Capcom's president and chief operating officer has said he thinks game prices should go up.Haruhiro Tsujimoto made the …

Capcom’s president and chief operating officer has said he thinks game prices should go up.

Haruhiro Tsujimoto made the comments at this year’s Tokyo Game Show, Nikkei reported. TGS is sponsored by the Computer Entertainment Supplier’s Association, a Japanese organisation which aims to support the Japanese industry, which Tsujimoto is currently the chairman of.

“Personally, I feel that game prices are too low,” Tsujimoto said, citing increasing development costs and a need to increase wages.

    • Mnemnosyne@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      4·
      1 year ago

      If a game today came with a nice solid box, a cloth map, a 250 page manual that actually explains almost everything about the mechanics of the game, and WAS FUCKING FINISHED WHEN I BUY IT, getting maybe one patch and otherwise never changing, then I might be willing to pay more.

        • ryathal@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          2·
          1 year ago

          The ability to patch games has been a huge improvement, but it has also caused most games to release in state that is worse than older games ever were. Maybe after 6 months to anyear a modern game is at a comparable level of finish to older games, but only if it sold well. Lots of games don’t get the patching they need.

            • ryathal@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              21·
              1 year ago

              Many triple A games released this year have featured game breaking bugs on release, that was practically unheard of in pre internet games.

                • ryathal@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                  1·
                  1 year ago

                  Yes Mario 64 has a lot of glitches, but it’s playable all the way through. Similarly superman 64 is notable for being a buggy Ness because it was uncommon. BG3 released with multiple game breaking bugs, same with Stanfield. Payday 3 has several crashing bugs, but nothing gamebreaking beyond overloaded servers.

                  The difference is magnitude not numbers.

            • NightOwl@lemmy.oneEnglish
              1·
              1 year ago

              Game would $100 but the same as they are now. Could be $200 and it’d be the same as they are now and still have mtx, since why would a company leave the option to get more money. Few companies operate with the approach of this is enough money we are content.

              And games have only gotten worse if you are looking at triple a titles the same way someone might say movies have gotten worse because they think high budget super hero movies are the only ones that exist.

              If the market could sustain $100 it would be, but barrier to making and releasing games has never been lower. So consumers would just move to alternative games that are cheaper or old titles they haven’t gotten around to. And worst of all to these comlanies the top sellers aren’t always these high budget titles, but some indie title that’s not even 3d. Then there’s game pass people would just turn to if game prices went up moving more people to subscription.