard so they aren't going anywhere.
Junior Member
Games cost more to produce now than they ever did before, and yet they still are price locked at $60. This is the reason for so many special editions, DLC, and microtransactions. It's to provide you with a standard, base price to pay for entry into all games.
Personally, I prefer microtransactions over increasing the $60 price point. In 99% of the games I play, I have no trouble ignoring microtransactions entirely.
Senior Member
Member
Horizon Zero Dawn was in production for two years longer than this game. Not a microtransactions in sight. Nor does there need to be any because the game is complete AND a lot of people will buy it.Originally Posted by Napalm_Clambake Go to original post
Microtransactions are to suck the money out of people who stick with playing this game long term.
Hey UbiKeeba, UbiPhobos. How about chiming in on this topic? I dare ya.
Senior Member
Well, I won't be paying $20 for a weapon.
And I damn well won't be paying $20 for a gold vehicle skin. LOL
I do believe that is a worse deal than horse armor.
They might want to consider economics and that they can make more money be lowering the prices and selling to more people. I think some guy named Henry Ford figured this out with selling cars.
Member
https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=sKv728sTNkc
Here you go. An interview with a Ubisoft in 2014. Sums it up.
