The grift isn't in memecoin guy, it is in an industry poised to ensure they no longer have to pay a to press discs or distribute their title and, thus, they can maintain prices longer at whatever level they want for as long as they want.
For example: I recently checked out Star Wars Monopoly. Digitally, the game has been our for a long time.
Playstation store? $30
Nintendo Digital Store? $30
Xbox? $30 (though it is part of Game Pass)
A physical copy of the Switch 1 version? $5 if you want to risk Facebook Marketplace. Or $15 on Amazon. The Switch 2 version is one of those tricksy cards (which etches the license but has no content) but even that was only $25 on Amazon.
No competition = prices never have to be competitive.
Also, and I don't want to get off on a rant here but...
What follows is a long essay you don't need to read and is only tangentially related to the article in that it shows some specific ways the BIG game and platform shysters perform their magic trick of not increasing prices (till recently) and why, all of a sudden, they can't have discs.
People keep saying that game prices haven't kept up with inflation, but that is only if you look at sticker price compared to inflation. But that's because even without increasing prices companies have found ways to multiply the revenue from any particular product.
While pretending to be angels who only marginally raised prices, they're printing dollars at the expense of the customer; and most don't even know or care.
1) Digital distribution - No middleman
We all know this one.
Not having to pay a cut to a manufacturer, distributor, and retailer has put big $$$$ back into the pockets of companies. Even after paying a licensing fee to the platform holder most companies are still making 20% more off every digital title.
As an aside, this is one reason Sony is retreating from Steam: they didn't like having to pay a cut to Sir Gabe.
2) Pre-order incentives - They've locked you in!
Guaranteed revenue from the moment of announcement, which some companies slosh around in their accounting department depending on how the books are looking and how soon they have to report earnings...
If this is for a physical product the company can extrapolate how many discs they may need to press and prevent too many copies from gathering dust in warehouses. Not full proof math but a ballpark is better than grossly over printing.
And the pre-order incentives or digital incentives for deluxe collectors editions are BANK. It is almost as good as free money. It takes a Sr Artist almost no time to whip up a new texture for a different weapon or character skin. Maybe a little longer if they have to wait for some modeler to change geometry.
A digital soundtrack? You've already got them you just need to get the MP3s on the platform so they can be downloaded and played.
The digital artbook? Every studio and pretty much every team member has some scrap of something hanging around. Just collect those into a "book" and you are done.
This could take a week of effort by an intern, production coordinator, or associate producer.
In exchange for a one time investment into a minimal amount of labor the company gets to charge a 25% or so premium for the "Deluxe" edition. Those extras quickly amortizes those costs and starts turning into its own profit center.
And let's not even talk about Microtransaction cosmetics. Good lord, I know of a game that made almost as much revenue on weapon and character skins as the revenue from the actual game.
3) The 25 year campaign to turn "Expansions" into "Paid DLC", or "PDLC", or "$DLC", especially as it relates to season passes, or content that is promised in the future. For a HIGH premium, usually $30 - $50, players who pre-order with the season pass or the collector's edition are given extra content. Usually, the earlier you buy it the better the "deal" (though wait a few years and the deals look a lot better).
In the oughts, the big players starting looking at game play telemetry and found that popular games usually had double, triple, or greater numbers of unique players than the number of game copies sold. The culprit was identified as low expansion attach rates along with used game sales.
Attach on expansions was always pretty low, like 15% on average with 30% being exceptional. So the companies tried to solve the problem on how to fudge the attach rate numbers, to make themselves and the product seem more popular than it was, while also converting these phantom players into revenue producers.
Enter the Season Pass which slowly displaced the official concept of an "Expansions" in favor of some form of DLC. This has three main benefits:
a. The content is usually incredibly cheap to produce. Usually a rounding error for the revenue from a AAA or AA game.
Not only does this save a ton of money on the marketing and distribution side of things, but it also obligates the player to keep that copy of the game and not trade it in or loan it out. And since used copies can't be sold "complete" since DLC sticks with the first player, the new owner would have to purchase the DLC, disincentivizing used game sales.
So, no only do the companies lock in the initial player for what is usually a 30-60-90 cycle, long enough to get past peak sales territory, but they potentially get to double dip and profit when someone opts for a used copy instead of a sealed box.
So game companies have been raking in the money all the while crying out "We are still the same price we were 20 years ago so we need a huge price increase!"
Coporatization ruins gaming.
Every single time.
The grift isn't in memecoin guy, it is in an industry poised to ensure they no longer have to pay a to press discs or distribute their title and, thus, they can maintain prices longer at whatever level they want for as long as they want.
For example: I recently checked out Star Wars Monopoly. Digitally, the game has been our for a long time.
Playstation store? $30
Nintendo Digital Store? $30
Xbox? $30 (though it is part of Game Pass)
A physical copy of the Switch 1 version? $5 if you want to risk Facebook Marketplace. Or $15 on Amazon. The Switch 2 version is one of those tricksy cards (which etches the license but has no content) but even that was only $25 on Amazon.
No competition = prices never have to be competitive.
Also, and I don't want to get off on a rant here but...
What follows is a long essay you don't need to read and is only tangentially related to the article in that it shows some specific ways the BIG game and platform shysters perform their magic trick of not increasing prices (till recently) and why, all of a sudden, they can't have discs.
People keep saying that game prices haven't kept up with inflation, but that is only if you look at sticker price compared to inflation. But that's because even without increasing prices companies have found ways to multiply the revenue from any particular product.
While pretending to be angels who only marginally raised prices, they're printing dollars at the expense of the customer; and most don't even know or care.
1) Digital distribution - No middleman
We all know this one.
Not having to pay a cut to a manufacturer, distributor, and retailer has put big $$$$ back into the pockets of companies. Even after paying a licensing fee to the platform holder most companies are still making 20% more off every digital title.
As an aside, this is one reason Sony is retreating from Steam: they didn't like having to pay a cut to Sir Gabe.
2) Pre-order incentives - They've locked you in!
Guaranteed revenue from the moment of announcement, which some companies slosh around in their accounting department depending on how the books are looking and how soon they have to report earnings...
If this is for a physical product the company can extrapolate how many discs they may need to press and prevent too many copies from gathering dust in warehouses. Not full proof math but a ballpark is better than grossly over printing.
And the pre-order incentives or digital incentives for deluxe collectors editions are BANK. It is almost as good as free money. It takes a Sr Artist almost no time to whip up a new texture for a different weapon or character skin. Maybe a little longer if they have to wait for some modeler to change geometry.
A digital soundtrack? You've already got them you just need to get the MP3s on the platform so they can be downloaded and played.
The digital artbook? Every studio and pretty much every team member has some scrap of something hanging around. Just collect those into a "book" and you are done.
This could take a week of effort by an intern, production coordinator, or associate producer.
In exchange for a one time investment into a minimal amount of labor the company gets to charge a 25% or so premium for the "Deluxe" edition. Those extras quickly amortizes those costs and starts turning into its own profit center.
And let's not even talk about Microtransaction cosmetics. Good lord, I know of a game that made almost as much revenue on weapon and character skins as the revenue from the actual game.
3) The 25 year campaign to turn "Expansions" into "Paid DLC", or "PDLC", or "$DLC", especially as it relates to season passes, or content that is promised in the future. For a HIGH premium, usually $30 - $50, players who pre-order with the season pass or the collector's edition are given extra content. Usually, the earlier you buy it the better the "deal" (though wait a few years and the deals look a lot better).
In the oughts, the big players starting looking at game play telemetry and found that popular games usually had double, triple, or greater numbers of unique players than the number of game copies sold. The culprit was identified as low expansion attach rates along with used game sales.
Attach on expansions was always pretty low, like 15% on average with 30% being exceptional. So the companies tried to solve the problem on how to fudge the attach rate numbers, to make themselves and the product seem more popular than it was, while also converting these phantom players into revenue producers.
Enter the Season Pass which slowly displaced the official concept of an "Expansions" in favor of some form of DLC. This has three main benefits:
a. The content is usually incredibly cheap to produce. Usually a rounding error for the revenue from a AAA or AA game.
Not only does this save a ton of money on the marketing and distribution side of things, but it also obligates the player to keep that copy of the game and not trade it in or loan it out. And since used copies can't be sold "complete" since DLC sticks with the first player, the new owner would have to purchase the DLC, disincentivizing used game sales.
So, no only do the companies lock in the initial player for what is usually a 30-60-90 cycle, long enough to get past peak sales territory, but they potentially get to double dip and profit when someone opts for a used copy instead of a sealed box.
So game companies have been raking in the money all the while crying out "We are still the same price we were 20 years ago so we need a huge price increase!"
What a joke.
Leek burned his tokens, though.
“It's not about money… it's about sending a message.” - 🤡
I'm not looking forward to Gross Trans Anus 6.
It's funny how even anti-monetization-in-games movements have become... monetized.
"He decided to put his information to good use and make a little money out of it. What could be more American than that?"
-Tim Curry as Wadsworth the Butler
Yes, it's quite ironic.