Is The Price Of A Video Game Really Right?

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Well, is it? My answer leans toward “no,” based on all of the half-assed ports and DLC-prone titles out there.

…video games have no fixed running time; what takes one player an hour to complete may take another five…The conscientious fix a price that reflects the complicated cat’s cradle of costs that go into making a modern video game. Regardless, as any struggling artist will tell you, price and value don’t always correlate. Hopefully, however, as pricing becomes ever more flexible, the gap between the two will close.
 
The price has only went up $10.00 since 1988(Nintendo NES), so yes. I do not have a problem with it. I never pay full price due to the fact that I wait for sales or for the prices to drop.
 
I don't mind the current price, but what I do mind is when they chop up a game into multiple "episode" just so they could sell the same game multiple times.
 
At $60 on release? Yeah, I think that's too high, especially when I can wait for the price to drop. Two titles, The Crew and Borderlands: The Presequel come to mind. Both were released in late 2014 as $60 per game and as a bonus if you purchased a nVidia video card. About 14-16 months later, Borderlands: The Presequel and all of the DLC is $21 on a Steam sale, while The Crew can currently be picked up as part of a bundle for $15.

Of course, I also look at the backlog of games that are begging for me to play.
 
They are worth whatever people are willing to pay for them. If there was an incentive (greater profits) to be sold for less, then they would be.
 
Hornet said:
I don't mind the current price, but what I do mind is when they chop up a game into multiple "episode" just so they could sell the same game multiple times.
Click to expand...

It's already starting with movies. How many Starving Games movies are there already?
 
danpsmith67 said:
The price has only went up $10.00 since 1988(Nintendo NES), so yes. I do not have a problem with it. I never pay full price due to the fact that I wait for sales or for the prices to drop.
Click to expand...


I think even back then some games were MORE.. and not even counting inflation.

Even at full price games are a very good value.

Movies cost what $5-10 an hour? So if you play a game for 6 hours you basically are getting the same value (assuming you like the game and said movie the same).

Granted for PC gaming there is a cost to hardware but that has gotten to be similar to consoles assuming you don't have a 4k multi screen setup etc.
 
Here's the disparity I see:

Mobile Game: Usually free, a "AAA" title runs maybe $10

PC: Steam sales from <$5 all the way up to AAA releases at console prices.

Console: $59.99, up to $99 for "Collectors Edition"

Now, I'm not claiming the quality of all these games are equal. But the psychology of it: it makes the $60+ releases look extremely expensive comparatively.
 
PC game prices have been wildly fluxuating for, well, since PC gaming has been around. In the late 80's to mid 90's, it wasn't uncommon to see prices of $70-100 for most big-name games in stores and magazine/catalog ads.

When big-box stores like Best Buy, Wal-Mart, and Target allocated 3-5 full aisles for PC games in the mid-late 90's, it was common to see prices of $20-30 on release day, then $30-40 regular price shortly thereafter.

The late 90s to early 00s saw prices of $30-50 on release day with the prices increasing another $10-15 the following week. We also started seeing special/collectors editions start entering the market for about double the price for the standard edition.

With the advent of digital game services, release day prices are now $50-70 for all the early-adopters to shell out. Sale Events (for those that hold off) bring prices back down to mid-late 90s pricing, and sometimes way less than that after a couple/few sale events.

I feel the retail pricing scheme of PC and console games isn't dynamic enough. Most games are released and prices at the "industry standard" $50-70. Sure, there will always be early-adopters that pay that price, but if a game doesn't sell particularly well, it is still usually a long wait before pricing drops significantly enough to get on-the-fence prospects to finally pull the trigger...and at that point, a lot have already either borrowed from/played over at a friend's, bought it used at a 2nd hand store or a place like eBay, or rented it and is now not interested in a new copy, even if the price has come down $10-30.
 
I think games are too expensive, and they should be publicly subsidized. We need Bernie to do something about this. Hillary definitely won't, seeing as how she's beholden to the big publishers and all.

Alternatively, Trump is going to make vidya great again. DLC has to go back.
 
I think it makes sense. It's a luxury item.

To be honest I can't stand people who pirate games when they try to defend their mentality.

They tend to say things like

I can't afford it - well maybe save up

Companies release shit - yes I'm sure absolutely every game you pirated and have spent more than 20 hours on is shit.

Games are too expensive - don't buy it new.


Are games worth $60. I think some are. Fallout 4 I liked. While not addicted to it I played 150 hours. For the cost of the game I got pennies on the dollar worth of entertainment.
 
$59 for a digital game from Steam, Origin, UPlay etc etc is WRONG.

and the DLC shit that turned into Payday 2 is wrong as well, why I quit playing that particular game.
 
Games should be priced at whatever the market allows.
I do wish they would spend more on the game itself than the marketing for it, but that too is decided by market forces. If so many people were not sheep that bought on day one due to marketing hype, I think we would get better games. But, I have accepted that, that changing is just a pipe dream.
 
As noted prices have not gone up as much from 15 years ago, so inflation has not played a massive role in gaming.

I would be curious for those who saying $60 is too much, how many of you have $500 video cards and 400$ CPU's and such...

:)
 
What reason do I have to pay $60 for a game buggy on release when I can pay $30 a year later when the game is stable? If it was the same stable product, I would buy a lot more games at release. If they increased the price to $80 for a stable game, I would buy more games at release.
 
BreezeDM said:
What reason do I have to pay $60 for a game buggy on release when I can pay $30 a year later when the game is stable? If it was the same stable product, I would buy a lot more games at release. If they increased the price to $80 for a stable game, I would buy more games at release.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately if someone raised the price to 80$ "because" it was stable... everyone else would raise the price to 80$ and you would be right back to where you were.

Axe
 
Honestly, video game pricing hasn't really changed much in 30+ years. At least on the PC side of things. You will have some "special edition" pricing that are a bit crazy, but the basic game is still typically under $50. DLC doesn't bother me unless it's a blatant money grab. If the content is of reasonable size for the price it's fine. What I don't like are micro transactions for things that you really need if you wish to compete.

For example: The original Dragon Age DLC was fine. A good solid stand alone game with extra DLC in the form of short adventures or a continued story. I'm not so crazy about how Company of Heroes 2 charges for better commanders. It can get spendy really fast.
 
PC games have only gone up $20 in the last ~16 years, I've got an old game box from 1999 sitting here, the game just came out and it was $39.99 which seemed to be standard.

Back then you had free demos which you could play right away without having to preorder anything or buy early access, there were no alpha/beta previews and DLC was referred to as expansion packs
 
griffinhart said:
Honestly, video game pricing hasn't really changed much in 30+ years. At least on the PC side of things. You will have some "special edition" pricing that are a bit crazy, but the basic game is still typically under $50. DLC doesn't bother me unless it's a blatant money grab. If the content is of reasonable size for the price it's fine. What I don't like are micro transactions for things that you really need if you wish to compete.

For example: The original Dragon Age DLC was fine. A good solid stand alone game with extra DLC in the form of short adventures or a continued story. I'm not so crazy about how Company of Heroes 2 charges for better commanders. It can get spendy really fast.
Click to expand...

Adjust for inflation and it's gone down significantly, the reason they can keep the price down is that they're selling more copies than they were in the past. Super Mario RPG came out in May of 1996 and cost $99 at the time (Canadian prices). I bought Fallout 4 for $69 approximately 19 years later in November 2015. That 1996 price was equivalent to $151.44 in 2015, so it's effectively less than half the price.

This is just an example I can recall offhand, but prices have definitely fallen and games are more accessible than they ever have been, especially if you buy games that have been out a while. Game prices never used to fall by 80% over the first year and now that's pretty common. When I was a kid you were lucky to get a couple of games a year.
 
While the price in real terms has come down the volume of shipping units has gone up by a lot.

I think Jim Sterling says it best, due to companies over spending on development they want ALL of the money and if they only get SOME of the money then the game was a failure.

Where are the glut of smaller but more focused and high quality experience $30 from the AAA publishers that while don't make as much as the larger titles don't have as much risk and can still rake in millions in profit? They are not there because they don't bring in ALL of the money :(
 
The problem with game pricing is that there's no middle ground. The $30-40 segment is occupied by portable games on the 3DS and Vita. If companies made more experimental or lower budget games and put them on sale at $30-40, I suspect the resulting revenue would cause pricing concerns to vanish. It might even allow the price ceiling to rise above $60, though at that point companies need to start selling digital versions for less (since there are no physical manufacturing and inventory costs).
 
People pay for them so apparently the prices are "right". I think Early Access is even worse than DLCs. At least DLCs are part of a finished game. With Early Access people are paying for betas that may never be complete. Again though, tons of people are paying for them. You can only blame the developers/publishers so much before you have to start blaming the people buying the games. The developers/publishers are just going where the money is.

I've learned to just have a little bit of patience and you can save tons of money, which lets you buy more games. :D I only buy new games if I know for sure I will love it, and even then I use greenmangaming for 20-25% off.
 
so-called AAA titles are almost always all garbage which don't even push graphics beyond poor optimizations requiring hardware that doesn't justify the visuals.

2 dollar indie games provide all the entertainment, but none of the graphical horsepower we want.

Waiting five years for a so-called AAA title to drop to essentially a penny as part of some mega bundle is the only way to go.

It's for this reason that I have yet to play any call of duty games: five dollars? No thanks. I don't really care what I'm supposedly missing out on.
 
These entitlement threads are hilarious.

We aren't discussing the cost of baby formula or heating oil. A video game is worth whatever people will pay for it. If you think it's too expensive, then don't pay it. Apparently the bulk of the buying public disagrees with you.
 
It's especially bad on Android and IOS.

Though I would be incredibly embarrassed to say how much I've spent on iRacing and World Of Warships....
 
trentchau said:
I think it makes sense. It's a luxury item.

To be honest I can't stand people who pirate games when they try to defend their mentality.

They tend to say things like

I can't afford it - well maybe save up

Companies release shit - yes I'm sure absolutely every game you pirated and have spent more than 20 hours on is shit.

Games are too expensive - don't buy it new.


Are games worth $60. I think some are. Fallout 4 I liked. While not addicted to it I played 150 hours. For the cost of the game I got pennies on the dollar worth of entertainment.
Click to expand...

Because I don't want to pay for it. That's the reason. They want the game, but don't want to pay for it. It may not sound great, but it's the main reason. Hard to justify it. Gotta come up with something to at least give some justification to it.

Although, I'm not judging those that do it. I did it, many others have or do. If you like the game, buy it at some point. Even if it's waiting for a 90% off Steam sale.
 
I almost want to say games are (more or less) the same price the same way every movie ticket is the same price (minus shit like 3d/Imax/etc), you have some games that sell gangbusters and others that do so so, but the so-so games can exist because of the gang buster sales.

That said games cost what they cost, it's the ultimate in consumer ability to fight back, much like a toy or some other "non essential" if you don't like the price they are don't pay it, and yeah it might be hard to explain that to your little Johnny who desperately wants the Xbox Alpha 7 for Christmas. It's not like gas, food, rent, utilities, etc, where you have a much harder time just saying "nope, not going to pay that price" without serious repercussions, I mean why the fuck does cereal which has any sort of nutritional profile cost $5+ for a box, yet sugar coated puffs cost $2 all the time?

So yeah, games are not essential to life, you might argue entertainment is, but fuck it, buy older games, let them entertain then when the $60 game is half price you can move on to that one and let that entertain you. Nothing says you need Far Cry: Primal on day one, buy Far Cry 4, and play that instead, by the time you get bored of it, Primal will probably be on sale.
 
I'm comfortable with the prices most AAA games can be purchased today. But I don't mean trough steam, since that is way overpriced. Third party sources are more reasonable at around $40. I'm fine with that. As long as the games are worth it.

However there are other problems in the gaming industry that cropped up recently. For example BETA access. In order to get into the BETAs of most games you have to pre-order the game. That's just wrong. You shouldn't just test the game with people who are already committed to buying the game.

The order problem is pre-order bonuses. Why am I getting less if I walk into the store on release day and want to buy it then and there, instead of forking out the money months before release?

Also micro-DLCs They're a plague that needs to be stopped. They are selling damn skin colours for games. If I buy an AAA title I expect everything to be in it already. Games are starting to become like cars, where you have a mile long options list, and you only get the basic model by default. You want a cool looking outfit in the game? Then pay for it with real monies.

This is plain wrong. Another r issue I have is multiplayer only games.Why do they cost the same as regular games with a full campaign, with tens of thousands of lines of spoken text by real actors?
 
I don't see a problem with the price of most games. Don't really agree with the cost of some DLC but it is more that I don't want to pay that much for it, not that I think they are wrong in doing so. Some people complain about how after a year the games are cheaper, and that is true, but that is because they made back the money from everyone that paid full price. It is just like any new tech, the price is higher till people buy it at the higher prices allowing them to start to buy parts in bulk and improve the process till it gets cheaper and cheaper. That is why a new resolution standard starts off costing you thousands at first for a new tv then after a few years you can get a better tv for much less. Somebody has to be the first to buy it at the higher prices. Same here with games, they want to make their money back quickly and that is what they care about, so by not changing the price of games they can sale maybe few copies than if they started right at $30 but make more money in the long run and make back their money faster. Those who really want the game are going to buy it to start with, those who don't are going to wait a year or two anyway at that point they will use the excuse that they are waiting for all the DLC to come out and be included before they buy the game.

All that said I do feel that a few games are pushed out at full cost for a partial game and the rest of the game is shipped via paid DLC later. But I don't buy those games to show that I don't want to support that becoming the normal way for games to be released. It doesn't matter what the cost is, if a game is released at the cost of every other game be it a standard $60 or standard $30 it should be a full game not 1/2 missing and will include later in $20 pieces.

The Lurker said:
It's already starting with movies. How many Starving Games movies are there already?
Click to expand...

That is different as you are looking at different books for different movies and each is a full movie. For your example to hold true you would have to pay normal movie prices for a 30 minute movie where you have to then wait 6 months for part two and watch another 30 minutes, then wait another 6 months and pay another full movie price to see part 3 to get your 1.5 hour long movie in full. That is much different from a 3 book series being made into 3 or 4 movies each 1.5 - 2 hours long.

Brian_B said:
Here's the disparity I see:

Mobile Game: Usually free, a "AAA" title runs maybe $10

PC: Steam sales from <$5 all the way up to AAA releases at console prices.

Console: $59.99, up to $99 for "Collectors Edition"

Now, I'm not claiming the quality of all these games are equal. But the psychology of it: it makes the $60+ releases look extremely expensive comparatively.
Click to expand...

Why count steam sales but not console sales? Both Microsoft and Sony have digital games on sale all the time. Case in point right now selct EA games are up to 60% off digital copies on the Xbox . I could pick up Battlefront for 1/2 off right now if I actually cared to own that game. I picked up Titan Fall during a sell with all DLC for $5. So you get the same type of sales on a console as you do pc, not all games are $59.99 forever.
 
I don't mind the cost of games. I do have a problem with getting half-assed games with the intent of selling DLC.
 
what do you all think about nova ops dlc ? it's 3 mission staggered to 3 more missions x 3 so total 9 missions.

wish it was a proper expansion... not this >_>;
 
dandirk said:
I think even back then some games were MORE.. and not even counting inflation.
Click to expand...

Super Metroid upon release was $74.99.

So even more. Worth every penny.

That said, games are overpriced when they're not complete.

Complete game on release day? $59.99 max.

DLC on release day? Probably a $34.99 or $Fuckyouyou'renotgettingmymoney, depending.
 
Exavior said:
Why count steam sales but not console sales? Both Microsoft and Sony have digital games on sale all the time. Case in point right now selct EA games are up to 60% off digital copies on the Xbox . I could pick up Battlefront for 1/2 off right now if I actually cared to own that game. I picked up Titan Fall during a sell with all DLC for $5. So you get the same type of sales on a console as you do pc, not all games are $59.99 forever.
Click to expand...

Because console digital store sales, while they do exist, as you point out, are few and far between. And games stay at retail prices on console stores for far longer than they do anywhere else. It's not uncommon to see a digital copy of a game still at retail while the retail box is discounted by 20-50% just to clear shelf space.

Case in point: BLack Ops 3 right now is $59.99 on the PS4 digital store. I can buy it new, on disc, at Amazon for $39.. That game has been out a few months. I just picked a recent (non-new) release at semi-random, and it's a case that I see played out over and over again. Destiny - same thing, and that game's been out for over a year now. It's $59 right now on PS4 digital store, it's $17 at retail box. Just a couple of examples that I seem to think are typical - not that I've done any qualitative analysis, just how I feel.

So sure, there are sales, but it's not nearly competitive as Steam. Maybe because they have the monopoly on digital distribution for their respective consoles, I don't know.
 
IMO, part of the problem is that AAA games are stuck at the $60 pricepoint, but developers need to sell the products for over that, hence the proliferation of season passes and whatnot.

Not that I think that an $80 pricepoint would put an end to that sort of thing. Once something has become commonplace, backtracking is rare.


Though personally, I find most AAA games to take far too long to play, and having lots of unplayed cheap games certainly doesn't leave me eager to spend a large chunk of money for a new and expensive one.


But I think that the real solution here is for AAA publishers to stop escalating the graphics race. Maybe I'm just getting old, but graphics have been "good enough" for a long time now, and "is it fun?" and "does it run well?" are far more important than this year's shinies.
Simple and abstract graphics cost a whole lot less to make, and can generally run better, too. Though that's usually more of a console issue than a PC one, since it's relatively simple to make a PC run everything well.
 
bigddybn said:
These entitlement threads are hilarious.
Click to expand...

Yep. If you have a problem with the price of a game don't buy it. It's as easy as waiting for the price to fall where you want it to. Has the pricing on digital games ever gone up after release?
 
I think the last game I bought for full price was CSGO...which was like $15-$20 on release. Every other game since I have always found some sort of discount for it or waited for the price to drop.

Now Amazon Prime offers 20% off pre order/new releases....

As far as $60 being a price point, I dont see an issue if it has continuous support from the devs and re-playability. Yes majority of the time those AAA titles still need fixing upon release, but the devs try to fix it as soon as possible. Players lose patience and get angry and start flaming.

Look at the CSGO community. The damn game was released back in 2012. The game still has issues!

Anyway, back to $60....always shop around for a discount, you will find it.
 
BroHamBone said:
I think the last game I bought for full price was CSGO...which was like $15-$20 on release. Every other game since I have always found some sort of discount for it or waited for the price to drop.

Now Amazon Prime offers 20% off pre order/new releases....

As far as $60 being a price point, I dont see an issue if it has continuous support from the devs and re-playability. Yes majority of the time those AAA titles still need fixing upon release, but the devs try to fix it as soon as possible. Players lose patience and get angry and start flaming.

Look at the CSGO community. The damn game was released back in 2012. The game still has issues!

Anyway, back to $60....always shop around for a discount, you will find it.
Click to expand...

Amazon's 20% off is only for physical copies btw,
Prime Exclusive Savings
20% off new physical video games during pre-order through two weeks after release
Discount will be applied automatically at checkout
Offer valid when shipped and sold by Amazon
Offer will be automatically extended to all existing Prime member pre-orders.
Click to expand...
 
As long as chumps pay $60 for a game the price of it is perfectly right. Don't like it? Vote with your wallet.
 
rat said:
Super Metroid upon release was $74.99.
Click to expand...

I remember many great SNES were around $80. Final Fantasy 3, Chrono Trigger and Super Mario RPG.

Even Street Fighter 2 was $75. Imagine the rage now dropping $75 on SF2 then hearing about SF2: Champion Edition and after that SF2 Turbo: Hyper Fighting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top