Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

[DaveDQ]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

reminds me of...

[fishepa]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

Why would games cost more? Can they give us valid reasons?

[rspencer86]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

Why would games cost more? Can they give us valid reasons?

Good question, the development costs should not be taking a significant jump up like they did when we transitioned from SD to HD in this generation.

[Quint75]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

Why would games cost more? Can they give us valid reasons?

Valid? Probably not. But they lose money on the consoles, so that may be why they would pursue it. Oh, and greed.

[DaveDQ]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

Good question, the development costs should not be taking a significant jump up like they did when we transitioned from SD to HD in this generation.

If I recall, the price jump for this gen was somewhat justified by the SD/HD transition. Then came exclusions from certain titles, only to be introduced as microtransactions a couple months down the road.

Slowly and surely, this generation introduced a more efficient way for producers of video games to find ways to increase profit. The consoles cleared the path for it. It became blatant what their intent was. I can not fault them for developing a means of further profit, but it really bothers me when with the transition, quality does not follow. A large majority of games this gen were mere HD upgrades. I still refer back to Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory as a past-gen game that showed up many current gen ones.

I don't want to be some angry gamer that is never satisfied, but if you are going to raise prices to a $70 norm, there better be some excellent quality in your product.

[mestevo]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

I don't really think there was a jump and then it got less expensive or stayed the same for the last several years. Games kept getting bigger and more expensive to make, but at the same time inflation has brought in less for that effort at $60.

Then came a bigger push for DLC in part to help offset that.

I don't think $70 is the answer, that's suicide for many non-AAA titles and many titles without shaky reviews. Microtransactions/DLC done right (read: not horse armor) should be a no-brainer for enjoyable titles and a way to recoup expenses/add to the bottom line, rather than impede the initial purchase with a higher sticker price.

[ghettogeeksta]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

I don't see what the problem is, I expected the games to go up in price as they do every gen. Bigger, better, and better looking games is a excuse to charge more for games. These companies wanna make more money not the same or less. Prices will not be lower for console games until they go all digital download.

[Rockie_Fresh88]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

That's true but thing is... There are more alternatives to consoles than ever!

iPads , phones , portables , etc...

I would buy only the games I really wanted. That would only be 2-3 per YEAR at 70$

I would just put even more time into my iPad lol

[Burns11]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

I don't see what the problem is, I expected the games to go up in price as they do every gen. Bigger, better, and better looking games is a excuse to charge more for games. These companies wanna make more money not the same pre less. Prices will not be lower for console games until they go all digital download.

But they haven't, games had been $50 since the days of the NES, and even higher in the later days of cartridge based consoles (Genesis, N64, etc all had some $70, $80, $90+ games). They've only gone up for a console generation once, this past gen.

[TracerBullet]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

But they haven't, games had been $50 since the days of the NES, and even higher in the later days of cartridge based consoles (Genesis, N64, etc all had some $70, $80, $90+ games). They've only gone up for a console generation once, this past gen.

And those weren't even special editions. I always find that amazing when I see old ads.

[ghettogeeksta]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

That's true but thing is... There are more alternatives to consoles than ever!

iPads , phones , portables , etc...

I would buy only the games I really wanted. That would only be 2-3 per YEAR at 70$



I would just put even more time into my iPad lol

Those devices are not alternatives to consoles. They don't have the horse post or games.

[Rockie_Fresh88]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

Those devices are not alternatives to consoles. They don't have the horse post or games.

Lol ok bro . I disagree but ok.

[CMH]

But they haven't, games had been $50 since the days of the NES, and even higher in the later days of cartridge based consoles (Genesis, N64, etc all had some $70, $80, $90+ games). They've only gone up for a console generation once, this past gen.

You know, I never paid that price for a game. Ever.

I remember when a friend bought this highly touted SNES game for $100 and thinking "what the heck man! You got screwed!"

Then again, at that time I usually bought games with Christmas money so they were probably on sale. I can't remember.


Sent from my mobile device.

[ab713]

Re: PlayStation 4 Discussion

I woudn't be surprised if they lower the price down to $49.99 and than try to up sell features (similar to in-app purchases on mobile devices). $5.99 for online multiplayer, $2.99 to skip levels, etc. The mobile industry is making a killing off of in-app purchases; makes sense the game industry would try to do the same.

[CMH]

I woudn't be surprised if they lower the price down to $49.99 and than try to up sell features (similar to in-app purchases on mobile devices). $5.99 for online multiplayer, $2.99 to skip levels, etc. The mobile industry is making a killing off of in-app purchases; makes sense the game industry would try to do the same.

I'd be very surprised if they lower the price.

People are buying $60 games in droves. You don't cut back on money.


Sent from my mobile device.