I’ve already touched on this topic several times over the past year or so, but my mind just keeps coming back to it. The ballooning prices, the insane budgets, the ever-more predatory monetization schemes, lazy design, bad writing and altogether way too lengthy development cycles…it all just has me thinking that there’s no way that this can go on. Even more, I don’t think it should.
There are a number of things happening that have me thinking this way, but, oddly, it’s the situation surrounding Grand Theft Auto VI that’s got me writing today. Now, I may not be a fan of Rockstar or Grand Theft Auto, but even I can recognize that this is going to be a generational game. The hype for it has been beyond insane for several years now, and it’s still growing even now. I fully expect it to shatter records on release and perhaps even make back the full 2 billion-plus dollars that Rockstar invested into its development. Well, actually, I’m not so sure about that.
Two billion dollars is a lot of money, and I’m not so sure that Grand Theft Auto is still as popular in the casual market as it once was. I don’t think they’re making that money back in just retail sales. No, most of the money will almost certainly come from the next generation of GTA Online that’s certain to come as part of GTA VI. That’s probably where a lot of the delays are coming from: ensuring that the online component is appealing (and addictive) enough to generate that all-too-necessary ongoing revenue.
Considering this, I just can’t help but think that many of these companies are just plain too big to sustain themselves effectively. They need (or at least think they need) to make these bloated, overly-expensive money-printing machines because nothing else will turn enough profit to keep the company afloat, much less be profitable enough to satisfy shareholders. GTA VI is going to be a monster of a game, no doubt. I just think it’s kind of a shame that it has to be such a monster in order for it to be worth Rockstar’s time and energy.
Activision, Bethesda, Ubisoft, Blizzard and EA are all in the same boat too. They’re all too big for their own good and now believe that the only way they can sustain themselves is through hitting the veritable mainstream jackpot again and again and again. The thing is, gamers don’t have infinite money to spend. Gaming is and always has been a luxury business; luxury meaning that it’s not a necessity. People can live without buying new games and they can certainly live without Game Pass subscriptions and buying pointless skins in CoD, Fortnite or GTA Online.
As necessities like rent, food, water and electricity continue to climb in cost, more and more people are either going to cut back on video game spending or cut it out entirely, a decision which, by the way, is being made a lot easier thanks to the conscious decision by game makers and platform holders to increase prices in hopes of squeezing their remaining customers even further. Even core gamers like myself are cutting back massively, buying maybe one game at full price a year now. If the core audience is cutting back, then how much more will the casuals?
Industry executives seem to think that GTA VI will open the doorway to $80, $90 and $100 games. Me, though? I think GTA VI is going to be the last straw. Rather than the beginning, I see it as the end: the last and only game that most people will be willing to drop that kind of cash on. After GTA VI, I’m thinking that the AAA end of the industry is going to collapse into a true luxury goods kind of business, something that only wealthy customers will be able to engage with.
Maybe in the next few years we’ll see EA and Activision-Blizzard products become something akin to designer clothing/accessories from the likes of Gucci and Prada. They’ll be status symbols first and foremost, with the question of whether the game is any good being pretty much moot. And, you know, that might be a good thing. At the very least, it’d break what’s left of their influence over the industry as a whole and free it up to start growing in healthy ways again.
What do you think of all this though? Do you think AAA can keep going as it is now?
Image from the Grand Theft Auto 6 website.
Hopefully people are finally starting to get fed up with the rising prices, alongside dwindling quality, of modern games. Interestingly enough, people seemed pretty willing to pay $60 for games, and maybe even $70, but when Nintendo started saying they would be charging $80 for Switch 2 games, that finally crossed the line for a lot of people. People can only be pushed so far. Hopefully enough people will get fed up to make a difference…but even if they don’t, gaming is actually still an affordable hobby thanks to the existence of indie games. I hardly ever buy AAA games anymore, and I don’t even miss them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m pretty much there with you, Duck. In the past year, I’ve bought only 2 AAA games, and both were on massive discount (like 60% – 80% off) at least several months past launch. Everything else has been indie or AA level, and it’s still been a really fun year.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m pretty biased (as an indie game developer) but I spend most of my time with indie games. It’s about the content, the length and price, but also about how the games are made – companies like Rockstar firing members for unionising, Microsoft’s infrastructure enabling surveillance, etc (the amazing youtube channel People Make Games has great videos about these things, for anyone interested). As with many aspects of the world today, it’s tough to figure out how to be/do ‘good’ when things are purposely obfuscated, but luckily there’s plenty of fun, enriching indie games =)
LikeLiked by 1 person
I know I’m biased as someone who’s developing a Doom II mod, but games being priced above $50 has always been laughable to me. Especially now since most video game sales are digital, even on Nintendo consoles:
Nintendo digital game sales 2025| Statista
Realistically, games when Millennials were growing up came on CDs, Floppy Disks, and Cartridges, and of course, games with technology like the Super FX Chip (or the Nintendo 64 Expansion Pack) were always going to be more expensive than normal. Also, games had to be shipped around the world (think of games developed by Japanese companies like Nintendo, Capcom, Sega, or Konami) in an era without digital distribution (and remember, games had instruction manuals back then!). However, companies like Blockbuster existed and people also rented games or bought them on sale back then (I know I did!), so not everyone was spending >$50 on games. Borrowing games was also common back then too (especially with me and my cousins and friends). Also, I can talk about wages not keeping up with inflation and the declining value of the USD, but that conversation can be had another time.
Are video games really more expensive? | GamesIndustry.biz
sam_naji_pricing_1.jpg (1379×671)
LikeLiked by 1 person
The real irony is that the reasons these giant companies cite for “needing” to charge higher prices are all internally driven. More production value =/= more sales, yet they keep dumping more and more money into each project with each passing year. Then there’s the whole business of MTX and directly monetizing game mechanics. These guys are making more money than ever per gaudime yet have the gall to come cry pauper to all us working stiffs.
LikeLiked by 1 person