Honest question, why the $60 standard for publisher release? Should different game cost differently? It's obvious that some games have bigger budget than others, and is of better quality than others. It is nonsensical to have standard price for all cars, obviously a luxury Ferrari will cost more than a Toyota Civic, same with phones. What's the argument against this?
It's the same with music and movies. They're "creative products", so quality is subjective. Just because you say it's not worth $60 doesn't mean someone else won't think it is. So, rather than argue, one solid price across the board.
>>333462904
I agree with that, but movie tickets prices have changed in the past while games since the early 90s have stayed 60. Do you think there will be a price increase across the board, or do you think that the new doctor trend will supplement the financial offset.
>>333463395
*dlc not doctor
>>333462675
Yes, every EA and Activision game should cost $30
>>333462675
Not all games cost $60, I'm not sure what you're talking about. There are plenty of smaller $40 games, and not just on handhelds.
>>333463395
A lot of games costed more than 60 bucks in the 90s. You were more likely to see actual price variations on titles based a lot on popularity
>>333463395
Production costs have fallen since the 90s and there is about 10x more people to sell games to, if not more. They should be cheaper
>>333462675
>Honest question, why the $60 standard for publisher release?
Remember a few years back when EA was talking about raises the price of their games to $90? Well, it was decided at that consumers wouldn't go for it. It was eventually decided that consumers were willing to pay $60 PLUS purchase a DLC or two. To go even further, there are microtransactions now in full priced games.
Basically, $60 isn't really the standard.
>>333463612
>Production costs have fallen since the 90s
Except thats fucking wrong, they have increased by significant amount since 2006
Because software can be copied billions of times for the cost of bandwidth. A lambo costs a ton of money to make each and every "copy"
The point is to make the game extremely good and appealing so that more people buy it.
All of the people that came up with 59.99 for a game probably did some math and figured that's about what the average person can blow on a game once a month.
>>333463395
I actually remember when $50 was the standard for consoles, and $35 for handheld. And I'm not even an oldfag.
And it's a ballooning problem, as more money gets poured into games and marketing, the more they have to make back. So we have less risky, more generic, wider appealing games with huge budgets that just get bigger and worse every year. So, as long as this is the standard, I doubt we'll see prices decrease.
>>333463580
You still see this nowadays, very popular games keep their price tag, while others lose value.
>>333463882
The price increase is due to average household income increase. It really has nothing to do with development costs. The answer to development costs is just to sell more copies, which is why you see insane marketing budgets for AAA titles.
This is something minimum wagers don't understand. If they get paid more, then stuff gets more expensive because everyone has more money, so they still have no money.
>>333463612
>Production costs have fallen since the 90s and there is about 10x more people to sell games to, if not more.
But on the other hand, it takes way more manpower and code monkeys to make complex HD games than just making pixelshit. Also voice acting and mocap.
For example a lot of older masterpieces such as Suikoden 2 with turn based combat and text dialogue only would get overlooked as "niche retro stuff" nowadays. You need to swim upstream against the crud of mediocrity pool to get noticed if your game uses sprites (even high quality one like in Suikoden), no voice acting and archaic turn based combat system. There is a constant pressure for AAA titles to one up each other graphically or else go into "cartoony" feel.
Gone are the days of shamelessly releasing mid tier PS2 games that looks like PS1 games but with good gameplay (God Hand cough cough).
>>333463856
Discs are cheaper than cartridges, while human production has doubled and wages have barely risen. Marketing spending is the only thing that's really increased
>>333464691
You're retarded, it takes 10x more developers than before to produce AAA games now
I BELIEVE VIDYA GAEMS ARE HUMAN RIGHT AND SHOULD BE FREE
>>333463395
Didn't Nintendo get in trouble for price-fixing at some point?
The discrepancy in cost between PC titles and console at that time was also a thing.
>>333464832
>it takes 10x more developers than before to produce AAA games now
That's only really done so they can make yearly or bi-annual deadlines and release on the maximum amount of platforms.
>>333465134
Games back then had yearly releases but it didn't take 600 people to make a yearly release
I'd rather have this than the alternative. Games like halo and battlefront and ubishit would be 200$ and most other games would be more than 60. I know for a fact that no AA and AAA producer/director thinks of their game being worth only 60 dollars.
>>333465449
>Games like halo and battlefront and ubishit would be 200$
You only want the games you don't like to be $200. What if Dark Souls 3 and Persona 5 was $200? There would be shitstorm beyond any reckoning
Law of Value
>>333462675
fixed cost mostly only affects consoles.
honestly the console market is just dumber overall. if companies like EA can still be successful after all the years of reaming consumers with nickel and dime practices, then the console market is filled with idiots who don't know the value of a dollar.
>>333462675
In the same regard if a standard game costs 60 bucks then you are getting a steal for AAA games for the same price.
