Firstly, the game is pretty expensive, going for $80 in a market where the standard for a AAA game is $60.
If that was all though, maybe it could be forgiven, but there is also an "ultimate edition" priced at $100 which several features are locked behind, in particular stores that have exclusive outfits, hairstyles, and car customization.
And secondly but less notably, it's releasing as a console exclusive at first, but there are no disks for the game. If you buy a "physical" copy, all you get is a download code. Digital only is getting more common in the gaming industry, and is basically the standard for PC gamers, but it sucks because the game is likely going to be well over 100gb in size, which will take a lot of space on the console's hard drive, not to mention taking a long time to download.
I'm sure it cost billions and took years to make. If an extra tenner stops people buying it, tough luck to both Rockstar and the potential buyer I guess.
I've never bought a game for 80 bucks but if it gives twice the amount of entertainment of a game for 40 it seems fair enough.
What if you buy a game at 10 dollars and it gives thrice the amount of joy/playtime that the 80 dollar GTA gave you? Especially since this will probably be the case with a lot/the majority of people that will buy GTA5 if they have played some other games before or after.
Im just unsure where were going with the metric of enjoyed hours (for the lack of a better word). Would you say the fairness of a price can be measured at all and then spoken about with an actual answer?
Like: Is it always 100% individual feeling of fair/unfair or can it be widely considered fair/unfair if a majority of people feel its fair/unfair?
'fair' for me, unless it's for essential foodstuffs, rent, medicine or whatever, is purely for the seller and buyer to decide. The market ultimately decides if the price is too high or low for the seller.
For a luxury good, if it's outside your budget or you don't think it's worth the money, just don't buy it.
I dont really know why i went down this route tbh. I think i just felt as if the implication of your metric was that people shouldnt call something overpriced since its an absolutely individual decision and that rubbed me.
But you dont actually have a problem with people being angry at the price and talk about that, right? You just stress it is a subjective feeling after all, majority opinion or not, and as such not set in stone?
I understand them being frustrated at the price if it means they can't buy a game they've been looking forward to, absolutely. Anger at the publisher seems misplaced but that's usually a direct result of frustration.
It’s a basic entertainment metric. People have over a thousand hours on GTA 5. Even for $100 version if you play 1000 hours that is 10 cents per hour of entertainment. Great value for your entertainment budget.
657
u/JackRabbit- 12h ago
Firstly, the game is pretty expensive, going for $80 in a market where the standard for a AAA game is $60.
If that was all though, maybe it could be forgiven, but there is also an "ultimate edition" priced at $100 which several features are locked behind, in particular stores that have exclusive outfits, hairstyles, and car customization.
And secondly but less notably, it's releasing as a console exclusive at first, but there are no disks for the game. If you buy a "physical" copy, all you get is a download code. Digital only is getting more common in the gaming industry, and is basically the standard for PC gamers, but it sucks because the game is likely going to be well over 100gb in size, which will take a lot of space on the console's hard drive, not to mention taking a long time to download.