this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2025
89 points (94.9% liked)

PC Gaming

11380 readers
256 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Resplendent606@piefed.social 45 points 2 days ago (5 children)

And the publisher will state something like "industry standard" or something like that which really means "we charge $80 because other people charge $80." In reality, they no longer have to worry about printing games (so that cost is gone) and no longer have to compete for shelf space, there is infinite supply (digital games), the cost of technology decreases over time, and the increase acceptance of DLC and digital marketplaces. The increase of prices only benefits overall profits and is anti-consumer. The consumer does not see a decrease in prices when they fire thousands of people or other expenses are cut. Instead they just raise the price. 100% greed.

[–] erytau@programming.dev 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

they no longer have to worry about printing games (so that cost is gone)

While digital distribution is definitely cheaper, it isn't free. The cost of printing games got replaced with the storefront's cut. Steam takes 30%, for example.

I'm not defending the $80 price tag, but the storefront cut is a personal concern for me as an aspiring indie dev. Sadly, the 30% cut is also being pushed as an "industry standard".

[–] Resplendent606@piefed.social 7 points 2 days ago

While that is true, from what I understand from reading up on this topic some more, Nintendo (for example) has always taken a 20% cut, even on physical games and retailers would take ~25% in addition to another ~5% by the manufacturer. With physical sales, the publisher could expect about 50% of the sales while with digital sales you can expect roughly 70%. Of course, this doesn't even take into account things like licensing fees. I am sure this is all very simplified and subject to change, but it gives us a rough idea of where the money is going - in the pocket of the publisher.

Sources (not the best but there isn't a lot of public data on this): https://www.konvoy.vc/newsletters/evolution-of-console-business-models https://www.serkantoto.com/2020/12/30/price-video-console-game-digital-physical/ https://www.zeldadungeon.net/forum/threads/game-price-breakdown-digital-vs-physical.62076/ https://globalxetfs.co.jp/en/research/video-games-esports-building-on-2020s-rapid-growth/index.html

load more comments (3 replies)