$70 is the New $60: Ubisoft on AAA Game Pricing Going Forward

[hat]

Not when you don't own any of them any more. And by time all the added content they ask way more than $60 for them.

End user ownership doesn't have anything to do with the initial cost of developing the game itself. Whether you have a disc in your possession or you rely on Steam for everything, you are still beholden to some launcher or other form of authentication which could be shut off at any time. One could, however, argue the cost of this relatively new type of digital distribution compared to the cost of oldschool physical distribution. Rather than manufacturing hundreds of thousands, or millions of discs, or some other type of media such as a cartridge, you now have digital distribution where the cost of manufacturing physical media has shifted to the cost of bandwidth and keeping the distribution servers online. I'm going to take a wild guess and assume that digital distribution is cheaper, but there are many other factors at play such as inflation as the most obvious one. Even back in the PS1 era, new games retailed for $50 a pop. That's slightly over $90 in today's terms.

People can whine about greedy publishers all they want, but it is an undeniable fact that the dollar is simply worth less than it was 20 years ago when games still cost $50. Take that with the growing cost and complexity of developing these games, and suddenly the increase to $70 doesn't seem so bad. My problem, as I said before, was all the added costs on top of purchasing the base game initially, with day one DLC being the worst offender.

 

[Fasola]

Ubisoft went on my do not buy list after dealing with their support. The NFT and DLC access removal further cemented my position. In fact, I'm contemplating going the Skull and Bones route for the games I have on their platform and outright delete the account.

 

[gQx]

only 1/3 minimum wage in my country!! definitely buying it thx ubisoft!!!

 

[Easo]

only 1/3 minimum wage in my country!! definitely buying it thx ubisoft!!!

No offense, but should buying games be priority for anyone who earns only that much...?

Not when you don't own any of them any more. And by time all the added content they ask way more than $60 for them.

Do I not? Steam is debatable, but GoG? My Cyberpunk 2077 is mine, so is Witcher 3, so are both Pathfinders. Official offline installers, yo.

 

[AsRock]

No offense, but should buying games be priority for anyone who earns only that much...?



Do I not? Steam is debatable, but GoG? My Cyberpunk 2077 is mine, so is Witcher 3, so are both Pathfinders. Official offline installers, yo.

GOG being the only place ?, and not asking $70 $80 $100+.

End user ownership doesn't have anything to do with the initial cost of developing the game itself. Whether you have a disc in your possession or you rely on Steam for everything, you are still beholden to some launcher or other form of authentication which could be shut off at any time. One could, however, argue the cost of this relatively new type of digital distribution compared to the cost of oldschool physical distribution. Rather than manufacturing hundreds of thousands, or millions of discs, or some other type of media such as a cartridge, you now have digital distribution where the cost of manufacturing physical media has shifted to the cost of bandwidth and keeping the distribution servers online. I'm going to take a wild guess and assume that digital distribution is cheaper, but there are many other factors at play such as inflation as the most obvious one. Even back in the PS1 era, new games retailed for $50 a pop. That's slightly over $90 in today's terms.

People can whine about greedy publishers all they want, but it is an undeniable fact that the dollar is simply worth less than it was 20 years ago when games still cost $50. Take that with the growing cost and complexity of developing these games, and suddenly the increase to $70 doesn't seem so bad. My problem, as I said before, was all the added costs on top of purchasing the base game initially, with day one DLC being the worst offender.

haha, more like people are dumb enough to put up with it, just like right to repair people are only now realizing they don't really own most of there items and starting to push back on this BS.

Then they have the balls to complain about having to take services away because it's costing to much and they win and you lose every time, as long as it the change don't effect them they don't give a flying uck about disabling content which you might of payed a lot for.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Well you probably have most of your library in GOG

This is true, so I can see your point.

They just don't respect us as customers.

Exactly correct. They look at us as numbers and a paycheck instead of seeing us all as an audience of intelligent people.

 

[Easo]

GOG being the only place ?, and not asking $70 $80 $100+.

How much do you think I paid for my Wrath of the Righteous? It was not 60 EUR, nor was it less. Season passes and DLC's are a thing on GoG too.

 

[lexluthermiester]

How much do you think I paid for my Wrath of the Righteous? It was not 60 EUR, nor was it less. Season passes and DLC's are a thing on GoG too.

Good points. However, it should be said, most "premium" titles are sub $70 and the DLC thing is not the predatory kind of thing like it is on other platforms.

 

[Deleted member 177333]

Ubisoft went on my do not buy list after dealing with their support. The NFT and DLC access removal further cemented my position. In fact, I'm contemplating going the Skull and Bones route for the games I have on their platform and outright delete the account.

Darn right. All Ubisoft releases are high seas exclusives as far as I'm concerned after the DLC removal.

 

[AsRock]

How much do you think I paid for my Wrath of the Righteous? It was not 60 EUR, nor was it less. Season passes and DLC's are a thing on GoG too.

But you own them....

 

[lexluthermiester]

But you own them....

Exactly. Not with Ubisoft...

 

[Easo]

But you own them....

Exactly - but it was about the fact that even on GoG you can very very easily pay more than 60 units of cash.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Exactly - but it was about the fact that even on GoG you can very very easily pay more than 60 units of cash.

But unlike the comptition, with the sole exception being Steam, you get what you pay for on GOG. You get actual value for your money.

 

[Easo]

But unlike the comptition, with the sole exception being Steam, you get what you pay for on GOG. You get actual value for your money.

Ehh, it also is kinda questionable if it came to pass what would EU do and actually what EU thinks about this kind of "ownership".

 

[lexluthermiester]

Ehh, it also is kinda questionable if it came to pass what would EU do and actually what EU thinks about this kind of "ownership".

From what I understand, EU law fully supports it. The ideal of ownership of what one pays for is a protected value in most of the EU.

 

[Easo]

From what I understand, EU law fully supports it. The ideal of ownership of what one pays for is a protected value in most of the EU.

So basically Valve would be forced to concede. Probably something like "you cannot remove the ability to play the games people have paid for no matter what was your legal jargon", or create offline installers.

 

[lexluthermiester]

So basically Valve would be forced to concede. Probably something like "you cannot remove the ability to play the games people have paid for no matter what was your legal jargon", or create offline installers.

That about sums it up. Enforcing the law for software distribution is complicated.

 

[gQx]

No offense, but should buying games be priority for anyone who earns only that much...?



Do I not? Steam is debatable, but GoG? My Cyberpunk 2077 is mine, so is Witcher 3, so are both Pathfinders. Official offline installers, yo.

digital market bro. they adjust it for currencies usually(and sensibly) but big firms don't really care when they have whole other market they can impose their 70$ selling just for their name and earn tons of it. and you are right owning a home or car so expensive right now in my country still you can't stop breathing cause some group decided to siphon whole country's resources for themselves

 

[lexluthermiester]

My Cyberpunk 2077 is mine, so is Witcher 3, so are both Pathfinders. Official offline installers, yo.

Exactly. Ownership is liberty and liberty is freedom!

Ubisoft and the ilk like them can go suck a duck with their moose-muffins DRM and pricing.