From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action


Well, anyway, that's what this article* claims, that shows that modern
consoles aren't experiencing the same price drops as they age. It used
to be that you'd see significant reductions in sales prices of
consoles as the years went by, dropping down to a third or less of
their launch price within four or five years. But the prices of modern
consoles haven't been similarly lowered. They've gone down, sure, but
not to the degree as in years-gone-by.

The reasons for this are numerous. Inflation and tariffs are one
reason, of course; so are disruptions to supply lines and changing
priorities of the tech industry (the AI-bros are paying top-dollar for processors, for instances, causing the fabs to churn out chips for
them and not gaming hardware). Corporate greed certainly plays a part
too.

But let's not also forget that console generations also last longer
nowadays; up until maybe a year ago, the PS4 still topped the PS5 in
daily usage, for instance. This means there is less incentive to push
out NEW models of consoles, which reduces competition... which in turn
keeps prices high. Plus, the biggest market for the cheap console
--the kiddies-- is less interested in dedicated gaming devices, being
more focused on mobile. So the console market is now aimed more at the
adult market... and they have more money to spend.

Whatever the underlying cause, more expensive hardware makes for more
expensive games too. The price of the console sets a baseline; an
expectation of what other accessories and games should cost in
comparison. If you're paying $700 for your console, it doesn't seem as outrageous that your games cost $80. That's less the case if your
console costs only $100. And, unfortunately, these assumptions spill
over into the PC market too. If Call of Battlefield CXIV costs $79.99
on the PS5, it doesn't seem that unusual that it costs the same on PC.

Of course, the frugal gamer can make do by sticking to Indie titles,
or the rampant freebies being tossed out by publishers. Computer
hardware, too, is "good enough" that you don't really need to spend in
excess to get good performance. But if it seems like you're spending
more on the hobby than you used to.... well, the numbers show that
you're not wrong about that.









* This article. This one here. It's got some nice charts. Who doesn't
like a nice chart? https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2025/08/todays-game-consoles-are-historically-overpriced/


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action

I am glad I don't PC game much like I used to!


Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

Well, anyway, that's what this article* claims, that shows that modern consoles aren't experiencing the same price drops as they age. It used
to be that you'd see significant reductions in sales prices of
consoles as the years went by, dropping down to a third or less of
their launch price within four or five years. But the prices of modern consoles haven't been similarly lowered. They've gone down, sure, but
not to the degree as in years-gone-by.

The reasons for this are numerous. Inflation and tariffs are one
reason, of course; so are disruptions to supply lines and changing
priorities of the tech industry (the AI-bros are paying top-dollar for processors, for instances, causing the fabs to churn out chips for
them and not gaming hardware). Corporate greed certainly plays a part
too.

But let's not also forget that console generations also last longer
nowadays; up until maybe a year ago, the PS4 still topped the PS5 in
daily usage, for instance. This means there is less incentive to push
out NEW models of consoles, which reduces competition... which in turn
keeps prices high. Plus, the biggest market for the cheap console
--the kiddies-- is less interested in dedicated gaming devices, being
more focused on mobile. So the console market is now aimed more at the
adult market... and they have more money to spend.

Whatever the underlying cause, more expensive hardware makes for more expensive games too. The price of the console sets a baseline; an
expectation of what other accessories and games should cost in
comparison. If you're paying $700 for your console, it doesn't seem as outrageous that your games cost $80. That's less the case if your
console costs only $100. And, unfortunately, these assumptions spill
over into the PC market too. If Call of Battlefield CXIV costs $79.99
on the PS5, it doesn't seem that unusual that it costs the same on PC.

Of course, the frugal gamer can make do by sticking to Indie titles,
or the rampant freebies being tossed out by publishers. Computer
hardware, too, is "good enough" that you don't really need to spend in
excess to get good performance. But if it seems like you're spending
more on the hobby than you used to.... well, the numbers show that
you're not wrong about that.

* This article. This one here. It's got some nice charts. Who doesn't
like a nice chart? https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2025/08/todays-game-consoles-are-historically-overpriced/

--
"A patient man has great understanding, but a quick-tempered man displays folly." --Proverbs 14:29. Not a good Skynet (Fri)day so far.
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org.
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action

On Fri, 29 Aug 2025 23:31:27 -0000 (UTC), ant@zimage.comANT (Ant)
wrote:

I am glad I don't PC game much like I used to!

There's a related article (well, editorial) here* about the possible
long-term consequences of this: mainly, the high price of hardware is encouraging younger gamers to stick almost entirely to mobile gaming.
Why bother buying a PC or console when you can get the same experience
on your phone... which you already have.

And once they're hooked on mobile gaming, it's much harder to get
those gamers to move over to gaming machines later on. People stick
with what they know and what they have.

So its quite possible that consoles (and to a lesser degree, PCs)
are... well, maybe not on life-support, but have a limited lifespan as
the current users age up and die out. Which means we might see
big-name publishers and developers increasingly focus on mobile rather
than the older platforms that were traditionally their main
money-makers... just because that's where the audience is.

What a horrible future. I hope it doesn't come true.






--- --- --- --- ---

* well, _here_ actually** https://www.gamesindustry.biz/console-pricing-has-gone-terribly-wrong-opinion



** you know, if there's /one/ thing I dislike about Usenet, it's the
inability to make transparent hyperlinks to a web-page in an article.
Sure, I /could/ just add the URL to my responses directly, but given
how long modern URLs are these days, that makes things look very messy
(that's why I usually put the URLs in footnotes like the one above).
But I almost wish NNTP had a feature where I could have made the word
"here" the link itself.***


*** of course, I know if that actually were made a feature, it would
probably lead to link-spam and even more pointless 'me-too' style
responses, so Usenet is probably better off the way it is now ****



**** I've run out of footnotes to add to my footnotes. You're welcome.
;-)



--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action

I do play more quick games (thinking type) in my iPhone than my PC.


Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

There's a related article (well, editorial) here* about the possible long-term consequences of this: mainly, the high price of hardware is encouraging younger gamers to stick almost entirely to mobile gaming.
Why bother buying a PC or console when you can get the same experience
on your phone... which you already have.

And once they're hooked on mobile gaming, it's much harder to get
those gamers to move over to gaming machines later on. People stick
with what they know and what they have.

So its quite possible that consoles (and to a lesser degree, PCs)
are... well, maybe not on life-support, but have a limited lifespan as
the current users age up and die out. Which means we might see
big-name publishers and developers increasingly focus on mobile rather
than the older platforms that were traditionally their main
money-makers... just because that's where the audience is.

What a horrible future. I hope it doesn't come true.

--- --- --- --- ---

* well, _here_ actually** https://www.gamesindustry.biz/console-pricing-has-gone-terribly-wrong-opinion

** you know, if there's /one/ thing I dislike about Usenet, it's the inability to make transparent hyperlinks to a web-page in an article.
Sure, I /could/ just add the URL to my responses directly, but given
how long modern URLs are these days, that makes things look very messy (that's why I usually put the URLs in footnotes like the one above).
But I almost wish NNTP had a feature where I could have made the word
"here" the link itself.***

*** of course, I know if that actually were made a feature, it would
probably lead to link-spam and even more pointless 'me-too' style
responses, so Usenet is probably better off the way it is now ****

**** I've run out of footnotes to add to my footnotes. You're welcome.
;-)

--
"A gentle answer deflects anger, but harsh words make tempers flare." --Proverbs 15:1. Quieter hot Th., but w annoying bugs & lots of watching videos (e.g., 2 long sports USA games).
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org.
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2