Why does Just Cause 3 cost $85.00?

[cbrunny]

JC3 is great. The expansions would add a lot more content if they were played early in the game.

 

[RockinZ28]

Think the base game was down to $8 or some shit at one point. Still didn't buy based on reviews and the poor support/optimization on pc.

 

[NoSoup4You]

Don't these game developers understand we're entitled to play their damn games regardless of whether we want to actually pay for them?

 

[Stg-Flame]

Don't these game developers understand we're entitled to play their damn games regardless of whether we want to actually pay for them?

What?

 

[Freejack2]

I bought the base game for $15 a couple of months ago, and it has bugs for Nvidia cards that aren't fixed. I tried a few things, but it still kept crashing every few minutes. I would wonder if it's my computer, but no other game or program has this problem, and forums are full of people with crash problems with this game. How has the experience been for other Nvidia card users? I have a Gtx1070, on a i5 6600k, and Asus Z170 board.

 

[zinfamous]

I think I paid about 7 bucks for JC 2 way back when on steam....it had probably been out for about 5 months at that point? I feel that was a decent price, but I would have balked at paying more than $15.

It's a fun game with a gorgeous world (I assume that is at least the same with JC 3), but it really is quite boring at the end of the day. You basically have 3 or 4 different things you can do, hundreds of times over, to mark off little icons on the map. Just too repetitive for me after you've blown up the 15th weapons depot and have another 40 to take down.

 

[moonbogg]

I didn't buy it. I'd play this game for an hour and never touch it again just like JC2. I may pick it up for a fiver at some point. Too mindless for me to enjoy really.

 

[pmv]

I don't care if games are expensive at launch. Nobody forces me to buy them. And if they are too expensive it's just an excuse not to buy them (when I've got too much of a backlog already).

What I personally find irritating is the trend to release only part of a game at full price, then try and nickel-and-dime you to death with a zillion bits of DLC. I guess others are OK with it or companies wouldn't do it. But I pretty much now always wait till the whole lot are available in a reasonably-priced bundle.

Maybe there are two different kinds of purchasers, with different kinds of anxiety? Those who have to have it _now_, on the day of release, and those who are more concerned about it feeling _complete_?

 

[XavierMace]

What I personally find irritating is the trend to release only part of a game at full price, then try and nickel-and-dime you to death with a zillion bits of DLC. I guess others are OK with it or companies wouldn't do it.

On the other hand there's games that never make it to release because they couldn't fit in everything they wanted to or they just release a half finished (content wise) game and that's all you'll ever get. I don't understand the mindset of a lot of gamers these days that games should only be released with every conceivable feature/content and then should never be touched again. Life simply doesn't work that way. Have you serious never done a project and then later decided "oh, I could do this". I've been PC gaming since the late 80's and I've NEVER had a game where I looked at it and went "there's literally nothing that they could possibly be added to this". But back then, adding more content would have been a far bigger issue logistically and cost wise. That endeavor was often under took by modders many of whom provided quality content for free but then still take crap from people for not including some feature they wanted. These days modders are more often asking for donations for their work and people give them grief for that too.

DLC provides the developers a painless way to add content after the fact. That is not a bad thing. Do some companies abuse this? Sure. But some don't. DLC in and of itself isn't bad. Was the released game what you were promised (that doesn't mean it's necessarily what you were expecting)? If yes, then what is there to complain about? They aren't making you buy the DLC. It's up to you to decide if what's being added is worth the asking price. I'd rather have DLC at a few bucks a pop where I can pick and choose what I want rather than an "expansion" costing the full price of the base game that really only has a couple of things I want. Variations of cosmetic items with a new color scheme? Pass. A new collection of missions? Yeah, I'll probably pick that up.

A lot of PC gamer's expectations are just laughable these days. People sit in free to play MMO's refusing to spend even a penny on it (out of "principal"), insult the people that do spend money, then complain the game isn't what they'd like. I know people with 500+ hours into a game that they've never spent a dime on and they complain it's not as feature rich as they would like. I mean, seriously? These days they many PC gamers act like PC gaming is a life necessity that should be included at no cost to them but it must be of the absolute top quality.

 

[pmv]

DLC provides the developers a painless way to add content after the fact. That is not a bad thing. Do some companies abuse this? Sure. But some don't. DLC in and of itself isn't bad. Was the released game what you were promised (that doesn't mean it's necessarily what you were expecting)? If yes, then what is there to complain about? They aren't making you buy the DLC. It's up to you to decide if what's being added is worth the asking price. I'd rather have DLC at a few bucks a pop where I can pick and choose what I want rather than an "expansion" costing the full price of the base game that really only has a couple of things I want. Variations of cosmetic items with a new color scheme? Pass. A new collection of missions? Yeah, I'll probably pick that up.

True, though that still doesn't stop me being irritated by it. You see something on sale at a given price and only then work out to get the 'complete' version you'd have to pay 3 or 4 times that price, and have to make a note to buy it if and when a discounted full bundle appears. Particularly annoying if its a remake of an existing title that has stripped-out things that used to be part of the original, or has stuff already in the code at first release that you have to pay to 'unlock'.

Edit - I guess essentially my gripe is with that misleading initial impression of a game being cheaper than it is, given that DLC is often proportionally priced _way_ higher than the base game.

But no disagreement that in the end it just comes down to 'if you don't like it, don't buy it'.