{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
4/18/2015 6:09:40 PM
12
I don't think it's about the $15 necessarily
I think it's more about the trend in the gaming industry of selling us an incomplete experience for $60 and then drip feeding us the remainder of the content for additional fees
The end result is you never really get a complete game and it always feels diluted.
Now companies are doing this because the cost of developing these AAA games has become enormous and because of our refusal to up the standard cost of a game from $60 to say $80 or $100 they have to find a way of recouping their investment while still selling the game for $60
I would personally rather get rid of this drip feed model and just pay $80 or $100 up front to these developers who create an entire experience as originally envisioned by the artists.
In the end we end up paying the same as now but we would have a completed non diluted experience.
English
-
Some people may remember that Super Nintendo games were at least 60$ back in the 90's. Nothing new. The only danger is selling anything for more is it will become the new baseline and DLC will still be added on top of it.
-
The cost of rendering the amount of detail in the graphics capable today is much greater than the snes days though. We have to accept that it costs a ton to develop these experiences and if we aren't willing to pay what they are worth up front (more than $60 with today's inflation) then companies are going to adapt to make the money they need to survive, which is the stripped down DLC model. We get what we pay for You always hear people talking about the crazy value games have to us the consumer when talking time to cost ratios in comparison to something like movies. Goes to show that we would be willing to pay more than $60 if the game is good and complete up fromt
-
I agree except games shouldn't be more expensive than 60 even for a complete experience. Companies shouldn't be allowed to get away with this. Consumers can control the market, but people don't care anymore they are willing to spend more for less. Prices will only go up because they can.
-
If we aren't willing to pay more for these games that are more expensive to make then we simply won't get these experiences because those companies will fail and go to more profitable areas like mobile games
-
Games were 60 back in the N64 days and as inflation has lowered the value of each dollar the price hasn't increased to compensate.
-
Games werent 60 brand new back then more like 50 Xbox 360 and ps3 was when it started to increase. I understand it gets more expensive but they make plenty of money and will do just fine without charging 90 for incomplete games. We arent getting the value for what we buy.
-
You don't seem to understand
-
Video games aren't going away and companies don't need to charge above 60 to make a profit lol you think after halo combat evolved bungie ever had to worry about money ever again? Maybe now they do since they pissed off a lot of their fanbase with destiny
-
The only reason you think that is because you are used to $60 as the norm It's an arbitrary number, there's no reason we wouldn't get used to $70 or $80 as long as the experience was of appropriate value
-
There is no game worth that amount of money. What destiny is doing is ripping people off. With all the DLCs even comet destiny is a 60 dollar game. Because of DLCs people think they are getting soo much content which isn't true. I made the mistake of pre ordering destiny with expansion pass thinking its going to be a massive game.
-
I have a feeling you are younger then 16 You don't seem to understand what I am saying or how risk/reward/value works
-
I know what exactly you're talking about lol you're not listening to what i'm saying. Game companies aren't putting more content or value to be charging more than $60 No mans sky is coming out this year and has way more content than destiny yet destiny is more expensive...does that make sense? I get you're saying if a game is soooo big and so much to do its worth 80, 90 ,100. There hasnt been that game worth that ever.
