Probably not. I haven’t seen a single major AAA release on this console that was not $69.99 minimum. It’s the one reason I still buy games on my PC if they are cross platform even tho the PS5 is better spec wise; they’re usually $10 cheaper.
Edit: Well now I can’t say this because I am looking at Armored Core 6, which just came out, being only $59.99.
I believe it’s $70 USD on PS5 not $80, However it’s $60 on Steam and GoG for PC. Keep in mind PS5’s, and consoles in general are sold at a loss and make up for it from game sales.
Sony takes a cut of all game sales, not just first party. Larian probably got a better deal with Steam and GoG than Sony and are passing the costs onto console players.
I kinda dislike this excuse for the higher prices these days.
While it was pretty valid for the PS3 era and before, the PS4 and the PS5 have both been sold at profit well within the first year. This is just a console tax to make more money from people.
They sold consoles at a loss to begin with, they overcharge for games to make up for it and people ‘happily’ paid it. Just because they cost less now, they still need to make up for the loss they accrued when they were selling at a loss. When they truly break even on the costs, why would they lower the price? If people have been paying $70 for new games, why would they drop the price when their costs go down.
It’s not that simple. This article is from 2021, so the numbers may be a different now, but the point remains. Steam takes about the same cut as Sony to start, but Steam reduces the percent the more the game sales. Given the 5 million+ units sold on steam, Larian made an additional $25 million+ because of the reduced rates.
I am not a console gamer. But afaik the extra money you have to pay goes not towards Larian. It’s a toll that Sony collects for allowing the game to be released on their system.
I return you get easy to use hardware for a somewhat decent price.
Well, that’s the thing: With the additional cost of games, it’s not really more affordable. You cannot use the hardware for anything but expensive games.
With just 5 games, that’s already $100 more than the same games on PC would have cost.
Depending on how many games you’re going to buy, you could spend hundreds more on the PC’s hardware and it’d still be cheaper overall.
Depends from how many games you want to buy during the life span of your console. If you are happy with one or two games, and only interested in Singleplayer then go cheaper with a Playstation, Xbox or Switch.
If you need assistance in using a full flegded Desktop Environment you could even buy a few games more because you will never need to call an IT professional to reinstall your Console after you clicked to wrong link in the internet ;)
Nope, they can’t. Because they have signed contracts that allow them access to the build tools for Playstation, and require them to pay the fee in return. There is no way to avoid it, becuase Sony will sue you if your “pirate- relase” a game for Playstation.
If you want to see an abusive party here, your finger must point to the Console developer.
Yep, correct. Steam and Gog charge a provision of 30% on every sale.
Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo als charge this 30% on Top of that they chage a toll for releasing your game. And they charge you if you want to play online with the console you already payed.
Epic is not a good comparison here because they are subsidized by chinese money.
Tencent is a very prolific investor as has been pointed out. The way this is phrased also comes across a bit xenophobic. Please keep that in mind when commenting further. Thanks
You can always for a sale. The game (imo) is absolutely worth the price tag. I mean COD comes out every year and now includes a premium battle pass on top of the regular battle pass, not to mention the $20 skins sold separately.
If you like these types of CRPGs, this one is hard to beat.
As the other comment mentioned, I’m saying it’s getting harder and harder to find well designed games that dont include a plethora of microtransactions. So, yes, BG3 is full priced AAA game but you get a complete game unlike many games coming out (see RedFall, Gollum, and Forspoken to just name a few).
It’s as arbitrary a number as anything else. Games used to be $50 in the sixth gen, and N64 games in the generation before that could cost as much as $90. We first switched to $60 games in the mid 00s, and if you adjust for inflation, that would mean games today should cost $90, all other things being equal, but not everything is. The average game, and especially Baldur’s Gate 3, is way bigger now than it used to be. Those non-inflation-adjusted $90 N64 games and $50 PS1 games were made by about 20 people as opposed to Baldur’s Gate 3’s 400. If the game isn’t worth $70 or $80 to you (there is a $70 version, FYI, but you seemingly only saw the deluxe edition), then you can wait for a sale or play a cheaper game, but I do believe they’re charging what the game is worth, if not underpricing it. I know I bought Elden Ring for $60 and felt like I’d rarely ever gotten that much value out of a game before; and value goes well beyond how long the game is.
Nah, it’s pretty easy to avoid games with microtransactions. You’re just listing the games with the most marketing, but those are also the games most likely to have microtransactions because they know they’ve got you in the hype cycle. If you look a little bit outside of that bubble, the next closest games are most likely to earn your dollar just by making a good product.
Right, but while I don’t want to speak on behalf of the original commenter, I’m sure what they’re trying to get across is the value, with the comparison of COD charging the base cost plus DLC plus skins, whereas Balder’s Gate is a one time purchase of $80, and that’s it.
You are really gonna feel bad when the price for such a game was 39.99. This is just the way it works friend. When you get older some kid is going to be saying the same thing but 79.99 will be the pricepoint.
Read your comment again. You are outraged because someone made a completely valid assumption bases on the information you gave. Truley someone that old wouldn’t be that angry about it would they? You are really just reaffirming that you are a kid masquerading as someone older by being this upset.
The point of my comment wasn’t even about your age. It was that this is how things go in general.
What are you referring to? They released enhanced/definitive editions for their previous games without any extra charge. Their games have gone on sale regularly.
Sorry. I‘ll correct this shortly. Not larian, the studio that made the game but the company that owns D&D, Wizards of the Coast is who I‘m referring to.
Mate, you have no idea what you’re on about. Larian is one of the most transparent studios there is, and they have not once released a game with microtransactions or DLC. Similarly, every game they made has had a free “definitive edition” within twelve months of release.
Research before you make claims like this, Larian are not a AAA studio.
Games should cost more than $60, they have not remotely kept up with inflation. The price was able to stay static so long because things could get cheaper with economies of scale as the industry grew, but it can’t do that forever. The price has to go up.
I‘m not interested in watching youtube vids and no, games dont need to get more expensive. This just imposes other limits.
The most important oversight „more cost!“ argumenters always make is that game companies (same as movie companies) produce a game once that can rake in profits forever.
Minecraft for example, the most played game ever, is 30 bucks. It’s a wonder that microsoft hasn’t made it 60 after buying the company and starting the enshittification of minecraft but maybe it is around the corner.
The point is, game companies are not people, they are companies. They don’t need out pity. If they make a good game, they make millions, real easy calculations. Some make games with shitty loot boxes, others without. They still both make money.
Just keep your pro corporation arguments to yourself.
I’m technically working right now so don’t have time to dog up the tweet, but in reply to someone claiming that Lairan were funded by WotC to make the game, their CEO replied stating they approached them and paid for the rights, rather than WotC coming to them. Maybe there is a clause in the contract that WotC get a small percentage on a certain amount of sales nut from what it sounds like the ink was dry on the rights before development began
Yes, but apparently I phrased it incorrectly. The company behind the game, behind the game which is D&D and Wizards of the Coast. They’re also known to overprice stuff.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !gaming@beehaw.org
From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it’s gaming you can probably discuss it here!
Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.
Probably not. I haven’t seen a single major AAA release on this console that was not $69.99 minimum. It’s the one reason I still buy games on my PC if they are cross platform even tho the PS5 is better spec wise; they’re usually $10 cheaper.
Edit: Well now I can’t say this because I am looking at Armored Core 6, which just came out, being only $59.99.
I believe it’s $70 USD on PS5 not $80, However it’s $60 on Steam and GoG for PC. Keep in mind PS5’s, and consoles in general are sold at a loss and make up for it from game sales.
Wait for a sale.
That shouldn’t really effect anything but first party titles. Larian don’t care about Sony’s loss on the machine.
Sony takes a cut of all game sales, not just first party. Larian probably got a better deal with Steam and GoG than Sony and are passing the costs onto console players.
Yeah, but Larian shouldn’t care if Sony get 30% of £50 or £70 to make up their PS5 losses.
If Larian sets the price at £50, they make £35 per sale. If Larian sets the price at £70, they make £49 per sale.
Larian cares, because Larian wants to make money.
I kinda dislike this excuse for the higher prices these days.
While it was pretty valid for the PS3 era and before, the PS4 and the PS5 have both been sold at profit well within the first year. This is just a console tax to make more money from people.
https://www.pcmag.com/news/sony-says-499-ps5-no-longer-sells-at-a-loss
PS4 - 6 months to be profitable
PS5 - 8 months to be profitable(despite the chip shortages as well).
So what?
They sold consoles at a loss to begin with, they overcharge for games to make up for it and people ‘happily’ paid it. Just because they cost less now, they still need to make up for the loss they accrued when they were selling at a loss. When they truly break even on the costs, why would they lower the price? If people have been paying $70 for new games, why would they drop the price when their costs go down.
The revenue split is the same (30%) on Steam, PlayStation, and Xbox, which seems like the number that should matter to the publisher.
It’s not that simple. This article is from 2021, so the numbers may be a different now, but the point remains. Steam takes about the same cut as Sony to start, but Steam reduces the percent the more the game sales. Given the 5 million+ units sold on steam, Larian made an additional $25 million+ because of the reduced rates.
https://www.theverge.com/21445923/platform-fees-apps-games-business-marketplace-apple-google
$80 is the new $60. Better get used to it.
Weird mine was $0
Well done, you deprived one of the good developers/publishers making full games with no microtransactions any compensation for their work.
🙄
You could wait and maybe buy used.
Gert er sterm derk.
!patientgamers@sh.itjust.works
Usually gents get cheaper over time.
A gentleman never gets cheaper. He just doesn’t immediately raise his prices to keep up with inflation.
I am not a console gamer. But afaik the extra money you have to pay goes not towards Larian. It’s a toll that Sony collects for allowing the game to be released on their system.
I return you get easy to use hardware for a somewhat decent price.
Well, that’s the thing: With the additional cost of games, it’s not really more affordable. You cannot use the hardware for anything but expensive games.
With just 5 games, that’s already $100 more than the same games on PC would have cost.
Depending on how many games you’re going to buy, you could spend hundreds more on the PC’s hardware and it’d still be cheaper overall.
Depends from how many games you want to buy during the life span of your console. If you are happy with one or two games, and only interested in Singleplayer then go cheaper with a Playstation, Xbox or Switch.
If you need assistance in using a full flegded Desktop Environment you could even buy a few games more because you will never need to call an IT professional to reinstall your Console after you clicked to wrong link in the internet ;)
They could also release a physical copy without the sony extra but why would you bother not being abusive. People will buy it anyway
Nope, they can’t. Because they have signed contracts that allow them access to the build tools for Playstation, and require them to pay the fee in return. There is no way to avoid it, becuase Sony will sue you if your “pirate- relase” a game for Playstation.
If you want to see an abusive party here, your finger must point to the Console developer.
Steam and GOG also take 30%. Nintendo, Microsoft, Google, and Apple too for that matter. The only exception is Epic who takes IIRC 12%?
FWIW the Steam cut is lower for games that sell well. It’s probably below 25% for BG3 overall.
Yep, correct. Steam and Gog charge a provision of 30% on every sale.
Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo als charge this 30% on Top of that they chage a toll for releasing your game. And they charge you if you want to play online with the console you already payed.
Epic is not a good comparison here because they are subsidized by chinese money.
Tencent is a very prolific investor as has been pointed out. The way this is phrased also comes across a bit xenophobic. Please keep that in mind when commenting further. Thanks
Sorry mate.
I did not intend to be xenophibic.
Let’s just state that the money comes from the same un- democratic country that also brought us Tiktok
You know all these companies have investments from the same Chinese company, right?
Valve and CDPR have (significant) investments from Tencent? link please!
Guess I am waiting for a sale
Just move to NZ, according to the Sony website it’s only $120 over here!
You can always for a sale. The game (imo) is absolutely worth the price tag. I mean COD comes out every year and now includes a premium battle pass on top of the regular battle pass, not to mention the $20 skins sold separately.
If you like these types of CRPGs, this one is hard to beat.
Comparing it to COD, a game I don’t even play doesn’t make it better.
As the other comment mentioned, I’m saying it’s getting harder and harder to find well designed games that dont include a plethora of microtransactions. So, yes, BG3 is full priced AAA game but you get a complete game unlike many games coming out (see RedFall, Gollum, and Forspoken to just name a few).
See the problem here? Micro transactions, or charge extra for not having micro transactions… either way- you’re paying more than you should.
What “should” you pay?
The usual $59.99 that it’s been for years.
It’s as arbitrary a number as anything else. Games used to be $50 in the sixth gen, and N64 games in the generation before that could cost as much as $90. We first switched to $60 games in the mid 00s, and if you adjust for inflation, that would mean games today should cost $90, all other things being equal, but not everything is. The average game, and especially Baldur’s Gate 3, is way bigger now than it used to be. Those non-inflation-adjusted $90 N64 games and $50 PS1 games were made by about 20 people as opposed to Baldur’s Gate 3’s 400. If the game isn’t worth $70 or $80 to you (there is a $70 version, FYI, but you seemingly only saw the deluxe edition), then you can wait for a sale or play a cheaper game, but I do believe they’re charging what the game is worth, if not underpricing it. I know I bought Elden Ring for $60 and felt like I’d rarely ever gotten that much value out of a game before; and value goes well beyond how long the game is.
Nah, it’s pretty easy to avoid games with microtransactions. You’re just listing the games with the most marketing, but those are also the games most likely to have microtransactions because they know they’ve got you in the hype cycle. If you look a little bit outside of that bubble, the next closest games are most likely to earn your dollar just by making a good product.
EDIT: Also, what about Forspoken is “incomplete”?
Right, but while I don’t want to speak on behalf of the original commenter, I’m sure what they’re trying to get across is the value, with the comparison of COD charging the base cost plus DLC plus skins, whereas Balder’s Gate is a one time purchase of $80, and that’s it.
I don’t even like CRPG’s and BG3 is probably gonna end up being my personal GOTY.
You are really gonna feel bad when the price for such a game was 39.99. This is just the way it works friend. When you get older some kid is going to be saying the same thing but 79.99 will be the pricepoint.
When I get older? Do you always make assumptions of people?
Are you not planning on getting older? Time marches on.
I’m 51. I don’t need to be older. Nor do I need some random clown on the internet judging me because I have an opinion on the cost of games.
Read your comment again. You are outraged because someone made a completely valid assumption bases on the information you gave. Truley someone that old wouldn’t be that angry about it would they? You are really just reaffirming that you are a kid masquerading as someone older by being this upset.
The point of my comment wasn’t even about your age. It was that this is how things go in general.
Absolutely correct imo. Although bg looks great, the company behind it is also not known for their decency iirc.
Maybe consider sailing the high seas my friend.
Edit: I am not talking about Larian studios but the IP holder, Wizards of the Coast. They’re know for their less than stellar trackrecord.
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/the-dd-world-is-on-fire-right-now-and-wizards-of-the-coast-can-only-blame-itself/1100-6510643/
What are you referring to? They released enhanced/definitive editions for their previous games without any extra charge. Their games have gone on sale regularly.
Sorry. I‘ll correct this shortly. Not larian, the studio that made the game but the company that owns D&D, Wizards of the Coast is who I‘m referring to.
Source:
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/the-dd-world-is-on-fire-right-now-and-wizards-of-the-coast-can-only-blame-itself/1100-6510643/
Please, do tell how they’re an indecent company.
Ok, I misphrased it. The company behind the lore ancestor (D&D) is who I‘m talking about: Wizards of the Coast.
Here‘s an explanation why they suck: https://www.gamespot.com/articles/the-dd-world-is-on-fire-right-now-and-wizards-of-the-coast-can-only-blame-itself/1100-6510643/
Yeah, we know WotC suck, but Larian is behind the game and they paid for a license to use the system and lore.
So why should we be pirating from Larian? Because they bought a license for a product?
Just read my comment. I think 80 bucks is too much same as op and the fact that wotc is part of this fits perfectly with the too high price.
Also, please show proof that larian paid a one time fee for the license when you claim stuff like this.
Mate, you have no idea what you’re on about. Larian is one of the most transparent studios there is, and they have not once released a game with microtransactions or DLC. Similarly, every game they made has had a free “definitive edition” within twelve months of release.
Research before you make claims like this, Larian are not a AAA studio.
It was a misrepresenation on my part. I should have said the company behind the game behind the game. Which isn’t larian but wizards of the coast.
And yes, I am correct with that:
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/the-dd-world-is-on-fire-right-now-and-wizards-of-the-coast-can-only-blame-itself/1100-6510643/
But Larian have already paid for that license, you’re not hurting WotC by not buying the game.
That be as it may, to ask for 80 bucks is not ok, period. Paying 60 to get it early made sense to me for some games but I just won’t do it for 80.
Not to hurt anyone, just because I‘m not accepting this new situation. I didn’t get a 33% pay raise so they don’t get one either.
But since we‘re already here, can you please deliver a source for your claim that the „license is already paid“?
Games should cost more than $60, they have not remotely kept up with inflation. The price was able to stay static so long because things could get cheaper with economies of scale as the industry grew, but it can’t do that forever. The price has to go up.
https://youtu.be/VhWGQCzAtl8?si=Lxpy-xO8o2frw8qx
I‘m not interested in watching youtube vids and no, games dont need to get more expensive. This just imposes other limits.
The most important oversight „more cost!“ argumenters always make is that game companies (same as movie companies) produce a game once that can rake in profits forever.
Minecraft for example, the most played game ever, is 30 bucks. It’s a wonder that microsoft hasn’t made it 60 after buying the company and starting the enshittification of minecraft but maybe it is around the corner.
The point is, game companies are not people, they are companies. They don’t need out pity. If they make a good game, they make millions, real easy calculations. Some make games with shitty loot boxes, others without. They still both make money.
Just keep your pro corporation arguments to yourself.
I’m technically working right now so don’t have time to dog up the tweet, but in reply to someone claiming that Lairan were funded by WotC to make the game, their CEO replied stating they approached them and paid for the rights, rather than WotC coming to them. Maybe there is a clause in the contract that WotC get a small percentage on a certain amount of sales nut from what it sounds like the ink was dry on the rights before development began
Feel free to dig out the tweet. Until I know that wotc gets 0 cents off of my purchase, I will promote sailing.
It’s $60 on Steam.
Which is ok imo. Still a lot of money but reasonable. The 80 bucks is for ps5 which is idiotic.
Is that so? I am researching, but I am not having much success finding indecency from Larian Studios. What have they done?
Regardless, $80 for a game is just way too much. High seas is a good option
They are speaking out of their ass. Pay no mind to the bullshit they are spewing.
Yes, but apparently I phrased it incorrectly. The company behind the game, behind the game which is D&D and Wizards of the Coast. They’re also known to overprice stuff.
https://www.gamespot.com/articles/the-dd-world-is-on-fire-right-now-and-wizards-of-the-coast-can-only-blame-itself/1100-6510643/
Yeah I love D&D, but WotC sucks big time
No denial from me there :)