[dagmx]

Why would it cause the cost of games to go down?

They still cost the same to make regardless, and they’d still need some form of distribution that would take a cut.

PC games aren’t any cheaper at launch than console games. Console games don’t become any cheaper when the cost of manufacturing goes down over the course of a generation.

[Nullabillity]

Because you'd be paying for the games themselves, not also reimbursing the console manufacturers.

[dagmx]

I think you misunderstand how the cut works and why they’re subsidized.

Take a look at PC games. Steam also takes a 30% cut, which is the same as what the console makers take. Steam doesn’t have to pay anyone back. The 30% is a pretty long standing cut and is about the lowest most incumbents have gone despite reductions in other costs.

The subsidizing of the console is pre-factored into that 30% cost. Historically console manufacturers have also reduced the amount of subsidization over the course of a generation without affecting the price of the games. The subsidizing is to get it into as many homes as possible, but even a few games purchased over the lifetime of a console would negate any subsidy.

There’s no precedence or indication other than wishful thinking that removing console subsidies wouldn’t remove that cut.