Treasure Hunter
Registered: 08/13/2007
5125 posts

Re: Are game makers greedier than gamers?

Nov 14, 2010


Jim777 wrote:

I think they raised it to 60 due to the blu ray disks,


Well, the reason that the 360's disc prices are still 60, instead of 50 *which we know doesn't use blu-ray*, is from what I hear, the "price of the content", which seriously makes me laugh, since more than half of the games these days, if sold at the price of what the content is really worth, would be going for 30 dollars on average.


Seriously. Most games end in a few hours, not all have online, and even if so, online only has so much. If online is only competitive, the "content" you are buying, is only a few maps, and weapon locations *depending on the game*.... nothing more. Other people provide the alternate content, or difficulty in the first place. What I mean by this is, you could go online with Warhawk, and you have all those maps, sure, but online is all Warhawk has. If you buy the game, as the developers put it out, without having other people in it, Warhawk is nothing.The difficulties one would face, the types of people one might encounter, developers have no hand in on that. They can just lay out a few maps, put weapons here and there, and say "have a blast" and that is it. If you sell that alone as "content", then that game should never have been 60.... but hey, like most others, It is the fun factor that makes it worth it in my eyes.


Point of my reply here is, if it really is sold at 60 for "Price of content", I demand they start releasing some games at lower prices from the get-go. That, or simply, give a more logical reason to the 60, instead of saying "this game has enough for the full 60 you gave us" which, isn't always true at all.


*I love warhawk mind you*

Message 11 of 15 (376 Views)
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 01/11/2009
6519 posts

Re: Are game makers greedier than gamers?

Nov 18, 2010
i think when the use the series name and make a shoddey game to make money then i think the makers are worse there but when gamers demand an such it makes me wonder but it really depends on the company and on the gamer each to their own with this particular question
Message 12 of 15 (376 Views)
First Son
Registered: 12/25/2010
2 posts

Re: Are game makers greedier than gamers?

Dec 25, 2010

This is a good post and question btw, but both to me our greed. We cant wait for a game to come out, and they give you 2 or 3 add on's for a $79.99, $80 something game, or to the ps store we go for DLC for the MP we are playing, and they suck us into it with maps, new weapons all these other things that should had already been in the game. But its a busniess and there in it to make as much money as they can.

What gets me is that we jump for things add on's (DLC ect...), yet we need to be saving our money in our pocket demanding them to fix there problem's that they have online. Sure sometime they patch up a problem when they release a game, yet when that patch comes out another problem pop's up.

A game that catches my eye was socom confrontation, look how broken that game is, people cried for weapons and maps, why not put our foot down and make them work on the problems they had when the game was 1st release, and we will pay all this money making our pockets smaller, and there's larger.

Message 13 of 15 (376 Views)
Fender Bender
Registered: 05/04/2007
3233 posts

Re: Are game makers greedier than gamers?

Dec 26, 2010

I think that both gamers and game developers are greedy. It has been a lot clearer in the past five years or so. Gamers are asking for to much and developers are charging to much.

To be honest I think that most of the greedy people are with Call of Duty series. When Call of Duty 4 was released, there were not a lot of people that played Call of Duty. But after Call of Duty 4's release, it was almost a household name. Soon the people that played Call of Duty want more and more and more. IW release a map pack with 5 new maps for $10. A great deal I think. The maps were fun and gave an even style of gameplay.

When Call of Duty World at War was released, it was stormed with hate mostly from the Call of Duty 4 fanboys. However it was a better game. Map packs were $15 for only three new maps but they also included a Zombies map.

When Modern Warfare 2 was released it was a dream come true for the Call of Duty 4 fanboys who would still ask for even more features than the game would have. Activision basically took Call of Duty over. The released their first map pack for $15 for 5 maps total; however, two of the maps were old ones just "re-done" for the "Modern Warfare 2 Engine" So basically they were telling you to buy maps you already had AND that were already on the disk.

Before Black OPS was announced, fanboys of the Call of Duty series again asking for things that were unreasonable, things that I saw were stuff like:

Jeeps, Tanks, Planes, Choppers, 50 killstreaks, Maps 5 times the size of Modern Warfare 2, 300 players at once ect...

All of this stuff that would never happen yet they still ask for it and if they don't get it they would say they would "go on strike" Which is just fancy talk for crying in their basements for 2 weeks then go out and by Black OPS.

The developers have also started to get greedy. I heard (and most of you have too) that Black OPS may start charging for a pay-to-play service for online. If this happends it would suprise me but I'm not sure. Maybe it's just a rumor but who knows.

So end the end developers and gamers are greedy. Hope that gamers and developers alike learn to be a little less greedy.

Message 14 of 15 (376 Views)
PlayStation MVP
Registered: 12/08/2000
28071 posts

Re: Are game makers greedier than gamers?

Dec 26, 2010

I don't think that developers are "greedier" than gamers, I think what we are seeing now is the business side of gaming becoming more open, and exposed as it wasn't before. For all of the rancor that Activision instills in gamers, they will line up to buy Call of Duty and Guitar Hero in droves. You can't blame them for giving people what they want.

I think though gamers have become more fastidious and more demanding, but not in a good way. I've said for a while now that gamers, with the advent of message boards and internet forums, really believe that all of these discussions are some kind of "focus group". When in reality they were intended to share information regarding gameplay, and to compare experiences. How many times have we seen long winded manifestos that make demands of publishers and programmers? They always seem to have the same tone; "I'm a gamer, I know more than you. You need to do X, Y, and Z because if you don't nobody will buy your games anymore". This seems to be the only entertainment medium where the fans believe they know more than the creators. I've often said if I went up to Paul McCartney and said "YOU NEED TO MAKE RECORDS MY WAY, BECAUSE I'M A FAN AND I KNOW MORE THAN YOU! AND IF YOU DON'T YOU WON'T SEE RECORDS ANYMORE AND I'M RIGHT AND YOU'RE WRONG!!", he'd say to me as his security people were dragging me away "Yeah, that's great kid. Tell me something; how many hit records have YOU had?". We can start to bleed over now into music, when fans took up an internet petition to force Metallica back into the studio to remix their last album.... Art, whether it's film, television, music, or even video games, should not and MUST not be created by "internet committee". Creative people need to be allowed to create free from interference. We owe them that much.

I really don't have an ending here.

Message 15 of 15 (376 Views)