Video games have never been more prevalent or elaborate, but the industry that creates them is currently facing unprecedented headwinds amid spiraling costs, intense competition, and a stagnating player-base. A new market analysis suggests that breaking the current $70 price barrier on games could help ameliorate some of the challenges, and that Grand Theft Auto VI could be the one to do it.
“In 2025, GTA VI’s impact on player hours and revenues will be mixed as it launches console-only and severely cannibalizes hours/spend that would go to other titles,” reads a slide from venture capitalist, analyst, and author Matthew Ball’s presentation “The State of Video Gaming in 2025” (via GameSpot). “But there is hope that Take-Two will price GTA VI at $80 or even $100, thereby breaking a key price barrier and enabling the rest of the market to move up, too.”
This prospect is one of several factors Ball thinks could help contribute to the future growth of the gaming industry, alongside things like PC gaming handhelds, the Switch 2, new genres and franchises, and overhauls to mobile marketplace regulation. Take-Two might not need the extra money, but raising the price of GTA VI could give cover to other companies to raise their prices as well. The increasingly hollowed-out middle ground could go from charging $40 and $50 to $60 and $70, so the reasoning goes. Then again, in the current zero-sum environment, raising the cap could also just drive even more money away from smaller companies and lesser-known franchises.
This isn’t the first time someone’s brought up the idea of GTA VI potentially breaking the current $70 price barrier. Take-Two CEO Strauss Zelnick has been asked about it on investor calls in the past and responds by saying the company always wants to overdeliver in terms of quality and value. That noncommittal response certainly doesn’t close the door to GTA VI being $80 or even $100, and Take-Two was one of the first companies to push existing games into $70 territory with the launch of the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X/S.
Before that, premium boxed games had been $60 since the launch of the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360, remaining stagnant for roughly 15 years even while most other things around them got more expensive, including development budgets. When GTA 3 came to PS2 back in 2001, it was $50. If it were adjusted for inflation, it would cost $90 today. And in fact many big blockbusters, like Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 and Assassin’s Creed Shadows, already have $100 versions for those players who want limited-edition skins, premium battle passes, extra in-game items, and early access to play ahead of the official launch (the ultimate edition of Monster Hunter Wilds is even more at $110).
In his analysis, Ball points to a number of reasons why companies are so hesitant to raise game prices, or at least now use a one-size-fits-all approach to selecting them. The mere fact that game prices have historically not changed much has reinforced how “sticky” they are and leads to outsized player scrutiny any time price hikes are discussed. Other factors are competition from the rise of free-to-play games like Fortnite and Genshin Impact and the desire to reach as big a player-base as possible for battle passes, DLC, and other paid add-ons down the road. Plus it’s no secret how many people are already trained to wait just a few months for major discounts on everything but the best-selling games.
Nintendo recently showed that price hikes aren’t the end of the world when done smartly. It charged an extra $10 for The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom despite still being on the same hardware as the $60 Breath of the Wild. The game still went on to sell over 20 million copies and it also didn’t mean that Pikmin 4 was all of a sudden going to cost $70 too (though it certainly would have still been worth it). Baldur’s Gate 3 was only $60 on PC, but could have been another obvious contender for an $80 or even $100 game.
“I don’t love the artificiality of pricing structures post retail,” Larian Studios head of publishing, Michael Douse, wrote online last year. “Use the inflated base price to upsell a subscription, and use vague content promises to inflate ultimate editions to make the base price look better. It all seems a bit dangerous & disconnected from the community. I think a game should be priced accordingly with its quality, breadth & depth. I’m not against higher prices, but this arbitrary uniformity just doesn’t make sense to me. It feels so unserious.”
.