How Much SHOULD a Game Cost?

New Troll

New member
Mar 26, 2009
2,984
0
0
Doesn't really matter cause everyone will complain anyways. It is very, very rare I spend more than $30 for a game. I'm patient enough for either the price to drop or for it to go on sale. RPGs I plan on spending a lot of time within are about the only thing I might possibly pay release price for.
 

psivamp

New member
Jan 7, 2010
623
0
0
$60 is generally too much for me. I can't say that the price should be lower, since I haven't done any real research on the economics on the other end.

DLC prices are ludicrous. DLC is barely advertised at all and charging someone a quarter of the cost of a game for four multiplayer maps is just ridiculous.
 

bushwhacker2k

New member
Jan 27, 2009
1,587
0
0
Radeonx said:
They should stay $60.
Because they've been $50-60 since they started coming out, and changing it just because the part of the fanbase that doesn't recognize this complains is stupid.
I pretty much agree. The problem, IMO, lies in the fact that game releases have become routine to the point that it's generally just the same game with slight differences and they're still getting 60$ per.

Mutilator7 said:
A plastic disc is worth only pennies, a game is worth $60, this has always amused me.
I understand why it is that way, i just find it interesting.
It's intellectual property, though I do get what you're saying.
 

Catalyst6

Dapper Fellow
Apr 21, 2010
1,362
0
0
MisterShine said:
Whatever price the market will bear.

Capitalism, HO!
Exactly. Economics is a magical force, good games end up with high price tags and the crap gets put on sale for 5$ on Steam a month down the road.

All you have to do is have a little patience and it becomes much more reasonable. Unless you want to play it *now*, then you have to pay for the privilege.

That's the market, kids, and that's how it goes.

Oh, and in before "Durr all games should be free durp"
 

AmrasCalmacil

New member
Jul 19, 2008
2,421
0
0
£30.

PC games over here are around that cost, console releases are £40 or in rare cases up to £50. Bugs me no end. I'm sure there's a reason that isn't 'We can exploit more people who play consoles', but I have no idea.
 

Jaded Scribe

New member
Mar 29, 2010
711
0
0
Jake Poulos said:
I think the prices now are good.
^^This. $60 for most titles is perfectly reasonable. 25+ hours on average of entertainment for less than you'll find elsewhere.

Just to put current prices into perspective, (note: movies assume a 2-hour movie, and prices are based on my local area averages) to get 25 hours of entertainment in other places are:

Movies (theatre): $109.38
Movies (DVD): $187.5
Amusement park: $70+ (2 days, not including food, parking, etc.)
Concerts: $291.67 (assuming 3 hour show, $35 cheap seats)
Theatre: $416.67 (assuming 3 hour show, $50 seats)
 

Worgen

Follower of the Glorious Sun Butt.
Legacy
Apr 1, 2009
14,985
3,848
118
Gender
Whatever, just wash your hands.
console 50
pc 40
handleld 30-40

they should be cheaper if there is no resale ability
 

SonicKoala

The Night Zombie
Sep 8, 2009
2,266
0
0
Unless you have an intricate knowledge of the various costs associated with both a)Making the actual video game, and b)distributing/marketing the video game, I don't see how anybody here can actually claim that "THIS is how much a game should cost".

Obviously, the company is going to have to charge an appropriate amount so that, for one, the costs of actually making and marketing/distributing the thing are covered, AND enough of a profit is generated so that the company and its employees can stay afloat and live comfortably. I just think that there are a myriad of motivations behind charging people "X" amount of dollars for a certain game, and I think that very few people actually take that into consideration; instead, people do what people always do - complain about how expensive everything is.
 

Et3rnalLegend64

New member
Jan 9, 2009
2,448
0
0
Jaded Scribe said:
Jake Poulos said:
I think the prices now are good.
^^This. $60 for most titles is perfectly reasonable. 25+ hours on average of entertainment for less than you'll find elsewhere.

Just to put current prices into perspective, (note: movies assume a 2-hour movie, and prices are based on my local area averages) to get 25 hours of entertainment in other places are:

Movies (theatre): $109.38
Movies (DVD): $187.5
Amusement park: $70+ (2 days, not including food, parking, etc.)
Concerts: $291.67 (assuming 3 hour show, $35 cheap seats)
Theatre: $416.67 (assuming 3 hour show, $50 seats)
Can we have an "/thread"? The prices now are fine. If you don't like them, wait a few months/a year and you can have them cheaper. I bought Mass Effect 2 more than half a year ago and I'm still playing it. It's given me a lot more per hour compared to the movies I go watch every other week.
 

MisterShine

Him Diamond
Mar 9, 2010
1,133
0
0
Mallefunction said:
Squirrelygod said:
I got no problem with what games cost, DLC on the other hand...different story
This...a thousand times, this.
bushwhacker2k said:
Radeonx said:
They should stay $60.
Because they've been $50-60 since they started coming out, and changing it just because the part of the fanbase that doesn't recognize this complains is stupid.
I pretty much agree. The problem, IMO, lies in the fact that game releases have become routine to the point that it's generally just the same game with slight differences and they're still getting 60$ per.
I'll address both of these points at the same time.

If a large portion of gamers DID NOT mind either games with very little changes in each iteration or the supposedly low content-per dollar DLC, their sales would not be as high now and the publishers would realize that such a business model isn't sustainable. As both game sequels with small changes (you know the ones) and DLC are both doing extremely well, it's pretty clear that this is indeed what many gamers want. Just because you guys don't like it doesn't mean it isn't warranted: It clearly is. The market decides how much goods are worth, not people giving what they feel like (unless its the Humble Indie Bundle)

Catalyst6 said:
Exactly. Economics is a magical force, good games end up with high price tags and the crap gets put on sale for 5$ on Steam a month down the road.
Lets not overextend. Its not so much that 'bad' games end up as the 5 dollar Steam sales, its the ones that aren't very popular. I mean, Modern Warfare 2 is by no means BAD, but its not even in the neighborhood of greatness and it STILL costs 60 dollars and has never been on sale for less than 50.

While I bought Recetear for 3 dollars and change >.>

There is no law.
 

Nohra

New member
Aug 9, 2008
143
0
0
Why does posting to the Escapist make me feel increasingly like I'm on 4chan...

Regardless.

TU4AR said:
In Australia, new release for about $60. Why?

BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE IN THE FUCKING US
Here's the worst part: 60 US dollars = 59.0900 Australian dollars

As far as game pricing goes, I'd rather see distributors get a decreased cut before the prices get slashed.
 
Apr 29, 2010
4,148
0
0
Radeonx said:
They should stay $60.
Because they've been $50-60 since they started coming out, and changing it just because the part of the fanbase that doesn't recognize this complains is stupid.
They should stay 60? The cheapest game I've purchased at retail in the past 2 years set me back 80 dollars. The most expensive was over 100. Is it just me, or are you just taking the US market into consideration when saying that a game should stay at a price of 60 dollars? I'm not mad or anything, I just want to know is all.
 

Radeonx

New member
Apr 26, 2009
7,013
0
0
superbatranger said:
Radeonx said:
They should stay $60.
Because they've been $50-60 since they started coming out, and changing it just because the part of the fanbase that doesn't recognize this complains is stupid.
They should stay 60? The cheapest game I've purchased at retail in the past 2 years set me back 80 dollars. The most expensive was over 100. Is it just me, or are you just taking the US market into consideration when saying that a game should stay at a price of 60 dollars? I'm not mad or anything, I just want to know is all.
I was speaking for the US market, but I'm under the opinion that they should stay what they were when they hit the mainstream (IE: Being released to general stores and such).
Or the countries' equivalent of $60.
 

bushwhacker2k

New member
Jan 27, 2009
1,587
0
0
MisterShine said:
Mallefunction said:
Squirrelygod said:
I got no problem with what games cost, DLC on the other hand...different story
This...a thousand times, this.
bushwhacker2k said:
Radeonx said:
They should stay $60.
Because they've been $50-60 since they started coming out, and changing it just because the part of the fanbase that doesn't recognize this complains is stupid.
I pretty much agree. The problem, IMO, lies in the fact that game releases have become routine to the point that it's generally just the same game with slight differences and they're still getting 60$ per.
I'll address both of these points at the same time.

If a large portion of gamers DID NOT mind either games with very little changes in each iteration or the supposedly low content-per dollar DLC, their sales would not be as high now and the publishers would realize that such a business model isn't sustainable. As both game sequels with small changes (you know the ones) and DLC are both doing extremely well, it's pretty clear that this is indeed what many gamers want. Just because you guys don't like it doesn't mean it isn't warranted: It clearly is. The market decides how much goods are worth, not people giving what they feel like (unless its the Humble Indie Bundle)
I understand what you're saying and I've made several points against that in other threads. The group that annoys me the most is the group that gives a thumbs up to generic games that have been done before. The Wii sold so well because it was marketed towards people of all ages, not just gamers. But at the same time the Wii really hasn't delivered nearly as many good games as the 360 or the PS3. It's like the experienced dedicated gamers are getting ignored because more money can be gotten off of inexperienced gamers because something which is actually old and overdone appears new and it's an endless cycle where something that's been done before is just released again and again. That's what I have a problem with.
 

XT inc

Senior Member
Jul 29, 2009
992
0
21
I think the max should be like 80 bucks grand total, with dlc schemes. A 40 dollar game with 4 10 dollar add ons, or a 59.99 game with two.

As it stands its like 70 bucks with tax and then 30-40 bucks worth of dlc and then the new game comes out the following November.