Are games overpriced, or are gamer's expectations too high?

PC Aficionado: "The fact that a developer like Creative Assembly or Paradox continues to make content for games that people love instead of leaving the game to die is admirable. The least PC gamers could do, especially considering we don’t help keep the servers live, is pitch in a little for DLC that isn’t essential to the experience, but enhances it."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Sciurus_vulgaris508d ago

Games are generally priced to a standard,not by there cost to produce. I personally think several “remastered” game, which were priced at $60 US, were overpriced.

507d ago Replies(2)
jdaboss507d ago

Gamers are setting their expectations to match games that are currently out and awesome.. If you dont at least meet that bar you are going to get criticized.

uth11507d ago

Considering how little content i used to get for more money, i'd say in many cases expectations are just too high.

Not in all cases, some things just arent worth the money. But a lot of the complaining i see is from people with no sense of historic context and dont realize how good they have it now

freshslicepizza507d ago

People say back in the day games were complete and so on. Great, go buy Shovel Knight for 25% of what that game would have cost you back in the 80's. Those games are still here. Oh, you want highly polished games that take multiple years with hundreds of people employed for $60 and still want to whine about loot crates that for the most part are completely optional?

nitus10506d ago (Edited 506d ago )

The concept of loot crates is a form of gambling although you really do have to look at this in more detail.

If you play say an RPG or an MMO loot drops from enemies and chests are normally random and the more random in relation to the protagonist or party the more replayable the game. Even in some games, you can find mini-games that are to all intensive purposes gambling (e. Zelda1 (yes really) and Dragon Quest 8 to name two) but with in-game money, however, you could skip them or save, play, restore and so on.

Fast forward to microtransactions. These are in-game purchases normally done with real money and for all intensive purposes are not a form of gambling but cater to the crowd who like what I would call vanity items.

Now for loot boxes. Yes, they are gambling but in their simplest form are not that much different to randomized treasure chests in an MMO even to the point of paying for them with in-game money. Once you have loot boxes which you can purchase with real money then they adopt full gambling status. To get around this issue which would definitely bring them under the gambling laws of most countries many games allow you to purchase loot boxes with in-game money as well as real money.

With loot boxes, the contents normally appeal to randomized vanity items for the player however lately the push is for extra buffs or better weapons and protection which you as the player can get with just playing the game However what we are now seeing in games like for example EA Star Wars Battlefront 2 (I had to put in EA for emphasis) is that a normal player is being forced to unnecessarily grind whereas someone who makes a real-world money purchase has a much easier time. IMHO there is no skill in playing games like that.

agent4532506d ago

Agree nor disagree, I respect your opinion but today's games especially on console are as expensive as the 80's games but are more expensive than PS One and PS2 games. The reason why I say that is today's console games are sold in pieces (DLC, Microtransanctions, Pay to play online, map packs, etc.); therefore, is not $60.00 plus tax is more like $100.00 dollars plus tax once DlC and microtransanctions are factored in. In contrast a PS One and PS2 game would cost $40.00, $50.00 , and even $20.00 plus tax but it came with map editors, free unlockables, alternate endings, mini games, lots and lots of offline multiplayer modes, etc.

Artemidorus506d ago

Tim but dim here also doesn't tell you that video game sales have risen over the years due to popularity too so it balances out. You also didn't point out the many other companies who worked hard and offered a full game with no dlc had no problems.

Companies also expect extra because gamers have accepted this pay to play culture. You have yourselves to blame if the demand gets higher.

admiralvic507d ago

"Considering how little content i used to get for more money, i'd say in many cases expectations are just too high. "

Yeah, but standards change and so do other considerations. It's impossible to deny it costs less to produce something like a disc as opposed to a cartridge.

"But a lot of the complaining i see is from people with no sense of historic context and dont realize how good they have it now"

Ignoring the fact some of what I said above comes into play here, we've moved past the "good" and are back to another dark time. For instance, loot boxes are at an all-time high and becoming a new standard. Like Destiny had no issue launching without microtransactions, where as Destiny 2 has roughly the same amount of content, with the majority of cosmetic items behind Eververse. Even if you don't pay, something you can do, the idea of paying for things is much worse than the PS2/early PS3 days when things either had it for free or didn't have it at all.

There is no denying things like television, electronics and even games are better than they were in the '80s, but just because 19" inches was considered a good size, doesn't mean buying a 20" today is considered good. Likewise, regardless of how much better games are from the old arcade days, it's also quite true that we hit a point where more things were included via unlockables that are now paid, part of a complicated paid RNG system, require something like an amiibo or something else entirely.

agent4532506d ago

I disagree for back in the day during the PS One/Two era the games looked awful compared to today's games but those games offered:

Map editors
Free unlockable game content
Alternate Endings
Mini games
Cheat Codes
Maze like levels or game maps
Offline splitcreen multiplayer

It was also the era that gameplay mechanics changed a lot by introducing:

Destructible environments
Ability to move in 3D space
Stealth mechanics
Run and gun

Really to this day there has not been a revolution of gameplay mechanics since the PS2 era.

This generation of consoles blows for its pay online, pay dlc, pay $60.00 plus tax for PS3 games in pseudo 4K or native 1080p lol, pay for microtransanctions, pay for map packs. Where does the paying stops seriously.

On PC it has gotten better; yes there is microtransanctions and DLC on PC but thanks to mod support and map editors, there is no reason to buy DLC or microtransanctions. The online is free. For PC gamers is great for console gamers not so much.

KwietStorm507d ago

I always found it kinda strange or interesting that the vast majority of retail games cost $60. You can probably count on a couple fingers how many industries there are that have a flat price across the board for every product, regardless of content, quality, length, etc. It's even more under a microscope in this age of games with season passes and cut content and DLC . The more cinematic these games get, the higher the budget gets, and a lot of these publishers feel like their games *have* to have this and *have* to have that, so they end up saying things like game A isn't a sustainable model.

CorndogBurglar507d ago

But at the same time, the $60 price is 100% decided by the company. There are definitely games that release for less, like the Lego games. They are generally $50 when they launch.

So it is interesting that $60 is a price that MOST companies decide to stick to.

agent4532506d ago

Yeah because they have no idea how to price their games or the retailer forces game developers/publishers to sell it for $60.00. Funny, PC exclusives are.less than $60.00

gangsta_red507d ago

You and corndog made some great comments.

I think a lot of companies know that the price point of 60 is what a lot of gamers are willing to spend. Anything higher and they'll start backing away.

This is why we see Live and PSN give or take in the same ball park area of price point. I'm sure this industry has thousands of analytics and surveys letting them know the breaking points of the average gamer.

agent4532506d ago

True but there is too much focus on making games pretty but the facial.animation, body animation, and even running animation is pretty much the same as the PS2 era except for L.A. Noire. Why is hair still plastic when tres fx and NVIDIA hairworks exist. Gameplay mechanics have not changed at all since the PS2 era. I see a problem with poor management, poor budgeting, and wasting time and money on game engines, glorious technical demos, too much time and money wasted on game expos. Yes, I get it marketing a game is critical but why market a game which is not going to look like nor play like the glorious technical demo. ....

chaos-emeralds507d ago

Game prices are still good. They were £40-£60 in the 90's, so all good.

AntiZeal0t507d ago

That's how I feel in the US also. I remember paying 60-70 USD for PS1 games, now we're paying 60 flatout for most of them.

agent4532506d ago

US or .Australia. I never paid $60.00 dollars for PS One games. I always ended up paying $20.00 for PS One greatest hit green label games. The best selling and popular games after 6-9 months in retail. It was a flatout $40.00 US dollars for every PS One launched.

DarthSocio507d ago

Games were never £60 in the 90s let alone the early to mid 2000s. It's only with the PS3/360 did the price increase ridiculously

TheVetOfGaming507d ago (Edited 507d ago )

Actually, I remember paying £59.99 for streetfighter 2 when it first came out on the SNES. There were games that were around that price back then. Not many, but there were some.

Mikefizzled507d ago

I vividly remember opening an Argos catalogue not long after the PS2 released in Europe and seeing Gran Turismo 3 as £65.

CorndogBurglar507d ago

Games in the U.S. were always $50, going all the way back to the original NES days. They went up to $60 when Xbox 360 came out.

Can't complain though. Almost 30 years there has only been one price hike. Thts pretty damn good!

chaos-emeralds506d ago

They were even higher when the N64 came out. I think Mario was even close to £80.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 506d ago
KwietStorm507d ago

Games were $50 when I was a kid, from NES all the way through PS2. It's only been in recent times that the price went up by $10. The thing about it is all games generally cost the same price, regardless of how different they are or how much gameplay you get for your money.

agent4532506d ago

So never heard of the PS One greatest hits green label, the PS One crappy $10.00 games program by the end of the PS One. PS One games were $40.00 flat during game launch. The PS2 games were flat $50.00 dollars during launch. It too had the greatest hit red label for $25.00 PS2 games. There were PS2 games like the 2K sport games for $20.00, Everquest for $30.00, etc. Those are the facts for US PS One and PS2 prices. The rest of the world could of been cheaper or expensive

KwietStorm506d ago

Why are you bringing up greatest hits and special cases? We're talking about new retail games, and the average price was $50 for the period I mentioned. I don't know why people always come with these other prices when this topic comes up, but that's what the prices were for games I owned from everyday retail chains.

Show all comments (56)
The story is too old to be commented.