Gaming companies can mullygrub and complain all they want about not making enough money for their company to survive and piracy, but what about us, the consumers? We have to put UP with your crappy games that you hawk at us for 50-60 bucks apiece brand new!
It's been quite a while since I played a game that I bought at full price and felt it was worth it. In fact, think about it. What was the last game YOU played that actually SPURRED you to finish it and when you did, you sat back in your chair, heaved a sigh of relief and thanked everyone that you saw on the credit roll? For some reason the only game I can remember doing that for was Super Metroid back on the SNES.
Oh sure, don't get me wrong, there's been a lot of decent games coming out, but not worth $60! I can however tell you that I've fallen into the hype of the sequels. Fable II and Resident Evil 5. Both games have weight names. Neither one (In my opinion) lived up to their predecessor. Oh sure, Fable II you got a dog and stuff, but at the end of the day it was the SAME BORING GAME just with UGLIER CHARACTERS. Don't even get me started on how terrible RE5 was compared to 4. If anything, the quality of games have gone down since the good ol' SNES/SEGA days where games relied on plot development and fun gameplay to make a sale.
Personally I'd rather go buy me an okay game for 20 bucks rather than spend 60 bucks on that brand new shiny one that I'm not even sure is going to be worth my time...or fun...I've been burned by the oven once and I'm not about to do it again. Cross Edge is sitting there on my local Gamestop's shelf for -$50- brand new and it's going to sit there, because although it so embodies the fanservice and humor I love, I'm too wary of new titles that cost me a decent chunk of change. PSN and XBL's downloadable game network THRIVES because there's people out there just like me that are willing to shell out the $15-30 for a downloadable game they're pretty sure is going to entertain them and if it doesn't well...damn. 20 bucks shot down the tubes. Sounds a hell of a lot better than 'I just spent 64.89 on
Â
Bottom line burns down to this. If the industry is going to survive, it needs to put out games that are WORTH the money we pay for them. Everything has pretty graphics now days. Give us something interesting! Characters we CARE about. Stories that capture our attention and music that moves us. Give me a reason to buy your game for full price, and then I'll start supporting you as a publisher/developer, not buying it off the used rack at Gamestop...
Â
Either that or give us a manufactuerer's warranty on gameplay enjoyment.
I don't mind paying for my entertainment. Renting movies costs money, going to the movies even more. How about a day at the waterpark? An evening in a bar? how about a topless bar? Go ride a bike... 120 bucks for the bike (or more if yer anal) flat tire repairs, repairs for that bump in the road, doctor bills for that flip over the handlbars, etc etc. Go play sports - beverages, gear, pain meds for afterwards. Sure, it's not as cheap as sitting on yer fat ass watching tv, lol, but look how much more you get from an interactive video game, as opposed to static tv. Actually, now that I think about it, I pay more for 200 channels of "nothing's on" than I do for hundreds of hours of "just this one more quest".
Real life entertainment usually costs money. I spend so many hours in a video game, that if I were doing any of those other things, I'd need to be bernie maddof.
Sure, I've played "free" games. I've found that most of these "free" games have some way for the developers to make money, and it isn't through advertising revenue. There's some kind of cash shop where you can buy things. I've spent more - $10 at a time - on the "free" games than I'd like to admit. Only to find that most "free" games have issues with spammers and hackers, and buggy code, and non-intuitive interfaces. These "free" games introduce new content without working bugs out of the old content, and they can care less about the hackers and spammers - those are "active accounts" too, and fluff the membership numbers.
The bottom line is, how much are you willing to spend on entertainment. When you buy a video game for $60, how many hours do you play it before you quit? Even the worst of them get 8 to 10 hours of our attention, just figuring out how bad they suck. so 60/10= 6 bucks an hour. Can't go to the movies for that these days.
I spend way more time than that per month in my "paid mmo". I've spent $120 buying the software, and $15 a month for 3 years, and I'm in the game at least 2 hours per day. That translates into a cost of about $1 per hour of fun for the last 3 years.
The solution is free trials. Let players try your game to get a feel for it, and make sure they'll enjoy it. Then, when I spend that $60 to buy the game, I know that I am going to get 60 hours or more in entertainment from it.
I really don't mind supporting the developers when they improve my game with each patch. When they listen to the suggestions of their fan base. When they charge me "my share" to pay for good programmers that write intuitive, non buggy interfaces and funny content, then I get even more entertainment from it, and I'm even willing to pay up for more entertainment.
No one has to buy the expansion packs. Most games can still be fun, even if you don't pay up. I've spent the last couple months in wow without the wrath upgrade, and I've still spent 120 hours or more in the game over the last 2 months having a blast. I paid for the expansion, and so far, the only part of it I've utilized is the ability to earn exp, and improved my crafting skills. I could still buy the crafted and looted gears from other players, I just couldn't go to the raids in the new zones, which isn't a problem for me, because I didn't yet fully explore the previous 2 versions.
I admit that wow probably went a little overboard in the first expac with the gears. It was very discouraging for those who were the "leetest of the leet" to be basically back to square 1. For those of us who weren't in the best of the best gears, it was just a continuation of our search for good gears and fun times. But they also added flight. Not many mmos have flight, especially the free ones.
Bottom line - when you do the math, $60 isn't much for all the hours of entertainment you'll get from it, if you've done your research and pay for a game you like.
-
- +0
-
-
I agree with you, but the problem with you're viewpoint is that to get better writing and more direction, you have to pay more to bring those people on board.
guazzastrip is right in that the folks behind Steam have said there's a pricepoint games should be at, but a digital distribution method removes the packaging and store-shelf space required.
Developers aren't making games to please fans, they're making games to move units. Marketers know this, so they show you the good bits in commercials or an awesome poster to get you hyped. Those marketing professionals are payed a king's ransom for what they do, but without them, 14 year old Jimmy doesn't know about a game because he doesn't have the dedication folks like you and I do to do a little research.
I remember paying $70+ for Mario 3 on NES and $70+ for Sonic 3 on my Sega. The so called "next gen" tax is a little gaudy, but not terrible if eventually prices right themselves. This hasn't been the case yet because people (the general public) are still willing to pay $60 per game. When you vote with your wallets, companies ultimately listen.
-
- +0
-
-
I agree, just look at what steam is doing for the gaming community. They claim there is the right price for every game that people are willing to pay for it. They put left 4 dead up for sale for $14.99 6 months after release and sold more than double the amount of copies that weekend.
-
- +0
-
-
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
