this post was submitted on 31 May 2024
112 points (95.9% liked)

PC Gaming

8651 readers
1048 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FireTower@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Controversial take but having the industry fixed at $60 only will increasingly encourage predatory models as inflation continues. Price should be reflective of the quality and content of a product, not a fixed standard.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 17 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'd agree with you if studios producing actual high-quality games (like Elden Ring or Baldur's Gate 3) were hurting for money, but they don't appear to be. So what is the justification for the higher price? All I see is more money being shoveled towards investors, or used to buy (and bleed out/close) smaller studios.

[–] TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 5 points 5 months ago

I think if a studio had more money they could improve the conditions for their emplyees. But of course the executives are just going to pocket it