$60 Games

[JAH]

I don?t know about you guys, but I still can?t accept paying $60 for PS3 and Xbox 360 games. Last generation, if I wanted a game, I would go to a B&M retailer and buy it on launch day.

But now, every game I own for PS3 and 360 are bought from eBay two weeks to a month after released. I usually get them for around $40-$50 for new and even lower if they had been used.

I sure hope once the development cost come down on these consoles, they will bring the price back down. But that?s probably very unlikely.

 

[UTmtnbiker]

Ditto. I generally wait, be it a month, two, or sometimes even 6 months before purchasing a game. In addition, I'm finding that the used game market is just as good as buying new as long as you're careful.

 

[EvilComputer92]

I don't really like it, seeing as PC games still cost 50. I can deal with it, but I think PC games have the advantage in that respect.

 

[purbeast0]

I came to terms with $60 games back in the days of cartridges.

So yes, the $60 doesn't bug me. The $70 for LE's and crap however does and I won't ever buy one of those versions of a game.

The games now a days just take much more man power to make and typically offer MUCH MUCH more replay value than games did pre-online gaming, so the $60 doesn't bug me at all.

 

[Queasy]

Not really because I usually hunt for deals to get them for $50 or less for the games I want to own. The rest I rent for free.

 

[EvilComputer92]

Originally posted by: purbeast0
I came to terms with $60 games back in the days of cartridges.

So yes, the $60 doesn't bug me. The $70 for LE's and crap however does and I won't ever buy one of those versions of a game.

The games now a days just take much more man power to make and typically offer MUCH MUCH more replay value than games did pre-online gaming, so the $60 doesn't bug me at all.

I can name plenty of PC games that offer replay value in addition to online gaming. That extra 10 doesnt even go to the developers, it goes to MS/Sony.

 

[purbeast0]

Originally posted by: EvilComputer92

Originally posted by: purbeast0
I came to terms with $60 games back in the days of cartridges.

So yes, the $60 doesn't bug me. The $70 for LE's and crap however does and I won't ever buy one of those versions of a game.

The games now a days just take much more man power to make and typically offer MUCH MUCH more replay value than games did pre-online gaming, so the $60 doesn't bug me at all.

I can name plenty of PC games that offer replay value in addition to online gaming. That extra 10 doesnt even go to the developers, it goes to MS/Sony.

I thought we were talking about consoles games here in this console forum, especially the PS3 and Xbox360 games he mentions in the OP, sorry

 

[MikeyLSU]

the point is, games still cost $50 for PC games so the "higher development cost" excuse does not cut it. Otherwise the prices would be raised across the board.

To the OP, I had a 360 and now have a PS3 and have not bought 1 $60 game. I will just wait till I can get a good deal or find it used for less. $60 is just way too much to pay for some of these games.

Also, to the excuse that games offer so much more now, that is only half true. Perfect example is the reviews of heavenly Sword, they say the game only lasts about 6-8 hours. Why should I pay the same for that as a game like Warhawk where I will get so much more time out of it?

 

[randay]

i have no problem with it.

 

[PricklyPete]

I'm fine with it. It has narrowed the likelihood of me buying a game to just really good games (well reviewed or ones I liked the demo of). So the higher prices have just made me a smarter shopper and now I waste less money/time on crappy games. I don't mind paying the extra $10 for good games...developers deserve to be rewarded with my money for good work.

 

[MikeyLSU]

I also have a problem with the inability to lower prices. I just went to Bestbuy(had a giftcard) to buy a PS3 game since I just got the PS3. What do I see? Launch games that still cost $60. I was going to buy Resistance, but no way in hell am I paying full price for a game that has been out nearly a year.

Same thing with NCAA football, game only has a value life of 1 year since the next one comes out at that time, and 2 months have already passed(12.5% of life gone) and it still costs $60. So I left with nothing, I will not pay that much for old games.

 

[purbeast0]

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
the point is, games still cost $50 for PC games so the "higher development cost" excuse does not cut it. Otherwise the prices would be raised across the board.

To the OP, I had a 360 and now have a PS3 and have not bought 1 $60 game. I will just wait till I can get a good deal or find it used for less. $60 is just way too much to pay for some of these games.

Also, to the excuse that games offer so much more now, that is only half true. Perfect example is the reviews of heavenly Sword, they say the game only lasts about 6-8 hours. Why should I pay the same for that as a game like Warhawk where I will get so much more time out of it?

I see what you mean about the PC games costing less, but that's also how the PC gaming market has always been. PC games have always costed cheaper than console games (I'm not sure why either). But I remember PC games used to be typically $40 and now they are $50, so I guess they went up in price too? (correct me if I'm wrong, I haven't bought a PC game in over 5 years but I have seen advertisements for them over the years but again I may be wrong)

And I agree with you about PS3. I have not bought a $60 game on it either. The reason is because the PS3 really has no good games on it worth $60 IMO (and yours too apparently). I picked up motorstorm and resistance for $70 from someone.

I have however bought quite a few Xbox360 games and all of them have online multiplayer which is where I have spent the bulk of my time playing (except burnout revenge because the career mode took me probably 40 hours to get 100% on)

I also agree that Heavenly Sword is not worth $60. And that is why I'm not going to buy it for $60.

But I was talking about $60 in general - when I buy a new game on Xbox360 - I don't feel bad spending because I know I will get my money's worth. I honestly haven't bought a game strictly for single player in probably 4-5 years. My first will be this November when Uncharted and Ratchet and Clank come to PS3.

EDIT:

the only time I will buy a brand new game pretty much is if I buy it at launch. Otherwise it's used. however I will be making the exception when I buy God of War and Ratchet and Clank 2&3 for PS2, because brand new they are $20 and I've seen them used for like $18. I'd rather pay $2 more to get a brand new copy.

 

[TecHNooB]

The must-have games I will prompty get.. cuz they're worth the pricetag to me.

Examples: MGS4 and FF13

 

[Yreka]

Originally posted by: PricklyPete
I'm fine with it. It has narrowed the likelihood of me buying a game to just really good games (well reviewed or ones I liked the demo of). So the higher prices have just made me a smarter shopper and now I waste less money/time on crappy games. I don't mind paying the extra $10 for good games...developers deserve to be rewarded with my money for good work.

Same here, I definatley have much fewer impulse buys. If its an A++ Game though, I have no problem going out and paying full retail.

It also caused me to quit buying sports games every year ( MLB & NFL ). I always play though a season or two then never pick them up again. From now on they are getting gamefly-ed.

 

[mugs]

I don't particularly care how much the MSRP is, but there aren't many games that I'm willing to pay MSRP for. I'm usually content with waiting until they drop. Fortunately I have enough 360 and Wii games already that I can hold off on buying new games unless they're really, really great. Bioshock was the last game I bought new right after release (but I got it for $50), GTA IV will be the next one. All of my other games were bought used and well after they were released (mostly under $25).

 

[vi edit]

My gaming sort of goes in spurts. I'll play for a week and then not touch the console for two. Coincidentally my gaming usage goes up when my wife is scheduled for nights or weekends to work.

For my gaming habits, free rentals from Blockbuster through my online service are perfect. I can get in about 20 days of gaming a month from the two free rentals that way.

If it's a game I'll buy, I'll hold out and wait for it to either drop in price or hit the used racks for 50% off.

Even with my old Xbox, the only game I can remember rushing out and buying day of release was Knights of the Old Republic.

Going forward, Mass Effect is really one of the only current 360 games I would consider buying new and at full MSRP.

 

[Jules]

The only games i buy are games with good multiplayer. Otherwise i rent. I use gamefly for 2 at a time and gameznflix for 3 at a time. worth $30 a month

 

[Aikouka]

I don't mind too much really. I mean, if a game is only mildly interesting, I won't pay $60 for it, but if it's alright looking, I'll usually cough up $30.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

I'll let you know when I actually pay $60 for a game. So far I think 45-$50 for Gears is the most I've ponied up.

 

[RandomFool]

I haven't paid $60 for a game yet, I still think 50 bucks is a lot. If the price was actually based on development costs wouldn't that mean Wii games would need to be cheaper then?

 

[Ackmed]

Someone doesnt remember the N64 prices... $80 a pop at launch.

I can somewhat see PS3's price of $60, since I guess that a bluray disc costs more than a standard DVD. But the 360 has just a DVD player, not anything special.

Things that make you go Mmmm... Spider Man 3 is $20 right now for the PC, yet for the PS3/360 its $40. Its the same game, just cross platformed, so why twice as much for consoles?

 

[MikeyLSU]

and the N64 is where Nintendo lost its stranglehold on the market. That price was obviously too high.

 

[RagingBITCH]

If it's a game I really want, sure. If not, I'll wait.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
Someone doesnt remember the N64 prices... $80 a pop at launch.

I can somewhat see PS3's price of $60, since I guess that a bluray disc costs more than a standard DVD. But the 360 has just a DVD player, not anything special.

Not nearly $10 more.

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
and the N64 is where Nintendo lost its stranglehold on the market. That price was obviously too high.

It wasnt for any of those reasons. It was because it was a cartridge, and the big N pad devs pay extra for it.

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Ackmed
Someone doesnt remember the N64 prices... $80 a pop at launch.

I can somewhat see PS3's price of $60, since I guess that a bluray disc costs more than a standard DVD. But the 360 has just a DVD player, not anything special.

Not nearly $10 more.

Really, how much then? A game that comes out costs the same on a PS3/360, even though the media costs more for the PS3. Either way you look at it.