Comments (173)
« 1 2 3 4 »
-Mika-  +   1293d ago
Look in my opinion, If game development costs go up. Then the price of the game should too. That how it is in every market.
#1 (Edited 1293d ago ) | Agree(15) | Disagree(146) | Report | Reply
No_Pantaloons  +   1293d ago | Well said
Assuming you get the same amount of content, and there in lies the problem. They're just cutting stuff out now for dlc, so you'll actually get less for more money.
#1.1 (Edited 1293d ago ) | Agree(125) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
Gaming101  +   1293d ago
Games have always gone up in price when consoles initially come out. I can't remember if PS3 games were 70 bucks initially but I know PS2 and some PS1 games were depending on where you shopped.
Initial costs to keep a console going are extreemly high on startup due to huge manufacturing, marketing and R&D costs that can sink a company if it doesn't manage its cashflow properly, the extra money can be the difference between profit and loss for the year, and in Sony's case with its dire financial straits it can use all the cash it can get lol
Nitrowolf2  +   1293d ago | Well said
Games have always been expensive.
In the NES times to the PS2 times, there have been games that have ranged anywhere from $30-$100 bucks.

Production cost my ass, publishers have always been raping gamers wallets. DLC or not.
aCasualGamer  +   1293d ago

I don't agree. Look at the movie industry, the costs went up but movie tickets are still the same as in the 80's and 90's. And the price of the DVD's were as high as Blu-ray are now. So there really isn't any significant increase in prices. Same goes for music industry, the albums are just as expensive as before. Heck, the music industry has even lowered in price thanks to Spotify and other digital music services.

Costs increase, but so does the number of gamers out there who buy the consoles and games. You can't expect us to pay upwards 10$ more for each generation.

By the time i'm 50 games will cost upwards 150$.
Peppino7  +   1293d ago
As all things in this world go up I'll settle for 64.99 because 70 just seems like a lot.
SilentNegotiator  +   1293d ago
I would rather next gen titles look no better than current day games (except higher res/AA) and get more content, than pay $70 per game. I already don't like paying $60 for a game that could ultimately disappoint me.

"Why Next Generation Games Will Cost $70"
As a community, gamers have become so pathetic that many of them defend getting screwed over on a constant basis. No one will put up enough of a stink when games hit $70. COD sales will probably stay the course, and other games will suffer. The industry will saturate more and get weaker as idiotic CEOs stay the course. Meanwhile, titles akin to Angry Birds and Minecraft will be booming.

When...oops...IF these foolish CEOs ever find their heads, buried miles in their butts, and reel them out, maybe they can realize that expensive engines and copying what the most successful game is doing, is not alone what makes and sells games. Or even the most important. If that day comes, perhaps the game industry can thrive even further, and pull itself away from another inevitable crash.
gamingdroid  +   1293d ago
I don't have as much issues with $70 games, because if you can't afford them now just wait and they will drop in price. Capitalism will ensure fair market pricing on games. Just take a look at the current state, brand new games price drops within weeks now.

It is basically the one thing, publisher cannot screw me over on.

On the other hand, anti-consumer behavior such as online passes, and ugly DLC is far more damaging to me as a gamer.

As a note, I love DLC that are done well. For instance, Lair of the Shadow Broker for ME2 was an excellent and worthwhile DLC despite the slightly high cost. However, ugly DLC are the likes of weapons and characters. Which also exist in ME2 ironically...
JhawkFootball06  +   1293d ago
They spend more making movies... and the cost doesn't go up so why should the price of games go up?
da_2pacalypse  +   1293d ago
I think publishing costs is the last thing a publishing company actually looks at when they're picking their prices... It's all price/demand curves... if there is a good demand for it, you can charge more... That's economy 101.

I highly doubt the cost of production is the reason why call of duty games are 59.99 each year. They could lower their price to 39.99 and still make billions.
Dee_91  +   1293d ago
i havent bought a game for $60 since 08.If games cost $70 everything i buy will be used.
Spydiggity  +   1293d ago
There's something very important that for whatever reason, most people can't seem to realize.

Improved technology brings prices down. The reason prices went up is because there's more to production than the engine. There's the music, the motion capture, the actors, etc...

The reason games went from 50-60 is because of that very reason. Well, we already have that now. In the next generation they aren't going to need to make music more sophisticated than 7.1. it's already there. they aren't going to have to hire MORE actors than they already do. The only thing that will improve in the next generation is going to be on the graphics engine side. the physics, the look, etc...

So you aren't going to need drastically bigger teams to develop for the next generation like you did in this last leap.

If prices go up to 70, it's only because they think they can get away with it. and the only way to stop them, is by not supporting it. but we're really bad consumers, and we'll just suck it up and try to justify it because we think that the cost of development in the next generation will go up the same amount as it did in the last.
#1.1.10 (Edited 1293d ago ) | Agree(14) | Disagree(1) | Report
sikbeta  +   1293d ago

Games are 6hrs campaigns as standard @ $60, IF next gen is going to be $70 for the same amount of content, it's time to bail out

Publishers get it all wrong, with lower prices, they could sell more copies at faster rate, now @ $60 they have day one purchases and after a mere month massive price-cuts :/
AngryTypingGuy  +   1293d ago
Next gen games will cost $70...that's what GameStop and Amazon are hoping for, at least.
irepbtown  +   1293d ago
Cinema prices have NOT stayed the same.

Example, 4+ Years ago to watch a film in Cinema you pay £3.50/£4.00. Now that price is £6.95. 3D is ridiculous aswell, a 3D film with glasses will cost you £9.95. Then on top of all this, the food at the cinema are ridiculously expensive and they dont allow you to bring your own food.

Back to gaming, PS2 era and before I would happily pay £40 ($60) because back then, they were complete games. Not games that were half done and then the DLC costing £10+. Now a days you pay £40 for an incomplete game.

Oh and btw, we pay £40-£45 for a new release game here in UK. That in US $ is $63-$71. So if you Americans think you have it bad there, think again; We have it ALOT worse...
#1.1.13 (Edited 1293d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report
decrypt  +   1293d ago
"Then the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 came out and $50 games were a thing of the past."

Only on console, PC games till this day cost only 49usd at launch some even cost 39usd. Hell i personally bought BF3 at launch for only 37usd on the PC. Most games if shopped around are very cheap on PC. Its only console makers looking to rip people of be it with high game prices, charges to go online, lack of BC, HD remakes, over priced accessories.

Now regarding cost of development, its only way to prepare console gamers to get milked even more than they already are. A game like Crysis 1 on PC is still a gen ahead of whatever there is on Console. Yet Crysis only cost 20million usd to develop. It was even very profitable selling on PC. So why are console developers and makers crying about game dev cost going high. Reason is simple they want to create an environment where they can milk the people.

What is making console gaming expensive is royalties MS and Sony want, Massive advertisement costs (sometimes even more than the cost to develop the game), its all what console gamers must indirectly bare. They are fooled into buying hardware that looks cheap as an initial investment however later on its plainly ripping people off.
JayD-1K  +   1293d ago
Just to let some of you know, the ticket price hasn't gone because, Drinks and food HAVE SKY ROCKETED!!

I mean come-on, $4+ for a drink???
Gamer1982  +   1293d ago
Devs are not to blame for rising costs publishers are. Devs get about $20 for the game at most which means they cant really say its anything to do with development costs. I honestly think though to cut costs devs should start doing Digital right. Why is it on my UK PSN new games are £49.99 yet in stores they are £39.99 for the physical copy? The digital copys sells and the dev gets 90% of the fee but the physical copy? 30-40%. Devs shouldn't punish digital buyers and instead embrace them. Release digital copys for £29.99. They still get more money, you cannot trade a digital copy nor sell it and the devs get more than you buying it at £39.99 from a store.
Getowned  +   1292d ago
$70!?!?!? DAMN!! thats too much to pay with tax were I live new games come to a total of $75 any more then what were already paying is to much. I wonder if we will start to see a decline in games sales because of that, and if you think piracy is bad now just wait until then. I think the average price should be $45-$55 to me that is acceptable to me.

Publishers have been doing a lot of penny pinching lately and I think it's geting out of control, take a look on PSN and XBL and look at some of this DLC most of it is over priced and 90% of it all are costume packs.The gaming idustry seems to becoming one were the "customer is always wrong" imo maybe im wrong idk not really saying I am but damn...all I can say is my PC and steam will keep me going if this happens next gen -small rant
#1.1.17 (Edited 1292d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
superadvanced  +   1292d ago
hay guys theres this thing called inflation. 70 2012 dollars is equivalent to 60.83 2006 dollars is equivalent to 50.76 1999 dollars. the price of games around a console launch has really always been the same for over a decade. the price of games gradually decreases through the console generation, then hikes up about 10 at the start of a new. i'm not saying inflation is okay, (damn you federal reserve) but it is what it is. now i do think that dlc is getting out of hand though.
Deadpool616  +   1293d ago
You just continue to fall into all the misconceptions about gaming industry Mika. Here's an bit of information that will enlighten you.

I hope you learn something from it and realize that they're trying to pull a fast one on the ill-informed. Don't fall for the bs without knowing all the info, I believe you're smarter than that. :)
scotchmouth  +   1293d ago
Nice article. Thanks for sharing

Nitrowolf2  +   1293d ago
If games go up to $70 then I'm done with buying games new.
It was a nice hobby, but it's becoming to expensive.

I will see terrible things with Activision if games go to $70.

Anyway there is a flaw with the first paragraph.
PS1 games, NES games, have seen prices around $50-$60 bucks

Also adjust for inflation and see how much those games would cost today. So technically games are cheaper now considering inflation.
I think

Use this:
game for $80 1991 = $133 for today
I remember buying a few games $50 Plus back in the days. I take it this Author didn't buy his games when he was little.

Apparently some even remember paying $80 for some games

As you can see though, the prices have always been everywhere.

Still would not pay $70 for them.
#1.3 (Edited 1293d ago ) | Agree(29) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Nitrowolf2  +   1293d ago
And as I've said, this whole production thing just seems like utter BS to me. I know cost are rising, but our wallets have always been raped by publishers. Inflation or not, $80 earned back then is still $80 today, even if the purchasing power may be different.

Not a genius, just some old high school learning. Also wanted an excuse to make this cause I'm bored:
#1.3.1 (Edited 1293d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(4) | Report
larrym  +   1293d ago
Damn dude. You must not remember those Genesis and Snes cartridges that were around $70+, back in the early 90's!! I remember going with my buddy to go get Legend of Zelda Majora's Mask, and that bad boy was 89 bucks!! And that was I think 2000 or 2001.
nirwanda  +   1293d ago
you cant compair expensive cartidge production to a disk based format there is a massive difference in production costs dont forget in the same era you still had games on floppy disk which were much cheeper and games on tape if you go back even earlier that i used to buy for £1.99.
sikbeta  +   1293d ago
@ $70 I'll not stop buying games new, I'll just wait a month for the typical price-cut or 3 months, so I can pick a game from the bargain-bin lol game-industry, you have it all backwards if you think that higher prices will make you some good
irepbtown  +   1293d ago
With this SHIT economy, I dont think its right to compare game prices to that of past generations.
Main reason why I dont want the prices to increase is because everything else is getting expensive.

The world is turning into a shit hole...
cyborg6971  +   1293d ago
This is an archaic pricing system and is flawed to the point that if it keeps going this way, we might see the day where we only have a handful of devs.

60 bucks is ridiculously mad. And I call bullshit on the higher cost of production. Maybe at the start of a console cycle, hut at the middle end with one game under you belt, you should have optimize your code to fly through.

It's all crap ten bucks every cycle. Whatever. There's a reason this gen has lasted longer than usual. It's because the publishers are scared to raise it again, as had as they want to.
RedDead  +   1293d ago
Games used to be 70 euro in the Eu...
Wintersun616  +   1293d ago
They still are here in Finland, but we have crazy tax rates to thank for that. I usually wait for prices to drop before purchasing a game.
torchic  +   1293d ago
what do you mean used to? I coughed up €70 in cash for the normal edition of Battlefield 3. never again. like Wintersun I wait for a price drop, or borrow from a friend.

I live in Italy btw.

some games though cost less then others. like all the Sony HD Collections launch at €39.99, fighting games for some reason launch at €59.99, etc.
#1.5.2 (Edited 1293d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
ChickeyCantor  +   1293d ago
You mean when publishers want a higher percentage?
dboyc310  +   1293d ago
gaming is an expensive hobby. if you cant keep up with it then change it or better of stick to the iOS since games there ar cheap. Games now are capable of a lot more so its evident that the price should go up. You want better graphics, deep online etc. Then you better assume that theyre going to cost more. You get for what you pay for.
Nodoze  +   1293d ago
Spoken like a true sheep. I am sure you are also fully on board for all of the DLC craziness as well?

We have MS to thank for $59 games and the introduction of micro transactions. They are the bane of gaming and the sooner they leave, the better off we all will be.

The good thing is that when they release a download only console (which is the present rumor) they will be done.
jeeves86  +   1293d ago
As much as I hate iOS, this statement is right on. Gaming is an expensive hobby - do you have the right to be upset because its expensive? Absolutely - but that's the way the industry is.

Remember that it's not just the production costs that go up, it's the cost of living all together. It's why bread used to cost 25c and now costs over a buck per loaf. It's why minimum wage goes up. These are universal market trends, not just something from one industry.
morkendo23  +   1293d ago
ur ok with 70.00 game?? r u nuts??... hell SNES games @ 49.00 was to much not alone ps4 70.00 games.
if this true im out. cant justify 70.00 4 one game.

love racing games GT6,NEED FOR SPEED 13 (criterions HP 2) ,RATCHET AN CLANK 4
but i'd be damn paying 70.00 a pop for them.
dont know about u guys but video games getting less an less interesting. (HIGH PRICES) HAPPY WITH MY 60GB PS3
#1.8 (Edited 1293d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
Matilda96211304   1293d ago | Spam
TBONEJF  +   1293d ago
You must be crazy. NO ONE DOESN'T want to spend 70$ on a video game while prices are already going up.
Xof  +   1293d ago
...Except in many cases game development costs have gone down. A LOT. And game prices go up no matter what because of basic inflation coupled with static wages.
zeddy  +   1293d ago
thats too much. £40 is just about right, if we allow them to go higher there no telling what the prices are going to be. it not like were getting paid more at our jobs yet the prices of most things are going up.
cannon8800  +   1293d ago

Any of you guys still remember that before the ps3 was released, people were predicting that it's games were going to cost 120 dollars? lololol
mcstorm  +   1293d ago
Mika i agree with what you are saying but if game prices carry on going up we will see alot more developers go bust just like this gen as people will start to only buy 2 maybe 3 games a year and we will start to see the cod effect again. If i look at what people who are not core gamers buy on my live friends list i will see cod fifa and gta as the main 3 games for none exclusives.

What i think developers should do next gen if games will cost so much is bring the game out for £50 to £55 and then instead of release a w full retail game the next year make it a dlc. For around £20 to £30 where you get a new sp and mp added onto the 1st game. I think this would help sales of alot of games go up.

I am one of the lucky people who buy lots of games from my self but i know people who cant afford to do that so they have to pick something they will play for 12 months or so.
oricon  +   1293d ago
This is a copy and paste of a post i made regarding on Jaffe saying that he doesn't care much about next gen consoles, as it would mean more budget etc.

Jaffe pretty much said what Ive been saying all along, consoles are advancing far too quick, to develop games it costs alot more compared to how much they cost to develop last gen its only hurting devs, games also take more time to develop and people wonder why a lot of games today are barebones compared to last gen, I think this is the main factor that the number of quality games in Japan is a lot less as the Japanese developers are smaller whereas in the west most devs are backed by big publishers such as EA, Activision etc, thats why most Japanese devs have moved onto handheld notice how there are a lot more quality games from Japanese are now on handhelds.

If we keep carrying on this rate next gen games will probably cost more and see a lot more dlc so that devs can cover costs as much as i want to see much more powerful consoles i think it will just hurt the industry and the devs, i think Nintendo were on the right track this gen in that they slowed down the console cycle with the wii by not creating much powerful thus allowing the same quality as games as last gen although this didn't work out since there was bigger audience on the HD systems.

I know what im going to say isn't going to be popular if Sony and Microsoft followed suit with nintendo and had consoles slightly more powerful than last gen the game industry would be in a better position and we would see more quality games even though they might not have amazing graphics, we're in the finals stages of the current gen and now games on current systems costs nearly the equal amount as last gen and by the time we get to the next gen consoles who knows how much more budget is needed to develop games, this could mean alot more dlc, prices of games increase, publishers will want to take less risks with new IPs which is bad for the industry.
CarlitoBrigante  +   1293d ago
I dont understand this article.

AFAIK games have always been 59, here in Europe I was buying my PS1 games at 59 euros. This has been like that for the past 20 years or so, dont listen to these hipsters, 70 dollars lol.
specialguest  +   1293d ago
Wow! Everyone here just don't get it...SMH
There's a huge misconception that video games today are overpriced. The truth is that current video game cost at $60 is actually a discount compared to the past. The reason why is because the cost of video games have not factored in inflation.

Back in the NES days games cost as much as $50, that's equivalent to paying $80-$85 today. If video games kept up with inflation, we would be expecting to pay $90 per game today.

The fact is that in the past, development cost was low, yet the price per game was high. Where as today, development cost is high, but the cost of games are actually very low due to the lack of inflation being tacked on to the cost.

Even if the cost of video games goes up to $70, we are still paying a lower cost compared to the past.

This link explains it more in detail:
#1.17 (Edited 1293d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
Relientk77  +   1293d ago
I hope that next gen games are not $70, but they probably will be.
Snookies12  +   1293d ago
They -shouldn't- be... The only reason games are 60 dollars today is because of the blu-ray discs that cost more to use. (With Microsoft who knows... They have no excuse for charging an extra ten dollars for games) Why do you think (most) PC games are still 50?

Still, that would suck to see rising prices for no known reason whatsoever. :\
NYC_Gamer  +   1293d ago
console games are 60 bucks because of development cost plus the publishers have to split the profit between MS/Sony plus the retailer.
#2.1.1 (Edited 1293d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(3) | Report
Nitrowolf2  +   1293d ago
"The only reason games are 60 dollars today is because of the blu-ray discs that cost more to use."

Um weren't 360 games at launch $60?
Don't think that's the reason, I think it's mainly due to competition and production costs.
Persistantthug  +   1293d ago
All new retail released games on Steam are $50 - $60.......just as can be found on consoles.
Not to mention that BLURAY pressings are now LESS than $1.

That's why you're getting an unbalanced amount of 'disagrees'.
vortis  +   1293d ago
Thanks Persistantthug for pointing that out.

Steam and Origin and a few others usually launch PC games at $60 a pop. There's no disc, no booklet, no box and no extras...just code.
Machioto  +   1293d ago
I doubt that because some don't Sell at 60 and next gen requirement are that games look good and run smooth .
#2.2 (Edited 1293d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
KingJFS  +   1293d ago
>> Um weren't 360 games at launch $60? <<

Actually, they weren't. MS-published 360 games like Kameo and Perfect Dark retailed for $49.99. Third party publishers charged $59.99 and then a year or so later MS used the "rising development costs" excuse to jack up first party games to $59.99.

But anyway, I agree with those who say that the only people complaining about high game prices didn't pay $80 for a Street Fighter II cartridge back in the day.
aviator189  +   1293d ago
I usually never buy games within the first few months they're released anyways, but used games price would probably increase as well.
wiggles  +   1293d ago
I do the same. Not to mention most new game usually go down to $40 after a few months on their own, or through an sale.
The_Devil_Hunter  +   1293d ago
amazon has saved me soo much money when buying games. its definitely one of the best places to purchase games.
xtremexx  +   1293d ago
NYC_Gamer  +   1293d ago
just wait for some nice deals on amazon
NobleRed  +   1293d ago | Well said

Square Enix tells us the exact opposite.

According to Square Enix chief technical officer Yoshihisa Hashimoto, Luminous Studio will reduce the cost of creating a game by "up to 30 percent" and should make the dev cycle faster. The publisher says Luminous was created to be used for any type of game from a casual title to a full-blown next-gen experience.

So why should the games become more expensive?
vortis  +   1293d ago
Good comment and bubbles to you, sir.

Software development tools are dropping drastically. There's even some new lip-sync facial tech that scales in cost per project and can offer up the same fidelity as L.A. Noire (goodbye ridiculous costs for MotionScan).

People believing that game production costs will rise are vastly misinformed about the way game design works.
#5.1 (Edited 1293d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
1nsaint  +   1293d ago
Yeah this article is complete bs, this guy doesnt even give a good reason, and higher production cost is not a good reason, Rockstar games spend around 100 mil on gta 4, red dead redemtion and now max payne, all in stores new for 60 bucks

Another point i have is that here in europe games have always costed around €55.-
The only price increase i saw in years was for ps3 because they use bluray
Mithan  +   1293d ago
In the 80's and early 90's, the average NES and SNES game was $80-100 here in Canada.
Finch  +   1293d ago
I was coming in here just to say the same thing, but for the USA. I rember games from $75 to a $100 back then. How soon people forget!
Motorola  +   1293d ago
They never knew, some people werent born yet and didn't bother to look at where video gaming was prior to when they were around. Sad really.
aquamala  +   1293d ago
That's what happens when a console maker owns the majority of the market, and this is what i don't understand the console wars, why would any gamer want a console maker to "win"?
Fel08  +   1293d ago
If that's true, I will just buy them used or wait for the good deals like I do now.
marioPSUC  +   1293d ago
thats what I do. Usually websites have game deals, especially amazon after a few weeks. Only time I buy games on launch are really big titles like GTA.
Flatbattery  +   1293d ago
I recall the early PS1 games retailing at £50, that's $79 at today's exchange rate, so I don't understand why it's a problem now.

I've even got Atari 2600 games in the loft with £20 price tags on them from the late '70s, early '80s. I dread to think what that equates to now.
#8 (Edited 1293d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
NotSoSilentBob  +   1293d ago
It is a problem due to the fact that by the content level from that Gen is not even half as much. When you are paying 30-40$ more and only getting a quarter as much content is where the trouble starts.
Ace_Man_6  +   1293d ago
yep, I've got a receipt here from when my dad bought an early PS1 game, 12/09/96 was the date and he bought it for £44.99 D:
AdmiralSnake  +   1293d ago
I hope not, but the way things are going, I see it happening. The problem isn't the price, but it's what we get for that price. Honestly most of the content they ship isn't worth 70 dollars IMO. Astounds me how we pay for more, but get less as the generation continues.

Some of the games I played last generation if not most, has more content than most of the games I've bought this gen.
#9 (Edited 1293d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
Deadpool616  +   1293d ago
That's right Admiral Snake. One of my favorite games on the Ps2 Steambot Chronicles had the most content I've ever seen in a game. I can't even tell you how much freedom that game gives you in a one paragraph. The graphics are flat, but beyond that it has a lot of substance.
ksa-sh8sh8b8  +   1293d ago
games in this generation don't cost 60$ it's cost 80$ or more , don't forget DLC (disk black ops and dlc cost 120$ )
#10 (Edited 1293d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Kamikaze135  +   1293d ago
If that happens, I will wait for sales or just buy them used.
Morgue  +   1293d ago
UHHHHHHHHH... Neo Geo games were that much and more back in the day and Electronics Boutique back in the day had a return policy which allowed you to basically beat a game in a week, then return it and get your money back. People complain about everything these days and it's really getting old. Can't afford it then don't worry about it.
#12 (Edited 1293d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
gtxgamer2  +   1293d ago
depends on dev kits
kagon01  +   1293d ago
Take note

I predict in the future you'll buy 1/4 or less of a game at full price then pay for the rest, by that time most gamers will adapt to become officially mentally challenged...

I recommend to watch this video and you'll understand:

Related video
vortis  +   1293d ago
Like those idiots who defended Capcom saying "38 characters is more than enough for $60" all the while other fighting games out there offer just as many fighters and a huge accoutrement of stages, costumes, colors and destructibility included in the package. Yet everything else in SFxT is disc-locked behind a pay-wall.

I can't believe gamers have stooped so low in intelligence they're defending paying more for less and then having to pay EVEN MORE to access the full game. Unbelievable.
ExitToExisT  +   1293d ago
i would gladly pay $70 for games , if they would be 15+ hours.
#15 (Edited 1293d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(13) | Report | Reply
spacedelete  +   1293d ago
who is dumb enough to pay $70 for a game nowadays ? most games drop in price after like 1 month.

be a smart shopper. let the dumb masses buy day 1 with less content, expensive and buggy game.

good things come to those who wait.
#16 (Edited 1293d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
theeg  +   1293d ago
Steam and Amazon, thats where my money goes, I cannot remember the last games besides Skyrim and Starcraft 2 on PC, Demons Souls PS3, Dark Souls PS3 that I paid $50-$65 for....maybe Halo 3, I dunno....they are just not worth it...

ohh Uncharted 2, bought that day one, Rented Uncharted 3, damn glad I did as i thought it was vastly inferior to 2, I bought Resistance 1 the day I bought my ps3 on launch day back in 2006 of war 1 i bought for $65

hell, the rest i rented or bought on sale

I rent console games with my blockbuster game pass for $14 a month, play every single game i want and buy pc games on sale on steam 90% of the time

very, very few games are actually worth $65 to me

I have 220 steam games, most were $5

many were $2.50 and a few were $10-$20
BrianC6234  +   1293d ago
Games didn't go up this generation. Most of the last generation games were $59.99. Toward the end I think they dropped about $10 but most of the life of the PS2 and Xbox games were what they cost now.
Shivan  +   1293d ago
they will not be 70 dollars
frequentcontributor  +   1293d ago
This article is fairly black and white; you buy one $60 game then throw the other $40 away? Or you're "forced" to spend it? First of all, game prices go down all the time. With so many sequels and "flops", now, games are often lowered to $20-30 within a few months of release. And game prices have remained steady for 25 years, with the recent $10 increase being a minor shift upwards that, even if it is a false inflation, is unlikely to happen again soon. Gamers will stop paying for software if the value doesn't "seem" right, and another $10 increase doesn't. Where is the extra money going? Is the game 100 hours longer? Are the voice actors actual famous movie stars? Are the graphics so close to real life that we won't be able to differentiate? If not, then an extra cost will be difficult to justify... Actually, with an increase in digital distribution, I'd expect to see costs drop. Even if you're downloading a new title for $50, that's still cheaper than gamers have grown accustomed to over the last few years. We will definitely see the low end of game prices go up, though... I can see games on Amazon (used) for $10-15, but digital distro will erase all of that, with no physical copies for gamers to unload. Prices are unlikely to dip below 20 bucks on a digital marketplace, without independant sellers trying to undercut one another. Thankfully, wiiU will be disc-based. Rumors abound regarding the next Xbox lacking an optical drive, which would actually make selling games for $60 seem highly unreasonable. I fully expect game prices to basically return to the standard rates, with the high and low ends meeting in the middle.
DigitalAnalog  +   1293d ago
I would've preferred a more flexible pricing system as opposed to the standard $60 for ever A, AA and AAA title available.
turgore  +   1293d ago
this is stupid. Then by this logic the original crysis should've cost 200$. You can implement next gen effects, high res textures and tesselations with very little investment !
vortis  +   1293d ago
And what about Project CARS? Pretty much photorealistic gameplay right there, right out of the box.
CanadianTurtle  +   1293d ago
Nobody said gaming was a cheap hobby.
Bercilak  +   1293d ago
That already cost $70. It's called Day One DLC.
DFresh  +   1293d ago
Yeah it sucks.
Luckily being more into PC gaming in the coming years I'll save tons of money with game distributions like Steam, Gamer Gate, Direct 2 Drive (Game Fly), GOG, etc.
(Steam deals FTW!)
Honestly the only things that will make me keep playing consoles are the exclusives and the occasional game that I can't get on PC.
Not to mention all of the emulators I can run with every console on PC with all of the bells & whistles.
(I can always plug in a controller and play.)
Moving to PC will be the smartest thing a gamer can do as the years go on.
SKUD  +   1293d ago
Games are already costing over 60 dollars. There at about 80+. Thanks to DLC.
DeltaCanuckian  +   1293d ago
It's already $70 in Canada. Then there's DLC. F*ck this sh*t.
Omega Zues  +   1293d ago
if game prices go up...

It just makes me love Gamefly even more. However, publishers can learn a thing or two from the app market. I mean look at Angry Birds, only cost a few bucks and they've made boat loads.

Lower prices = more buyers
kma2k  +   1293d ago
fellow gamefly member agreeing with you, but i could see gamefly saying they have to increase there monthy price by a dollar or two, no real biggie to me!
Khordchange  +   1293d ago
Gaming to Entertainment is like Golf to Other sports. Extremely fun but extremely expensive to play.
kma2k  +   1293d ago
i do gamefly so i guess there monthy price might go up a dollar or two no biggie to me!
« 1 2 3 4 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login