Elden Ring Streamer MissMikkaa Simultaneously Defeated Two Malenias With a Dance Pad and a Controller

As if beating Malenia – arguably Elden Ring’s hardest boss – wasn’t a feat enough in itself, Twitch streamer MissMikkaa just beat two Malenias at one time with a controller and a dance pad.

MissMikkaa accomplished this astonishing feat during an “Ultimate Challenge Run,” where she tasked herself with playing “two Elden Rings games simultaneously with different controllers (Dance Pad & PS5 DualSense).” She also had to kill the “bosses on the same try on both game instances.”

You can see a clip of the victory below, and you can click here for the full battle.

It took her three days and 199 tries, but she prevailed in the end. She plans on taking down Radagon/Elden Beast next, and who knows what other challenges she will come up with in the future.

We spoke to MissMikkaa in November 2022 and she walked us through how she beat Elden Ring entirely with a dance pad, and this was even after she beat Malenia at level 1 with the same dance pad.

Malenia has been one of the toughest challenges in recent memory in the world of video games, and the difficulty of her battle inspired the rise of, alongside MissMikkaa and others, one of Elden Ring’s most legendary players, Let Me Solo Her. This player would appear in players’ games to take down Malenia single-handedly, and we also talked to them about how they became a hero to all.

For more in the world of Elden Ring, check out our chat GinoMachino, the player who beat every single boss without taking a single hit and why we picked Elden Ring as our Game of the year in 2022.

Have a tip for us? Want to discuss a possible story? Please send an email to newstips@ign.com.

Adam Bankhurst is a news writer for IGN. You can follow him on Twitter @AdamBankhurst and on Twitch.

Wizards of the Coast OGL Change Draws Ire From Creators and Fans Alike: ‘It’s Not Right’

The tabletop industry looks to be undergoing a seismic shift based on leaked documents showing that Wizards of the Coast intends to implement a more restricted Open Gaming License (OGL) agreement.

According to a recent Gizmodo report, Hasbro subsidiary Wizards of the Coast is poised to revoke its longstanding OGL, which allows for third-party publishers and fans to create D&D content using their game rules. For over 20 years, this license has empowered countless creators to make and distribute their own D&D content using tools like Kickstarter, and has allowed large publishers like Paizo, creators of Pathfinder, to become titans of the tabletop space in their own right.

Reportedly, the new license, called OGL 1.1, makes numerous revisions to the D&D policy, including adding a requirement that all creators register any products they’re selling with Wizards of the Coast. The new agreement also introduces a new 20-25% royalty to be paid to Wizards by license-users making an excess of $750,000 in a year while giving Wizards a “non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, sub-licensable, royalty-free license” to use content created using OGL for any purpose. The new agreement would force all creators to adopt OGL 1.1 despite the current version’s explicit language that a move like that could never be forced upon creators.

Wizards of the Coast responds: “The OGL is not going away”

After rumors regarding these changes began appearing online last month, Wizards of the Coast responded to online backlash from fans by issuing a statement on their D&D forum.

“The OGL is not going away,” Wizards of the Coast wrote. “You will still be able to create new D&D content, publish it anywhere, and game with your friends and followers in all the ways that make this game and community so great. The thousands of creators publishing across Kickstarter, DMsGuild, and more are a critical part of the D&D experience, and we will continue to support and encourage them to do that through One D&D and beyond.”

But the leaked draft of OGL 1.1 seems to tell a very different story – one aimed at obstructing competitors like Green Ronin Games, which sells numerous products that utilize OGL.

If I publish under the OGL 1.1, by the letter of the agreement, WotC could republish all my writing at their discretion. It’s not right.

In OGL 1.1, Wizards states “the Open Game License was always intended to allow the community to help grow D&D and expand it creatively. It wasn’t intended to subsidize major competitors, especially now that PDF is by far the most common form of distribution.” With D&D alternatives like Pathfinder enjoying enormous popularity in recent years, Wizards is increasingly interested in reigning in the OGL.

The changes to WOTC’s OGL come amid increased pressure to increase revenue from parent company Hasbro. Just last month, CEO Cynthia Williams described D&D as being “really under monetized” during a digital event with investors, and expressed an interest in unlocking “the type of recurring spending you see in digital games.” These statements came immediately following a dip in Hasbro stock after analysts criticized their handling of Magic: The Gathering.

The leaked document gained additional credibility when Kickstarter Director of Games Jon Ritter, tweeted, “Kickstarter was contacted after WoTC decided to make OGL changes, so we felt the best move was to advocate for creators, which we did. Managed to get lower % plus more being discussed. No hidden benefits / no financial kickbacks for KS. This is their license, not ours, obviously.”

The lower percentage Ritter refers to is the perplexing 5% reduction in royalty payments offered to projects funded through the crowdsourcing platform, all but confirming the rumored OGL 1.1 changes.

Reached for comment by IGN, Wizards of the Coast declined to comment further and pointed toward its statement on D&D Beyond.

“It’s not right”

Now, with details of the draft of OGL 1.1 out in the open, fans and creators alike are sounding the alarm. Pat Mooney, the Lead Designer at Flagbearer Games told IGN, “The most painful part of the new OGL is the clause that gives WotC the right to use any of my content, in perpetuity, royalty-free. I’m planning to Kickstart a sourcebook on the American Revolution in the spring.”

He went on to write, “More than half of my book will be “fluff,” or worldbuilding, history, and other narrative content that has nothing to do with rolling a die. Yet if I publish under the OGL 1.1, by the letter of the agreement, WotC could republish all my writing at their discretion. It’s not right.”

Nerd Immersion, a YouTuber and creator of D&D content through use of OGL, told IGN, “If this continues I could see a rise in popularity of other non-D&D and non-OGL RPGs. I also wouldn’t be surprised if several of the creators who are frustrated by these changes end up designing a new, replacement RPG system…similar to how 4e and the Game System License lead to the creation of Pathfinder using the original OGL.”

Some publishers, like publisher MCDM which makes supplements for D&D, remain optimistic, saying to fans via Twitter, “Regarding the OGL 1.1, MCDM has taken advice from counsel and we don’t think it affects the development of Flee, Mortals! If/when other products are affected, we’ll let the community know.”

Tyler A. Thompson, an attorney who represents games publishers Sad Fishe Games and Prudence Holdings (both of which rely on OGL), wrote in a letter to Wizards that “creators are not going to be bullied,” and that if Wizards would not clarify the planned changes in OGL 1.1, his clients “will be forced to begin preparation for litigation to the fullest extent allowable by law, including to contact major and minor publishers to join in a potential claim against Wizards for anticipatory breach and other claims.”

Time will tell if the leaked draft of OGL 1.1 will see the light of day, as Wizards is apparently “open to being convinced we made a wrong decision.” After all, it wouldn’t be D&D without a DM asking “Are you sure?” before making a choice that completely upends the game.

Travis Northup is a writer for IGN. You can follow him on Twitter @TieGuyTravis and read his games coverage here.

Meta Quest 2 Deal: Get an Elite Strap for Free

Anyone in the market for a wireless VR headset should look first at the Meta Quest 2. It hits a nice sweet spot in terms of price, quality, and the availability of games and apps. For a limited time, between now and January 19, if you buy a Meta Quest 2, you’ll get an Elite Strap thrown in for free (see it at Amazon). Those usually cost $59.99, so it’s a nice value proposition.

Free Elite Strap with Meta Quest 2 Purchase

The Elite Strap is an add-on that helps make using the Meta Quest 2 more comfortable. The standard Quest 2 uses fabric straps, so the headset feels a little front-weighted and possibly looser. The Elite Strap has plastic straps to hold it in place, plus a flexible rear brace that makes it stay more securely in place. It offers better balance for the device as well, and it has a wheel you can twist to tighten the headset on your head.

As for the current VR market, I’d say the Meta Quest 2 is still the best bet for most people. It’s cheaper than the upcoming PSVR 2, and you don’t need to connect it to a PS5 to run it. It’s way cheaper than the upcoming HTC Vive XR Elite. If you want to run more impressive games than the Quest 2’s hardware allows, like Half Life: Alyx, you can connect it to a gaming PC and use it like a regular VR headset. It’s super versatile, comfortable, and priced a lot lower than most of its competition. You can check out our initial Meta Quest 2 review for more details.

The only real bummer is that the previous Meta Quest 2 promotions have ended. Over the holiday season, you could pick one up for $349.99 and it came with Beat Saber and Resident Evil 4. That promo is over, so there’s no longer a pack-in game. But getting a free Elite Strap is a good deal for anyone who missed out on the previous promo.

Chris Reed is a deals expert and commerce editor for IGN. You can follow him on Twitter @_chrislreed.

Deathverse Devs Announce Shutdown 3 Months After Launch, Plan to ‘Redevelop’ and Re-Release Game

Developer Supertrick Games and publisher GungHo Online Entertainment announced that Deathverse: Let it Die will temporarily suspend online services on July 18 for the game as they attempt to fix issues such as in-game matchmaking and lag.

“This was a difficult decision for us to make. However, we believe that re-releasing the game with significant improvements will allow it to be enjoyed by a wider audience as well as our current players,” said GungHo in a statement on its website.

GungHo continued, “Considering how much time goes into developing a game–and that there’s a finite number of games one can possibly make in a lifetime–it’s impossible to say at this stage whether this is the right choice. But we love this game and are proud to have developed it together as a team. Therefore, we believe this is the best possible decision at this time.”

The free-to-play multiplayer game has struggled to capture high player count numbers, with its all-time concurrent high on PC being barely above 1000.

The premium currency, Death Metal, will no longer be purchasable starting on February 7. However, the currency can still be used until the game’s suspension in July. Additionally, Season 2’s content is still planned to launch in Spring 2023, which includes features such as tournament matches and new weapons. Season 3’s content will only be partially released during its planned Summer 2023 launch.

Deathverse: Let it Die was first revealed at a PlayStation State of Play presentation back in October 2021. A spinoff of Let It Die, Deathverse took its aesthetics and added a battle royale component to the series.

The game launched on September 28, 2022, for PS4 and PS5, with a PC release on October 5, 2022.

George Yang is a freelance writer for IGN. He’s been writing about the industry since 2019 and has worked with other publications such as Insider, Kotaku, NPR, and Variety.

When not writing about video games, George is playing video games. What a surprise! You can follow him on Twitter @Yinyangfooey

Vampire Survivors Dev Released Mobile Port Itself to Fight Copycats

Vampire Survivors developer Poncle was forced to release its game on mobile “ASAP” after several exact copies began appearing on the market.

As reported by GI.biz, Poncle had initially attempted to bring Vampire Survivors to mobile devices in the wake of its successful 2022 launch on PC and Xbox, but struggled to find a partner that shared its views on monetization.

“Soon after the initial success of VS, I started to look for a business partner to work on a mobile version of the game,” reads a new blog on the game’s Steam page. “Unfortunately, nobody I spoke with was on board with the monetization I had in mind for the platform: non-predatory.”

In the wake of these conversations, however, unlicensed versions of the game started appearing on mobile stores. “Months passed by and a large number of actual clones – not “games like Vampire Survivors”, but actual one to one copies with stolen code, assets, data, progression – started to appear everywhere,” the post continued.

“This forced our hand to release the mobile game ASAP, and put a lot of stress on the dev team that wasn’t even supposed to worry about mobile in the first place.”

The mobile version of Vampire Survivors released on Android and IOS in early December 2022. However, the need to release the game quickly led to some features – including cloud servers and save transfers – being left out of the initial release.

According to the Steam post, Poncle is still looking to implement these features as they work on numerous bug fixes, but in the absence of a backend engineer, they may take “longer than expected” to appear.

As it stands the mobile version of Vampire Survivors is entirely free to play, with gamers having the ability to view optional adverts at the end of a run in order to earn more gold or revive their character.

On December 15, Poncle released the first piece of DLC for Vampire Survivors, Legacy of the Moonspell, on PC and Xbox. In the new blog post the developer admits that it’s still figuring out how to bring the DLC to mobile.

“The problems we’re facing are the same mentioned above: how do we make it fair, but also accessible to players who are only into free games. We’ll figure something out and publish the DLC as soon as possible.”

Moving forward, Poncle has announced that it intends to continue updating Vampire Survivors, and has pledged, in terms of main game mechanics, that “no key-feature will ever be gatekept by a paywall”. The developers also said that more DLC content packs will be released in the future that will bring more characters, weapons, and stages to the game.

In our review, IGN awarded Vampire Survivors a 7/10, stating that “It may look extremely basic, but if you give Vampire Survivors’ clever one-stick shooter idea a chance to sink its teeth into you it might not let go for a while”.

Anthony is a freelance contributor covering science and video gaming news for IGN. He has over eight years experience of covering breaking developments in multiple scientific fields and absolutely no time for your shenanigans. Follow him on Twitter @BeardConGamer

IGN UK Podcast #678: Wot We Did Over Christmas

Cardy, Dale, and Mat watched and played a lot over the Christmas break, so here’s 15 of their favourites. From big hits like Glass Onion and Avatar: The Way of Water to slightly more hidden gems like The Menu and White Noise, there may well be something you like the sound of.

Got a game for us to play or some feedback you’d like read out on the show? Why not email us: ign_ukfeedback@ign.com.

IGN UK Podcast #678: Wot We Did Over Christmas

Dead Space and Hogwarts Legacy Have Gotten Massive Preorder Discounts

Okay so here’s the gravy; there’s a big sale on at eBay at the moment with code NEW15 which can take an extra 15% off your order. That’s good, but here’s what makes it better; it can be used on preorders via discount gaming retailer The Game Collection.

We all know TCG for its stellar preorder deals, but this just takes it to a whole other level with up to £20 off the RRP on upcoming games Dead Space and Hogwarts Legacy.

To snag the deals below, all you need to do is use code NEW15 at checkout. But, TCG has already increased the Dead Space preorder price today (from £48.41 to £50.11), so I’d jump on and order ASAP if you want to get the best price (this promo will also expire after January 9).

TL;DR – Preorder Using Code NEW15

Hogwarts Legacy

Dead Space Remake

Preorder Hogwarts Legacy for Just £47

Right now you can preorder one of the most hotly anticipated games of the year Hogwarts Legacy for just £46.71. To give you some perspective, its RRP is £64.99, and Amazon currently has it listed for £59.95. This is a huge deal, and well worth considering if you want to get the game on release day.

Not only that, but the #(seemingly sold out at every other retailer) Deluxe Edition is also available for just £57.76. This Deluxe Edition will ship three days early February 7 (rather than the regular release day of February 10), and includes a bunch of other digital goodies to enjoy within the game. Moreover, it’s also sold out at a bunch of other major retailers, so this is an even better deal to take note of.

Preorder Dead Space Remake for Just £50.11

Don’t feel like paying £70 for the Dead Space remake? Well, have no fear, as you can preorder for just £50.11 with this latest discount. This comes via a brand new NEW15 discount code at eBay. Just enter the code via The Game Collection’s eBay outlet store, and your preorder will be secured for January 27.

This is a huge deal, and over £20 off the RRP before the game has even dropped. But, just like the deal above, this promo will expire after January 9, so get those preorders in ASAP. For more on the Dead Space Remake, check out our extensive preview coverage here.

Use eBay Promo Code NEW15 for Even More Discounts

There’s plenty more to check out in the NEW15 sale at eBay, and here’s a few of my other favourites in the sale as well you might want to check out. Happy shopping!

Robert Anderson is a deals expert and Commerce Editor for IGN. You can follow him @robertliam21 on Twitter.

Pedro Pascal and Bella Ramsey Reveal Their Reactions to Seeing Clickers in The Last of Us HBO Series

The stars of HBO’s The Last of Us series, Pedro Pascal and Bella Ramsey, have shared their reactions to seeing the half-zombie, half-fungus infused Clickers for the first time.

Revealed in a new interview with IGN (below), Pascal seemed to have a reaction somewhere between disgust and fear, while Ramsey found them to be somewhat beautiful.

“You were very grossed out by them,” they said to Pascal. “I found them sort of beautiful. That’s what was scary actually. I think the beauty that they had, that was what was terrifying.”

Pascal did agree somewhat, describing the Clickers – which are humans who act like zombies as a result of what’s called the Cordyceps fungus growing out of their heads – as “a monstrous, floral nightmare”.

He did retch at the word “fungus”, however, as Ramsay added: “The whole fungus, [the] Cordyceps infection is based on science. Theoretically it’s possible, and that’s what’s also terrifying.”

Fans will get to enjoy (or not) their own reaction to the Clickers when The Last of Us premieres on HBO Max on January 15. Details around the show were hazy for a long time but the marketing train has been speeding up for the last few months, with HBO sharing new looks at the cast and a dramatic official trailer.

Ryan Dinsdale is an IGN freelancer and acting UK news editor. He’ll talk about The Witcher all day.

CD Projekt Red Settles Lawsuit Over Cyberpunk 2077’s Rough Launch for $1.85 Million

CD Projekt Red has settled another lawsuit over Cyberpunk 2077’s rough launch for $1.85 million.

As reported by GameSpot, the settlement will see CD Projekt Red pay investors who bought stock between January 16, 2020 to December 17, 2020 settlement administration costs, taxes, attorney’s fees, and more.

Investors filed the class-action lawsuit in 2020 claiming that CD Projekt Red hid the state of Cyberpunk 2077 from them after the game launched with several bugs that, at least on console, rendered the game unplayable for many.

Multiple lawsuits were filed against CD Projekt Red following the game’s launch, one of which was settled in December 2021 for the same $1.85 million figure.

Cyberpunk 2077 remained riddled with bugs for several months and was completely removed from the PlayStation Store as a result, only returning in June 2021. CD Projekt Red has since updated the game several times, however, leading to somewhat of a resurgence of its player-base and even Steam’s Labor of Love award earlier in January.

The biggest leaps forward for Cyberpunk 2077 arguably began in February 2022 with the launch of the next-gen update, or Version 1.5 for PC players, which saw several bug fixes and even free DLC added to the game.

This theme continued in September when developer CD Projekt Red released the Edgerunners update to go alongside the launch of the anime series (which itself was praised by fans and critics alike). It also announced the Phantom Liberty expansion which is due to launch this year, and continued to build excitement by revealing that its sequel, codenamed Orion, is also on the way.

Ryan Dinsdale is an IGN freelancer and acting UK news editor. He’ll talk about The Witcher all day.

Pay More to Play: Why Video Game Prices Could Rise in 2023

The video game industry has lately had to face a difficult truth: hardware and software prices are going up.

In the last year, Ubisoft, Take-Two, Xbox, and Sony all formally announced a bump in game prices from $60 to $70, and other AAA publishers such as Activision Blizzard, EA, Square Enix, and Warner Bros. have quietly followed suit with games like Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, Star Wars Jedi: Survivor, Final Fantasy 16, and Gotham Knights. In hardware, the PlayStation 5 got a price bump earlier this year across a number of regions – though its cost remains steady in the US for now.

So what’s going on here? Why are prices going up? And will they continue to rise in 2023?

In short, yes – game price increases are likely here to stay. But the answer, as always, is a bit more complicated than that. There are a lot of conflicting factors at play, from game pricing history to inflation to the general games landscape where consumers have wildly different perceptions about the value of a $60 versus one priced at $20.

So if you’re concerned about price increases or just want to know a bit more about why you’re paying $70 to begin with for Redfall next year, it’s worth getting to know a bit more about the games pricing landscape, and what to expect in the year to come.

Wait, are game prices increasing?

One key to understanding why game prices seem to be increasing is that while the bump to $70 AAA games is ostensibly a price increase, it’s also not really an increase when you cast it in light historical inflation and pricing. GamesIndustry.biz recently published an excellent analysis of what’s going on here, which itself is based on another excellent analysis by TechRaptor from 2020 of how video game prices have changed since the 1970s. I highly recommend reading both these pieces for a good overview of this issue, but the short version is that, relative to inflation, games are actually much, much cheaper than they used to be. The Nintendo Entertainment System, for example, cost $179.99 at launch and an average game cost $45. But when you adjust for inflation in 2020 (as the TechRaptor piece did), the NES would cost $432.71 and games on average would be $108.18. And the NES isn’t an outlier – every single older console and its games followed this trend, with games and consoles getting gradually “cheaper” over time, even as the price tag itself appears more expensive. As Omdia principal analyst Liam Deane noted, if game prices had risen with inflation since 1990, games would now cost over $90 a pop. In fact, Deane even sent us this lovely graph illustrating how the inflation situation has impacted game prices – and is even already impacting existing $70 games:

This explains one reason why price increases like the ones we’re seeing now happen in the first place. But apart from that, video games have also become increasingly expensive to make. When I asked Kantan Games’ Dr. Serkan Toto why game prices were going from $60 to $70, he replied that companies “have no other choice.” He pointed me to comments last year from former PlayStation boss Shawn Layden saying that the PlayStation 4 games he had helped get out the door cost at least $100 million apiece, and predicted that PS5 games would cost $200 million or more.

And it makes sense that they would. Newzoo’s Rhys Elliott noted that the core development team of Assassin’s Creed 2 in 2009 consisted of (roughly) 450 people. Assassin’s Creed Valhalla in 2020 required over 1,000 people across 17 different studios. That’s a lot of salaries, benefits packages, equipment, and more to pay for. Per reporter Jason Schreier’s interviewee estimates back in 2017, making a AAA video game cost then, roughly, about $10,000 per person per month. Assuming that number hasn’t grown since then (it surely has), that ballparks at roughly $10 million per month for a game that takes much longer to make than games used to. And that doesn’t even include all the other game making expenses, like the increasingly pricey technology used to make them, the expenses of marketing and distribution over longer and longer marketing cycles, and all the other bits like paying for booth space at an E3, keeping the plumbing working at the office, company lunches and retreats, and on and on.

Given all this, it’s actually rather a bit surprising we haven’t seen games get even more expensive than this already. Why haven’t prices gone up more drastically before? Elliott offered a theory:

“The answer is that they’ve long offset these rising costs with DLC and microtransactions, bolstering premium game sales with smaller purchases (in-game boosters and cosmetics) as well as more robust content expansions,” he said. “Simply put: the industry has sustained itself with new monetization methods and live-service strategies alongside the classic premium launches. Content subscriptions, like Xbox Game Pass and PlayStation Plus are another factor in the mix.”

Another point worth mentioning is that many games are already much more expensive than $70, and people happily pay for them. As NPD analyst Mat Piscatella pointed out to me when I asked him about game price increases, we already have deluxe, silver, gold, collector’s, and other editions of games that sell for much more than $70 and are very successful, though there are usually extra pack-ins to incentivize those purchases.

Meanwhile, games increasingly get deep discounts within a year of launch. A quick glance at Steam as I’m drafting this piece reveals sales on recent releases like Sonic Frontiers, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, Marvel’s Spider-Man Remastered, and Uncharted: Legacy of Thieves Collection. While two of those are technically re-releases of older games, you can look at Steam pretty much any week (and especially during large Steam sales) for example after example of this. The console triad isn’t quite as generous with its big sales as Steam tends to be, but you can still find significant discounts across Xbox and PlayStation first-party games multiple times per year. Nintendo is the one major exception – but notably, its games are still $60…for now.

All that said, it’s understandable to feel frustrated when game prices go up, because at least in the United States, wages have not kept pace for many people. So when an entertainment product that already felt expensive creeps up by an extra $10, it feels painful on an individual level even if the economics behind it make sense. And very recently, a number of complex economic factors have resulted in especially severe inflation that’s bumped the price of everything up seemingly all at once, making the $10 price increase feel like an added kick in the pants.

These on-paper price increases are unlikely to ever go away. In fact, we’re likely to see even more companies follow suit on these increases in the coming months and years.

Who’s raising prices next?

As the vast majority of large gaming companies have increased the prices on their biggest games, the handful of major companies that haven’t yet nonetheless haven’t closed the door on the idea. That applies to both software and hardware, too. While Microsoft said in August it had no plans to increase the current suggested retail price of its consoles, comments from Xbox head Phil Spencer since indicate that it’s not entirely off the table. Nintendo is in a similar boat with the Switch. Both Toto and Elliot told me they wouldn’t be surprised if Xbox raised its console prices in 2023, and Elliott pointed out that the Xbox Series S will likely continue to be pushed as a low-cost Game Pass box.

Deane disagreed, suggesting that he didn’t think Xbox necessarily needed to increase its console prices.

“Microsoft has been running a pretty aggressive pricing strategy recently, especially with the Series S, which they’ve been offering at steep discounts in a lot of markets,” Deane said. “Market share is the name of the game for Microsoft and they’re not going to risk a golden opportunity to make up ground on Sony for the sake of a bit of extra short-term hardware revenue.”

Microsoft has been running a pretty aggressive pricing strategy recently, especially with the Series S.

None of the three thought Nintendo would increase prices on the Switch so far into its life cycle, though both Deane and Toto pointed out that new models down the line would likely have higher price tags.

Meanwhile, in terms of software pricing, just a handful of AAA publishers are still holding out on the $60 cap, and incidentally, the ones of note are all Japanese companies: Nintendo, Bandai Namco, Sega, Capcom.

Nintendo has previously lagged behind Xbox and Sony in raising prices on its games – the latter two brought their first-party games to $59.99 in 2005, and Nintendo didn’t match them until the release of the Wii U in 2012. Nintendo has kept its Switch games at that price ever since, but has also been the most notorious of all three companies for rarely putting its biggest first-party titles on deep discounts even years after release. With this history, it’s pretty likely we’ll see Nintendo maintain $59.99 for first-party games through the rest of the Switch’s life cycle. And promisingly, The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom already has pre-orders up at $59.99, meaning Nintendo will very likely stick to this specific gun for a while longer. But given the trajectory of its competitors, we should be braced for Nintendo to match Xbox and Sony soon – perhaps tied together with whatever its next console launch ends up being.

As for the rest of the major publishers, it’s likely their inevitable price increases will take place with little fanfare. EA, Square Enix, and Warner Bros. did their price lifts over the last year almost in the shadows, simply dropping upcoming pre-orders at the new $70 price without issuing any big statements or explanations. Of course, if companies like Bandai Namco, Sega, and Capcom want to do the same, they’ll need to time it with a release big enough to warrant it. For Capcom, the natural fit would be Street Fighter 6, but given that it’s currently up for preorder at $60, Capcom might be willing to cling to the old price point a bit longer than most. Bandai Namco, meanwhile, has Armored Core 6 coming up in 2023, which seems like a likely candidate for a $70 price tag. And as for Sega, Like a Dragon: Ishin! is firmly at $60 for preorders, but the upcoming Like a Dragon 8 in 2024 might push the publisher into $70 territory with the rest.

The Japanese giants have most probably been discussing price hikes for their software in the West for some time now.

“The Japanese giants have most probably been discussing price hikes for their software in the West for some time now,” Toto said when I asked him about the developers above. “Square Enix already made heads turn last year when they said they want $70 for the Steam version of Forspoken. I don’t think every Japan-made video game will cost $70 in the future, but players should get used to the idea for sure.”

Deane noted that while it was hard to make predictions on individual publishers, he did think there were other ways to sneak price increases to consumers without the fanfare of increasing overall AAA game cost.

“A big question is: to what extent have they shifted their business models from full-game sales to DLC and microtransactions?” Deane posited. “It’s much easier to raise prices for those quietly because there’s no psychologically important $60 mark that consumers are anchored on. So some publishers might decide to stick with $60 and instead quietly increase other prices. The strength of the dollar and weakness of the yen also makes things easier for Japanese publishers—their US revenues are rising in yen terms purely thanks to the exchange rate, so they’re more likely to stick to $60 than their American competitors.”

The good news in all this is that not every game is going to be $70, in the same way that not every game now is $60. All major publishers release a number of their non-blockbuster games each year for lower price points, or using alternative business models like free-to-play, subscription services, and the like. But while $20, $30, $40, $50, and yes even $60 games will still exist, if the top line goes up, we’re likely to see the average prices under that slowly creep higher over time as well.

That situation may soon start to bear out in the indie scene. Video game marketing consultant Chris Zukowski published a fascinating analysis earlier this year of the average price of every game released on Steam going all the way back to 2006, and broke down the averages by AAA games and indie games. Prior to 2012 or so, AAA and indie games on Steam were roughly priced the same. But from then on, AAA pricing has climbed, while indie has remained stagnant. Both Zukowski and the folks at VGInsights have come to similar conclusions, urging indie developers to price their games higher, as all the data seems to indicate that bumping a $5 up to $10 or a $10 up to $20 doesn’t really hurt total sales numbers much. While the data doesn’t indicate that indie games are overall getting more expensive, anecdotally Zukowski pointed out on Twitter that a number of indie games toward the end of 2022 launched at $20 or more – Choo-choo Charles and Dwarf Fortress being just two examples.

Especially given the economic situation, the rising prices of AAA games, and a growing awareness of game pricing data, it’s possible indie developers might begin a well-earned push toward pricier games themselves.

Subscription Service Saviors

So where does that leave those of us who are still apprehensive about paying $70, multiple times a year, to stay up on the latest games? It leaves us, mercifully, blessed with a few other options. Amidst the rising game prices we’ve also seen the rise of subscription services such as Xbox Game Pass, Ubisoft+, EA Play, PlayStation Plus, and others that offer free or discounted games for a low monthly price. Individual mileage varies on these, of course – it’s not much help to folks who are huge fans of Nintendo games, for instance. But subscription services can certainly help ease the burden of having to pay for every game you want to try.

Unfortunately, at least one of those subscription services (and arguably the most robust one) might also be on its way toward a price hike. During the same conversation in which he suggested Xbox games would get more costly, Phil Spencer also hinted that Xbox Game pass could follow suit. Rumors have been swirling for some time that Xbox is considering ditching its base tier subscription and nudging its audience to a more expensive higher tier of some kind. The rumors haven’t yet come to pass, but combined with Spencer’s comments it seems likelier than ever we see a shift of some kind in the new year.

Toto and Elliott feel the same way. When I asked Toto about Game Pass, he called it a “prime candidate” for a price increase, especially if more Bethesda blockbusters arrive in the new year. And Elliott noted that Xbox has been priming customers for this for some time now by emphasizing Game Pass features like cloud, PC and (via the potential Activision Blizzard acquisition) eventual mobile gaming.

We could see Xbox taking a leaf out of Netflix’s book and utilizing advertising to make entry-level tiers more affordable.

Deane again had a slightly different take. While he, too, expected price increases on subscription services, he didn’t think they’d be as straightforward as I suggested- especially after Microsoft’s “disastrous” attempt at increasing the Xbox Live Gold price in 2021.

“Companies like Netflix have introduced new tiers to justify price increases, or introduced lower tiers to give consumers more options,” Deane said. “With Game Pass, Microsoft has so far focused on aggressively acquiring users. Game Pass and Game Pass Ultimate are still at their original launch prices, but inevitably when Microsoft shifts focus to profitability, prices will have to go up. We think that this will most likely come in the form of a new, higher tier Game Pass subscription. On the other end of that spectrum, we expect that in 2023 Microsoft will start testing a cheaper, cloud-only Game Pass tier. Further down the line, we could also see Xbox taking a leaf out of Netflix’s book and utilizing advertising to make entry-level tiers more affordable.”

On the brighter side, I think we’re unlikely to see Sony make a similar move with PlayStation Plus for the sole reason that it literally just did an overhaul of the system earlier in 2022. While a price increase certainly isn’t off the table, it’s far more likely Sony planned the new PlayStation Plus structure to stay in place for at least a few years and certainly with knowledge of the current economic conditions.

As for Nintendo? At $20 for online functionality and a smattering of retro games, that service is likely neither going anywhere else price-wise, nor is it magically going to turn into a free new game vehicle any time soon.

Rising Ever Higher

All told, we’re likely to see things continue to get more expensive in 2023. It’s cold comfort, I know, to hear that actually gaming is more affordable than ever due to inflation. In the end, $70 is still more than $60, and it’s especially impactful when you’re gaming on a budget or there are just too many exciting AAA games dropping in a single year to reasonably buy them all – even if you’re conservative and wait for those big Steam sales to pick a few up.

For now, at least, game prices are unlikely to rise any further than $70. Reports earlier this year indicated that Sony was planning to increase game prices above $70, but SIE CEO Jim Ryan claimed those were “categorically false.” While he did leave open the possibility that prices could rise again in the future, given the heinous optics of doing so immediately after this $70 increase, we’re unlikely to see another bump anytime soon. It’s the kind of situation where if one major publisher tried to pull such a move, all its competitors would immediately flock to brag about keeping their prices steady – a wave of bad press no individual company would be willing to weather.

And Deane noted that while future price increases aren’t off the table, the rising costs of AAA development mean that publishers are looking for other ways to make money that don’t rely on the $60/$70 purchase model. The pricing model of the future, rather, is battle passes, microtransactions, and the like.

Titles that once would have been AAA premium games are now free-to-play.

“Or at least they want to shore up their revenue until they can sell themselves to Sony or Microsoft (or maybe some other tech giant like Amazon or Apple),” Deane concluded.

One other silver lining to all this it’s that as bad as price increases can feel, the games we’re getting for that money are largely better than they’ve ever been in every respect. And, as Elliott concluded in our email correspondence, not every game will be $70. In fact, most won’t be.

“Lessons learned from the advent of free-to-play on mobile have meant that titles that once would have been AAA premium games are now free-to-play,” he said. “…Simply put: the industry has sustained itself with new monetization methods and live-service strategies alongside the classic premium launches. Content subscriptions, like Xbox Game Pass and PlayStation Plus, are another factor in the mix.

“All these choices and entry points to gaming means that—in our view—a $70 price point for all premium games is an absurd concept.”

Price increases may be inevitable, but there’s no shortage of options for excellent, cheaper gaming out there. Subscription services, digging deeper for cheaper games that aren’t necessarily AAA big budget blockbusters, and combing those deep discounts in Steam sales all can offer some relief from the growing expense.

But yeah, we’re with you. It stinks that Final Fantasy 16 is $70.

Rebekah Valentine is a news reporter for IGN. You can find her on Twitter @duckvalentine.