86
Ubisoft CEO defends Skull and Bones’ $70 price despite its live service leanings, calls it ‘quadruple-A’
(www.videogameschronicle.com)
this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2024
86 points (96.7% liked)
PCGaming
6486 readers
223 users here now
Rule 0: Be civil
Rule #1: No spam, porn, or facilitating piracy
Rule #2: No advertisements
Rule #3: No memes, PCMR language, or low-effort posts/comments
Rule #4: No tech support or game help questions
Rule #5: No questions about building/buying computers, hardware, peripherals, furniture, etc.
Rule #6: No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
Rule #7: No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts
Rule #8: No off-topic posts/comments
Rule #9: Use the original source, no editorialized titles, no duplicates
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
While I don't know enough about this specific title to say whether it's right or wrong, I do think that eventually something's got to give and people will need to accept prices higher than $60 or stop complaining about DLC. New game prices have been the same for decades at this point but game development costs have only grown. I'd happily pay $80 for a great game that didn't need to rely on microtransactions to sustain itself
Wild because games in the $20-$40 range have been killing it the last couple years.
Maybe instead of charging more, big developers could spend less on overhead and bureaucracy. Palworld is made by 4 guys and has sold more in a few weeks than most AAA releases last year. Hifi Rush, cyberfunk bomb rush, subnautica if you want examples out of early access.
Maybe instead of gamers getting used to higher prices, game publishers should get used to lower sales until they wise the fuck up.
Great games don't even really need a marketing department.