Games are starting to become a little more expensive between retail price and additional cost of DLC. Are all games worth a $60 price tag?
Some yes and some no. It depends how much we enjoy them. Like for me, I paid $30 for Metal Gear Solid Ground Zeros, and despite being a huge fan of the series, I spent more time watching the ending cinematic than playing the game. Although the game does look gorgeous and I'm looking forward to Phantom Pain, GZ was basically a glorified demo. On the other hand, games like Titanfall an COD I've played for over 170 hours each, meaning that the entertainment they have brought me is less than $.40 an hour...where else can you entertain yourself than well for that cheap? I'm not sure I'd have that much fun standing in my yard waving a stick...it's not 1080p/60fps :) Side note, I love this picture that was used for the article...it cracks me up.
I'm pretty sure someone disagreed with you just because you said you enjoyed Titanfall. How dare you have the opinion that you do. On topic though. Well said.
I've grown up with games for so many years and this subject always keeps getting brought up. I can remember when there was this big consumer push to get companies to lower the costs of the games and it worked for a while back in the 90's. Then that "while" wore off and we were back to paying $60+ for games again. We were told that the increased cost was due to the newer technology in making the games. the media used (as that time we went from carts to cd) and how because of such advancements it justified the costs the companies were charging. But now here we are...again...with the same topic of discussion. The mfg costs should be significantly lower based on the materials used to make the games. Yet we are told the development costs are the main reason they are asking for the prices they do. But then why are we getting incomplete games? Day one patches or DLC released later on for a small fee (free is better but still) and then within 6mos of being on the market these games get reduced to crazy prices that make you wonder why they didnt just release at something more reasonable in the first place. Nobody ever said this hobby was cheap but it could be more affordable if they really wanted to sell their wares.
Recently paid $15 (regular price) for Child of light. Best purchase I have ever made on a game. Really well worth it cause it's an awesome and pretty lengthy game! hell I'm surprised they didn't charge $60 for this gem! and This game is like an old school Jrpg, but with a twist to keep you busy and active during battles. Buy it if you enjoy JRPG's
Most = No Some = Yes The Rare = worth even more than we pay
I agree. Most games you feel are worth the $60 and within a week or so, you shelf it and never touch it again until years later. There's been many games I've spent $60 on that during the first couple days I felt was worth it, but after spending more time with it, I could have easily waited and spend half the amount and still be satisfied. Then of course there's games that are over quicker, and don't last as long, but leave that lasting appeal. Then in my case, which I'm sure I'm the minority on N4G, is a game like ESO. I spent $100 on the Imperial Edition (being a huge TES fan that I am), and I've played the game over 400 hours and counting. A game is only worth what it is to the person buying it.
GTA 5 = I regret buying day 1 for $60. Crimson Skies - I would pay $100 for right now!
Depends form game to game imo
Nintendo games? Absolutely. .
@Becuzisaid Nope in my case . i just disagreed based on being tired of the "GZ being a demo" argument . Barely fits to me , when only a few time did a demo even provide such content , even accounting the raw length of a first run on normal settings ... and for lesser games . Plus i feel these days that people easily buying similarly short if not shorter games , based on the easily accepted premise and idea that "so called indies should mean short yet worth 20 bucks" . Well some are worth the 20 bucks , some arent necessarily , but no one complains . So yeah i'll easily be the sheep , buy the exceptional occurance of a prologue for a usually cult game serie , and get the warrented disagrees . And let other pretend it will be a gateway for something that's essential already there .
Far cry blood dragon was $15 and had a longer campaign
And ? Vanquish was 3-4h ,6 to 10 pushing it , if you suck ... at 60$ at release (and worth it to most fans , myself included) . And there are low budget indies at 15-20 dollars . There were always games that are shorter or longer released at a given price . Length never necessarily led to cheaper games , in any era of gaming Like i said some are worth it , others arent .
I agree .. i still regret paying $60 for infamous SS. the game is enjoyable but way too short.
My gripe is when a game is hyped as the second coming, only to learn there's already DLC planned at a later time (or day 1). Then the companies bitch/complain because "not enough sales;" then release some "GotY" or "Complete" version at either reduced price or at full price with everything included. I grew up in a time where games had unlocks; that was the drive to continue playing, and that's where the value of a game came in. Games like Chrono Trigger had 15 different endings, and if it was made for the audience today those endings/extras would have been paid dlc for the "full experience." Watch Dogs I wanted to play, however, now that they announced DLC I'm gonna wait until some "full" version is announced (say what you want, I'm not spending $ anymore on games that already mention dlc/expansions before it's even released outside MMOs, and even then it's a big "if"). I want companies to realize just because "cost of gaming" went up doesn't mean everyone has the $ to just throw away on medicore games and/or games with cut content for that extra boost in income. I've already limited myself from purchasing a lot of games because anymore it's based on how much a company can get away with ripping customer off instead of amplifying the positive experience.
Yup, I just payed 13 bucks for Assassins Creed 3 for Wii U, because I am like the only gamer on the planet who has not played it. Also, so many of you kids do not remember the time when a Colecovision, Atari, Pong, Magnovox odyssey, game cost, Oh yeah, you could pay $70 for a no bit game
Stupid article, do some research and see what a game cost in the 80's. N64 games were at least $60.... and that was in the 90's.
I still have the £45 price gun sticker on a MegaDrive copy of Ghouls & Ghosts. Tough game but it can be beat in an hour. Compare that to Infamous Second Son which I just completed with 100%. That took ages. Now I can play through again with Evil Karma, so I'm really just 50% though. Modern games are easily worth the price tag if (a) they're AAA and (b) You collect all the achievements / do the side missions etc.
Games, like anything, are only worth as much as you get out of it. Stupid question really.
Yes if you're type of gamer who like fps, sports, action, & rpg games.
So you mean every genre basically?
The genre doesn't matter, what matters is the quality of it. I can name one game in each of those genres that were worth it (minus sports, not into sports games), one worth more than the $60 I paid, and several in each that were not worth it at all. More often than not, they're not worth the price tag.
Video game prices were about the same since the early 90s. I remember SNES games being between $40 and $50 dollars which would be around $60-70 with inflation. Didn't change much did it?
Not only that but wages were lower back then.
It all depends if YOU feel you are enjoying it enough for what you paid. I may love a certain game and someone else may find it to suck, so it varies from person to person.
Yes and no. There are some games that should never have been released at $60, $40, or even $30 (looking at you, Ground Zeroes) for one reason or another. What a game is worth and how someone values it are two totally separate things. If you enjoy a $10 game enough that it was worth the $60 you paid, more power to you but that doesn't override the fact that the game is objectively worth $10.
Some are definately worth it. Games I'm not sure about I'll wait for them to go on sale or get a price cut.
Love how they are showing MGS Ground Zeroes as a related article :D Although for the record I love Ground Zeroes! It was worth it to me.
No games are worth that but if you are patient now you can get games for much less a couple months after release i never buy games at launch
Couple weeks, more often than not lol.
Value is dependent on personal experience.
We are lucky they are not more. In the 80s and 90s, yes I am dating myself, games were $40 to $50 and I remember paying $400 for my Sega Saturn. Honestly, this is little to no price increase other than a AAA title with DLC up at $75 to $100 or a Skylanders draining you for $250+. Also, there are so many more retailers now and constant sales and price wars. It is an amazing time to be a gamer!
I feel that fighting games get a sometimes underserved rep in that area . People forget being lured and tempted into buying AT FULL PRICE - at a time games were more expensive - two to three updated versions of a same numbered fighting game . All of that based on the fact that we couldnt update the cartridges , and pre ps3/360 versions of those games . And now we are at a juncture where some people complain no matter what . Give them dlc characters , they'll complain about being sold cut parts or the price of each characters , whatever the behind the scenes and reasons , are about said releases . Propose them an update expansion two ways , one with a dlc pack expansion cheaper , or even a new disc at a discounted price ? Still complaints Answer a strong demand from an existing base for yet another version ? To , i insist , satisfy the demand of a fanbase that do demand it ? And still complaints from people that mostly dont even care , but need a forum to vent their anti dlc frustations . Or grudges with a publisher