surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
I don't have a problem paying $60 for some games. They're worth it. I wait and buy those that aren't worth $60 when they're cheaper. I thought that's what everyone did?
That's great guys,, but unless a big publisher is willing to take the initiative to actually release a high-profile title at a lower price-point, things will never change.
Lulzwut? Twisted Metal still looks really bad. The only price I would even consider getting it at is 30$.
Basically what Hel105 said. I'm personally of the opinion that bitching about the price of a luxury item like video games is really stupid. Can't afford them? You have 2 options then: Wait for a price drop or do without. You don't see people bitching about the price of luxury cars like bmw's and mercedes. Why should games be any different? Oh wait, they're not!
I'd be more willing to jump on games priced at 40.
Like NMH on PS3.
I'll be getting that since they could gave priced at 60 but they didn't.
Like NMH on PS3.
I'll be getting that since they could gave priced at 60 but they didn't.
Solution for gamers: Wait 1-2 weeks and buy it for $40 like every current gen game in the past year. Let the developers do the math when it comes to first week sales numbers at $60.
I agree with the whole "$60 is too much for a game" argument, but unless I am mistaken isn't it the publisher's call to make and not the developer?
considering origin of new Twisted Metal title, Jaffe's saying that his game deserves 60$ is complete insult.
just 14 months ago it was multiplayer-only 15$ PSN title in early alpha stage of development as was presented at E3 2010, few days after sony announced to developer that their game will be 60$ retail product.
also i love how all developers claim that 60$ price tag is too high for all games EXCEPT their own products.
just 14 months ago it was multiplayer-only 15$ PSN title in early alpha stage of development as was presented at E3 2010, few days after sony announced to developer that their game will be 60$ retail product.
also i love how all developers claim that 60$ price tag is too high for all games EXCEPT their own products.
Who wants to admit that the game they've been working on for a year is a "value priced title" at launch? Apparently, nobody.
I'm not sure the developers have much control over pricing. Publishers are paying the bills, and it's the guy with the check book that gets to make all the decisions.
Before anyone comes in here telling everyone it should have been a PSN game "sofik" watch the twisted metal comic-con panal and tell me it is a PSN game.
http://comic-con.gamespot.com/video/6325040/comic-con-2011-panel-scea-twisted-metal
http://comic-con.gamespot.com/video/6325040/comic-con-2011-panel-scea-twisted-metal
It's not about bitching about price, it's about companies recognizing there is a flaw in the current "$60 average" market structure yet being too proud to make moves to correct it.
People keep paying 60, so they will keep games at that price...there ARE games I find to be worth that price,just not very many
Battlefield 3
Gears of War 3
Mass Effect 3
Skyrim
^Games worth $60 to me.
Most* other games? Not so much...
*Sure I'm forgetting some :)
Gears of War 3
Mass Effect 3
Skyrim
^Games worth $60 to me.
Most* other games? Not so much...
*Sure I'm forgetting some :)
I buy too much stuff in steam sales so 50-60 always seems like too much to me, but to be honest, game budgets have just gone up and up and with inflation I'm surprised that general price point has been around as long as it has.
Fuck I was too late. And Sofik were is your fucking source. And who fucking cares if it was going to be 15 dollars but now is going to be a full retail title if there is content to back it up. And so far it looks like it will.
Some games are worth $60, some games are not even worth $10 and sadly they usually all launch at $60.
I didnt really care about $60 console games until they started that BS on PC. Who do think they are!?
It will cost me $750 + tax to get the13/50 games going out for the rest of the year that I want... I think there is a problem.
Sadly, I don't trust Jaffe's opinion of what justifies $60 for a game if he thinks a "Twisted Metal" game is worth $60.
Or rather, would the gamers finally stop whining about the 60? If it truly is intolerable (and for most of us it is!) then simply wait a few months and pick the game up new (nope, you don't even have to resort to used copies apparently killing kittens and everything) for about 20-30. Stop talking about high prices and f*cking show a little patience.
@HEL105
I agree completely. I buy very few games at $60, and then only if I KNOW that they are going to be worth it, like a Fallout or a Dragon Age title, or probably Borderlands 2. Other than that, $40 is my normal price point, and you can find most games for that within a month.
I agree completely. I buy very few games at $60, and then only if I KNOW that they are going to be worth it, like a Fallout or a Dragon Age title, or probably Borderlands 2. Other than that, $40 is my normal price point, and you can find most games for that within a month.
60 dollars may sound like a high price, but I'd like to see someone who has factual information of how much is basically split between that $60 to pay for everything needed to get out the door.
You think 60$ is much, how about you try paying 60€ for most new games, like in Europe. Now that's expensive!
Also, I bet if they actually tried to take to publishers or whoever to say "Games shouldn't be $60" the initial reaction from whoever makes the price $60 is going to be "Devs better be willing to pay cut then cause we can't afford to sell them for less."
@OscarGe
Whats the minimum wage in Europe?
In Canada it's like $9/hr so you have to work 7.5 hours to be able to pay for a game after taxes.
Whats the minimum wage in Europe?
In Canada it's like $9/hr so you have to work 7.5 hours to be able to pay for a game after taxes.
Am I the only one that thinks Twisted Metal is worth 60$. It has three campains with three endings each, fuck awesome live-action cutscenes, huge maps for multiplayer with tons of secrets, a ton of weapons and power-ups, a large selection of vehicles that all have their advantages and disadvantages, many multiplayer modes and some are quite different from most, if you hate call of duty it has no regenerating health, large amounts of health, and you can hold all the pick up weapons you want.
Dem gamez be expensive but ours be worth it yo
That's pretty much what I heard; tell me when a group of publishers band together to make a pledge to only do $40 new retail games.
That's pretty much what I heard; tell me when a group of publishers band together to make a pledge to only do $40 new retail games.
@SalarymanDaishi
THIS!!!!
@Jim
Not trying to be snarky or anything, but seriously what is the difference? You call it 'pointing out the flaw', I call it bitching/ complaining. Just wait for a price drop and problem solved.
THIS!!!!
@Jim
Not trying to be snarky or anything, but seriously what is the difference? You call it 'pointing out the flaw', I call it bitching/ complaining. Just wait for a price drop and problem solved.
I think that they both have a point that $60 is a fair price for a QUALITY game... meaning one that works. Paying $60.00 for Homefront and then having a matchmaking system that DOESN'T work, is a travesty. Homefront is not alone and lots of games seem to get shoved out of the door with glitches, freezing issues and aspects of online that fail hard just in terms of basic mechanics like getting into a game.
I don't mind paying $60.00 for a game that has been tested and works. Unfortunately, I've also been burned so many times now that I'm reluctant to preorder any game... because regardless of the dev's track record, so many games just don't have the basic mechanics in place - like they were never properly beta tested or even tested at all (like Homefront... which was very obviously not tested by anyone with a PS3... or alternatively anyone that actually has friends they might want to play a game with)
I don't mind paying $60.00 for a game that has been tested and works. Unfortunately, I've also been burned so many times now that I'm reluctant to preorder any game... because regardless of the dev's track record, so many games just don't have the basic mechanics in place - like they were never properly beta tested or even tested at all (like Homefront... which was very obviously not tested by anyone with a PS3... or alternatively anyone that actually has friends they might want to play a game with)
I don't have anything against games being $60 at release and staying at that price for a few weeks to a month afterwards,it's when games stay at that price and drop by maybe $5-10 dollars after a full year, Call of Duty for example, CoD 5 is has only dropped in price by about $10 after 2 years. But on the other hand, Bioshock 2 which was a great game, dropped to $14 after a month and the collectors edition- which had been over $100 at release- dropped to $40 soon after, If only more games dropped price after a few weeks then the games market would be a much nicer place :)
Just wait for a price drop or buy used games.
Don't support the $60 price point if you don't agree with it.
Don't support the $60 price point if you don't agree with it.
I for one appreciate that developers are speaking out about this, but at the same time, I recognize that it is out of their hands. Publishers, unfortunately, have the final say with this type of thing. I completely agree that having every game released at $60 is actually detrimental to the game industry.
Take a title like Shadows of the Damned. I guarantee that if it was released at $40 instead of $60, it would have sold twice as many copies. Unfortunately, it will drop in price after any hype it had is gone, and all the big autumn games will start taking over the market mindset...
Take a title like Shadows of the Damned. I guarantee that if it was released at $40 instead of $60, it would have sold twice as many copies. Unfortunately, it will drop in price after any hype it had is gone, and all the big autumn games will start taking over the market mindset...
Every developer: "$60 is alot to ask for a game, developers should start charging less for their games. Except us. out game is worth it."
I solve this problem by renting most games I play, and only buying select titles. Just doing my part to prolong the recession.
Quick, somebody say something positive about Sony so I can watch Sofik get angry. That boy is so adorable, I swear.
Here's my take on it all:
Shouldn't games be priced according to their production values? AAA releases can be $60, Sports $50, movie games $35 to $40, low budget games like Earth Defense Force $25 to $30. It would make much more sense. AAA titles would act as a sort of "luxury."
Shouldn't games be priced according to their production values? AAA releases can be $60, Sports $50, movie games $35 to $40, low budget games like Earth Defense Force $25 to $30. It would make much more sense. AAA titles would act as a sort of "luxury."
@Jawmuncher
"I'd be more willing to jump on games priced at 40.
Like NMH on PS3.
I'll be getting that since they could gave priced at 60 but they didn't."
I'd even be willing to jump at the old $50 price tag we used to pay (in the US) last generation. Sure, there were people who had issues with that price point but I seem to remember a profound and universal "WTF" from EVERYONE when the $60 change was announced. And yeah, its only a whopping $10 but that really does add up over time, specially if your the type to buy a bunch of games in one go.
"I'd be more willing to jump on games priced at 40.
Like NMH on PS3.
I'll be getting that since they could gave priced at 60 but they didn't."
I'd even be willing to jump at the old $50 price tag we used to pay (in the US) last generation. Sure, there were people who had issues with that price point but I seem to remember a profound and universal "WTF" from EVERYONE when the $60 change was announced. And yeah, its only a whopping $10 but that really does add up over time, specially if your the type to buy a bunch of games in one go.
follow
