this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2023
242 points (97.3% liked)
Games
32674 readers
866 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Everytime there's a change in pricing that was already a set precedent there's a hurdle to overcome like this, and it becomes extremely important to handle the situation delicately since 95% of possible ways to handle it could go very wrong.
I feel like the only way to really deal with it correctly if it truly must happen because of rising costs is to just admit that, like they did, but then stick to that and only that message, and just wait for the community to come around. If it's possible to provide any sorts of even vague math around sales and cost to produce this content then that context would help people understand, but there's almost no way to change a precedent for the worse on the consumer end without some amount of backlash.
Well it's not very complex. A software company has a lot of its cost coming from wages. If the employees see their cost of living increasing by 20%, they'll expect to see their wages rise to compensate.
Consumers will bitch, but eventually accept the higher cost of the software
They pissed $100M away on a project inspired at a boozy directors lunch.
They then rushed out half assed dlc and a new game and put the price up for both.
Poor management calls that customers aren’t happy about. If the quality was there people would have been fine