Video games for $ 70: briefly about the consequences that a new industrial standard can lead to.

The recent statement by the head of Take-Two Strauss Zelnik, in which he was quite unconvincingly tried to justify the increase in video games in the next console generation prompted me to write this blog. I do not want you to seem to me deliberately overpower his words, so I will give them below:

The prices for AAA games have not risen for a long time, despite the fact that creating such entertainment has become very expensive. And we think that we offer consumers a valuable product … Impressions that can only be obtained on the consoles of a new generation, so this cost is justified.

We just talk for ourselves. Obviously, we are not talking to the entire industry, which, of course, is not coordinated in such issues. The price should reflect the quality, and we strive to provide the best “expirence”. From our point of view, this is an extremely modest increase in price, given that it has not changed for a very long time.

Now let me translate the above statement from the officially cooked into Russian. Firstly, this publisher complains of the significantly increased cost of developing a video game, and it will be very difficult to argue with this. To create a video game AAA-Class, the publishing house has to pay for the development itself (the states of many large studios may have hundreds of people), and for an advertising campaign (whose budget is sometimes approaching the cost of the development itself), and for many organizational issues. And even after the active development phase is coming to an end, and the game itself will be on the shelves (including digital ones), the publishing house will need to pay for its further support (at least the release of patches treating the most serious bugs), and also will have to give a solid percentage to stores. Despite the very significant increase in income for the period indicated in the recent financial report, it is important to consider that income is far from profit. Large companies prefer to share only the information that sets them in the most favorable light for investors, and therefore the real state of affairs in the industry remains very foggy for us. In other words, it is unlikely that the increase in the expenses of publishers is very far behind the growth of their income. I dare to assume that they are trying to prevent a crisis, predicted by analysts from the marketing department, raising the price.

Perhaps at some point you even felt sorry for the publishers, but everything is far from so unambiguous. You see, you should not look at this situation through the prism of human relations, because large publishers come from the extremely distorted and seeming so absurd for an outside observer of corporate logic. If this year publishers have achieved record indicators, then in the next they are required to surpass them. And not just surpass, but significantly surpass! This craving is caused by the need to constantly attract the attention of shareholders and investors, a significant part of which does not think anything at all in the video game industry as a whole and video games in particular, which often leads to open self -suffering. The most textbook example is the history of Anthem development, which questioned the further future of the entire BioWare. The creation of this Destiny / Warframe clone was doomed from the very beginning. Not only did EA try to jump on Hyp-Train, which had long left, she also entrusted this suicidal mission of that studio that was mainly engaged in role-playing projects. Poor BioWare employees did not understand what exactly they should do, as a result of which it turned out to be a fiasco. And you know what? EA would not be herself if she had limited himself to only one studio! The APEX quickly gained popularity was made by absolutely the same logic, but only with the difference that Respawn Entertainment had experience working with multi -user shooters. For this very reason, I do not really believe that EA managed to extract at least some important life lessons from all this story with Anthem. Needless to say, sometimes large publishers conduct their affairs rather dirty and harshly, enriched at the expense of their employees and consumers using extremely unsightly methods? The release of raw and frankly unfinished games, excessive emphasis on microtransactions, as well as regular treasures and other methods of pressure on developers … Believe me, video game publishing houses have enough skeletons in the closet.

In this light, the statement of the head of Take-Two begins to seem frankly mockery, however, it’s time to return to it. In his statement, the potion said one interesting phrase: “And we think that we offer consumers a valuable product … Impressions that can only be obtained on the consoles of a new generation, so this cost is justified ”. No matter how insignificant, at first glance, this statement does not seem, but it is the result of the painstaking work of the legal department of Take-Two. This phrase is verified in such a way that it does not come out the company sideways with a possible trial. Pay attention to the phrase “We We think, What we offer consumers Valuable product“. This wording carries only one meaning – the company takes off any possible responsibility for the quality of the product, because its assessment comes exclusively from their faith to its value! Dedicated to supporters of the position “If for $ 70 they begin to make good games without a donat, then let it”. The fact that the first game for next generation consoles was NBA 2K21 for $ 70, and those few people remained up to this moment are completely destroyed, regarding the fact that the increase in price will at least somehow affect the quality of the final product.

However, this is far from the only manipulation of public opinion, laid down in such a small statement from such a large company. The thesis that the games for the next generation consoles will be so much different from the games that have been published on the consoles of the previous generation, should also be met with a fair amount of skepticism. I will not again decipher in detail how the company evades liability in this case, but I will say the following: we have experience in the release of the current generation consoles, which very eloquently demonstrates that in the early years of the generation, the developers use only a small part of the possibilities of new platforms. In the case of PS4 and Xbox One, the transition from PS3 and Xbox 360 was rather sluggish. In the first year on the next generation consoles, there was a trite game, and the real potential of the newly -minted consoles was disclosed later. Let the reverse compatibility with the games of previous generations will help PS5 and Xbox Series Xs to avoid such a shortage of games (although their starting rulers still continue to cause many doubts), however, the radical change in the development of video games of speech has not yet been undergoing. In my opinion, the change of console generation is just a convenient excuse that allows the publisher to “smooth out the corners” when making such an unpopular and controversial decision.

So that you do not have to return to the beginning of this blog, I will give the second half of the potions of the potion here:

We just talk for ourselves. Obviously, we are not talking to the entire industry, which, of course, is not coordinated in such issues. The price should reflect the quality, and we strive to provide the best “expirence”. From our point of view, this is an extremely modest increase in price, given that it has not changed for a very long time.

In my opinion, the phrase about the fact that the increase in the cost of the video game is exclusively the initiative of Take-Two, and is completely made for the corresponding antimonopoly structures. Of course, the large publishers of the Western countries will not conduct any negotiations on raising prices, because this is a banal conspiracy, for one fact of which all involved parties would have to pay fabulous fines. Theses about the fact that “Price should reflect quality” And “We strive to provide the best” expirence “, are only not binding dust caught in the eyes of the public. The desire for better experience can mean anything at all, and the correlation between the price and quality without specifying specific numbers cannot be used against them in court in cases of the release of masterpieces of the NBA 2K20 level, whose user rating reached marks 1.2 on PC / PS4 and 1.4 on Xbox One. By the way, critics were awarded to this casino simulator with basketball theme 74 on PC, 78 on PS4 and 80 on Xbox One. Really among all the games of the Take-Two publishing house there was no other candidate for an “extremely modest increase in price” except the next part of the NBA series, the previous part of which caused so much negativity?!

Regarding the financial side of the issue, here everything is somewhat simpler for understanding. The standard of $ 60 was adopted for a long time, and therefore this amount managed to lose in value due to banal inflation. For a long time, this “osushka” was compensated by the significant growth of the video game market – it is much more profitable for the publisher to sell ten games for $ 30 than to sell only one, but for $ 60. However, such a state of affairs, apparently, is no longer satisfied with large players. But is it only a fair requirement or a consequence of rash policy and banal greed? I am not inclined to optimism about this issue. Moreover, I believe that the increase in the price of the AAA-Igra will lead to a decrease in their profitability, substituting this entire segment of the industry at risk. You see, in their desire to get even more money, the publishers seem to have forgotten about how their best dairy cow is working-services, clogged with microtransactions to the eyeballs. These beasts bring the main revenue not so much due to sales of copies of the game itself, but due to prolonged stretching of funds to various tinsel: from cosmetic items to “military passes” and other analogues of their analogues. In other words, a decrease in the entry threshold is more profitable for them than its increase (Hello, Fortnite!), so that the number of players who are ready to fork out for the main offer of games, and did not think to contract.

It is also not worth https://palm-casino.org.uk/ hanging the label “Untections for stupidity” (if only because of banal decency), because the NBA 2K21 is only the first swallow, which, probably, will be followed by the rest. The main audience of large video game hits is practically not interested in the news of the industry, so the whole AAA segment is under threat. If the same Take-Two did not imply far-reaching plans, then she would make such an emphasis on this increase or silently increased the cost of those projects whose audience would not be particularly indignant? Let the answer stay with you. However, I will try to predict the consequences from the introduction of a new standard:

Raising AAA-class games will lead to a decline in sales, which will entail a decrease in profit from games. In the first year, large publishers will try to continue to bend their line, but at some point they will have to revise their policy, which can lead to a gradual transition from AAA-IGR to cheaper analogues with an annual development cycle;

The number of microtransactions will begin to grow along with the complexity of the game without them, and the large publishers finally turn towards the Chinese market, trying to transfer the customs there in relation to the “Donata” to the world level;

Such a state of affairs will inspire a new life into a pirate movement, which will become a reaction to global changes in the market, which have put gamers in the most in -comfortable conditions;

The indie sector will use the current situation, starting to attract that part of the mass audience that will be fed up with a new model (I gently call it “Play to Pay”). In the end, most indie developers have to determine the price of their games, based on the ratio of demand and supply, and not a bloated conceit bordering on self-deception.

Such a picture was opened to me after I thought about what exactly so outraged me in the statement of Zelnik. We live in an interesting time when people in expensive costumes are ready to go so far in an attempt to climb into our pockets deeper that, without knowing it, they subject themselves to such a risk so hated by them. The next console generation will definitely be associated with serious changes. However, I would be interested to hear your opinion on this subject. It would be nice if everything was not as bad as it seems to me. And for Sim everything. Thank you for your attention!

The best comments

Here the question is not whether the players will endure or not. The question is the priorities and solvency of buyers. Somewhere in Ukraine/Russia/on the CIS-sales can fall, pirate will begin more often or buy at sales.

In America/Asia – almost nothing will change, for them to throw 70 bucks per game – this is to throw out 1/10 or 1/7 from the ZP. For some, this is not money at all. We argue everything here, because for us 70 bucks is a normal amount. But we do not invest as much dough in games as guys from Europe or Asia. We have a piracy one of the most advanced on the globe.

I doubt that everything will be so, it is likely that the players will endure everything, and everything will be as before. However, I will be glad if the predicted here comes true. All the same, it’s time to move away from all these services, and indie the market would be nice to pump.

The quality did not enter the deal. In general, I’m sure that some specific studios will do better. But what does it mean better? Personally, I am already tired of the open worlds for 200 hours. A maximum of 50 hours and already cool. Unless this is a life simulator, like GTA or Persona.

There is no greed of large aaa of publications. Everything according to banal economic laws. As the crisis shrugged in 2008, so in fact the game industry did not leave it, falling into hypercarcarenia, and clearly following in this channel. And two things flow out of this. Reducing cost-Services Games Refusal to test for the sake of a patch of the first day-to reduce the cost of ejection, and increasing the cost of the final product through DLC and microtransaction. That is, with hypercarcials, you consume a bad product at an increased price.
And what is hypercarcarenia? This is when the system does not have enough money for everyone.

Great viewing article. Sometimes getting amazed what the leaders of the AAA of the game industry think.Either they consider us fools, or they themselves do not think deeply.In any case, it is clear that the highest management leads games to the crisis

Personally for yourself, from new products there is nothing to buy. Uninteresting and everything, with some exceptions. And let them download, some games cannot be bought, and when you want to play, what else remains. The question is different, how will it be with.Your games themselves?

In America/Asia – almost nothing will change, for them to throw 70 bucks per game – this is to throw out 1/10 or 1/7 from the ZP. For some, this is not money at all. We argue everything here, because for us 70 bucks is a normal amount.

This is, why did the conversation go about seventy bucks now, in 2020?
www.Thestreet.COM/MISHTalk/ECONOMICS/Over-62-Million-PEOPLE-HAD-NO-PAY-LAST-WEEK
News from July 30. 62 million Americans did not receive any salary last week. 55 million Americans did not retire and do not work.
And where is it? And because the game industry is not in vacuum. And in our reality with you. And when in this reality, half of the richest audience simply evaporates, because what a fucking game, to find money for renting and devour, then the games can no longer cost 60 bucks. Because the games cost 60 bucks when the audience was physically larger. And so, how indirect ways to increase the final price of games and lower the cost of games have already been exhausted, only a direct increase in prices to 70 bucks remains. There is no other way out. And not to be fat, but in order not to burn out.
In general, I look at the knead, at statistics, at numbers, 70 bucks for games is not the worst. It will be fun if the next generation of consoles -PS 5 and others like them will be the last generation of consoles, and the Jubisotophic jerking off -a pleasant nostalgia from the past, when they could make expensive AAA -Igra.

Like in many ways, most of them simply endure and such prices will become the norm. Maybe I’m mistaken, maybe because of my pessimism I think so, or maybe it will really be so.

But look yourself, don’t say anything, don’t mind, don’t even think. It is constantly necessary to keep silent and wriggle so as not to offend anyone, because “everyone has their own tastes”, and that all sorts of nonsense can supplant the games more intelligent.
I would also say about the hydra-phuministic of games when the characters will be made with morons for the sake of the agenda, but they quickly begin to be angry when they read the illegal. For such a summons there is no

Therefore, let the publishers say thank you for $ 60, since most modern projects are not worth this amount

Well, they do everything with the thought “what if”. “What if” do not notice microtransactions? “What if” do not notice bad optimization? “What if” will not notice the lack of content? Now “what if” the new value standard will ride.

Based on the presence of a wild number of donat (especially in the NBA 2K20) and the number of release those problems in modern games

In fact, the only factor affects the price – demand.
And if, for example, people do not buy a bastard of NBA 2K21 for $ 70, then it will return the price back very quickly

You are trying to determine the price of products belonging to private enterprises on the basis of personal preferences. These products are not essentials, not subxidized or what other types of goods, so that someone outside the company can directly affect their price. You have no comprehensive sales information. costs or even general condition of the industry. But nevertheless, you can also “legally demand”.
Yeah, but I will tear nonsense here.

Here the whole thing is in the inner kitchen. No desire of players, even massive, can not affect the pricing. You may disagree and not buy games at this price. You can say friends and acquaintances. You can create a whole public organization, which hundreds of thousands, or even millions of people, will support – this does not change anything. Only global economic processes affect the price. And the consumer’s opinion in these processes has very weak weight.

First they buy. But even if sales are bad, this is not a guarantee of price lowering. Options for the development of events are mass. Demand, without readiness and the ability to pay for goods – means nothing.