Take-Two Interactive CEO Justifies $70 Price Hike

CEO Strauss Zelnick explained to publication Protocol the reason for making the leap to a $70 price point on the next-generation version of their 2K basketball game.

[Activemessiah]

Duh.. of course hes gonna justify it...

[shuvam09]

He justified why I won't buy any Take Two game at launch.

[mikeslemonade]

All next gen AAA games should be $69.99

[v_eno_m]

@mikeslemonade - "All next gen AAA games should be $69.99"

why, so CEO like Blizzard and Gearbox have higher bonuses? Cause they're not paying their grunts any of those bonuses to begin with.

[Spenok]

You'll avoid Rockstar too?

[Unspoken]

Take-Two CEO justifiably can take a hike.

[REDGUM]

I wonder how many of the people who left comments here about this article have been working for the past 15 years and would be happy with thier employers if they weren't given a payrise within the same time frame?

What they do with the money is up to them, but the GDP goes up every year. Here in Australia we average a 3% increase in all costs yearly. 3% x 15 years = 45% and yet they are increasing it by basically the same amount but instead of yearly have done it after 15 years.
I couldn't run my business down 3% consecutively year after year.

Games are getting bigger, longer, more graphical, processing etc etc and then we hear complaints about games taking up too much room or too big of a patch etc.

I know fluff all about sports games so can't comment on what they are offering but seriously.... prices of just about everything in the world go up over time, why not games too?

P.s. this is not aimed at shuvam09 at all, I was just making a point about the article in general.

[DJStotty]

@redgum

But the gaming audience is growing, and publishers are selling more and more base games.

Add in to that they are all adding microtransactions and loot boxes then there is absolutely no justification for charging more for a base game.

[IMissJimRyan]

If Nintendo can charge $60 for 3 emulated games with the newer with more than 10 years, it becomes easy to justify $70 on GTA VI or Red Dead Redemption III.

[averagejoe26]

Agreed. Old ports for $60 that millions buy without question. Why not brand new games for $70?

Not saying I'm pleased to have to pay more, but it makes sense.

[potatoMax]

except Nintendo is the only company you named not to include microtransactions

[zeuanimals]

Title should have "fails to".

[Positivelypositive]

Then I want all that "launch day DLC" Included in the price. We don't need more games that you "own" that also have 700 dollars of day one DLC just waiting for your idiot kid to use your CC to buy all of. This industry is becoming nothing but greed. To be fair that is the standard so why change.

I will get WAY more play hours out of three Mario games for 60 dollars than their new 8 hour campaign games they want you to buy for 70.

If they were like "look this price is to help us pay the artist and programmers more and help improve the lives of all who are working so hard in our industry.

I would be like... cool I can get behind that. It's not. The Board at the top wants more yachts.

[JackBNimble]

If your kid has your credit card number then the idiot is you.
Who the hell gives their cc to their kid anyway, that's just asking for trouble.

As a parent myself I have parent control's setup and passwords that only I know so only I can actually purchase games and dlc on my kids console.

[badz149]

Kinda big douchebaggery when the game with very low effort yearly rehash and full of MT in NBA 2K is among the first to justify the price hike. What a scum!

[TheExecutioner]

eventually games will be costing 70 and of course we will buy it

[brandonb21]

they are 90$ in Canada now

[TheExecutioner]

Brazil is much more too

[Vits]

@olivier1

Do you understand how regional pricing work? Clearly no.... And unfortunately a lot of publisher don't get it either.

[IMissJimRyan]

In Brazil we pay around 48 usd for a launch game.

[neomahi]

You can blame EA for that. Your very own screw you over. Canada sucks. Nothing like the great U.S. of A. Freedom and opportunity, we bow to no king or queen. EA are the masters of pocket picking. They nickel and dime to you to death and love it with zero remorse. Their huge supporters of paid DLC and Microtransactions, moreso then any other company, not mention the whole lootbox b.s.

[SegaGamer]

I guarantee that I will never buy a game that costs that much money. I don't even buy them for 60.

[Gaming4Life1981]

Yea i wont pay 70 for a videogame but luckily i gameshare on xbox and ps so im good.

[v_eno_m]

unfortunately, once the medium becomes all digital, we wont have a choice unless they have sales

[SegaGamer]

@v_eno_m

Well that's the thing, there will always be sales, and if that is what I have to wait for to buy a game, then so be it. I have been doing that for the past 10 years anyway.

[Stanjara]

Don't be so sure.

[averagejoe26]

Yea, people here are delusional. The millions upon millions of casual gamers aren't going to suddenly stop buying games because they're $10 more.

[jukins]

Eh im pretty sure I remember spending 90 on iron sword for nes more than 30 years ago

[Rambokind]

Speak for yourself. "We" is editorial.

[xer0]

It's how darn expensive they've gotten.

I remember when studios were asked why games cost $50 / £50, about 10 years ago.
They justified price hikes then because there was the cost of:

- packaging
- the medium (optical disc)
- translation of manuals / artwork
- distribution
- duplicated assets taking extra development time and space on blu-rays

Now that games are distributed online without most of this stuff... and with assets being theoretically less because of the fast SSDs... I don't know how they can justify this cost.

It's basically capitalism 101 😏

[blackblades]

Eventually games will go on sale and as a cheapassgamer I always wait til theyre $30 and below.

[Yppupdam]

Only if your stupid, or not paying for the game with your own money, everyone just has to wait till the price drops, and voila, you don't pay 70.00 US.

[NealGamby]

They're called "Take-Two" because they're gonna Take Two extra fives.

[Double_O_Revan]

That was so dumb, but I laughed anyway.

[NealGamby]

Hah. Thanks, buddy.

[ArchangelMike]

That's the best one I've heard 🤣🤣🤣

[Skuletor]

It's going to take two price drops before I pick up any of their games now

[kythlyn]

Literally the best comment I've ever seen on N4G.

[Kabaneri]

Are they actually gonna charge $70 for GTA5 ReRemaster?

[neutralgamer1992]

That game should be flat $100 why stop at $70

S/

[Minute Man 721]

EA wanted those prices for 360 n PS3 games

[Stanjara]

GTFO Take Two CEO

[RgR]

Don't think they understand the meaning of justifying. It has to be actually justified to begin with...they tried...they failed

You can try to excuse your actions but you don't determine justification. It isn't just simply because you say so

[TheOtherMoon]

The Onion Headline: Man in-Charge Justifies Decision Made by Man in-Charge

[DaReapa]

😄😄

[battletrax]

CNN Headline: Man Robs a bank justifies decision by saying he can't find a job.

[TheOtherMoon]

@battletrax, What...what are you talking about? Why did you go political? Isn't there something better for you and the proud boys to go do?

[CaptainObvious878]

@TheOtherMoon

Clearly you watch too much cnn.

I'll give you a tip. Whenever any feckless far left media establishment calls a group 'far right', it's a lie.

[Edgelordsupreme]

You and CaptainObvious878 need to get off the internet, like what are you two even saying? What are you trying to accomplish here? Did you own the lib snowflakes with that one?

[Elda]

Of course a CEO would justify to making more money.

[Bathyj]

Actually I'm all in favour of a price increase for games because Devs work hard and budgets are only increasing and games haven't gone up in decades. But Take 2 is the last Dev that should be championing it. Cut the MT crap out of you games if you're going to preach price increase.

[CaptainObvious878]

I would be for a price increase if almost every single game hadn't been infested with useless MTs this generation.

I would/will gladly pay $70 (or $115 Australian) for cyberpunk.

[Bathyj]

Just looking at the prices at JBHIFI. Damn. I might have to rethink what I said.

[CaptainObvious878]

Yeah, I saw DS remake for $120...

After seeing that and the news that horizon and spiderman are cross gen... not sure I'll be getting a day one ps5 anymore.

I'm thoroughly disappointed at sony right now.

[Bathyj]

Price aside This getting way overblown. Take a day, have a deep breath. Watch the trailers again. That's what you'll be playing. Nothing has changed that.

[CaptainObvious878]

"Price aside This getting way overblown. Take a day, have a deep breath. Watch the trailers again. That's what you'll be playing. Nothing has changed that."

You're right of course. I was very angry yesterday. Still am a little today, but I know I need to calm down in order to make a rational purchase decision.

Although, every Aussie online outlet is already sold out of PS5s, so maybe the choice has already been made for me. And that might not be such a bad thing, I don't know.

[gold_drake]

again, 70 euros for a new game has been the norm for years. thats like 82 dollars id say.

but of course he would say that, its not like that GTA V has brought them millions in profit ha

[X-23]

I seriously hope people aren't going to stand for this shit, but who am I kidding...of course they will and the rest of the industry will see nothing wrong with it.
Every new generation comes with a new set of bs to deal with, last gen with the online pass, this gen was the microtransactions and live service (otherwise incomplete) games and next gen will be overpricing the hell out of everything because "Come on, producing these games at such high fidelity costs money.", meanwhile they come fresh out the oven incomplete and a buggy mess just waiting for the patch in hot fix.
I bet season passes will eventually be $39.99 standard.

[PSX-94]

I won't, and neither will a lot of people.

[Artemidorus]

70 for a incomplete game with beta features, no thanks.

Let's be honest they will also squeeze out more content for much more as a complete package.

[neomahi]

And you're and idiot. Ya know what the sad thing is though? They're going to find some way to retaliate against gamers and pout over consumers not buying in the price hike. You're going to see more Digital Deluxe b.s. going on and they're going to Microtransaction the crap out of things and use digital items as they have where they should be including all of that as part of the game experience anyway. Case and point, Ghost of Tsushima, I love Sucker Punch. If there's something new, it comes along as a software update for everyone to enjoy. Sucker Punch says, "they paid their $60 for a game, so we're going to give them what they paid for." I love this. Sucker Punch does it right and they take care of their customers. Businesses are just greedy. It's tough times Take 2, people are losing work, they're getting laid off and locked away in their homes and they have to make do, and the one thing they can do to try and feel better about things or take their mind off of things and live in a different world, and you wanna just pick their pocket, huh? You have two or three different houses and your own private jet, and your complaining your games can't be $70 while people are losing their jobs and a 56 year-old woman is living in a van (I'm dead serious) and others have lost their homes and living in tiny overpriced cramped apartments. This guy's a greedy anti-consumer asshole.

[PSX-94]

Funny thing about retaliation is that CEOs ultimately have far more to lose since videogames are quite often their main business... videogame players tend to have huge backlogs, it's rather easy to not buy games with a price hike.

[RosweeSon]

Not happening not for that yearly dribble anyway

[Silly gameAr]

If all of their games are going to have microtansactions or any other form of money grubbing bs, then I don't think their games should be $70. I might be willing to pay $70 more, if most of these companies weren't trying to make all of their games come with some kind of live service trash.

[nachokingp]

To be fair, he's actually right. NES games in 1990 cost $50. That's $99 today. N64 games cost $70 in 1998, that's $111 today. We actually are in the cheapest time, right now, for the cost of games, as that $60 price point we've had for a few generations now is worth less and less compared to older game prices.

Source: https://www.ign.com/article...

[ssj27]

But at the same tim that because of the hardware they come with, they were cartridges. Playstation 1 games didn't cost that because they came on cds. So he isn't right specifically when you take into account that games came fully complete working right no need. Now days they are buggy as f lots of games and they want to sale you $100 of dlc characters etc which is ridiculous. Most of the time content that is already created and lock behind a paywall is ridiculous

[Edgelordsupreme]

Man who knows nothing continues to speak, more at 6.

If you think games games weren't buggy before this generation, then I'm willing to bet you weren't actually around during those times. Games have always been buggy, and while I can sympathize that it's annoying modern games are also an order of magnitude more complex than something like Contra 3. The rest of your meaningless dribble can be summed up pretty simply, Day one DLC is terrible but to say that most of the time the content is already created is an outright falsehood that only someone as simple minded as yourself could perpetuate. Artists aren't making art for the base game right up to the end of a project, it's the same with writers and designers there comes a point where you can splinter off people and work on post release content. If you had even the slightest inkling of what project management was you would understand this, but you don't. You don't understand anything and you continue to speak and if I had the power to shut your ignorant flapping mouth, I would in a heartbeat.

[nachokingp]

Games DEFINITELY weren't "complete working right". Was there DLC? No, definitely not. What you got was the complete game, as-is. Was it bug-free? Rarely, if ever. Nintendo, however, was better than most with having bugs hammered out, as is still the case today. And yes, carts cost more than CDs. Still, I think graphically, there is a lot more work on games today than previously, and game engines are much more complex, requiring a lot more bug fixing. Also, I think if internet-connected consoles were a thing in the 80's, game companies would've released more content for those games back then. He is right that game prices have been the same for over a decade, and are ready for an update.

[PSX-94]

Due to COVID 19 (coronavirus) there's actually been a trend of deflation meaning money in general is worth more not less in the year 2020 because people are not buying as much... your article is from 2013.

https://www.theguardian.com...

[nachokingp]

My article is from 2013, but I updated my numbers for 2020 using an inflation calculator. Go read the article, my numbers aren't the same. I used the source for the historical prices, not for the current values.

Inflation calculator: https://www.usinflationcalc...

[Psychotica]

In my opinion the problem with these sports games is that they have too much content wrapped up in a single package. I don't want to pay $70 for the $20 worth of content that I will actually use.

[TheEnigma313]

and i can justify waiting for a price drop similar to what I do now.

[darefix83]

What a bad joke, they are the first or the second to put that price tag for a game, here in Canada the price is extremely ridiculous, I will no longer support Take Two with my money since that they must use golden toilet paper already.

[CrimsonWing69]

why wouldn't he justify it?

I figured this was already inferred since, y'know, they're pushing out the price.

As for my justification on games prices, I'll be waiting for a hefty price drop on a lot of games, just to vote with my wallet.

I damn well don't want to hear some justification for $80 games in the generation after next. I mean the N64 pulled that on cartridges but eventually dropped down to $49.99.

[Miraak82]

I can barely justify to myself to spend $60 on a game let alone $70 , don't get me wrong I'd spend 80-100 on a game if I knew I was getting a complete package but as this gen has taught me nothings ever complete on release .

[peppeaccardo]

In Italy/Europe is going ot be 80 euros ....

[agent4532]

If gamers don't buy the game then yes $60 for games will remain

[TheScotsman]

Take- Two is an anagram of "greedy corporate cash sucking scum" I'm sure, as a company who can't even be bothered to churn out a new game and just update the textures for a 10 year old game instead, says it all doesn't it

[Rambokind]

He's gonna find out that all that justifying leads to fewer sales. Just sayin

[Unknown_Gamer5794]

I hope so. Unfortunately we have no control over mass stupidity, and I have no trouble believing a lot of suckers will buy these games anyways.

[Shikoku]

This is why all digital sucks, if there was no used game market you'd be stuck paying 70$ for this garbage

[DivineHand125]

At the rate at which they are monetizing these AAA games, most people will move to free to play and indie games because the greed of these publishers is on another level. IDK how they can justify a $70 price while still maintaining a virtual currency/loot box type monetization structure in their games. I also fear that next gen games will be designed in a way where the enjoyment of a game you paid full price for will be hindered because they want to entice you to buy micro transactions as we have seen from some of Ubisoft's recent titles.

[badboyz09]

I gotta see the product.

[Positivelypositive]

... yeah so why did you build another krusty crab right next to the first one? Money!

[savedsynner]

I remember N64 games being $70. Interesting that $60 has been the gold standard for this long. I think Genesis/SNES games were $50 new?

[Mithan]

I have no problem paying $70 for a game that will provide me with 50+ hours of gameplay, games such as Fallout, Skyrim, Dark Souls, and countless others.

If its a game I will play for 6 hours and never touch again, then no, piss off.

That being said, it isn't like the money is going to fund a better game. We know this because they keep paying everybody less.

[jonesmiller04101]

Erhm nope! Not buying it, but the suckers will LMFAO

[Nodoze]

So he can milk more money from consumers. Living large is expensive.

[FPS_D3TH]

Meanwhile Nintendo fanboys are content paying $60 anyday, everyday even for games that came out at the beginning of the generation.

[Unknown_Gamer5794]

Yeah...and they still haven't managed to adequately explain their reasoning for that either.

[lnfiniteLoop]

while games are released incomplete and in a bug ridden state which needs patch after patch, with micro transaction, loot crates or whatever you want to call the crap extras, no game should cost anywhere near £70 ($70)...

[dcbronco]

I think they should have a pay system where AAA games go up to $70 until they reach a certain level of sales at which point the price drops to $60 and people who paid $70 get a credit for a future game. Games have been $60 for 15 years which is unrealistic. They are getting more expensive to make so prices have to go up.

[Edgelordsupreme]

The market has also grown considerably larger over 15 years too.

[ssj27]

They are getting more expensive to make? Sure but they also miking more money than ever. Even a free to play game made it creators multi billions so there is no excuse games cost more to make now days but they making more than ever this corp greedy f#&$ are making gaming less enjoyable the other day i went to my cousin house to play mk11 and there was only lik half characters to select other half were dlc is ridiculous and he paid 60

[dcbronco]

People always go to the extremes and completely overlook the average. There are hundreds of games released each year. Most of them don't make a profit. Sony has stated only 3 of 10 exclusive games make money with the three successful games covering the cost of the others. But what if you're a small or medium sized business? You don't have the ability to risk making a game unless you can guarantee profit. And you can't do that because a lot of good games fail. Gamers are going to kill gaming by being selfish. You want exclusives, new IP, innovation, no loot boxes, free dlc. Eventually EA, Sony, Microsoft and a couple of others will be all there is.

[ssj27]

All games created profits but for them 1 million or few is not profits this companies are spoiled and if they don't create profits is their fault the game either sucks or something i even see trash games selling millions.
I mean if they wanna sale they need to stoo aiming so low you don't need 500 million in budget to create a good game but talented people and time.
They need to stoo rushing the games how is fault of the people when drive clu or athem or socom comes out buggy and bad? Some games get a pass because thir fans are so easy to please like the fallout community but because they don't have a direct competition.

Some other are not for example socom dev or killzone try to cater cod user base instead of it own making it own grow. Killzone went from Killzone 2 which still bess fps best AI best physics and details until today to shadow falls just another average cod wanna be.

Socom started the generation with a ok game but outdated and buggy as f when you compare it to other shooters. That's sony fault giving their number one online ip a very low budget and not having quality control on a talented team but very poor in quality it was a C team hence they don't exist anymore. That ain't costumers fault.

Zipper didn't pay attention to modt played ip online last gen and when they do they created a outdated animation term sound term catering cod crown and patching the game to have classic modes.
Is like sony didn't have a clue you got to be stupid to ask all your studios to copy call of duty and disrespect the great ip you got. Sony need to understand and let cod be cod do cod.

Socom needs to be and do socom if is done right abd polish it will sale if is rushed abd trying to be other games it wll fail.

Sony needs to put 2 and 2 together read people opinion and see how everyone ssk for a killzone 2 like game . It's GG most rated ip a remake now days will sale easily 10 million it didn't sold back then much because sony suck at marketing they games but not anymore
But some are not l

[dcbronco]

It's obvious you have no clue how the business of gaming works. There are expenses in addition to the revenue. Making the games isn't free. Retail gets a share. Publishers get a share. The government gets a huge share. Most likely, barring special incentives, the gov gets a bigger share than anyone. 1/5th is gone to federal, state and local taxes. Packaging, game pressing, creating masters, paying staff, rent, utilities. Developers don't have a mommy and daddy. CoD makes huge profits because it sells 30 million copies. A game selling 1 million copies might barely break even depending on the cost to make it.

Of $60 the government might take 10-12. Retail takes 2 or 3. Publishers take 5 or 6. The people who make the game get paid 12 to 15. Rent and utilities take another 10. You probably have a loan to cover development cost so interest and payments take another chunk. You have to make masters to print disc, pay for packaging, pay for printing, pay for delivery of finished disc. Advertising. The cost may vary but most likely every dime of that $60 is gone. So you have to sell 1.5 or 2 million to profit. But usually for a small game or new ip you added incentives to get people to try it. So you didn't charge $60. Ora month or two after launch you have to drop the price to get it to sell so 1.5 comes from a third being sold at $45.

Gamers who don't understand the basics of business are gaming's worst enemy.

[fleshzombie]

Justification: gotta pay for this suit and my salary.

[Gr1mmyshadows]

There is no justification when microtransactions runs rampant.

[Unknown_Gamer5794]

Yeah, at that point their games should be F2P. You're getting F2P quality with these yearly rehashes anyways.

[SinisterKieran]

I wonder if in the long run this will be bad for business because I know that I personally will be buying a lot less games. Not even because I don’t want to...I just don’t make enough to justify it.

[MWH]

It might sound like he's in charge but it only sounds that way, We, are the ones in charge.

so what's it gonna be?

[Edgelordsupreme]

Keep telling yourself the comment section at N4G is in charge, maybe one day it will even be true!

You're the minority, even if you factor in r/gaming, Neogaf, Gamespot forums etc etc. The market for games extends far beyond the enthusiast market and we can make noise all we want, but it's going to be down to "regular dude" if the 89.99(CAD) number sticks.

[MWH]

Sadly you're right.

[RCslayer]

Just don't f@$king buy it. Show these greedy pricks and hurt their pocket books.

[Edgelordsupreme]

Demons Souls is listed at 89.99 CAD on ebgames.ca and walmart.ca

[EmperorDalek]

$140 games in New Zealand now... Damn. I'll have to be even more selective about what games I buy day one. Demon's Souls should not be that price, considering its just a better looking PS3 game.

[Edgelordsupreme]

The price is high, but "better looking PS3 game" is a very simple way of looking at things.

[TheEroica]

They can charge whatever they'd like! I'm still gonna buy it at 19.99.

[sbprost]

Zelnick and his wife were at an ultra luxury resort I worked at a few months ago and I got to experience how he really is IRL. They were disrespectful as all hell. Constantly wanted stuff changed to accommodate them. They really loved flaunting how much better and more successful they were than "the help." Fuck him and the moneygrubbing way that people like him and Andrew Wilson run publishers.

[Hitman007]

I need my multi million bonus so i need to rip people off ehhh C.E.O = 💩💩💩
28169;

[Unknown_Gamer5794]

Of all the companies to justify this...sorry, you're not it. Your PoS yearly MT-fest sports games that are normally just rehashes of sports games from previous years aren't worth $60USD.

[ssj27]

Sony is just been greedy they are doing simple math 10 x 8million on sales 80 million extra on lastofus3 in 5 years.
Like 500 millions for those first 8 millions wasn't enough lol f it.

And now thy downgrading spiderman mm horizon 2 and. Most likely GOWII will also come to ps4 to make more money. After theh saw how amazing their exclusives are making really good for the first time.

They are becoming greedy and forgetting why they are selling is because they weren't been greedy and f$&@&s like now

At this point i don't even care i miss pre-ordering ps5 will i still get it? Most likely but will wait fr games to hit the 15 20 mark because they been greedy I'm be cheap.

[DJStotty]

because they are trying to squeeze money out the consumer.

Other publishers are keeping the same price point, so you can take your justification and ill pick it up from the bargain bin

[Sokol]

More incentive for me to enjoy the used game market and major price drops before purchasing any title.

What a time to raise prices...

[DiRtY]

Sony published games will cost $70 as well.
I mean $70 for a remaster (Demon’s Souls) is anti-consumer, isn't it?

Are we raging, yet?

[ChickenMan34]

are we really supposed to listen to some twat in a suit drinking his 300$ latte ? fuck you asshole nobody will ever pay 70 for a game especially one littered with micro transactions and pay to win scheme. what a pathetic greedy piece of garbage

[4Sh0w]

Do gamers think games are gonna be $60 forever? Hell milk is still the same milk but it costs more than it did last year.