Discussion Forums > Gaming
The End of $60 Games?
AceHigh:
Not "somehow", but because they sell more copies. Back in the "good old days" few games ever came out on a global market. Fewer countries even had computers and consoles back then.
vicious796:
--- Quote from: AceHigh on April 22, 2012, 04:17:22 PM ---Not "somehow", but because they sell more copies. Back in the "good old days" few games ever came out on a global market. Fewer countries even had computers and consoles back then.
--- End quote ---
This.
Nintendo was the first company to really do global launches and even that didn't start until the early 90s. Sure, we had Mario games in both Japan and the US near enough at the same time in the late 80s but it wasn't until the SNES that they really started pumping out launches in the US and Europe as well as Japan in the same year. Also, it was only Nintendo and they were still only selling a few hundred thousand copies worldwide.
Now, we know our favorite dev houses just as well as we know the console manufacturers and most games would be considered a failure if they don't break 1m sold in the first year (if not the first weekend). In today's world of entertainment, marketing often pays for itself and another department. Video games have gone from a thing for children and nerds (early 90s) to the mainstream - if you're a male under 35 there's a 75% chance you own at least one console.
tomoya-kun:
--- Quote from: vicious796 on April 23, 2012, 05:33:33 PM ---
--- Quote from: AceHigh on April 22, 2012, 04:17:22 PM ---Not "somehow", but because they sell more copies. Back in the "good old days" few games ever came out on a global market. Fewer countries even had computers and consoles back then.
--- End quote ---
This.
Nintendo was the first company to really do global launches and even that didn't start until the early 90s. Sure, we had Mario games in both Japan and the US near enough at the same time in the late 80s but it wasn't until the SNES that they really started pumping out launches in the US and Europe as well as Japan in the same year. Also, it was only Nintendo and they were still only selling a few hundred thousand copies worldwide.
Now, we know our favorite dev houses just as well as we know the console manufacturers and most games would be considered a failure if they don't break 1m sold in the first year (if not the first weekend). In today's world of entertainment, marketing often pays for itself and another department. Video games have gone from a thing for children and nerds (early 90s) to the mainstream - if you're a male under 35 there's a 75% chance you own at least one console.
--- End quote ---
Indeed. The real price of games has fallen by almost half since 1985.
If a game was 60$ in 1985, that would be about $117 in today's dollars. That is almost half as much.
As well, games now offer significantly more value than they did before. Compare Mass Effect 3 to games like Super Mario and you quickly realize how much more that money will get you.
And even compared to other media, games are pretty cheap. New blue ray releases are at least 30 dollars and you'd watch them, maybe once?
And for these reasons, I think that games are actually pretty underpriced. I have no problem paying $100 for the special editions of games because I know that they are worth the money by far.
zherok:
More value is kinda subjective.
And I'm not sure comparing a platformer to an RPG is really fair. You wouldn't recommend Mario to someone looking for something like Mass Effect. But as far as RPGs come, Mass Effect 3 isn't even particularly long. I did a full clear in like 35 hours. Their older games have been longer than that.
If anything, while "production value" might be going up, it's led to shorter games, arguably a lot more cinematic driven. This includes the very successful series of hallway shooters that dominate sales charts (though it's arguable their real value is in the multiplayer, though quantifying that "value" would again be something else entirely than what you wanted an RPG for) as well as Mass Effect. Even their first Dragon Age has a different scope than it's sequel, so I'm not sure the trend is really making better games so much as more "movie-like" ones.
AceHigh:
And I counter your argument with "Kingdoms of Amalur".
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version