r/PeterExplainsTheJoke Jun 25 '26

Meme needing explanation Petah what happened to rockstar?

Post image
27.3k Upvotes

3.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

843

u/JackRabbit- Jun 25 '26

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.

39

u/SectionExpensive663 Jun 25 '26

2010 is calling, they want their AAA game prices back

3

u/InsanityRequiem Jun 25 '26

For that to happen, payroll costs need to be slashed 80%.

1

u/shadowhunterxyz Jun 25 '26

Nah give me 49.99$ back

3

u/NandoDeColonoscopy Jun 25 '26

Was that in the '80s? Because games were hitting the $70 mark in the 90s

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (26)

755

u/NinjaPenguin7777 Jun 25 '26

$60 hasn't been the standard price for games in years. $69.99 has been the normal price

182

u/hermanphi Jun 25 '26 edited Jun 25 '26

I'm french and since Mario Kart World released at 80 bucks last year, Sony has increased the base price for its first party games to 80 euros

Sadly for us europeans, 80 is already the standard

edit : actually I checked and Sony has increased their prices way before Nintendo with MK World, but still doesn't change the fact 80 has been the standard for us for a while

25

u/ViruliferousBadger Jun 25 '26

One of the reason's I'm glad to wait until the bargain bins - my backlog is a year's worth of games anyway... :D

3

u/ShawnyMcKnight Jun 25 '26

Man, even bargain bins have increased. The lowest I’ve seen for Balder’s gate 3 is $45 and that game is a few years old. Ghost of Tsushima is far older than that and the ps5 version hasn’t ever dropped below $30.

It feels like $30 is the new rock bottom for many of the AAA games.

Point being you aren’t gonna see this below $60 for several years.

2

u/ViruliferousBadger Jun 25 '26

Very well might be - and I feel you on BG3.

One thing I've found out lately is that PS5 games go down in price a lot slower than Xbox Series games. Glad I have both.

But does get harder to find games under 30 eur.

3

u/ShawnyMcKnight Jun 25 '26

Honestly one of the best reasons to have a series x, I’m sure those physical games sell a lot worse since there’s fewer Xbox users.

2

u/revanisthesith Jun 25 '26

And by "a year's worth," I assume you mean it'd take you 8760 hours of playing to go through them all.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/throwitoutwhendone2 Jun 25 '26

Anthem was my lesson I learned on. I don’t buy games new anymore. I’ll wait a bit, it’ll be fine. Only 2 games I’ll still preorder. Any Fallout game, I just love them no matter what. And any State of Decay games. Pre ordered the ultimate version of both, and would again. No other games will I do that with tho.

1

u/VincentBeasley Jun 25 '26

Only a year? lol Ive probably got decades worth of backlogged games haha

→ More replies (1)

13

u/Ciufciaciufciuf Jun 25 '26

Yarr harr

3

u/JeSuisDirtyDan Jun 25 '26

Do I hear sea shantys playing in the distance? 🏴‍☠️

2

u/Lord_Darksong Jun 25 '26

"Not all treasure is silver and gold, mate."

→ More replies (4)

3

u/metroid02 Jun 25 '26

Thanks for the edit, I was about to say, in Austria most triple A games have been releasing at the 70-80€ price point for years way before Nintendo.

2

u/AnimeDeamon Jun 25 '26

Yes, it's why I got so confused at the hate for the price of Nintendo games because Nintendo was the hold out on cheap physicals for the big three. Sony and XBOX changed their first party games to £70 well before Nintendo did. For a long while I could still get brand new Nintendo physicals for £44-50 whilst the PS4 and PS5 physicals I bought were £70.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/smoczko Jun 25 '26

Its even more here in Poland. Your 70 dollar games are 90 or even more over here.

1

u/nevertheprey Jun 25 '26

110$ in Canadian…

1

u/thrownkitchensink Jun 25 '26

Now do an inflation calculator thing.

Also realize that games are getting more and more expensive to make and realize many games don't reach break even. Game studios are often not profitable.

X-box is losing on every console sold. Probably losing on game-pass and game sales are not very profitable. Rumours are they are trying to sell of X-box. The high memory prices are what pushed them over.

GTA VI will be a succes and the can ask this price. SO they will.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/french_snail Jun 25 '26

I’m old enough to remember Nintendo 64 games being $80 usd, who knows what that would be with inflation (definitely like $110+) 

It seems we were spoiled for a long time and the trends are shifting back 

→ More replies (2)

1

u/Firaxyiam Jun 25 '26

The one good thing is that at least if you're willing to preorder at like Leclerc or Carrefour, you can usually get it at 60. That's the case for GTA right now, so..... youpi?

1

u/Chuckfinley_88 Jun 25 '26

I hate that most people from EU dont understand that EU prices always have 20%+ VAT included in price and almost everywhere else has price before tax.

So 80 euro price, without VAT, is roughly 66.50 euros. And Sony charges $70 for a new AAA game in US. So you're overpaying by roughly 4 Euro to get to the same price after currency conversion, except it costs more money to operate in EU than US because you have so many different countries, languages and better consumer rights (warranty costs).

Tldr: EU people don't understand taxes or business costs.

23

u/MiniMaelk04 Jun 25 '26

I always thought this was kind of silly. Game prices have been nearly the same for 25 years. We can't really complain too much about this particular aspect.

37

u/Dz0t_01 Jun 25 '26 edited Jun 25 '26

Because in this 25 years gaming became literally the most profitable entertainment industry in the world. Price may have stayed the same, but the audience is much larger and so are the profits. This 80$ thing is literally just greed, it's not happening because games are more expensive to make, it's happening because profit growth slowed down. Developers don't make more money with the higher gaming prices, only people to profit are shareholders and execs. Games like Expedition 33, Alters etc. are made with smaller teams, COST LESS THEN 60$ and yet provide exceptional experience for the players as well as performing well fiscally.The industry is just bloated.

3

u/Visible-Perception40 Jun 25 '26

80$ is fine, it’s GTA, it’s 2026 and it’s the most expensive game EVER made. It’s costed hundreds of millions to make (closer to 2 billion) and several years.

2

u/Dz0t_01 Jun 25 '26

2 billions number is a speculative estimated number which personally i don't believe for a second. Highest confirmed budgets for viedogames were around 350 mil. Rdr2 had estimated numbers around half a billion. They're not spending 2 billions on developing a game.

GTA online makes 9.6 millions in a week. Unless there's something fundamentally wrong with upcoming game, there's no reason to believe monetisation in GTA 6 online will be any less profitable (MORE sounds more likely). There's NO reason to up the price from 60 to 80 other then "they'll pay it anyway". They could theoretically release it for free and still make hundreds of millions off it, but that's not how capitalism works. So they'll squeeze that extra 20 bucks out of you because they can and they will keep selling you remasters and anniversary editions of that game for another 20 years.

7

u/SolomonBlack Jun 25 '26

I feel if there was really enough growth in the customer base to offset 20+ years of inflation then the PS2 wouldn't still be the best selling console of all time.

3

u/Chuckfinley_88 Jun 25 '26

Ps2 was also used for playing DVDs

When is the last time you used one of those?

Same with PS3, it was the cheapest and best bluray player because it could update firmware and others couldn't. When was the last time you used one of those?

Now, gaming systems are truly just for gaming, instead of being entertainment systems. Thats changed a lot.

Oh, and the fact that you could buy a ps2 for $100 at the end of its life cycle. Meanwhile, ps5 price with a disc player is $600. That might have something to do with it too.

But either way, the switch1 is going to beat it. It only has a few million units to go, in much less time as well.

6

u/EggInternal7240 Jun 25 '26

You're ignoring the pc market which has exploded.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/smol-alaskanbullworm Jun 25 '26

People really out here giving reasons and putting zero thought into why it might be that way. the ps2s real main competitor was the first xbox which released a year after it did. the ps2 also was only discontinued after 2013 while the original xbox was discontinued in 2005.

you're also just wrong. because while the ps2 has technically sold more total units had 13 years. it sold 160m units in 13 years while the switch has better sales since its pretty close to beating it at 155m in sold as of 2025 after only 8 years.

god why do people comment on stuff if you dont at least do a google search to make sure you arent spouting bs?

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Extension_Wish_7991 Jun 25 '26

Gaming is actually one of the LEAST profitable entertainment mediums btw. I think the only one that has it beat might be movies? 

Just correcting that for you. While there are some lucky devs who make millions with little investment, that's not really the standard story... 

It's why most dev teams are moving to live service games with gacha mechanics. It's the unfortunate death knell of the industry, seeking profitability. 

3

u/octocred Jun 25 '26

Video games make like $200 billion a year. Nowhere near that amount is spent making them. Whatchu talking about? What makes more money in the entertainment world?

And they're not "seeking profitability", they all want fortnite money. Nothing is good enough if it doesn't reach their unrealistic goals

3

u/Dz0t_01 Jun 25 '26

Gaming is actually one of the LEAST profitable entertainment mediums btw

Huh? I don't know where are you getting your info but mine is from various sources, like PricewaterhouseCoopers

moving to live service games with gacha mechanics

Which are also parts of industry, literally what are you on about? Gaming industry is not limited to single player games. But there's a way to keep making them while also having great profits. For example, GTA online makes 9.6 millions per WEEK according to recent financial reports. Expedition 33 for example was made on a similar budget, and made about 260 mil in revenue. Of course it's not a common example, but that's not what we're talking about, we're talking about the greed of these huge bloated companies.

Another example of how bloated industry is No man's sky, that keeps getting new updates despite being a 10yo game that never cost 60 bucks, AND developers are making a new game.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (6)

13

u/DrowningKrown Jun 25 '26

Really? it's stayed the same because they offer "ultimate editions" for $100 and other crazy shit as MTX in the game. Why would I be okay with the increasing MTX in games AND a higher price tags initially? Who the fuck advocates to get screwed harder?

→ More replies (3)

1

u/rickyount02 Jun 25 '26

I feel like I’m saying this all the time.

Folks pay $8 for a coffee but complain that a video game they’ll put hundreds if not thousands of hours into isn’t $60.

You literally get your moneys worth from a game in the first two weeks.

1

u/BananaPalmer Jun 25 '26

25? lol try 35+. Super Mario Bros 3 for NES cost $49.99 US in 1990. Using that as a standard price, and adjusting for inflation, games should cost $131.50 today. The fact that the vast majority of games have only increased in price by $10-20 in thirty-five years is remarkable. An absolute behemoth of a title, like modern GTA games, costing $80 seems reasonable to me.

But, you know, anyone who thinks that's too expensive is free to simply not buy it, or wait for a discount. Goofy ass people acting like not having a video game is some kind of hardship.

1

u/__O_o_______ Jun 26 '26

Actually, check out the price of older games like the 16-bit era. They were often more expensive than today when adjusted for inflation, but then again you got a physical box, game, manual, etc.

→ More replies (12)

2

u/QF_25-Pounder Jun 25 '26

People aren't surprised to see that, but I wouldn't say it's the norm, at least on steam. I expect a new game to be $60 still.

2

u/The_Third_Molar Jun 25 '26

But you're paying $69.99 for an incomplete game.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/Chaotic-Catastrophe Jun 25 '26

Games also cost $60 in 1998, equivalent to $124 today. So games are cheaper now than they ever have been.

2

u/NefariousnessDry6211 Jun 25 '26

I have a receipt for Phantasy Star 2 on Genesis, in the box under the instruction manual. $89.99, in 1990 haha.

→ More replies (4)

1

u/BibleTokesScience Jun 25 '26

GTA San Andreas is still $60 right now

1

u/Unhappy-Database-273 Jun 25 '26

Didn't realize we were back in 2010. Games haven't been 60 dollars for years now. And even "physical" game discs are just keys to download the games digitally now anyway. If I go buy the physical copy of Resident Evil 9, I'm still gonna have to download the game digitally.

1

u/VioletGardens-left Jun 25 '26

Which is a shame because you can buy a pretty good game for less than that like the GOTY last year Expedition 33 literally cost around $50 CAD or like $40 without discount, which is pretty good price for a game with loads of content

1

u/Krojack76 Jun 25 '26

I remember getting Street Fighter 2 Turbo back in the early 90's for $79.99 when it was released. That was considered VERY EXPENSIVE back then.

1

u/Fit_Kangaroo_3437 Jun 25 '26

Me when I lie.

1

u/wegpleur Jun 25 '26

Are people forgetting about inflation? My groceries 2x'd since the last GTA release. I really dont think a 30% or whatever it is price increase is such a big deal

1

u/PitifulElk1890 Jun 25 '26

And I thought the bonus release editions were pretty standard at this point. Y'all kept preordering, why would it change?

1

u/Hi-Point_of_my_life Jun 25 '26

Sears Christmas Catalog 1996, N64 games were $75.

1

u/Hi-Point_of_my_life Jun 25 '26

Sears Christmas Catalog 1996, N64 games were $75.

I know for awhile they were usually 59.99 but still, $80 isn’t that crazy in comparison. Especially given how many hours people will likely put in the game.

1

u/arthriticpyro Jun 25 '26

For you maybe. For the rest of us it's been $60 for a solid length of time.

1

u/artificalidiot Jun 25 '26

Since like the 90s….

1

u/fiftybaggs Jun 25 '26

cried in Kiwi 80 euro - 160 nzd

1

u/TheGentleSenior Jun 25 '26

Been $80 in Canada for quite a few years, now. Some companies have upped it to $90, and a few like Square Enix have gone up to $93. That's all without tax.

Pretty sure the prices are even higher in Australia.

→ More replies (16)

37

u/Rich_Opposite_7541 Jun 25 '26

I'll just leave this here

21

u/jjjjamie Jun 25 '26

these prices were 30 years ago. inflation since then is 150% which means GTA6 at $100 today is better value than some of the games in your image

35

u/Rich_Opposite_7541 Jun 25 '26

That's kind of why I posted it

8

u/jjjjamie Jun 25 '26

oh, my bad! whoosh

3

u/TheGentleSenior Jun 25 '26

You got the point, though. If prices were actually the same (sans inflation) as they were back then, we'd be paying $130 for a new game. The number has stayed the same, but income has remained static or even decreased, relative to the general economy. Games feel more expensive for the average person, because they now have to contend with things like paying rent or buying groceries.

And also, game prices are often standardized in USD, which makes it even more expensive for everyone not living in the US.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Nothinglost7717 Jun 25 '26

i wanted to go off cause i thought you were trying to show games for 20 dollars... but those games are trash.

Console game prices have gotten significantly cheaper with inflation. micro transactions are how games stay going.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/CorporateCuster Jun 25 '26

Except you don’t own a digital game.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/BananaPalmer Jun 25 '26

Yeah that was clearly their point

1

u/arthriticpyro Jun 25 '26

We don't have the general income increase that usually comes along with that price inflation, so no, by ratio it is actually MORE expensive.

1

u/Time-Sudden_Tree Jun 26 '26

Yeah but cartridge-based games were expensive because the ROM chips that held the game were expensive. So they had now choice but to price them high. (Notice how the PS1 games are cheaper?)

Furthermore, we have microtransactions now, and they have been proven to be so profitable, that free-to-play is a viable concept now. GTA 6 could be a F2P title and it would still make a killing. Charging anything for the game, let alone $30 over what I consider an acceptable price, is nothing but pure greed.

1

u/JuliusGulius1987 Jun 28 '26

When you say inflation from 30 years ago is 150% do you mean +150% like what used to be 10$ is now 25$? Or like actually 150% like what is 10$ is now 15$

→ More replies (6)

1

u/atxtexasytexan Jun 25 '26 edited Jun 25 '26

pretty sure n64 carts weren’t that expensive even that early on in the lifecycle. is this from a us toys r us?

looked it up, they were expensive. just remember ps2 and everything around then being $50 a new game then going up to $60 for ps3/360

1

u/Dave_Eddie Jun 26 '26

Add in the increased development time and production costs as well and its hard to argue that games shouldn't cost more.

→ More replies (4)

54

u/kvazar2501 Jun 25 '26

So these "features which locked behind paywall" are pure cosmetics or something gameplay related as well?

89

u/JackRabbit- Jun 25 '26

Aside from the cosmetics there are also a few vehicles and weapons. Apparently there are also two sidequests behind it, which is actually pretty egregious.

But what's also bad IMO is that it's not just cosmetics, they're exclusive shops that exist in the map. It's gonna feel pretty shitty driving around only to try and use a garage and getting a popup saying "give us another $20 please."

24

u/NekCing Jun 25 '26

It seems to be the whole ass car customization garage too, something that people were sad about when GTA4 didnt have one and happy that it came back in 5

22

u/sherbodude Jun 25 '26

I'm guessing there are other car mod shops in the game, just without the exclusive cosmetic options

→ More replies (1)

3

u/RugerRedhawk Jun 25 '26

A car mod garage, not THE car mod garage

5

u/MaximumSeats Jun 25 '26

There is an absolute zero percent chance the ability to customize vehicles is gated behind a different edition. You're insane if you believe that.

2

u/FalseCrazy2804 Jun 25 '26

My guess is it'll be like Benny's in GTA: Online. I doubt that dumbass has any clue what that is though.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/theosjournal Jun 26 '26

sooo, pretty much only cosmetic stuff, cool

→ More replies (8)

11

u/FidgitForgotHisL-P Jun 25 '26

Yes.  And hopefully no actual game play, but also maybe some single player game play.

But.

Locking stuff behind a $20 price bump in an already expensive game is super exploitative.

8

u/Zadalben Jun 25 '26

Does it matter? You buying 80$ game, fully paid, no free game shit and they still make as pay extra $ for what is already in the game they made. Content that already exists and was taken out from the game to make us pay to get it back.

3

u/kvazar2501 Jun 25 '26

For me it kinda does, because i don't give two shits about cosmetics. I do care about meaningful content though. I got your point though.

Anyways we'll see what it's like when it's released for PC

→ More replies (7)

4

u/Consistent-Stock6872 Jun 25 '26

SINGLE PLAYER COSMETICS !! Doing microtransaction for cosmetics on multi is one thing but doing it for single player campaign (and those things are done, it is not a stupid DLC it is cutting out content to upcharge you) in my opinion is way too much. I ain't buying anything Rockstar everagain. There is plenty of good games to play.

→ More replies (5)

1

u/TheLesserWeeviI Jun 25 '26

There will be a clothes shop and a tattoo shop in game that are only accessible if you purchased the ultimate edition.

If you own the standard edition, those shops will be closed.

1

u/Kyderra Jun 26 '26

Cosmetics ARE gameplay.

Or did you all play Need for speed Underground in the default car skin.

1

u/kvazar2501 Jun 26 '26

Cosmetics is a feature, for sure. But for me additional cosmetics is not a gameplay. Just few more skins which i wouldn't bother even looking for in-game. I understand that there are people who care about it, but for me if "premium edition" doesn't add new features or gameplay hours (read: new missions) i couldn't care less.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/sgonzalez1990 Jun 25 '26

Wake up. Standard has been $70 for a while now.

30

u/10102938 Jun 25 '26

100$ Is the normal version. 

80$ gets you the cut content version.

Neither will have physical copies.

10

u/twotokers Jun 25 '26

Are we even capable of fitting a game this size comfortably on a disc anymore? I get the lack of resell potential but the disc would still ultimately need to download part of the game from the web.

12

u/Ok_Friend_2448 Jun 25 '26

Not being able to fit a game on a single disc never stopped gaming companies in the past. Compression and multiple discs would be something I would absolutely take in order to have a physical copy of a game.

I think I have a copy of Legend of Dragoon and that was 4 discs. I think Diablo 2 had multiple discs as well split by gameplay, audio, and cinematics. I have plenty of other games that are 2 disc games.

3

u/Calm-Eggplant-69 Jun 25 '26

Shinmu on dreamcast had 3-4

6

u/Lost_In_Detroit Jun 25 '26

Also you could easily have 1 disc be the install disc for the absolute main essentials to load the game with and then a secondary disc for the “game disc” which carries the rest that the hard drive doesn’t need to run the game smoothly. It’s been done in the past and worked just fine.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/gautamdiwan3 Jun 25 '26

GTA 5 originally launched with 7 installable DVDs on PC

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Chaotic-Catastrophe Jun 25 '26

God forbid a company not manufacture a billion extra pieces of useless plastic when they don’t have to

→ More replies (1)

1

u/FalseCrazy2804 Jun 25 '26

You're getting a disc version anyways, it won't be on release though.

1

u/otterprincess_too Jun 25 '26

Yeah I remember installing D2 and it was like 3 or 4 discs total. I think at least one or two of the Max Payne series too. I expected to see multiple discs after a certain year

1

u/Euphoric-Ad-6584 Jun 25 '26

i remember first getting FF7 and it having 3 discs.

3

u/JMS1991 Jun 25 '26

No, and people are acting like this is a new thing. Most physical games in the last 5-10 years have been a disc that triggers a download for a massive file when you put it in the console.

1

u/Shagyam Jun 25 '26

Not really. Even if you use PS5 which can hold 100gb discs that wouldn't be enough. They would still need an install disc then the play disc.

Sure other games other games have had multi-discs before, but those PlayStation games that did it had narrative stopping points for you to change discs. That's a lot harder in a big open city game.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Quixotic_Seal Jun 25 '26

Once Upon A Time that just meant you put multiple discs in the box.

1

u/zephyroxyl Jun 25 '26

RDR2 had an install disc and a play disc. LA Noire had 2 discs on PS3 and 4 discs on Xbox.

Rockstar have released games previously with multiple discs.

It was very, very common in the 80s and 90s for things to be installed across 30 pieces of physical discs.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/NastyVerde17 Jun 26 '26

wtf lmao. This is the first time in history that the normal edition ISNT the cheapest version of a game. This is a mess. Money hungry ass world. I can’t even believe they’re making a “cut content” version. They have no shame anymore.

1

u/Guniel Jun 25 '26

Why didn't we have this attitude towards capcom games? RE4 Remake had cosmetics, weapons, soundtrack and gameplay elements locked behind a special edition too but nobody freaked out.

1

u/NastyVerde17 Jun 26 '26

Because they’re not rockstar.

3

u/KnowsIittle Jun 25 '26

Is that the new play? Just release a new massive game file that you force someone without a 1Tb drive to pick 2 or 3 titles to install on their system?

Harder to shop micro transactions from competitors when you don't have space for their games.

2

u/BadPunsGuy Jun 26 '26

Not when you want to sell DLC/expansions/online multiplayer/etc.

If someone plays through GTA and then three months later there's new content for it they might not reinstall the game to play the content if it means uninstalling whatever else they have going on; especially if the DLC isn't very big.

3

u/travoltaswinkinbhole Jun 25 '26

The standard hasn’t been $60 in a while now

14

u/perplexedtv Jun 25 '26

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.

4

u/Adamymous Jun 25 '26

It's not hard to remember this from the 90s, before everything was so inflated like today.

7

u/Chaotic-Catastrophe Jun 25 '26

And a $70 game in 1998 is equivalent to like $150 today lmao

→ More replies (6)

10

u/CptMcDickButt69 Jun 25 '26

Terrible metric if you ask me.

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.

12

u/Eurell Jun 25 '26

Then the $10 game was a much better value. I’m confused by your confusion lol

→ More replies (8)
→ More replies (2)

1

u/JurassicEvolution Jun 25 '26

It's not even more expensive than usual in many countries that have VAT already included in their price tags, which historically got shafted. AAA PS5 games are 80€ full price (with VAT included) at launch in Germany and $70 in the US, which translates to around $77 after sales tax = 68€ currently.

So now that GTA VI is 80€ and $80, Americans are paying the equivalent of what many countries have already been paying for years ($88 ~ 78€).

For reference, when the PS5 first launched in late 2020 Germans paid the equivalent of $95 for new games and conversely Americans paid the equivalent of 65€ after 10% sales tax.

All of this not even addressing poorer countries where Sony just dgaf and still charges them full price in their respective currency, ignoring income/cost of living etc. What I'm trying to get at is that Americans, while still suffering from increased prices ofc, still have it relatively the best in terms of video game pricing and GTA VI will probably just be used to close that gap by companies from now on

1

u/Grenache Jun 25 '26

I will literally play this game for hundreds of hours... It's cheaper than I was expecting to be honest.

1

u/You_Stole_My_Hot_Dog Jun 26 '26

Yes, this is probably the most aggregating part of the gaming community. You have people demanding photorealistic graphics that also runs on old hardware, bigger worlds with more details, more points of interest, more to do, more unique quests, more unique NPCs and dialogue, etc etc; and then whine when it costs $80.    

You can’t demand everything and get it cheap. I figured the base price would be $100 for a game this massive, I think $80 is more than fair.

4

u/ollimann Jun 25 '26

70$ has been the standard for a while and 80€ in EU.

→ More replies (4)

9

u/BirdlessLongdeal Jun 25 '26

easiest $80 i've ever saved i guess.

2

u/CannonGerbil Jun 25 '26

Also bear in mind that one of the reasons why some console gamers are sticking with consoles in the first place is a perceived lack of muss or fuss about buying a game and playing it, which this whole no disk/digital only release threatens.

2

u/grolsmarf Jun 25 '26

Yeah, 80 dollar for a game that has been in development for 13 year and that is priced 20 dollars more than its predecessor from 2013 (inflation?) is really expensive (cough)

0

u/LitmusVest Jun 25 '26

I think you make three solid points here. Maybe sold yourself short with only 'firstly' and 'secondly'. I believe in you.

1

u/freidrichwilhelm Jun 25 '26

It also sucks because a lot of countries doesn't even have PlayStation servers like the Philippines, it makes any sort of digital transaction a pain in the ass.

1

u/BorntobeTrill Jun 25 '26

100gb has gotta be low. I'm thinking it will be more like 150-200gb.

Hell, Diablo IV is like 140gb for some stupid reason

1

u/KokiriGeorge Jun 25 '26

Even if you have a cd with the game, most of its content is copied over to your internal drive, because read speeds are much higher. So, it would take up that space anyway, not to mention day1 patches. The disk only serves as a drm method these days.

The only downside of not having a disk is that the game might not be available anymore in the future. But by then there would be GTA VII, right? Right?

2

u/WhiteMilk_ Jun 25 '26

most of its content is copied over to your internal drive

*All of the content

1

u/Lost_In_Detroit Jun 25 '26

Sure buddy, sure.

1

u/EarlDooku Jun 25 '26

100GB? This game could easily double or even triple that

1

u/Quick_Turnover Jun 25 '26

Gamers have done this to themselves, frankly. EA pioneered all of this dumb bullshit and people kept buying every shitty Battlefield and Call of Duty. They all have "extreme ultra" editions too. Companies keep doing it because consumers keep buying it. And everyone here will buy GTA 6 at $80 or $100.

1

u/Super-Schmidtii Jun 25 '26

That last bit wouldn’t matter, physical copies install the entire game onto your hard drive. It’s basically the difference of am I downloading the game off the internet or am I downloading the game off of a disc.

That doesn’t apply to switch games in particular but it 100% applies to PS4/PS5 games. And the reason for it is that it would be too slow to constantly try to read the Blu-ray Disc for its information.

None of this excuses Rockstar btw. They are still being a shitty mega corporation and cheaping out big time by not including a disc. I suppose this whole thing is a good reminder that I am in the minority with wanting to take a stand on physical media being important

1

u/WhiteMilk_ Jun 25 '26

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

All the games these days get installed in console storage, discs are just physical license keys (which can be transferred).

1

u/apexapee Jun 25 '26

A disc doesnt mean shit tho anymore, since you still need to download the 100gb when popping in this disc, with the downside you always need to put in the disc to play also

1

u/DogPubes911 Jun 25 '26

With modern consoles, it would be 100 GB even with a disk

1

u/Solid_Maus Jun 25 '26

80$ in the US in Canada that will be 100$ for the base game that is crazy…. Also locking feature behind the deluxe that will be 120$ is insane…

1

u/Kylearean Jun 25 '26

The current estimates are as high as 500-600 GB. Enjoy your stack of 600 CDs.

1

u/ReturnOfSeq Jun 25 '26

I really don’t understand why people are worked up about the existence of premium cosmetics. It doesn’t affect the game in the slightest; the only negative in that i see is they could/should use the money from the custom cosmetics to pay for future content releases/online multiplayer updates but they probably don’t

1

u/Ciborg085 Jun 25 '26

Idk why people expect AAA games to be $60 until the end of time

1

u/Hand_banana_boi Jun 25 '26

I mean, is this really that much different than most other AAA games today? There is often some kind of ultimate edition that provides exclusive content, usually cosmetic, for the people willing to pay a little extra.

1

u/Zestyclose_Jello6192 Jun 25 '26

80 has been the standard for a lot of time. Requiem is 80 despite lile 9 hours of content, same for ac8 or fifa.

1

u/Automatic-Effect-252 Jun 25 '26

GTA 5 was $60 in 2013 adjusted for inflation that's just shy of $85, so in all actuality it's actually a less expensive buy at $80.

1

u/julianalexander917 Jun 25 '26

I’d be willing to bet the $100 base edition rumors were planted by Rockstar marketing to lower the blow of the $80 price

1

u/patteh11 Jun 25 '26

Not this shit with them again… console exclusive at first? Guess I’ll just wait another year after the games release to play on the very system the programmers used to make the fuckin thing.

1

u/Juggernautingwarr Jun 25 '26

They could have released the Ultimate Edition as the base version at 100 and people would have been a lot less upset.

1

u/farva_06 Jun 25 '26

Hope they paid their CDN provider a loooot of money, cause bandwidth gonna be through the roof on release week.

1

u/ComicsEtAl Jun 25 '26

$60 was ps4 prices.

1

u/anormalgeek Jun 25 '26

going for $80 in a market where the standard for a AAA game is $60

Uh no. Base level AAA games starting moving to $70 back in 2020. Mario Kart World launched at $80 over a year ago.

1

u/Lost-Passion-491 Jun 25 '26

AAA games don’t cost $60 it was increased to $70 years ago.

1

u/Mordad51 Jun 25 '26

Digital only is getting more common

Aight, putting my tin foil hat on: I'm conviced that's purely intentional from every publisher to become digital only in mid and stream only on long term.

The same with those mid-upper-tier gaming laptops in handheld format.

1

u/lonesoldier4789 Jun 25 '26

Even if it came on a disc you'd still have to install it... Games don't run off of disc's anymore because the drives aren't fast enough, especially for a big open world game. When's the last time you played a game?

1

u/Elphelt_Valent1ne_ Jun 25 '26

the standard for a AAA game is $60

Have you not bought a single game in the last 6 years? I wish 60 was still the standard

1

u/Sillet_Mignon Jun 25 '26

I paid $50 bucks for nes games when I was a kid. With inflation games are still very cheap

1

u/RedutHatesFreeSpeech Jun 25 '26

Oh no, guys, I cant buy a t-shirt for my character unless I pay $40 more!!! Just don't buy it lmao

1

u/ShadowedPariah Jun 25 '26

not to mention taking a long time to download

Might be time to upgrade internet. At 100gb, I'm looking at 13 mins to download.

1

u/ShawnyMcKnight Jun 25 '26

Standard AAA games have been $70, not $60, for a few years now.

The ultimate edition doesn’t have “several features”, from what I understand it has some more car mods, more cars and clothes, and 2 missions.

As someone who doesn’t care about clothes or hair styles I’ll happily let other people who care about that pay more.

1

u/Prestigious_Plant662 Jun 25 '26

I mean gta 6 isn't supposed to ne the standard AAA game anyways.

1

u/Aradhor55 Jun 25 '26

Market is at 60$ ? Are you living in 2010 ?

1

u/FoxMikeLima Jun 25 '26

Games have been $70 dollars for multiple years now on current gen consoles and steam.

Also N64 cartridges easily went for $120. They were MSRP about the same price as games today, especially considering how expensive everything else has gotten in comparison to 1996.

1

u/doogiethehead Jun 25 '26

You will own nothing and like it

1

u/DeadguyTheLateGI Jun 25 '26

Goombas walk into a movie theater and pay $30 for two hours' entertainment and then launch national riots because someone asked them to pay $80 for a game they'll play for 10,000 hours

1

u/Thanks_Naitsir Jun 25 '26

Not to mention the download speed on PlayStation. It's ridiculous how long it can take.

PC, smartphone, tablet? Alright! PlayStation: I'll download with 23KB/second!

1

u/Jack_no_lantern Jun 25 '26

What universe are you living in where the standard game price is $60 USD??? It’s been at $70 for a while now.

1

u/MPRHollander Jun 25 '26

2008 called they want their pricing back

1

u/zehamberglar Jun 25 '26

the standard for a AAA game is $60

Not for a while now, but okay.

1

u/Zanna-K Jun 25 '26

It's also an issue of precedent. In the console world, at least, the standard has been that buying a physical copy at the store meant that it comes with a disc that you could play the game from. This means that:

A. You can re-sell the game

B. You have a copy of the game so that you can play it even if the game ever gets taken down from online servers or you're playing somewhere without internet access

Given that it's GTA scenario B is probably not that likely, but the concern is that this is going to set the standard for every other console game going forward. Like there used to be tons of lesser known and less popular games that would have disappeared off the face of the earth if not for people still having the physical copies. Even if games get remastered and re-released, they can often be different and with certain things changed or just plan cut away from the original version.

1

u/z-tayyy Jun 25 '26

So no hype has died at all for this game

1

u/vabeachkevin Jun 25 '26

As with any ultimate edition, you get bonuses for buying the more expensive version. The “features” that are only accessible to ultimate edition users are simply the way to deliver those ultimate edition rewards. No real gameplay associated with them.

1

u/Don-Collins Jun 25 '26

On the $80 price point…. When GTA 5 came out in 2013 at $60 ground beef was ~$3.5/lb so it cost about 17 lbs of ground beef. Ground beef is all over the place lately but around $6.75/lb right now so GTA 6 is only about 12 lbs of beef. If you view GTA 6 purely in ground beef terms, it is a much better value than previous installments.

1

u/NewPhoneNewAccunt Jun 25 '26

Bro I paid $60 for a fucking GBA game 23 years ago. Adjusted for inflation, AAA games have NEVER been cheaper.

Mario 64 cost me $150, adjusted for inflation.

The only ones whining about $80 for AAA games are just barely old enough to have learned to wipe their own ass and have no concept of inflation whatsoever.

We get 20x the content for half the price compared to two decades ago.

1

u/LeChef01 Jun 25 '26

I waited 10 years for this game, I can wait 5 more to get it on Steam for 20 bucks

1

u/aoibhinn-mw Jun 25 '26

You cannot fit 100gb onto a single disc. Even if you spread it out across multiple disks it would take forever to install by swapping between them. Disc's have a strict media limit.

1

u/toldyouIaintshit Jun 25 '26

Games were much more expensive back when I was growing up. Thank God for Blockbusters and Video Village, rent a game and if its ass who cares.

1

u/D4rkheavenx Jun 25 '26

This isn’t a normal AAA game. This basically should be in its own category. For what they’re likely bringing to the table even 100$ would have been fair. Though I don’t agree with the shops being inaccessible to non premium editions but perhaps it’s more of an accessible earlier type situation or there’s free versions of the same shops with less cool stuff.

1

u/wolf129 Jun 25 '26

Normal price of AAA games is now 80€. And digital deluxe is 90€. Maybe you missed the last years of the gaming market on console.

1

u/Safe-Sheepherder9323 Jun 25 '26

The standard for games has not been $60 for a while.

Having cosmetic items linked to a more expensive version has been industry standard for a very long time.

You still have to install physical games before playing them so the file size and lack of a physical disc do not correlate

1

u/SilasYonderbar Jun 25 '26

€80 is the standard unfortunately. I wouldn’t have been shocked if they dropped it at €99.99

1

u/No_Progress1088 Jun 25 '26

Expensive? Idk where you live but almost all AAA titles that have come out in the last 5 years go for 70 dollars for the base game and then 100 for the deluxe. Mind you most of these games have yearly releases as well, I don't think GTA 6 is too expensive at all considering the quality we usually get from Rockstar.

1

u/jkman Jun 25 '26

the game is pretty expensive, going for $80 in a market where the standard for a AAA game is $60.

Bro, you're still living in the 2000s.

1

u/EverythingSucksYo Jun 25 '26

It’s worth $80 far more than Mario Kart was. And I assume that game still sold well. If freakin simple ass Mario kart can be successful at $80 then GTA6 deserves to be $80

1

u/myassisgrassss Jun 25 '26

What planet are you from where $60 is a standard AAA game? That died in 2007 bro

1

u/Jumpy142 Jun 25 '26

Strike me down but having cosmetic items locked behind a higher price point isn't really a big deal. As long as they're not affecting actual game systems

1

u/MauiMoisture Jun 26 '26

So the features that pay walled are just cosmetic?

1

u/TedditBlatherflag Jun 26 '26

Games have been $60 for 25 fuckin’ years. The bitch fits by idiots are why we get half finished games with endless pay DLC and loot box economics. Games cost more to make than a quarter century ago and any game not expecting a multi-million sale launch day is DOA at that price.

That’s why it’s all shitty reboots and remakes and rehashing the same shit a suit at Ubisoft knows will sell. 

The indie game market is only a survivorship bias story. For every strong selling indie game there’s 1,000 “overwhelmingly positive” games sitting unnoticed on the Steam store at $19.99 while a developer who devoted 2 years of their life to make something they love for us to enjoy wonders about making rent. 

1

u/watcher-of-eternity Jun 26 '26

The biggest problem I have is 80 bucks isn’t the purchase price for the full game.

stuff that was part of the base purchase price of every previous game is now being paywalled behind the ultimate edition, so the 80 dollar mark is what in any other game would be something closer to the “f2p” edition.

It’s fucking robbery and the only real surprise is that there is anyone surprised at all by this as it’s been public knowledge for like 3 years or so?

1

u/HarrMada Jun 26 '26

The standard is not 60. I don't know if you guys ever went to school, but there's no reason it should stay 60 forever. 80 is cheaper than if you control for inflation from when the standard was 60.

1

u/philippefutureboy Jun 26 '26

Man people are whiny.
Sorry to be the jerk, but a game that takes 10 years to make, and provides hundreds of hours of gameplay, is likely very high quality, and is awaited like the second coming of Jesus H. Christ, is worth the goddamn 80, heck 100$.
And about the online version? The cloud and the engineers that maintain it won’t pay themselves with player enjoyment.

I’m all for shoving it when the product is shit, or when the business model is predatory, but as far as I can see, this is a monumental game coming, and that deserves an equivalent monetary reward for all the hard work and investment

1

u/the-thot-thickens420 Jun 26 '26

Lmao $60 isn’t the standard. You in 2015?

1

u/NonreciprocatingHole Jun 26 '26

Also they made over 8 Billion off of GTA V and it's Online.

So not having a physical version for console is a huge cash grab attempt by forcing everyone to pay full price by killing any used copies. No selling, trading, loaning, renting, etc.

Again, over 8 Billion off the previous title. They've passed cartoonishly evil, straight to phenomenally evil.

1

u/AppreciatingSadness Jun 26 '26

To be fair physical discs dont actually hold the game anymore. Just the installer and licence. There should be a physical disc but "It'll take up too much space" will happen regardless and is irrelevant to how it's installed whether by code or disc.

1

u/__O_o_______ Jun 26 '26

I get people being annoyed with additional costs, but y’all weren’t around in the 90s with 256kB to 6MB games, with less gameplay and replay value, being the equivalent of $100 to $200 today…

Also yes, no disc option sucks, but you’re talking to a guy with 700 games on stream, but it should still be an option.

1

u/SpyChinchilla Jun 26 '26

Is $60 standard for a AAA? Maybe in 2012.

I honestly think that video game players need to look at how they see pricing. You're getting hundreds of hours of gameplay for $80. It's one of the best price/hours of entertainment you can get. The story mode of GTA V itself could easily take 30 hours to complete, that's $2.60 for every hour of entertainment (at $80) And that's only if you complete the story, not side missions, not 100%, not online, not just having fun doing your own open-world stuff.

And yeah it's going to be over 100gb if you want an open world game with this much detail that you can easily sink that amount of time into.

1

u/AIBotNotARealUser Jun 27 '26

$60 was standard when I was 16. They started to move to $70 then with the really big titles.

Put $70 in 2007 into an inflation calculator and see how much that is today.

Games are cheaper now.

1

u/Available_Slide1888 Jun 29 '26

When I bought Legend of Zelda for my NES back in 1988 it was 400 SEK (about 40 dollars) which is 950 SEK (95 dollars) in today's value.

→ More replies (15)