A discussion is heating up in gaming communities about whether reviews should factor price into their scores. On one side, some argue that a $20 indie gem deserves recognition for delivering incredible value, while a $70 AAA game with 6 hours of content should get dinged for poor value proposition. On the other, critics point out that quality is quality regardless of price tag, and tying scores to cost creates problems when prices inevitably drop. With AAA games pushing toward $80 and Microsoft citing rising development costs for recent price hikes, this debate matters more than ever.
The Case for Ignoring Price
The strongest argument against factoring price into review scores is simple: quality doesn’t change based on what you paid. A masterfully crafted 10-hour experience remains masterfully crafted whether it costs $15 or $70. Reviews should evaluate what the game is, not what it costs. When IGN gives a game an 8 out of 10, that score represents the reviewer’s assessment of the game’s quality, design, execution, and experience. Mixing value calculations into that number muddies what the score actually means.
There’s also the practical problem that prices change constantly while review scores remain static. A game might launch at $60, get criticized for being overpriced in reviews that dock points accordingly, then drop to $30 six months later. Now those reviews are misleading because they’re penalizing something that’s no longer true. Updating review scores every time a game goes on sale is obviously impractical, so price-based scores become outdated almost immediately.
The perception of value also varies wildly between individuals. A 12-year-old without income views $60 completely differently than an adult with disposable income. Someone passionate about a specific genre might happily pay premium prices for niche content, while casual fans wait for deep discounts. Your personal budget and spending priorities aren’t universal truths that should shape supposedly objective review scores.
Why Price Actually Matters
Counterarguments point out that completely ignoring price disconnects reviews from real consumer decision-making. When Street Fighter 5 launched with minimal single-player content at full price, reviewers rightfully noted that players weren’t getting enough value for their money. That’s not about quality but about honest evaluation of what you’re purchasing. A technically excellent game that offers 4 hours of content at $70 deserves different consideration than one offering 60 hours at the same price.
The argument becomes even stronger when games launch unfinished or stuffed with microtransactions. If a $70 game launches with missing features and aggressive monetization designed to extract additional spending, pretending that doesn’t impact the experience feels dishonest. Price establishes expectations. Players spending AAA money expect AAA production values, content volume, and polish. When games fail to meet those expectations, acknowledging that in reviews helps consumers make informed decisions.
2025’s best-reviewed games prove that higher prices don’t guarantee better experiences. Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 launched at $50 with a 90 Metacritic score and 9.7 user rating. Meanwhile, $70 and $80 releases often deliver underwhelming experiences despite their premium pricing. If reviews completely ignore this reality, they’re missing crucial context about what consumers are actually getting for their money.
The Current Pricing Landscape
Understanding this debate requires context about how weird game pricing has become. AAA publishers are pushing standard editions to $80, citing rising development costs and market conditions. Microsoft recently announced price increases across first-party titles and hardware. Nintendo confirmed that Switch 2 games will launch at $70-80. Publishers argue that games now have massive budgets with enormous teams working for years, justifying premium prices.
Simultaneously, indie developers are racing to the bottom with sub-$20 pricing just to stay visible. The $20 price point has become the sweet spot for indie games trying to compete against both AAA blockbusters and free-to-play titles. Steam’s algorithm and Game Pass dynamics mean that visibility often matters more than pricing strategy, forcing indie developers into difficult decisions about whether to price for sustainability or discoverability.
This creates a bizarre market where the pricing gap between indie and AAA games keeps widening despite quality often being comparable or even favoring indies. When a brilliant $15 indie game gets the same 8/10 score as a mediocre $80 AAA release, that score communicates very different things about value and consumer recommendation even if the quality assessment is consistent.
How Major Outlets Handle It
Most major review outlets like IGN and GameSpot deliberately avoid factoring price into numerical scores. Their review systems focus on evaluating the game itself. Graphics, gameplay, story, sound, and overall experience determine the score, while price gets mentioned in the written text without impacting the number. This maintains consistency as prices fluctuate and prevents scores from becoming outdated.
However, these same outlets do acknowledge price in their verdict sections. A reviewer might note that the game is absolutely worth picking up at launch price, or suggest waiting for a sale if you’re price-conscious. This compromise attempts to provide both objective quality assessment and practical purchasing advice without tying the score itself to cost.
Some smaller outlets and YouTubers take different approaches. Rather than numerical scores, they use recommendation systems like thumbs up or down, or explicit buy/wait/skip verdicts. This sidesteps the scoring problem entirely while still providing clear guidance that naturally incorporates value considerations. When someone says skip this until it hits $20, that’s useful consumer advice that doesn’t pretend to be an objective quality metric.
The Middle Ground Solution
The most practical solution seems to be acknowledging price without letting it dominate the score. Reviews should mention pricing and value proposition in the text and verdict, giving consumers the information they need to make purchasing decisions. But the numerical score or rating should remain focused on quality, ensuring it stays relevant regardless of future price changes.
This approach recognizes that reviews serve multiple purposes. Some readers want to know if a game is good. Others want to know if it’s worth buying right now at current pricing. A well-written review can address both needs without conflating them. The score answers the quality question. The text and recommendation answer the value question.
Phrases like for the $60 launch price, it’s absolutely worth picking up or given the limited content, waiting for a sale is advisable provide practical guidance without making the score dependent on something that will inevitably change. This keeps reviews useful long after publication while still giving day-one buyers the value assessment they need.
What Actually Influences Your Decision
Here’s the reality: most people don’t make purchasing decisions based purely on review scores anyway. You factor in your personal interest in the genre, your budget, whether your friends are playing, how much free time you have, and dozens of other variables that no review score captures. A 7/10 game in your favorite genre might excite you more than a 10/10 game in a genre you hate.
Price naturally enters that calculation regardless of whether reviews mention it. You decide whether you’re willing to pay $80 for a game, or if you’ll wait for $40, or grab it at $20 during a sale. Reviews inform that decision by describing what you’re getting, but the value proposition is ultimately personal. What represents good value to someone with 40 games in their backlog differs dramatically from someone desperate for new content in their favorite genre.
This is why the best reviews focus on thorough description rather than attempting to reduce everything to a single number. Tell readers what the game offers, how it plays, what works and doesn’t, who it’s designed for, and let them decide if that package justifies the asking price based on their individual circumstances.
FAQs
Do IGN and GameSpot factor price into review scores?
No, major outlets like IGN and GameSpot deliberately avoid factoring price into their numerical review scores. They may mention pricing and value in the written review text, but the score itself focuses on evaluating the game’s quality, design, and experience independent of cost.
Why do some people think reviews should consider price?
Supporters argue that price establishes expectations and impacts the consumer experience. A $70 game with 5 hours of content represents different value than a $15 game with 50 hours. Ignoring this disconnect can make reviews less useful for consumers making purchasing decisions with limited budgets.
What problems occur when reviews include price in scores?
The main issue is that prices change frequently through sales and permanent price drops, while review scores remain static. A game criticized for being overpriced at launch might become excellent value six months later, making the original score misleading and outdated.
How much do AAA games cost in 2025?
AAA game prices are rising from the previous $60-70 standard to $70-80. Microsoft recently announced some first-party titles will cost $80, while Nintendo confirmed Switch 2 games will launch at $70-80. Publishers cite rising development costs and market conditions for these increases.
What’s the typical price for indie games?
Most indie games price between $10-20, with $20 being considered a sweet spot that allows for meaningful discounts while remaining accessible. Some premium indie titles go higher, but staying under $20 helps with visibility and conversion rates on platforms like Steam.
Can game prices affect review scores without explicitly stating it?
Yes, price can implicitly influence reviews through content expectations. Reviewers might note that a game feels short or lacks features, which are often value judgments related to pricing even if not explicitly framed that way. The line between evaluating content volume and considering value can blur.
Should I wait for sales based on review scores?
Review scores tell you about quality, but your personal value assessment depends on factors like budget, interest level, and backlog size. A highly-rated game might still be worth waiting for a sale if you’re not urgently interested, while a lower-rated game in your favorite genre might justify full price.
Do review scores matter more than the written review?
The written review typically provides more useful information than the score alone. It describes what the game actually offers, who it’s designed for, what works and what doesn’t. This context helps you determine if it’s right for you regardless of the numerical rating.
Why are 2025’s best-reviewed games budget titles?
Games like Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 prove that higher budgets and prices don’t automatically translate to better experiences. Many budget titles focus on tight design and strong execution rather than massive scope, often resulting in more polished, focused experiences than sprawling AAA releases.
Conclusion
The debate over whether game reviews should consider price ultimately comes down to what you believe reviews are for. If they’re meant to be timeless quality assessments, price has no place in scoring. If they’re consumer guides helping people decide what to buy right now, ignoring price feels incomplete. The best compromise acknowledges both purposes: keep scores focused on quality so they remain relevant over time, but discuss pricing and value in the text to help consumers make informed decisions. As AAA games push toward $80 and indies compete at $20 or less, the gap between price and quality has never been wider. Reviews that completely ignore this reality miss an opportunity to provide useful context, but tying scores directly to price creates problems that outlast their usefulness. What matters most is transparency about methodology. If a reviewer considers price, say so explicitly. If they don’t, explain that the score reflects quality independent of cost. Either approach works as long as readers understand what that score actually represents, allowing them to combine the quality assessment with their own value calculations based on personal budget, interest, and circumstances.