![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Games are so inexpensive all considering that worrying about having to pay for them has never crossed my mind.Glad I have it on Gamepass. Paying for games lol.
You asked strangers to buy you a copy of the game? Wtf?
![Zarathustra[H]](https://cdn.hardforum.com/data/avatars/m/9/9298.jpg?1715876891){kind=avatar}
I have not tried FSR yet, but DLSS Balanced is already too much of an IQ loss to me, I was only able to live with DLSS Quality in any game I played with DLSS.
Steam id?If you want to share the fun, share it with me.
A game like starfield is a team 400+ people working 5-8 years by major title and will support it for a long time, that cost more than 200 millions to make.
I've got over 1,000 hours in Ghost Recon Breakpoint, ($80? I think), 550 hours in Cyberpunk 2077, ($59.99) 3,000 hours in Destiny 2, (Tons of $39.99 expansions), countless hours in Star Wars: The Old Republic ($150 Collector's Edition), etc. I'm the same way. Value for me is determined by how much time I want to spend with a game. I do not shun a game because its full price or whatever. I'm more likely to take a chance on cheaper games, but if something interests me, I'll pay full price if I think the value is there for me.
I actually went a little deeper and figured out my minimum is 2 hours per dollar. $60 game = 120 hours.
Wow! I guess sometimes it "pays" to speak up!
My guess is it won't get it, because of that AMD money and the fact that they'll probably decide FSR is "good enough". I agree, DLSS is better and Hardware Unboxed did a huge test showing that to be the case, but it wouldn't surprise me if they don't implement it because they don't want to make AMD mad.
I'm sure high unit cost makes sense for highly anticipated big budget games, especially ones with an expected long tail of sales. Not just because a lot of people will pay the higher price, and thus make you more per unit, but because it looks like a comparatively better deal when it goes on sale, has GOTY re-releases, and that kind of thing. It also makes Gamepass look like a better deal, and that sweet recurring revenue stream is what MS really wants.
It's a drastic difference in many games, especially motion artifacts and thin stuff like fences and lines in general.
Sqenix charged €80 for Forspoken. The first game that was $70 I remember very well, was Metro Exodus on EGS, while Tim claimed to be the gamers champion for justice. So the precedents go back a while.
$60 was the de-facto industry standard for AAA games as far as I can remember. Basically since I've been buying games online instead of retail cca.15 years.
I typically paid $45 for games on greenmangaming and cdkeys, now it is usually around $55. The standard edition of Starfield is currently $58 there.
Well, that's different, that's your choice to buy games later, if everybody did that no big budget games would be made. They wouldn't magically cost $30.
You do you, but don't tell others what they should do. I'm perfectly comfortable paying $60 or more for a game that will provide countless hours of fun. It's not a mental disorder. Increase in prices was inevitable due to inflation alone. Besides games are much larger in scope today than they were 10-15 years ago.
There is no such rule, IDK where do you get that from. The Gabe Newell mantra is that piracy is a service issue, not a price issue.
You can't just increase the number sold ad infinitum. Therer is a limited audience for games. You lower the price from 60 to 50, you need to sell 20% more copies to break even.
Source? What experiment was this where they lowered the price of a highly anticipated AAA game by 40% and they sold 40x as much copies? That would mean 80 million instead of 2 million. And 2 million copies for an AAA game is considered a flop by today's standards. I'm sorry but I don't believe this.
If there is one thing you can't accuse them of is being against making more money. If there was real proof of this they'd all be standing in line, just as they all tried to make their own WOW or PUBG.
Well I have the Jedi Survivor Origin game key. I hear the game is a mess and I have no desire playing it. I just want to be sure it’s open to anyone now because once I sell if someone claims they can’t register it I’ll be SOL,
Tell me about it, I'm more concerned about basic quality. Like the writing/quests, the combat the overall game play and the ui. Because these are all areas where Bethesda has proven themselves to be pretty mediocre compared to other AAA studios. We already know that the npcs look like stiff wax dolls.
I will say from my informal observations and form Hardware Unboxed's testing it seems to make the most difference with lower resolution settings. They found a couple ties, and a bunch of games that were a minor win for DLSS at quality settings. The bloodbath was at performance settings, that's where FSR just sucked compared to DLSS. While I prefer DLSS and use it if there, FSR is usually fine in quality mode and not noticeably bad.
But it actually says that the five people had played dozens of hours and each person had encountered no more than a few bugs, all of which have been addressed in the day one patch.