• Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The game isn’t for you.

    They continue to do very little updates and charge full price because people keep buying it.

    They sell like crazy. There was a chart that showed Madden selling more per year than most Nintendo games.

  • Amilo159@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Let me share a secret with you: Madden (Year) is the same game as Madden (Year-1).

  • kemsat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    For like 20 years y’all have been buying the game, year after year, even if it’s not worth it.

    • legion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Football video games were such a big part of my childhood in the 80s and 90s, but football video games died the day NFL2K died.

    • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      New releases used to be £40 when I was a kid (twenty years ago), given inflation, £70 sounds not too bad.

      • MrNesser@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        That $40 included plastic packaging and a disc both of which largely don’t exist anymore.

        • ShittyRedditWasBetter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Never was a significant cost. So complaining, you are never going to get you 50c of plastic to burn down the planet to spite publishers.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        40? I remember when they were 20. Hell, I remember when you could get slightly older titles for 10. I used to go to Egghead and buy slightly older games with my allowance.

      • acosmichippo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        more importantly they sell way more units now. It takes virtually no more effort or cost for gaming companies to sell 20 million units vs 1 million.

        • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If they’re selling 20 million more units than they used to, then $70 clearly is not too much and outs this post as nothing more than a moan.

    • Spacecraft@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I dunno. Baldurs Gate 3 has a truly unbelievable amount of content in it. $70 for it is almost unfair when you consider how far $70 gets you in almost any other hobby.

      • Targy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Someone told me something similar about Tears of the Kingdom and my answer is the same: BG3 could be the greatest game ever made with content from here to eternity, but 70$ is still too much for a game. Specially considering who ends up benefitting the most from the sales.

        • Spacecraft@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That makes zero sense. Explain why BG3 is not worth $70. Give me real data showing that. How much should it cost considering how many people worked on it and how much was spent developing it?

          It takes 75 - 100 hours to beat the game, and that’s just one play through and that one play through can take even longer depending on play style. This is the kind of game people can get several hundred or thousands of hours out of. Show me any other hobby where you can spend $70 one time and get hundreds of hours of enjoyment.

          Hell, even if you sped through the game as fast as possible and spent 50 hours (made up number, not sure what a speedy play through takes), that’s still a LOT of time for the money spent. Take an uber out to a movie with friends, then go to a restaurant, then uber back home and you’ll have bought at least two copies of BG3, yet you got a few hours of entertainment.

          There are next to no other forms of entertainment that give give you that many hours for your money.

  • greavous@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’d say that’s its because there’s only really 1 country that’s going to buy it in large numbers but the reality is it’s the standard ea tax. Stop buying it every year or stop complaining.

  • Aceticon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If people buy it anyway at the full price, then the game publisher will correctly deduce that it indeed worth at least that much money for enough people (otherwise those people would not part ways with that much money to get it) to get that game as soon as it comes out.

    In Economics, perfect pricing (which is not yet possible but, damn, they’re really trying hard) from the point of view of a seller (i.e. for maximum profits) is when they get exactly as much money from each individual as that person is willing to pay for it, so the “ideal” world for them would be individually-tailored prices going as high as it could possibly go for each person whilst still managing to sell to that person.

    As they can’t as of yet sell at different prices to each and every individual, they’ve gone as far as they can (regional pricing, different prices in different stores with different audiences and, maybe more importantly, time-from-publishing pricing) and then push prices up and up slowly whilst checking if in total the price increase has yielded more money or not (they have no issue with loosing customers due to higher prices if in total they still make more money at the price point than at a lower price point).

    IMHO, in the face of this, the easist and best reaction for somebody who wants the game but does not think it’s worth $70, is to wait until the price falls down to how much they’re willing to pay for it (even better, let it fall some more and buy a couple more games with the savings). In fact if enough people do it the price will fall much faster as the publisher’s sales data analysis will signal to them that they’ve put the game at too high a price point and they’ll lower it trying to pick up the “money left on the table” from those who are interested but not at that price point before those people lose interest.

    • TommySalami@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Jokes on them, my limit is wildly low compared to this. Most sports games are worth 20 bucks max at this point, the main content is just reskinned gameplay with updated stats and an unnecessary twist on controls. Its DLC.

    • themajesticdodo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wow. Please tell me more about this capitalistic wizardry. This comment just wasn’t quite excessively detailed enough.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        So you just had to write what in your eyes is “obvious” for everybody as a comment, which hence is redundant, about how some other comment is “redundant and obvious”…

        Oh, the irony!!!

  • Phegan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    I loved sports games growing up, but they are absolutely terrible now. Over priced, full of cash grabs and needlessly complex. I just want to hit x to pass. I don’t want a fucking story line, I just want to play the game.

  • legion@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Anytime I consider buying a Madden game, I watch a YouTube video of competitive play for the latest version. It always reveals how garbage the football sim part is. It’s all audibles and hot route spam and exploiting the useless AI in the same ways over and over again.

    I’ll never buy a Madden game while all that crap is in there. They should make it so that spamming audibles and hot routes causes players to blow assignments and false start all the time, but the average “competitive” Madden player would probably die from nonstop crying and pants-soiling if EA did anything like that.

    • Mdotaut801@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s actually a brilliant solution. Wanna spam audibles? Flag, false start. Or like you said, botched assignments, perhaps a lineman fucks a protection and you take a sack.

      Madden games are such trash, the last one I touched had Peyton Hillis on the cover. I’ve always assumed they’re still ass. I truly don’t know how people play sports games in general.

    • Katana314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know what audibles are, but I’ve become increasingly interested in action-strategy type games that find ways to directly punish players that have high Actions Per Minute, encouraging people to take fewer, more deliberate movements. Kinda like combo rhythm in Arkham, rather than mashing X to attack.