A new report yesterday from supposed insiders speaking to Game Post says that Bungie and Sony are looking toward a $40 price point for Marathon, its upcoming PvP extraction shooter supposedly out in 2025.
I cannot confirm the validity of that and honestly, I think it’s something that’s very much still up in the air, but I think it’s worthwhile to examine the idea as a thought experiment.
First, there was immediately Destiny communtiy pushback to the idea of a $40 price tag. The failure of another Sony PvP game, Concord, is fresh in everyone’s mind and its price tag is credited in part with its failure in a market that demands essentially every new entry is free-to-play. The “DOA” idea is that Marathon could repeat the same mistake when it too is entering an almost identical market of free-to-play PvP titles, and it’s hard enough to stand out even if you are free, as seen by releases like The Finals and XDefiant. I do think this concern is valid, and it’s probably the side I land on.
So why then, $40, potentially? Here’s what I think the rationale would be for that:
- $40 multiplayer has created one huge hit for Sony. Helldivers 2 was a brilliant success at a $40 price tag, and Sony would no doubt love to see that repeated. Helldivers 2 level success is obviously not a guarantee, but it’s proof of concept, at the very least, and Sony may not be willing to give up the potential revenue.
- Concord did not fail because of its $40 price. No, I do no think it helped, but Concord fundamentally failed because it was…a deeply unattractive game. You can see clear evidence of that with a free open beta shortly before launch which only attracted 2,300 or so players on Steam. The price was just not the main issue there. (Still, Concord was such a historic failure that Sony may want to distance Marathon in every possible facet).
- Tarkov is $50, minimum. Escape from Tarkov is the other big extraction shooter in the market, and supposedly even though Marathon puts some distance between itself and that game, at least there is precedent in that subgenre specifically of that price being somewhat okay.
- Sony may not be as confident in Marathon’s monetization, hence they want a larger up front price. I have heard there has been some difficulty trying to effectively monetize an extraction shooter in a way that doesn’t mess things up. But I think we can also see this with Helldivers 2, which has “Warbonds” that even include things like new weapons, and yet the game is not considered pay-to-win because it is relatively easy to farm in-game currency to buy all that stuff. Good for players, less good for a revenue-focused Sony, and it could be a similar situation here where they want at least $40 to get in the door. And without that, microtransactions would have to be more annoying.
- Finally, maybe the game is…that good. Helldivers 2 would never have succeeded if it wasn’t great (at least at launch), and there may be internal sentiment that Marathon will prove itself to be worth that $40 asking price, especially if that means fewer annoying microtransactions to get in the way of gameplay and community building. (Then again that does sound exactly like what Concord was saying before launch).
I said yesterday that there was “no way” Marathon would be priced at $40 after what happened with Concord. I now think there is a way, though whether it’s a good idea or not remains to be seen, or if some compromise could be made ($20?). But like everything else with Marathon, we remain in the dark, lacking official information.
Follow me on Twitter, YouTube, and Instagram.
Pick up my sci-fi novels the Herokiller series and The Earthborn Trilogy.
