Has Gaming Become Too Expensive to Support Itself?

Elden Ring: Nightreign

Growing up, almost every game as far as I can remember came with a $60 price tag. Outside of indies, this was the norm. Potentially some DLC down the line, or even a limited/collector's edition to drive up the price (with reason). Ultimately though, this has become a rare sight, with $70+ becoming the new standard, for a BASE game. This change began almost as soon as this generation of games began, with the announcement that 2K21 would be an additional $10 for a 'next gen' version. After this came Call of Duty, which is to be expected. However, it didn't stop at just the obvious. Games such as Gotham Knights, God of War: Ragnarok, and Dead Island 2 followed suit not long after. However, these still generally remained 'outliers', with most other games holding strong in their $60 price tag.

Fast forward to 2025, and almost every new release is $70, and some even more. In the past two years, outside of some notable exceptions such as Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, Elden Ring Nightreign, and Mafia: The Old Country, every release leads us further away from the good old days of $60 and under. It is very easy to pin this on the fact that most of the world is stuck in a recession and everything else has gone up in price too. However, while this is semi-plausible, it still neglects to mention the fact that:

THE GAMES AREN'T WORTH IT

Games are releasing with less content, stability or even incentives to buy the games in the first place. When prices for games go up, especially between generations, these increases in price typically come with enhanced graphics, extra game modes, and promise of post launch support. In the time since the most recent increase, we have gotten stagnant graphical fidelity, nearly unplayable launches, and still being required to spend more money later to keep the game 'updated'. All of this is bundled with even higher sales expectations from shareholders, and it is clear to see why games such as Redfall or Suicide Squad: KTJJ were among the worst flops in recent gaming history. Asking people, some of which have relatively 'free' spending money, to part with even more money than usual for frankly bad games is ludicrous.

However, it doesn't seem to be stopping at a simple $10 increase. Some developers are pushing their luck into $80 titles. The trend began with Nintendo, who charges as much for their new Mario Kart World title. Even though it is surprising, it was on brand for a company such as Nintendo. But, as with most things, it didn't stop at Nintendo. Xbox threw their hat in the ring with confidence, and decided to up the price on nearly all of their new releases to $80, starting with The Outer Worlds 2. Expectedly, this was met with monumental amounts of backlash, causing Xbox to backpeddle these changes and go back to the 'standard' $70. Gearbox's Randy 'talk too much' Pitchford declared that "real fans'" would have no problem shelling out that much for Borderlands 4. Yet again, backlash ensued and the final price lands at 70 as well. As of now, no other games are planned to have an even higher price tag, but the conversation is out there, and it seems to be only a matter of time before this somehow becomes another new norm.

A 'simple' $10 increase would, at the very least, be 'justified' if it wasn't for the fact that money doesn't stretch as far nowadays, and it's too much to gamble on a game MAYBE being good or even POTENTIALLY functioning. Especially when those previously listed outliers are considered among the best. Expedition 33, although released in only the fourth month of the year, is an almost guaranteed lock for Game of The Year. The game received universal acclaim upon release, being praised for its graphics, storytelling gameplay, and everything in between. All of this coming from a non-AAA game, arguably an indie game, took the gaming sphere by storm and utter shattered all sales expectations. Elden Ring: Nightreign is another critically acclaimed 2025 release, priced at $40, and uses that price tag well. Lacking a single player campaign, opting for strictly multiplayer, it is understandable why the price is less, considering you are getting 'less' than FromSoftware's $60 titles. But it comes down to the fact that most other companies would've charged full price or more, for arguably less content.

Insomniac's recent cost/profits | wnhub.io

The question stands: Has gaming become too expensive? Accounting for the global recession, and the general decline in game quality is $70 too much to ask for when it comes to video games? For some, yes.

For @totallynotretro on Twitter, the answer is no. When previous 10/10 titles have been priced at $60, games would have to actually prove they are worth more. When a game such Baldur's Gate 3 has set a new standard for content, a game such as Spider-Man 2 trying to upcharge, in the same year, is an obvious fallacy. So what is a reason for this way of thinking? Games are simply far too expensive to create.

How much is too much?

Spider-Man 2, while a decent game, was potentially hoping to use the higher price tag to make up for the whopping $315 million budget. This is all alleged, according to leaks, but if this is true, it is among one of the most expensive pieces of media ever created. This issue isn't exclusive to Spider-Man. Many recent releases have "failed to meet sales expectations" simply because the cost to make was far too high. Recent release Monster Hunter Wilds, sold over 10 million copies, Capcom's biggest release in history. However, this still wasn't enough, and sales didn't meet expectations somehow.

Far too many companies in the past couple years have had cancelled projects, end of supports, and layoffs. Maybe the $70 price tags are meant to offset these issues, but so far this hasn't been the case. The amount of games that have actually had 'successful' launches recently are outweigh by continuous 'disappointments'. If record breaking sales isn't enough, what's to stop those in charge from raising the price even more to attempt to recoup these costs (fill their pockets more)? The absolute juggernaut, Grand Theft Auto 6, is constantly rumored to come with a $100 price tag, which would account for the multi-billion dollar development cost. If this becomes true, and breaks every previously set record, will companies see this as their cue to charge this much as well? Given previous activity, I would wager yes.

Nintendo Switch 2's upcoming releases | 9to5toys.com

Expecting people, most of which struggling with their own bills and debts, to pay even more for POTENTIALLY good games, is a dire state for gaming to be in. Clearly very few companies have cracked the code, be it with goodwill (Nintendo) or simply saying no (FromSoft, etc). Even with its $80 price tag, Mario Kart World sold nearly 6 million copies in its first month. Every subsequent Nintendo Switch 2 release will cost $70, and will no doubt sell amazingly. This is strictly due to Nintendo's recognizable and beloved library. Not many other companies can do this confidently or with the same results.

Unless something drastically changes in either the price of development or the price of the games in general, more and more games are going to release to 'sales disappointments'. Games are going to have to truly earn their new price tags in order for people to consider parting with their increasingly diminishing earnings. Games are going to have to take more risks, deliver more consistently, and earn back lost goodwill amongst gamers. There are much cheaper and easily accessible hobbies, and people will drift toward those, and away from video games. More studios will close, less games will release, and eventually only a select few will remain. This is a very bleek outlook to have, but if the past couple years have proven, this is an almost inevitable outcome.