Is the standard $60 price tag always a good fit?

[eezing]

$60 seems to be the standard for the majority of newly released games.

Do you ever find yourself saying... I'd buy that, if it wasn't 60 bucks... $40 and I'm there... That crap isn't worth more than $30.

Take the game "Pure" for example. I've played the demo at least five times and find it very entertaining. Unfortunately, I won't be playing "Pure" beyond the demo. I just can't bring myself to pay 60 bucks for it. It's a great game, but it ain't 60 bucks great (IMO).

GTA IV, Halo 3, COD 4, MGS4... In my opinion, those are games that are worth the $60 price tag. Does a game such as "Pure", own up to the titles listed above? If not, why should I pay the same?

What do you think? Should there be some kind of pricing scheme in place that places games at a different level based on some type of criteria? Could this ever work properly?

 

[bkilian]

The question becomes: how much would _you_ pay for the game.

For instance, I would not pay $60 for Halo or Gears of War (And luckily I didn't have to, since it was stocked by the company store). I would have paid $60 for Mass Effect. though I didn't. And I _did_ pay $60 for Oblivion, happily.

I think about it in these terms: How many hours will the game entertain me? if it's more than 12, $60 is a good price, and comparable to going to the movies.

Of course, for some games that I wouldn't touch at even $20 (any of the Call of Duty dreck), other people would happily pay $60. Thus the problem, the value of a game is different to each user, so it's impossible to set an objectve price, since value is subjective.

You'll note that once it looks like a game has run it's course at $60, it'll be lowered to try get the folks that would like to play it, but just can't justify the price, and some games (Viva Pinata) are even launched at a lower price. If you won't pay $60 for a game, all you have to do is wait a while, and it'll probably get to a point where the cost/value ratio stacks up for you.

 

[Rangers]

I suppose this is why I only buy triple A games for the most part. I wouldn't buy a second tier game like Pure, waste of $. On the other hand, I wont be able to drop 60 on Gears 2 fast enough, and the amount of content in triple A games like that these days is obscene (and Gears 1 is still in the top 5 on Live for it's multi-player, 2 years later)

You might look for game like Pure used, or so. I see say, assassins creed 360 for $24 used at my local video store, and plenty of other such deals. Many games also end up on the cheap at Wal Mart and other retailers. I'm sure Pure will do the same, in time. It's the type of game that will probably also fall in price quickly after it's initial surge.

Do publishers even have an option to set there own price or is it an MS/Sony mandated thing? Anyways, I'm sure the $60 price maximizes revenue for them, or they would use something else.

The only game I can think of to currently buck this trend is Banjo Nuts and Bolts, which will be 39.99. I can even see how that could be a bad thing, it makes one wonder if somehow it's not a full game, or some sort of budget title.

Also on pricing, I know I would be willing to pay even $70 for a true next gen game, meaning lets say, Intel released a console tomorrow 3X as powerful as PS3/360 (a premium console something like Neo-Geo back in the day). I would be willing to pay 70 or 80 for those games if they were truly next gen above any games on the current platforms.

 

[Zassk]

There have been a few games released at $40. The new Viva Pinata and Banjo are the latest. I think Table Tennis and Test Drive Unlimited released at $40. It would be nice if "less than blockbuster" games sold at a lesser price. But for that matter, this never happened with movies, either.

 

[RobertR1]

Support Viva Pinata and Banjo! Let your call for $40 price tag be heard!

 

[ShaidarHaran]

Heavenly Sword and Resistance are the two titles I'd been waiting for price drops before buying. $60 is too much for HS because of it's short length and lack of replayability, for Resistance it's too much because the game came out almost 2 years ago and the successor is just around the corner.

 

[ShaidarHaran]

Can we stipulate on these boards, going forward, that how we spend our own money is done with our own interests and that how we spend our own money has no/minimal impact upon most anyone else?

See the question mark in the thread title?

 

[ShaidarHaran]

Did you answer the question?

You're kidding, right? My on-topic post is directly above yours, posted just last night.

Anyway, my point is that there's nothing wrong with asking a question, as the OP has done. Your initial post seemed to assault this very idea. I asked if you saw the question mark in the hope that you would re-evaluate your initial response and reach the same conclusion.