Why can't games be sold for what they're worth? (gameplay)

[RuneLouie]

I really don't think it's fair to pay ($40/handheld , $70/regular console) for a game you can beat in 8 hours (or less) unless they've actually have spent time on it (like Resident Evil Remake for GC).


It's not fair for us customers... And on top of that I think it would actually improve sales.

Let me explain. Lots of people would think it twice to pay full price for a game they can beat it 8 hours or less (much more if there's no replay value). However if the game is being sold for $20 or less it would still make tons of money; people could actually recommend it: "It'a an average game... and/or short but for the price is very well worth it." Much different than " Too expensive for a so so game that can be beat in less than 6 hours".


More so... when there are tons of games where it shows it's just merely a port or haven't had that much more time spent developing.

What do you guys think?

[Suwako Moriya]

So you're essentially saying that "length" should determine price? It's an interesting idea and it would probably good for at least some games to be cheaper. However there are a few issues to consider here. I'll go by them one by one.

How long it takes people to beat some games varies. That so called 40 hour RPG may take one person 50 hours and another 30 hours. Same is true of longer and shorter games in general.

Shorter games tend to have the advantage that they're easier to replay than longer games. Thus in the long run they can in fact end up having more value. Simply because they're not exactly one shots. Or least have less chance of being one.

While some customers may be happy they are paying less for shorter games. Others may be angry they are paying more for longer games. It really depends on the outlook of the consumer. Some prefer to celebrate and some prefer to gripe.

Finally for some games length is not exactly a huge concern. Granted there are many games in the genre I never played, but from what I can tell a play through of a fighting game isn't meant to be ultra-lengthy.

[ADC]

You're making a very simple mistake of assuming that life is fair. ;)

Nah, there's a ton of shit that goes into a price. There's the developer cost, sure. There's developer profit margin. Then there's the licence from the hardware manufacturer. Marketing and advertising. The retail markup. And … sadly … there's what the market will bear. Microsoft brought out its Xbox 360 price structure with $60 games. Sony followed suit. There aren't that many people complaining about it, while there are a ton of people paying through the nose (or out the ass) for their games.

It was assumed that $50 would remain the first-run games ceiling, and that Nintendo, acknowledging that the Wii didn't have as high a development cost per game, would set a standard price of $40 for Wii games. But leave it to Microsoft and Sony to fuck it up for everybody in the name of increased profits.

That's a joke. Sad joke, sad because it's true, but a joke nonetheless.

Now, I'm sure the likes of Square Enix, Nintendo … um, help me out here, who else makes long games anymore? … would be overjoyed to charge you by the game-hour. At a buck per hour, Twilight Princess would go for around $60 for a reasonably thorough start-to-finish experience. Final Fantasy XII would go for around $100 because they made the game environments so damn'd big. But you'll never see a game company saying, "This game's only eight hours long, so give us eight bucks." Or eighteen bucks. Or twenty-eight bucks. Your option is to decide whether you'll get more value from buying the game for $60, waiting until it drops to ($20? $30?) as part of a Greatest Hits line, or renting it and praying the previous renter didn't set his beer down on it.

[Suwako Moriya]

Your option is to decide whether you'll get more value from buying the game for $60, waiting until it drops to ($20? $30?) as part of a Greatest Hits line, or renting it and praying the previous renter didn't set his beer down on it.

Personally I've more or less almost completely given up on renting. So either I end up buying new or waiting for a price drop. Although sometimes it's less a case of waiting and usually more a case of realizing I may as well get the given game after it becomes cheaper.

[TheLaughingMan]

Indeed tons of stuff goes and should go into fixing a price point on a game.
Lenght is more or less one, but actually some 80 hours game i wouldn't pay more than $20 and there are 10 hours game i'm glad to pay $70 for...

[untoldsorrow]

I'm going to be the ass and say it...

"Its business."

Companies couldn't care less as long as they get money, enough to break even for the development costs, advertising costs, etc. They saw that games at $60 sells, and sells good...look at Call of Duty 4, released last November and already sold over 7 Million in that short span of time. Granted the game is outstanding but. They could easily lower the price after selling over 5 million but still choose not to since it's still selling at full price, no need to make less money when you don't need to.


There's no true friends in when it comes to business and money, sadly...

[beatmania]

So how much would you pay per hour of game time?

You talk as if a game is completely worthless once you've finished it, when in fact developers have added a lot so it is worth playing over and over again. One simple example, achievements on the XBox.

[Lumberjack]

I'm going to be the ass and say it...

"Its business."
There's your answer. If people are willing to pay $70 for a game, why wouldn't a business sell it for that price? Hell, they'd charge more if they thought people would pay it.

[Leon_Belmont]

I'm not into length as a standard. My free time is so low I'll never finish even the awesome ones. Got Bioshock, Mario Galaxy, and Metroid Prime 3 still sitting on the side. Will probably never finish them. But regardless, some games just grind on making up reasons to force feed you some of the same crap (I'm looking at you JRPGs). Others really make the most of your time.

I kinda like the efficient approach, but to everyone their own.

[Suwako Moriya]

Ah speaking of RPGs. As much as I like the genre some of the games in it seem to rely too much on leveling and fetch quests to pad the length of the game. Then again that could be why I prefer the ones where leveling isn't the only strategy.

[RuneLouie]

You tell me....

Justice League Heroes The Flash can be beaten in 3 hours or less....

Looney Tunes Duck Amuck can be beaten in 30 min...

Resident Evil DS is merely a port of the PSX...

...the same goes for HOSHIGAMI Remix.


However, there are games that break the rules:

Prey for the 360 (8 hours long?) $20
...the same happened last generation for Sphynx and the Cursed Mummy and Beyond Good and Evil; games that were GREAT but didn't have replay value at all.

The Megaman Collections ; merely a compilation of ports with a very nice bunch of extras ($30-$20).

It's not just a case of length but also replay value and quality.

[Chacranajxy]

It'd be nice, but I can't see that ever happening. The important thing is the costs that the devs. incur making the game. I wouldn't be surprised if a hella-polished 5 hour game costs as much as the latest 50-hour, unpolished GTA-clone. Devs. have to recoup those costs, and thus, the prices are the same. And of course, there's the issue that if a publisher prices a game at $20 because it's shorter, when they release a lengthier game at $60, people will likely be like "wtf is this shit?" because it's 3x the cost. They don't necessarily know that it's a longer game they're getting -- to them, it's just more expensive. As a result, this pricing scheme would likely do nothing but hurt sales on future games. And they don't do this in the movie or music industry, either, unless I'm mistaken, so I can't see the game industry deciding to suddenly change the way it does business.

[Leon_Belmont]

The Megaman Collections ; merely a compilation of ports with a very nice bunch of extras ($30-$20).

It's not just a case of length but also replay value and quality.

OT but I remember back when those Megamans were $60 a pop. Those were the days I guess.

[Jumbo]

Wait a bit and/or buy used.

That or wait for the big sellers to hit the "Greatest Hits" collection.

If it isn't a game made buy a company planning limited print runs and average sales that turns into one of those must have blockbusters the used market does a better job of determining the "(re-sell) value" of most games after you get past the initial Gamestop "new games used for 5 bucks less" deals. ^^; If the game wasn't what it was cracked up to be or too short, you'll see a lot of cheaper prices that way.

I guess I don't have a problem with the price point for games myself. I figure $50~60 or so for console and ~$30 or so for portables is fair. Especially with the interwebs and being able to formulate a pretty good idea of the game from other players or reviewers.

That and I guess a lot of times a game can't be price pointed in such a way because fan reaction to the title determines whether it will end up pulling a following or fade into obscurity.

Of course I also purchase R2 games and am used to premium pricing from over there too...

[Soulblazer]

The amount of time that it takes to beat a game has nothing to do with its worth. I have played games that can be finished in 8 hours that were more fun than some RPG's that require endless grinding to finish.

[Phil]

This is why God invented internet game review sites.

[bluesilo]

Oblivion $1000

thats what you would see