You're making a pretty big assumption that companies are raising prices and resorting to these kinds of things simply to boost their bottom line and not that it just costs real money (a lot of) to make video games. You can't compare price increases in commodities to price increases in an entertainment industry. They are two completely different things. You don't need to buy a $60 game to get to work or feed your family.
No assumption, when I say trying to increase the bottom line, I'm taking the rising expenses into account. But ultimately, SE does have their shareholders to answer to as well and if they're not meeting their analyst estimates, they might as well be in the red (even if they ARE posting a profit). Frankly, I have not cared for their attitudes towards consumers since the merger (remember the whole "compilation of FF7" and "World of Mana"? And how long has it taken them to count to 3, in the case of Kingdom Hearts?). Let's also remember...the world's largest suppliers of food and gas are also publicly traded.
You CAN compare the two because a lot of the same factors are in place (rising labor costs mostly). I don't think any of us are in the position where we're going hungry because of rising food costs, but I might decide to pass up a road trip because of gas or to get a small fry instead of a large...Those are the lines I'm thinking of. And that is why you go the extra mile to hit the gas station down the road or food store with the lower prices, you don't want to give your business to the people that are raising prices. That is speaking with your wallet, but on the same hand, you're verbally telling people NOT to visit the gas station or store with the highest prices.
You are allowed to be vocal about pricing structures and such and I don't have a problem with that but it absolutely is entitlement when you expect game companies to change their business model because you don't like the way they release content. The entertainment industry is only as consumer driven as the demand for consumption. If you don't like how much something costs, you don't buy it and/or don't consume it or you find an alternative. If you don't like the price of a movie, you go to a matinee, wait for video or streaming or you just don't go. If you don't like the cost of a game, you don't buy it and you don't play it, or you rent it from a rental service, or you borrow it from a friend, or you wait until a bundle comes out or you find it in a used bin. Which you're basically doing by saying you don't want to buy a PS4 or the game, which is perfectly reasonable. The cost isn't passed down to the consumer, the consumer demand for/consumption rate is being passed up. Or maybe a bit of both.
And on the same hand, I think game companies are displaying a bit of an ego by basically telling consumers they need to pay more than they have in the past. It raises expectations frustratingly high. Assume $200 is the minimum total cost to experience all episodes of FF7...It better be the best damn game EVER for that price, relative to games that cost $40-$60. Why do you think .hack fizzled so hard and the Xenosaga saga went from 6 games to 3? This type of thing just has never yielded positive results and again, is very consumer un-friendly.*
The point of being vocal is you do expect to be listened to. Otherwise, you are wasting your breath. I can't stand passive consumerism...If people don't like something, they need to speak up or else nothing changes. The people who work at the companies sit in their little boardrooms, patting themselves on the back and laugh at the great job they've done when they don't receive negative feedback. In most cases, I think they remain oblivious to it anyway.
What I said was I am looking for reasons to buy a PS4 and a $60 one-shot deal of FFVII Remake would swing the decision in its favor. I'm not looking to make a sizeable entertainment investment in such a questionable prospect over a period of years. If I were more emotionally invested in the product, I'd be way more vocal, but my confidence in SE is just shot. But I certainly understand the sentiment of those that are on their Youtube channels, holding their breath and banging their heads on the floor.
I don't think we're talking about two different things, I think we fundamentally think the responsibility lies in two different places. I believe the problem is the consumer, and you believe the problem is the producer. Perhaps it's a bit of both but this is an entertainment industry, after all. Consumption is entirely optional.
I think the "business" part of the industry is incredibly toxic for both sides. It's hard to look at the underlying product when you feel like you are being taken advantage of. That's my take on it and why ultimately, I side with the paying, vocal and often obnoxious consumers. In reality, it's a large ugly gray area for both sides.
*Yes, I'm aware both had their fans, but generally neither was regarded as an overall success