Are videogames truly worth their price tag? And how does the industry's current pricing structure reflect upon gaming in general? A Nintendo Enthusiast contributor gets right into it.
$18 dollars *if it contains any DLC for extra characters, expansion for maps, or an extension to the story because you're not buying the whole "package". No, future players are just getting "30%" these days.
It costs me $20 to go see a movie that entertains me for 2 hours. Provided a game gives me at least 6 hours of entertainment I easily have a better investment than going to see a movie in the theatre. Most games I buy provide me at least double that, minimum. Movies $10/hr Games 13cents to $5/hr depending on game. I'll take games any day of the week for a price per hour of entertainment investment.
i was just talking about this to a lot of my friends that is why i love rpg's in general. but a lot of individuals who talk like this usually are not so the question is why are you content with so much less content.During last gen i noticed games starting being really short and campaigns especially on shooters were brought down to around 4 hours of content some of the larger action adventure games were at about 7-10 hours to experienced players. now its like a lot of people think its ok to have just 4 hours? dude that is why i think the destiny backlash to the campaign being small is outright crazy. Destiny an mmo style game online can possible yield much more hours than a campaign strictly for 1 player in per se a open world game and especially over another fps shooter.
Mini quest and fetch games or puzzle that are one and done are sort of lame entertainment. Skill based game play entertainment value is unbound. Most of the time if you are involved in that type of game you will replay it 100 of times. Like a good movie you will replay it because of the many things you can get from it, yet that can be limited I'm most cases. The problem is there are no new talent driven studio when it comes to game play. Every thing is visual and hour based or inflated. Gaming has become virtual toy collecting, where the toys can't be broken. Virtual reality in just graphical style is not trumped by imaginary styles simply because there are no new styles being created. We bought games mostly because of the art and game play in them during the 16 bit rev. This has all changed but I would argue we had way more fun than anything coming from modern studios that ignore what the 8 and 16 bit era did.
where the hell are u going to see your movies? i can watch 2 for that price lol.
Depends on the Game * I'd easily pay $80 for Dragon Quest 11, but I wouldn't pay $20 for that new sims game.
Considering all the man power that goes in to making a quality game? Sure. Why not?
What man power? Most games are cut and paste. Only games worth their asking price right now are coming from foreign countries. The Witcher 3, Sleeping Dogs, Metro, Deus Ex HR, Cyberpunk 2077 is likely, and Halo MCC. It goes to show money isnt everything.
"What man power?" Have you never played a game to the end and seen the credits? Those aren't all just random people they are listing. Those are the names of the people that made the game. All of those people have to be paid, which costs money. Yeah. That man power.
I personally don't care how much a game cost to make or even how many people are involved in the process of making it. If the game is only 6-9 hours long with no replayability; I will buy it for $10-$20 or just rent it. Why should I spend $50-$60 for something like that? If the developers are known for pumping out well made games (CDPR and Bioware to some extent) with either a long playtime or high replayability then I'll pay what they ask at release. I'm only talking about known games that get yearly releases or sequels. If it's a new developer or IP then I'm willing to drop the cash they ask for if the game looks fun to me.
And it's not just the many developers and other people working for the company. There is also manufacturing and distribution and advertising. So you are right lots time effort and money is spent making games.
This whole thing really comes down to how to attach quality to the content. I'm finding tons of people who are tired of realism. I find my self really in grossed in imaginary creation and how far they go. Most gamers choose online play over challenging game play or skill based game play. The casual have chosen pay to win or games that wait on you. Gamers are way older it would seem and bring their drama or armchair ideas into the platform alot more. It seems the idea is worth more than refining the idea or the effort to do that. Supporting a huge team is not the point of gaming. Supporting a huge advertising blitz is not the point of gaming. All other games fail if there is no replay value or actual game play. If you can answer what skill I'm using to play your game then you must be an interactive novel or movie. The value of those are minimum at best. Plus the story telling has to get way better. also why is everything being remade for realistic games. That is just silly. Do I pay people to build me a shed or just buy one at the home improvement store. Too much duplication and pawning it off as if it is new just because of a story or ip attached. Lots of things need to be stopped in gaming before huge amounts of people begin to leave. It is also as if game designers are only making games for game designers now in an attempt to win awards lol. No one cares about gaming anymore except a few companies and no I'm not talking about sony. They would have more to stand on other than specs and loosing money on hardware to increase the value of ownership. Also historically weak 3rd parties are propping them up now after they pulled a mini EA and let talent go. Sony has 3 more gens to fix their lack of game play leadership though. Nintendo are 1 or two gens away from doubling their output and sales. If they can pull an appstore like apple or valve out and make their hardware simple what you are willing to pay or play with super cheap to uber high end and get more indies to rejuvenate the industry then things will turn around very quickly for them. It will be an interesting generation though. I see a lot of duds coming that will get high sales simply because gamers are desperate to support their Fandom.
They used to be £40, now they're £50. I liked it when it was £40.
They used to be $60 where I'm at, now it's $70 (CAD). That and DLC is way too much, especially considering how poorly some DLC is made
...and here it's still 90-110$ (USD) (Sweden)
For me it depends on how long a game is and whether it's worth that amount of my time invested in its length. I will happily pay $60 for a game that will past me 40+ hours with an engaging story but I wont pay anywhere near that amount for something designed to pass small amounts of time here and there with minimal effort.
I dont pay more than $20 often, been a while since i felt a $60 game was worth my purchase so I just stopped. Id rather be behind on games with money in my pocket than disappointed by paying $60 for a game not worth it
In reality they are probably under priced as is.. Considering how much money goes into lots of games nowadays they should be priced higher and stuff. We tend not to buy a lot of games so we don't have a problem paying the $60 for the game. If it is a game we really want, for other games that we might be interested in playing but not enough to get it because we are not sure if we will like it. We wait until it has been out for a long time and we can get it for $20 or less if possible.
I use to buy the series I like 1st day, but I wait for sales now mainly $30 and lower now like those $5 psn sales and definitely black friday. Started back in 09 I think after realising they end being $20 off after a month. On another note movies has a bigger budget and a price lower then video games which are around $10-$40, I say games should be at least $40.
This is why video games need to stop trying to emulate movies. It is not working and movies rock so hard visually and storyline/telling wise and don't waste my time as much. It really sucks that sony can't leverage it's movie studios more because they simply need better game play designed for skill based replay not fetch quests and one and done puzzles.
I buy everything on sale.
I usually buy 2 games a year at 60 , and the rest i will wait for a price drop. But always buy new ! PS STORE has some good FLASH SALES too.
At Gamestop, 25 cents.
No game is worth 60$
Blockbuster (GTA): $50-60 Average (Watch Dogs) $30-40 Below Average (Ryse Son of Rome) $10-20 Way Below Average (Aliens: Colonial Marines) 10 cents Of course they're should be price drops, though.
I've started to worry about the backlog issue from sales. When there was no new console in 2009 I built my first cpu and paid full price for a lot because I was excited. But as I collected more with each Steam sale I now have every game basically from every genre and I haven't played them. So I've got to the point where I've stopped buying all kinds of games I want because I have 5 in the same genre that I want to play first. The only reason I'm buying any console games is because of the BestBuy Gamer's Club which gives basically $20 off new games so I've already pre-ordered GTA5, horizon2, mordor, sunset overdrive and madden. I hope I'm not hurting the industry with only buying $3 games anymore but I have 1000 year backlog, I know I've supported with hundreds per month for years but I can't see me going back to that.
Honestly, most games released today are only really worth $30 to $40. Most of today's games last 8 hours or less, they are absolutely NOT worth $60 ($70 here in Canada). Here's what I think would be a better standard for game prices based on content: $30 - 15 hours or less (Tomb Raider) $40 - 20 to 30 hours (Assassin's Creed) $50 - 35 to 45 hours (Mass Effect) $60 - 50+ hours (Elder Scrolls)
Darn our weak dollar!! D: I just created a US account for digital, buy the PSN cards in store and pay 0 exchange :) however it only works with 50 dollar cards for some reason
Every game should be priced separately based on development cost and how much value they bring to the consumer.
I completely agree with the concept, but knowing how vocal that 5% of angry gamers are we would have click bait articles on the daily about how "OVERPRICED GAME DESTROYING INDUSTRY". Also leaving the price up to publishers (like Activision) would not end well for the comsumer, unless regulations were put in place to sell a game for a specific fraction of its development cost, a system that would take a while for them to "figure out", resulting in more price hikes! (never would happen, if it did very few countries would, then the price gap would be even bigger) We live in an imperfect world of greedy corporations :/
The price of games would be influenced by market forces as consumers will determine if the game's value is worth their money. If publishers price their game too high people won't buy it and if they price the game lower they will sell higher volume. These "greedy" companies make money when people buy their game so it is up to consumers voting with their wallet to determine if these companies will make money or not.
But value is a subjective term. Let's say you buy GTA 5 and you loved it and played the game for 50 hours and got into the online stuff so to you GTA 5 was a great value but let's say another person buys it plays for 5 hours hated the online they think it's a rip off and over hyped crap that should have been cheaper.
It would seem the high prices are really a Game Tax for the console manufacturer and unfortunately they use each console generation to increase the tax. You have the PC price, then a game tax of 35-40% for PS3/360 and 50-65% for PS4/X1 consoles.
Yes PC games are cheaper, most the time. But I paid 60$ for a new game last gen and I pay 60$ for a game this gen.
So why aren't games $100 anymore, like they were four generations ago?
These new generation asking prices for games are a complete joke £50 for campaigns and gameplay that does not even last...how about no.
The price of games here in the states went up at the start of last gen. And hasn't gone up since than can you think of anything else that has stayed the same price in the last 7-8 years? But games are definitely not priced by quality or hours you'll get out of it. Example I paid the same for Beyond 2 Souls which was a short game that I didn't think was very good as I paid for TLOU which wasn't very long but did have good online mp and was really good. And then you have to consider games with good online mp can be played by millions of people for months on end. It's not like these gaming companies don't have to shell out money to keep those severs going. So bottom line is the pricing fair to us? You could say no but is the price of anything fair? Try buying groceries for a family of 4 for a month and make sure your eating healthy then answer that question. In the end you will always fell sometimes you got what you paid for sometimes you got ripped off.
"The Price of Videogames: How Much Are They Worth? Are videogames truly worth their price tag?" lol of course not anyone that believes a game in this day is worth $60 let alone anything near it is a fool, and the developers know this. Why do you think they charge the same exact price for a physical and digital version of the same game? Especially when there is no packaging or a need for retail space.
The problem with digital is they cannot undercut the retailers so there will never be a price difference between physical and digital.
thats called ripping off the customer son, and yes there are price differences at least on steam.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.