I mean, if anything most games are underpriced for what they provide these days.
Games seem to be the one thing that hasn't risen in lockstep with inflation yet - seems like that $60 price has largely held stable for 15-20 years, and no one has wanted to break it even with technology and content greatly increasing. Online micro transactions, DLC, and expanded editions supplement that, but there seems to be an industry agreement to keep the base price where it is. Maybe they're just loss leaders to bring in the online revenue.
I bought GTA3 in 2001 for $49.99. Loved it, played it to death, great memories. But its content is limited, I can 100% it in a week of playing a couple hours a night. Adjusted for inflation, that's about $90 in 2025 dollars. By contrast, the most recent Rockstar game, RDR2, cost $60 at release and had a 50 hour main story and approximately 180 hours to 100% everything - and beyond that you can spend a lot of time being just immersed in the environment. And that was released seven years ago on a previous generation console, so GTA6 on more advanced technology I'm sure will have just as much content if not more.
If you go to the movies you'll pay $15 for 2 hours of non-interactive entertainment. So why games with fifty times more content are not even five times more expensive is odd. Movie ticket prices have more than doubled on average since 2001, while games have only risen 20-40% despite also undergoing significantly larger leaps in quality compared to film.
I'd love for prices to stay low, but let's admit it, of GTA6 is $125 at release, it'll still be worth it.