Xbox Lowers the Price of The Outer Worlds 2 from $80 to $70 - News
by William D'Angelo , posted on 23 July 2025 / 4,714 Views
Publisher Xbox Game Studios and developer Obsidian Entertainment have decided to lower the price of The Outer Worlds 2 from $79.99 to $69.99 following feedback.
"We have received your SOS via skip drone about the pricing," said Obsidian Entertainment. "As an organization devoted to making sure that corporations do not go unfettered, we at the Earth Directorate have worked with [REDACTED] to revise the price of The Outer Worlds 2."
The Outer Worlds 2 will launch for PlayStation 5, Xbox Series, PC via Steam and Xbox PC, and Xbox Game Pass on October 29.
Dear Galactic Citizens!
A life-long and avid gamer, William D'Angelo was first introduced to VGChartz in 2007. After years of supporting the site, he was brought on in 2010 as a junior analyst, working his way up to lead analyst in 2012 and taking over the hardware estimates in 2017. He has expanded his involvement in the gaming community by producing content on his own YouTube channel and Twitch channel. You can follow the author on Bluesky.
More Articles
$70 is still too much TBH
Eh, it's more than the $60 of the first game, but I'm pretty sure that the devs said the game has larger planet maps and more hours of content too, so I can't really complain about $70, especially since most things have seen at least 20% inflation in price since 2019 (average movie ticket pricing is up by 23% for instance), $70 is 16% inflation by comparison.
You will be saying the same about $80 in a few years.
I mean it's not like $70 is a new thing, the first AAA to release at $70 was NBA 2K Holiday 2020, and by 2023 nearly every publisher was up to $70 for their AAA releases. AAA games sat at $60 from like 2005 until 2020, which was a surprisingly long run honestly, compared to pricing for other forms of entertainment.
$80 in 2025, not even 5 years since the first $70 AAA, was definitely too soon, I think we can all agree on that much. Nintendo seems to be getting away with it, but their fanbase tends to be the most loyal of the 3 console makers in my experience, and there is less competition with 3rd party games there since 1st party sells way better on Switch and Switch 2 than 3rd party.
Do they still describe it as a AA game? $70 is still quite high
Look at expedition 33. $50
Microsoft has called it AAA, unlike the first game.
A video game company actually listening to consumers on overpricing....that's rare! Good on them. $80 is absurd for any game.
80 dollars will be norm. Just wait cause I am sure GTA 6 will be 80. Companies can't sustain such high budget and give games away for cheap anymore
The thing is, they can sustain it.
Even with the lower pricing many developers/publishers have been breaking their financial records year after year for a long time...
How? Higher volume of sales, DLC/Microtransactions/Subscriptions and Special Editions.
If games are having such high budgets that they need to raise prices to recoup costs, then perhaps they should lower their development budget?
Why did insomniac games have despite huge successes. Same with many Sony studios
Lower dev budget then people complain game not big enough, not long , graphics not good enough, ai not smart enough and so on.
Sony and Ms have closed quite a few studios and laid off alot of devs .
Gamers just need to get better jobs and save cause gaming is a luxury not a necessity. Just good for thought.
Some of the most played games today don't have the best graphics.
- Minecraft.
- Fortnite.
-
Counter Strike.
Just to name a few.
Microsoft have been posting record profits and didn't need to close studios, they closed them because they want to chase the $3 trillion and $4 trillion market caps for their shareholders.
Sony made a few blunders with GAAS, so they also needed to take action to make their shareholders happy.
None of those companies were financially insolvent.
"Get a second job" is something Sony would say.
If you need to work more just to buy a video game, then the industry has failed and probably needs a hard reset.
Not as far as I’m aware. If you’re taking in response to MKWorld $80 price tag? They simply stated that the game’s quality justified the cost. Nintendo’s rhetoric has always been “justify price with quality” (which is much smarter than simply demanding consumers to “get a second job” lol).
Maybe you’re thinking of Borderlands 4?
edit: why the downvotes? Is what I’m saying not true? If so, the “Reply” button is available.
You are right, they didn't but I am mistaking it for that they did say the "You can't afford Switch 2, we have Switch 1." Just not as direct as this. Which is basically what MS said when launching Xbox One too but not in reference to costs but online stuff. Less said about Randy the better honestly. Gearbox PR/marketing need to just tell him to stay away from social media.
Sometimes, it's probably better for these companies to shut the hell up.
Any video game company that says people need to get a "better job" or a "second job" or be better financially... Is out of touch with their consumer base.
There are many reasons why people may be in under-employed or in low-paying jobs or may be unable to work certain hours... And that shouldn't be a barrier to buying a video game so they can detach from the real world.
Video games are entertainment, not an essential item, they need to release a product that appeals... And being shit towards their customer base is not how you do that.
Oh definitely, it's a sad fact that what was once a childs past time is nearly next to becoming a luxury hobby. Cost of entry, as in price of hardware, used to be cheap to allow for people to buy games, now cost of hardware is going up and games are following.
Long gone are the days of PS2 for £100 with £40 games, 5 years into a gen. Now we are 5 years into a gen with consoles and games costing more than they launched for. Madness.
Gaming was never cheap.
I remember my parents sacrificing alot and working everyday just so that me and my brothers had gaming.
I was lucky that when PS1 came out piracy was the norm in Malaysia so it was cheaper for parents to afford. If that never happened I wouldn't have been gaming or gaming much.. now that I have good job I buy my own. Been doing that since PS3 days and 360, days
If you don't have a job then I would imagine wanting to do gaming is last on their priority.
They should be focussing on getting a new job and working on their cv. If gaming is their priority then it's their fault not the gaming companies..
There other hobbies that allow you detsch from reality that are cheaper then gaming like movies online or reading a book or just going for a walk.
Also if you are in a low income job , the focus would be to improve your skills to increase your pay rather then gaming especially if the goal is to be able to afford gaming..
Consumers need accountability. You can't expect companies to sabotage themselves And their profit lines just because consumers have the wrong priorities in life.
You are naming live service games with micro transactions especially fortnite.
That's how they make money and actually, latest update to fortnite looks good graphically for a live service game.
Counter strike looks good on Max hardware but most don't use it as you need more fps instead.
We need less love service games..there's too many of them.
Sony isn't wrong cause gaming is not something you are entitled to. Gaming is like any hobby. It'd a luxury. Some can afford and some can't .
They wouldn't be wrong if they said get another job if you want to do gaming ..
GTA 6 has a good shot of being worth 80 dollars. The issue is the Outer Worlds 2 is likely not an experience worth 80 dollars. I think flat pricing for games is an issue. A game with a lower budget and lesser quality shouldn't sell for the same price as a well made game with a huge budget.
The way I see it is another MS corporate spin.
- Preorder sales wasn't great overall so they dropped the price.
- The fact that they can easily drop the price means they never needed to increase the game price at all and it was just corporate greed cause they saw Nintendo do it.
Even that is pricey. It shouldn't be more than 60. Outerworlds isnt exactly massive budget, judging from the first game i played. What were they thinking $80, 😂
clear mid-budget titles should really be 50 dollars max. triple a publishers should really normalize having smaller games existing at lower prices.
I'm glad they changed their stance. It's almost like if you pressure these companies, they will comply.
Good, although I don't think any game needs a $80 price, it especially doesn't sit right with titles that look on the lower budget end of modern AAA affairs.
I guess pre-orders scared them straight. Although 60€ should be enough for this one.
"following feedback" aka bad press or presales are low?
EDIT: Noting, this isn't only the US, the UK and EU prices have also seemingly got a decrease of 10, so UK price is now £60 across all platforms and EU is €70, no longer £70 and €80. To compare, Doom Dark Ages is those higher prices.
Beyond hilarious, don't fcken copy greedy Nintendo
Is there an early access option for $10 bucks now?
Id pick it up now. Good to see
Good on them. Microsoft and its studios need all the good press they can get right now.
