How much would you pay?

[asrabbit91]

I would pay 59 now(still way overpriced+makes me wanna puke). Any game over 50 is pathetic. I got a 360 though. I will still get it for 59. But I wish it was 50. Please do not give freaking ea greedy developers any more ideas. It's pathetic that the game's 60 and we still don't get shlt in the game that could be put in the game easily. The only ones that should cost are the alternate uniforms that they come up for maybe an oregon jersey that they come up with during the season. Like Someone said whats next pride stickers on MaddenMania. Please do not give them any more ideas. Next they will charge you to play ea games online even if you have xbox gold.

[Brandwin]

I find it funny that the people complaining about the 59 bucks are still going to buy it...must not make you as mad you think.

Id rather pay 50 bucks like current gen, but im not going to complain every thread about the cost and then go out and still buy it...whats the point ?

[ODogg]

Quote: Originally Posted by DookieMowf

I find it funny that the people complaining about the 59 bucks are still going to buy it...must not make you as mad you think. Id rather pay 50 bucks like current gen, but im not going to complain every thread about the cost and then go out and still buy it...whats the point ?

Yeah and $59 isn't bad considering games cost millions to develop now and not only are mightily more impressive in both audio and video, are far, far more complex and in-depth giving you much longer replay value than games made just 5 or 10 years ago. Also games have been in the $50 price range since the 80's as I distinctly remember saving up $50 to get pac-man on my Atari 2600 system. I read somewhere that if games kept up with inflation like alot of other things we'd be paying $94 or something for each game so $59 is nothing at all to complain about. For their value, games are underpriced if anything, not overpriced.

But yeah, people can whine and complain but when they do it reminds me of my grandpa when he says he remembers when a case of beer was a nickel or whatever.

[Brandon13]

Quote: Originally Posted by ODogg

Yeah and $59 isn't bad considering games cost millions to develop now and not only are mightily more impressive in both audio and video, are far, far more complex and in-depth giving you much longer replay value than games made just 5 or 10 years ago. Also games have been in the $50 price range since the 80's as I distinctly remember saving up $50 to get pac-man on my Atari 2600 system. I read somewhere that if games kept up with inflation like alot of other things we'd be paying $94 or something for each game so $59 is nothing at all to complain about. For their value, games are underpriced if anything, not overpriced. But yeah, people can whine and complain but when they do it reminds me of my grandpa when he says he remembers when a case of beer was a nickel or whatever.

Weren't Nintendo 64 games $60?

[ODogg]

Quote: Originally Posted by Brandon13830

Weren't Nintendo 64 games $60?

Yeah I think they were, you're right. Game prices have been pretty static. But people want more and more and more but yet they don't want the price to go up any. It doesn't work that way folks.

[bdseed316]

I paid $65 (after tax) for Tecmo Super Bowl so I think I could justify paying $5 more than that if I could go pick NCAA 07 for the 360 tomorrow.


And just to be clear, that was some of the best $65 I've ever spent.

[DaveDQ]

I think I'll wait a week after its release and pay 54.99 used. That's if I find it worthy. Not bashing the game, I'm just very cautious now as to where my gaming money goes.

[stagnant]

Quote: Originally Posted by vinny

I totally forgot to check Fry's price for the game.

I pretty much boycott Fry's. Have you ever tried to return anything there? It's a pain in the ***... the two times I've had to do it I felt like I was returning a car, not an ipod acessory.