@dragonadamant: Not only that, but tech in general was more expensive in the 90s and 80s. $500+ for a TV wasn't uncommon for the time, and you could probably break your bank trying to buy a high-end computer of the era.

I don't think anyone would mind higher prices if wages shot up to meet them, but that's not what's happening here, and in their greed, games makers are pricing themselves out of the masses.

@punkndrublic: One, games came down in price faster then, and two, (this is more important), the market was TINY back then compared to now. Unless Nintendo pines for the 16-bit market, this isn't a good comparison.

This is a large issue with these companies wanting a 2020s market with 1990s pricing. If they want the 1993 prices, you'll have the 1993 market.

This pretty much assures I'm not buying new games anymore. I'm being priced out, and clearly I'm not alone.

Hopefully a viable AA industry rises again, because this is not sustainable unless we want the market shrinking back to 16-bit era size.

$450 is high-performance pricing, though.

Are PC gamers going to be able to disable crossplay as well? I always see CoD PC players complaining about controllers basically being a free aimbot...

$450 is a huge mistake. That puts it within $50 of the PS5.

It's almost like skinner box games aren't for everyone and there's room in the market for other things.

I wonder how many more shutdowns and layoffs need to happen before people other conpanies to understand this.

I'm impressed at the sheer size of every patch. How buggy was this damn game at launch? These updates make Cyberpunk's launch seem flawless by comparison.

The more I hear AI voices, the more I can tell something is off. Much like AI "art," the uncanny valley remains undefeated.

@xnshd: How many people are gonna get new devices for an f2p?