Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Do you mean 
Reply
PlayStation MVP
Registered: 05/12/2009
Online
5421 posts
 

Re: Playstation 4 game price $70?

Oct 12, 2012

If they decided to hike game prices to $100, this industry would collapse in a heartbeat.


Message 11 of 32 (402 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
PlayStation MVP
Registered: 12/24/2007
Online
15581 posts
 

Re: Playstation 4 game price $70?

Oct 12, 2012

Emerald_Swords wrote:

If they decided to hike game prices to $100, this industry would collapse in a heartbeat.


You mean similar to the North American game industry crash of 1983? Where just about every game was $100?

 

Logic, who would've thought eh? Oh wait.... No one thinks anymore.
Message 12 of 32 (397 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Lombax Warrior
Registered: 07/17/2011
Offline
85 posts
 

Re: Playstation 4 game price $70?

Nov 27, 2012

70 bucks is on the wrong side of 50; people cna say that 60 dollar games sell all they want the reality is that the used market is really the driving force behind those sales. 70 bucks would just push more people even further into the used games industry and would likely cause a collapse.

Message 13 of 32 (312 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Lombax Warrior
Registered: 11/15/2012
Offline
151 posts
 

Re: Playstation 4 game price $70?

Nov 27, 2012

Its possible i mean the new latest game console to introduce the Eight Generation of consoles "WII U" has there games in $59.99

 

If the new PS4 does actually do a price increase it maybe $79.99 "In my opinion" "Or lower i may be exagurating"

The reason i think is games are increasingly more expencive to create these days i mean PS3 games are by far the hardest to develop for and 360 is the easiest out there.

 

But yeah a $69.99 price seems factual to me but that is a insane price for a game i would just give up on video games if that price was real

Message 14 of 32 (309 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
PlayStation MVP
Registered: 12/08/2000
Online
24907 posts
 

Re: Playstation 4 game price $70?

Nov 27, 2012

muslimsk8r wrote:

70 bucks is on the wrong side of 50; people cna say that 60 dollar games sell all they want the reality is that the used market is really the driving force behind those sales. 70 bucks would just push more people even further into the used games industry and would likely cause a collapse.


Then don't complain about online passes, because if what you're saying is true then EVERY game will have them. 

 

I've demonstrated time and time again that this misguided notion that "gamers" have that used games save you money, is completely and utterly false. It's the idea that you're saving money, and the quick turn around on selling off your old games that is the "driving force". The lack of patience to sell a game for cash, and the subsequent beating you take at the hands of GameStop only benefit one person, the reseller, not the consumer. 

 

I know it's a difficult idea to wrap your head around, but it's true. 

Message 15 of 32 (306 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Keyblade Wielder
Registered: 01/05/2006
Online
9741 posts
 

Re: Playstation 4 game price $70?

Nov 27, 2012
I really wouldn't have a problem with a price hike if only that is all we had to pay. I would gladly pay 70.00 and even 80.00 for a good game. My problem is with the **bleep** cost of DLC.

I mean when you factor in DLC costs, games are already reaching the 120.00 to 140.00 mark and the cost of DLC never reflects the value of the same exact content if it was on a disc instead.
Message 16 of 32 (305 Views)
Keyblade Wielder
Registered: 01/05/2006
Online
9741 posts
 

Re: Playstation 4 game price $70?

Nov 27, 2012
As for the part of this topic talking about used games? Most people are already getting seriously ripped off and the amount of trade in money they see in return towards a new game or even newer used games is less cost effective than just getting a rental subscription. I mean I see Gamestop offering 7.00 to 9.00 for games that still retail at 50.00 and 60.00. We also see preowned games that are retailing higher than new copies of older games like The Orange Box. Whether a game is 60.00 or 70.00. People are going to cry anyway. They have been all generation. Ironically though, these same people have no problem paying 15.00 for 4 or 5 multiplayer maps. Some of them are even dumb enough to spend 45.00 on nothing more than Gears of War 3 weapon skins. That's 45.00 for something completely cosmetic and is already on the retail disc.
Message 17 of 32 (303 Views)
Splicer
Registered: 11/01/2012
Offline
52 posts
 

Re: Playstation 4 game price $70?

Nov 28, 2012

I would have no problem paying $70 if a game is worth it. There have been too many games this current generation that were not worth $60. I expect a campaign of at least 12 hours. I expect smooth game play with minimal bugs. I don't think this is a lot to ask. 

PS4 launch 500gb
60gb b/c upgraded to 500gb
Pulse Elite headset
500gb AC3 super slim
Vita wifi and PS plus member
PS+ member
Message 18 of 32 (296 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Keyblade Wielder
Registered: 01/05/2006
Online
9741 posts
 

Re: Playstation 4 game price $70?

Nov 28, 2012
I don't feel the problem lies with a games length as much as it has to do with a games actual difficulty. Content wise, most games are not much different. Some have even more content than the old days. It's hard to notice this though when our RPG's have fast travel and GPS and our games have weaker bosses if any, checkpoints around every corner and very simple puzzles. Games now days are shaped for the casual consumer. They are far too easy to play through and as a result feel like they have much less content.
Message 19 of 32 (292 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
PlayStation MVP
Registered: 12/08/2000
Online
24907 posts
 

Re: Playstation 4 game price $70?

Nov 28, 2012

dknecht wrote:

I would have no problem paying $70 if a game is worth it. There have been too many games this current generation that were not worth $60. I expect a campaign of at least 12 hours. I expect smooth game play with minimal bugs. I don't think this is a lot to ask. 


With more focus going into online play than singler player, I would think that 12 hours would soon be the exception and not the rule. It practially already is.

 

As I always say, longer is not better by default. If you start place an artificial benchmark on game length then quality will suffer. You'll get mindless package hunts, pointless side quests, and a whole lot of "find the key". Nobody likes find the key. 

 

I see people say from time to time that "games totally were totally longer totally back totally in totally the totally PS-totally-1 totally days... totally". I replayed Syphon Filter recently, and with one section to go, the running time was... 

 

 

EIGHT HOURS! 

 

That's right, eight hours. If you remove the cutscenes from Metal Gear Solid, the running time is around four and a half hours. Games weren't longer back then, you probably had more time on your hands, and they only seemed longer. 

 

Length is not an indicator of quality, and it certainly isn't a barometer to judge if a game is "worth it". Nobody ever said to The Beatles "Sgt. Pepper is only 34 minutes? No way I'm going to even bother listening to it". Or to Iam Flemming "Casino Royale is only 250 pages? Bump it up to at least 1,400 and then I'll think about reading it". I know that many gamers believe in McDonaldization, but if longer were actually better the film The Cure for Insomnia at 96 hours would be the greatest film of all time, the 639 year musical piece by John Cage "As Slow As Possible" would be the greatest musical composition ever, and at 12,000 pages the United States Tax Code would be the greatest literary work ever committed to paper. 

Message 20 of 32 (291 Views)
Reply
0 Likes