20 years ago, they sold you the same game three times with more characters in each new iteration. Microtransactions suck, but simple DLC is a less shitty than what used to be normal.
Comment on CD Projekt CFO does "not see a place for microtransactions in single-player games"
toxicbubble@lemmy.world 3 months ago
what really bugs me are fighting games with dlc characters. i know fighting games arent as profitable, but twenty years ago you could unlock every character by actually playing the game. locking content behind paywalls are a slap to poor gamers. that’s on top of a $60 price tag
sdcSpade@lemmy.zip 3 months ago
Krackalot@discuss.tchncs.de 3 months ago
What? You didn’t like buying SUPER Street Fighter II TURBO Championship Edition?
Dran_Arcana@lemmy.world 3 months ago
I actually did, because once I bought it they couldn’t shut down the dlc servers on me when they released the next one.
ripcord@lemmy.world 3 months ago
This was more a way for them to keep people putting in quarters at the arcades and selling machines to arcade ops
Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Yep
Street Fighter II: The World Warrior - (1991)
Street Fighter II’: Champion Edition - (1992)
Street Fighter II’: Hyper Fighting - (1992)
Super Street Fighter II: The New Challengers - (1993)
Super Street Fighter II Turbo - (1994)
TheLowestStone@lemmy.world 3 months ago
You are mistaken about the price. Street Fighter II: The World Warrior had a retail price of $69.99 at launch.
Blackmist@feddit.uk 3 months ago
They did milk the fuck out of that, I’ll grant you.
But at the same time you couldn’t take them online and end up playing somebody who’d got the latest one and have to fight new characters you’d have no access to.
ArtVandelay@lemmy.world 3 months ago
$70 is the new $60 because fuck you that’s why
JJROKCZ@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Oh stop, games have been the same price for decades, it’s not surprising they’re seeing a small price increase after so long in stagnation.
In good companies this is passed along to the actual devs making our games, which is something we should all support
kboy101222@sh.itjust.works 3 months ago
Yeah, not a penny of the extra $10 is being passed along
Exusia@lemmy.world 3 months ago
This has been disproven and was called out at the time of the increase. Games cost less to develop now than ever. Microtransactions and recurrent subscription transaction1s like battlepasses mean a shit game gets to live longer than it would deserve. People have careers in the field and languages common to the industry - this isn’t a “new and groundbreaking” industry - its one of the largest on the planet.
Studios are absolutely not passing any of that $10 to lower level staff. It was to see if the market would bear it, and no other reason - and corporate defenders came out of the woodwork to pretend BILLION dollar corporations need more money. If videogames were too expensive to make, they’d not be spending so much, now would they?
wahming@monyet.cc 3 months ago
Games cost less to develop now than ever.
First time I’m hearing that, got a link?
Hyphlosion@donphan.social 3 months ago
“Small” price increase? Are your toilet paper squares $10 bills or something?
brygphilomena@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Has the distribution gone up though? If the quantity of games being sold has increased the companies are making just as much even though games are “cheaper.”
Imo. That’s the big argument in this debate that doesn’t get discussed. The reach has increased so prices could come down as more units are sold and the company would get the same amount of money.
PatMustard@feddit.uk 3 months ago
You’re going to be really unhappy when you discover the concept of inflation
xkforce@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Fighting games started in coin operated cabinets that were intentionally designed to be such a pain in the ass to beat that people would dump heaps of money into them just to keep playing.
Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Yeah, I noticed this with mortal Kombat on snes. Every time I played the single player campaign, I’d win one fairly easily, then I’d lose to the next guy. Then I’d use a continue and beat that guy fairly easily and lose to the next one. Repeat until I run out of continues, with the occasional upset of the pattern (extra win or loss).
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 months ago
Also true of timed arcade games like Gauntlet. Unless you were very good, you’d have to keep putting quarters in when the time ran out.