While Take-Two is riding high on their announcement that a GTA 6 trailer is coming, its CEO has some…interesting ideas on how much video games could cost, part of a contingent of executives that believe games are underpriced, given their cost, length or some combination of the two.
The problem is an hour of what. Me wandering around trying to find something described vaguely and being frustrated, is not the same as an hour of well written and interesting dialogue.
Do people get refund if the game have a bug or a glitch that slow them down?
Or hell, what if I play the game for 20 minutes and hate it? Do they pay me? Do I give them 25 cents?
An hour of grinding - that they will also sell you powerups to help you skip that grind.
The games will go all grind to maximize profit per player.
As a Morrowind player, I feel attacked
Morrowind has good writing in it too, though. I think we can all agree nobody should be paying ‘dollars per hour’ while wandering completely lost and annoyed ;)
Stupid metric by some rich asshole who is solely focused on making more money.
Seriously I’m tired of all these gaming CEOs that don’t play games therefore are so out of touch. Guy is just another Kotick clone.
Sounds like someone wants me to not buy their overpriced game.
Yup. For every idiot like this, there’s an indie game or even a Larian Studios offering MUCH better bang for your bucks.
Rockstar’s games are the rare few I’d say are worth a full $60
That was before they started diarrhea shitting themselves since the founders left. GTA Trilogy, GTA+, and removing cars people paid for in Online is just a taste of things to come.
I specifically mean their in-house single player games, so only GTA V and RDR2 for the last decade.
That’s what I mean, Rockstar was a brand you could trust until after RDR2. Founders left right after and you can see how things changed right after.
Yeah, they left and the change was IMMEDIATE. Holy moly the shit show that was RDO. If you were playing that game back then, you could see the crumbling of the company happening in real time, it was wild. RDO being left to rot is my Roman empire, and I wonder if the founders feel regret at all with how their creation was treated by the company they left. Or if they just dry their tears with hundos these days?
Heck, I don’t even feel like RDR2 lived up to it’s full potential before they left, what with post-game being the most buggy and unfinished-feeling part of the whole game. It felt like it was just waiting for DLC content to be added, since it was a huge patch of map with hardly anything going on. Sigh, who knows.
Too bad it will be at a minimum $70, and i bet with the hype, even $80, while also being chockful of microtransactions.
It’s Rockstar Games, they love microtransactions and Sharkcards and will more than likely implement more greed tactics into their next big game (GTA 6). I’m still pissed off over the bilking they did with the bunker series in GTA 5. They’re a ruthless, greedy company. And don’t forget those times they went after those fanboys/talented game designers who were revamping their old games like GTA 4. Those kids were super talented and Rockstar busted their asses like the mobsters they are. Fuck Rockstar and their next GTA greed fest.
Theoretically he can go fuck himself. All that is going to do is make games drag out mindless crap with no actual value entertainment-wise.
The most successful games are already like that, and I hate it. Give me a good story in a compact experience (luckily, still many examples for that).
First thing that comes to mind for me is Far Cry 6, where there is a few missions you have to find certain things without the aid of any quest markers.
Imagine a game like that with absolutely no markers and they take your map as well. At best you’d spend 3 times as long trying to finish the same game, and now they think they can charge you 3 times as much? Fuck that noise.
That’s a subscription. He should try it and see how that goes.
GTA+ is already a thing…
Apparently not enough of one if he is saying shit like this out loud. I would assume the GTA6 Online efforts will attempt to make their “+” more attractive.
The less someone actually plays games, the more this idea will make sense to them.
Gamers, especially older gamers, will know this is a BS metric.
“We were going to charge $60 but then we added 40 hours of tailing side quests so now we’re charging $120” - Ubisoft.
Hours of gameplay is a god awful metric and only a corporate dipshit could utter such a stupid fucking sentence.
4k+ hours on path of exile. I played D2 probably more hours than my kids have been alive.
I’ve often come across this sentiment in Steam reviews and it’s very reductive to judge games based mainly on this metric. Getting older I have less time for videogames and I value shorter games more. There are games that are extremely valuable because of their high quality even if very short, like the first Portal.
This is why we have companies like Ubisoft trying to game the system constantly with low quality content to pad the game to 100 hours or whatever is fashionable in open world these days. I will take 6 hours of quality single player anytime over 100 hours of AssCreed grinding and ridiculous ‘story’
I also have less time to game, but I sure as hell don’t want to play shorter games. I like to play games with good stories, who are engaging and with fun play. Witcher 3 is a prime example of how even the majority of the side quests can be meaningful and not feeling too generic. I also enjoyed the last of us part 2. And I usually feel sorry when I finish a good game.
And shorter games should naturally command a lower price which isn’t always the case.
I don’t know if shorter games should command a lower price. It depends on the value you get out of it.
It is debatable, but would you pay 70$ for a 2-hours game and another 10x70$ for DLCs and expansions that would extend the original content?
But this also doesn’t mean that you should feel your game with generic content in order to make it longer either. It is a fine line but I know that I would have a real problem justifying 70€ for 2 hours of game content without replayability, even if the game is amazing.
And shorter games should naturally command a lower price
This is exactly the thing that doesn’t make any sense. Should The Last of Us be priced at a fraction of The Witcher 3 because it is shorter? What about Bioshock? It’s half the length of The Last of Us 2
Executives are assholes and should not be listened to, ever.
I agree, that’s why i think Take Two owe me $23 because i finished GTAV in 37 hours.
Though i hope Wube, Bethesda, and Fromsoft won’t bill me for my playtime…
I played 3 GTAs, and I only enjoyed gta 2. They owe me money
"breaking news: a czech man known only as kovarex has rocketed to the top of the most wealthy men in the world list. Legislation is currently being drafted to regulate the use of the drug ‘factorio’ with several legislators describing as ‘extremely addictive. Like, so addictive. Really guys.’ "
Ok so somebody should ask this CEO how he expects gamers to pay potentially $200 per game.
What an idiot, games are priced at what the market will bear and they’ve pretty much reached that limit now.
When you get paid in 6-7 digits annually, ideas start to form that the peasants aren’t paying you enough of their 2 digits.
He’s out of touch and thinking about profit, like the blizz ceo pushing games-as-a-service
What are you, a weenie?
Which is what he said
Well, fuck them, at this point indie games are often better than AAA titles anyway.
I always prefer a good 5 hour experience over a bland 60 hour experience.
Man, imagine if movies or books charged you by the hour. Lord of the Rings would make bank!
Thing about a book (and a movie) is, that once it’s out, it’s done (99.99% done).
For a game like GTA Online (be it V or VI), there are ongoing server costs, massive content updates, support, all that jazz.
I’m not saying I support it, just that I understand
your understanding is misplaced; their ongoing costs are MASSIVELY offset by their in-app purchases already. to claim they need more is just greed.
Game companies make profits unrivaled by any other industry and all we hear is “it’s not economic to sell a game for 60 bucks.” Now there are microtransactions and those profits skyrocketet. Now even that is still not enough. It’s just Ridiculous.
When did I say I support microtransactions? It doesn’t have to be both at once.
That’s why live services games needs to incorporate micro transactions. The studio needs to have a constant revenue stream to maintain the development and the infrastructure cost.
That’s why live services game needs to end
That’s why live services games needs to incorporate micro transactions.
Not really. Subscriptions are a thing, or used to be, at least. But they’re nowhere as profitable as mtx.
That’s why live services game needs to end
MMORPGs would like a word with you
Sure, great idea, why wouldn’t I want more low quality padding content in my games? It’s not like they already have too much of it.
Of course it’s a Forbes article.
Forbes says companies should make more money. Wow hot take Forbes thanks
