I've been seeing a lot of people whining lately over the pricing of games. One of the games I've been hearing about is Mass Effect 2 for the PS3. Why do people think that since a game has been out for over a year that it shouldn't be priced at $59.99? Did that whole year lower the quality of the game? Are people today not going to enjoy it as much as someone who played it in early 2010? This is a Game of the Year title we're talking about, not a crappy movie tie-in. I think we have an uncontrollable mindset that time has some factor in the amount we are willing to spend on any game, when in reality we should be looking at what we get for the amount of money they're asking for.
Another complaint I've been hearing is PC games getting jacked to the now console game price of $59.99. Does no one remember the days of the Nintendo 64? Did no one pay $80 for a cartridge game on that system? I get it though, people don't like spending more money on a hobby when they've been set in their ways for so long. Personally though, I kind of envy the PC gamer and would be one if I didn't have a dependency on the controller and my sheer laziness of upgrading my PC. But look at all the stuff PC gamers get that console gamers only dream of. Look at all the mods, the better graphics, the better precision for some with the mouse.
I just wish people would look at the quality of a game before deciding whether or not to start a thread on how outraged they are by the price. Why shouldn't we spend the high price tag on games that come from developers such as Bio-ware or Bethesda? If you ask me I think a lot of games are undersold.
Game Prices
I've been seeing a lot of people whining lately over the pricing of games. One of the games I've been hearing about is Mass Effect 2 for the PS3. Why do people think that since a game has been out for over a year that it shouldn't be priced at $59.99? Did that whole year lower the quality of the game? Are people today not going to enjoy it as much as someone who played it in early 2010? This is a Game of the Year title we're talking about, not a crappy movie tie-in. I think we have an uncontrollable mindset that time has some factor in the amount we are willing to spend on any game, when in reality we should be looking at what we get for the amount of money they're asking for.
Another complaint I've been hearing is PC games getting jacked to the now console game price of $59.99. Does no one remember the days of the Nintendo 64? Did no one pay $80 for a cartridge game on that system? I get it though, people don't like spending more money on a hobby when they've been set in their ways for so long. Personally though, I kind of envy the PC gamer and would be one if I didn't have a dependency on the controller and my sheer laziness of upgrading my PC. But look at all the stuff PC gamers get that console gamers only dream of. Look at all the mods, the better graphics, the better precision for some with the mouse.
I just wish people would look at the quality of a game before deciding whether or not to start a thread on how outraged they are by the price. Why shouldn't we spend the high price tag on games that come from developers such as Bio-ware or Bethesda? If you ask me I think a lot of games are undersold.
"Personally though, I kind of envy the PC gamer and would be one if I didn't have a dependency on the controller"You can plug a 360 pad straight in and it'll work with 90% of new games.
" @Spiritgod said:I know and I enjoy a few like that but upgrading my PC doesn't happen very often, and I don't have a convenient way to play on my TV, which keeps me playing on console."Personally though, I kind of envy the PC gamer and would be one if I didn't have a dependency on the controller"You can plug a 360 pad straight in and it'll work with 90% of new games. "
Well I never got anyone who complained about 60$ PC game prices. If you have 3000$ to spend on a rig to play the latest games, you can afford a 60$ game.
Also complaining about charging 60$ for Mass 2 is dumb. It just came off from winning gobs of GOTY awards, and the PS3 version comes with a new game engine, and the DLC, plus a full motion comic. This isn't some 10 minute port job.
" @GetEveryone said:Yeah, upgrading is a total pain. If you do, though, new GPU's come with HDMI ports, so you can just use your TV as a monitor. That's what I do at least." @Spiritgod said:I know and I enjoy a few like that but upgrading my PC doesn't happen very often, and I don't have a convenient way to play on my TV, which keeps me playing on console. ""Personally though, I kind of envy the PC gamer and would be one if I didn't have a dependency on the controller"You can plug a 360 pad straight in and it'll work with 90% of new games. "
" Well I never got anyone who complained about 60$ PC game prices. If you have 3000$ to spend on a rig to play the latest games, you can afford a 60$ game. Also complaining about charging 60$ for Mass 2 is dumb. It just came off from winning gobs of GOTY awards, and the PS3 version comes with a new game engine, and the DLC, plus a full motion comic. This isn't some 10 minute port job. "That's my thoughts exactly. Why complain when you get so much for the money you're spending.
@GetEveryone said:
" @Spiritgod said:I won't be upgrading anytime soon...well, maybe if I win the lottery. But upgrading would mean I'd have to get back into the tech of video cards and I've been out of the game for so long that most will look like a foreign language. I think my next PC will be a store bought and if all goes right I'll just keep it hooked to the TV." @GetEveryone said:Yeah, upgrading is a total pain. If you do, though, new GPU's come with HDMI ports, so you can just use your TV as a monitor. That's what I do at least. "" @Spiritgod said:I know and I enjoy a few like that but upgrading my PC doesn't happen very often, and I don't have a convenient way to play on my TV, which keeps me playing on console. ""Personally though, I kind of envy the PC gamer and would be one if I didn't have a dependency on the controller"You can plug a 360 pad straight in and it'll work with 90% of new games. "
This argument would be valid if the Xbox 360 version wasn't $20. Has the games quality decreased? No. Has the market value? Yes.
PS3 owners have a right to be angry when other platforms pay a third of the price for the same game.
Also, really? $3000? My PC cost me $500, which is less than a launch PS3. I thought we were past this.
You're forgetting that prices have much less to do with the projected value of a product and everything to do with competition. When everyone charges $60, then it is a fair price. But when competing against Steam and it's ridiculous sales, $60 begins to look a bit outrageous. If the consumer is used to buying games for cheap, you are going to struggle whilst convincing them to spend more.
I'm not saying $60 is unfair, but I will say that it turns me off from buying a game new. I'll sit back with a stack of budget games (Torchlight, League of Legends, Trine) and enjoy them plenty while I wait for these high price AAA titles to end up on a Steam weekend for $10.
I have to agree with Tarakun above. 3000 is massive overkill, I built my computer in '06 for 500 bucks and it's still going strong for anything out there, though now I have to put settings at medium. People complain about 60 buck PC games because they've been 50 for the past years. And most still are 50. It's just a couple companies that are charging more then the rest. And 60 for ME2 on PS3 is a bit excessive considering even the superior PC version is a third of that. They should have priced at 40.
I could live with a rise in game prices if it meant more high quality niche titles. To be honest it wouldn't even really be a rise, because in real terms games are about half the price of what I was paying for them a decade ago. I don't think they can justify jacking the price on games that are so mainstream that they're already selling multi millions of copies and making a fortune on though.
"Another complaint I've been hearing is PC games getting jacked to the now console game price of $59.99."
PC exclusives going to $60 is one thing, but there's little justification for charging $60 for a PC version of a multi-plat game if it's also $60 on the consoles, what with there being no platform tax to come out of the PC price. It wouldn't be so bad if you got a decent port for the money, but that's rarely the case. That said, here in the UK I've never actually had to pay more than £30 (~$50) for any PC game in recent years, and ~20% of that is tax - more often than not the price for a brand new PC game (if you shop around online) is £20-£25.
" This argument would be valid if the Xbox 360 version wasn't $20. Has the games quality decreased? No. Has the market value? Yes.But people look at the PS3 version as if it were the exact same game that's on the 360. Like Bio-ware is supposed to sell their game with all DLC and a new game engine for cheap because the 360 is less expensive. People don't look at what they get, they just focus in on the price point, now if it were the exact same game, with nothing added then you might have a solid case but from my stand point all I see are people complaining because the game has been out for soo long.
PS3 owners have a right to be angry when other platforms pay a third of the price for the same game.
Also, really? $3000? My PC cost me $500, which is less than a launch PS3. I thought we were past this.
You're forgetting that prices have much less to do with the projected value of a product and everything to do with competition. When everyone charges $60, then it is a fair price. But when competing against Steam and it's ridiculous sales, $60 begins to look a bit outrageous. If the consumer is used to buying games for cheap, you are going to struggle whilst convincing them to spend more. I'm not saying $60 is unfair, but I will say that it turns me off from buying a game new. I'll sit back with a stack of budget games (Torchlight, League of Legends, Trine) and enjoy them plenty while I wait for these high price AAA titles to end up on a Steam weekend for $10. "
" Well I never got anyone who complained about 60$ PC game prices. If you have 3000$ to spend on a rig to play the latest games, you can afford a 60$ game. Also complaining about charging 60$ for Mass 2 is dumb. It just came off from winning gobs of GOTY awards, and the PS3 version comes with a new game engine, and the DLC, plus a full motion comic. This isn't some 10 minute port job. "I'm sure you will be corrected a million times on this, but it's not the 90's. You can get a perfectly good gaming PC for around $1000 or $500 if you have something to upgrade from. Yes it's still a bit more then consoles, but you can buy PC games a fuck ton cheaper and make back the difference in no time.
Welcome to 2011. Get a PC.
As for the topic, It's still a year old game no matter how good people claim it is. I think it should have been at around $40-$50. I got the dam thing on Steam for $10 around 6 months go.
people are complaining about that price because mass effect 2 for xbox 360 is cheaper. mass effect 2 has been out for a while now and the ps3 version just came out. i think it should be a little bit cheaper like $40 for the most.
also, people complain about the PC price because they have always been $50. it's weird for them to just increase the price of new games. it's not like the PC games have a paper, cardboard, and disc for the game. we have digital stuff from steam.
Just kinda weird considering this game can be had on other platforms. If I have 360, PC and PS3, which one would I get?
I actually bought the game last week for 10 bucks at best buy on the PC. You telling me that somehow 60 for the PS3 version is viable for me? No way. Now there are those who only have a PS3, but as we all know, this game will drop in price steadily throughout the year. So it is best to buy it in august or so, when new games are coming out. I think 40 or 30 bucks would be more reasonalble considering on the 360 and PC, regular price is 20. PS3 owners feel cheated because the game may include the DLC but it has not changed or gotten better from the 360 or PC versions, so why do they pay more? Because they got the shaft when the game first came out? Its not a good way to do business.
" @BigLemon said:I've seen prices like this too, it's kinda crazy seeing how some games never g down in price.... I'm looking at you activision." Supply & Demand, folks. There is an apparently large demand for ME2 on the PS3, so the game will be priced accordingly. Once the demand falls, the price will fall, too. "This. Just a side note, I've seen Mass Effect 2 for as low as £6/$9 recently. "
Maybe we should bend over backwards, let them take our wallets out of our pockets and let the publisher decide how much of our hard-earned cash they are willing to take for a game. I bet they would love to take more than $60. There is a point to the bitching, however, new games should debut at the MSRP price, if that price should be $60 is debatable
To be fair, the price on Mass Effect 2 on PS3 isn't too far off if you include all the DLC. A new copy retails for what, 20$? It's like 10 bucks for Shadow Broker, 15 for Kasumi and Overlord, etc. Not sure if some of the weapon packs are on there but those are like 2 bucks a piece. Even without those it still comes out to 45$.
I understand what many are saying, but I can justify spending that price for what you get. It's like every Game of the Year edition that comes out, but this time you get a brand new engine to play in, meaning the graphics for the PS3 edition are better than its 360 counterpart. I guess I was just arguing the fact that this is a great game with many "Game of the Year" stamps to proof it, yet people bitch because the 360 version is cheaper, well then go buy a 360 and play it with none of the DLC or better engine. Interesting thought though, I bet if a Game of the Year edition does release, which I'm sure it will, and it's price is $59.99, that you won't get all these people whining about the price being too high.
The PS3 version looks no better than the 360 version and suffers from the same glitches. It's still cheaper to buy the 360 version and all the DLC packs." I understand what many are saying, but I can justify spending that price for what you get. It's like every Game of the Year edition that comes out, but this time you get a brand new engine to play in, meaning the graphics for the PS3 edition are better than its 360 counterpart. I guess I was just arguing the fact that this is a great game with many "Game of the Year" stamps to proof it, yet people bitch because the 360 version is cheaper, well then go buy a 360 and play it with none of the DLC or better engine. Interesting thought though, I bet if a Game of the Year edition does release, which I'm sure it will, and it's price is $59.99, that you won't get all these people whining about the price being too high. "
My main problem is all games start out at £40 even if they're a pile of dogshit. Retail doesn't see Mass Effect 2 in any other light except than that there is a demand for it. It has nothing to do with the quality of the game that warrants that £40 price tag. When ME3 comes out ME2 will be £15-20 and retailers will be happy to get rid of it to make shelf space.
I personally see £40 as a complete rip off for any game and will usually just wait until a game I want falls below £25.
"So let me guess. You get money from mommy and daddy so you don't have to worry about prices. Once you get a job and start living on your own, you'll start to worry about the price point on everything. "
LOL!
60 bucks for any game is ridiculous, From what I heard Console games are a extra 10 bucks because of a publisher fee and PC games don't have these fees but yet now companies like Activision, Ubisoft and EA are charging that price on the PC for no reason just because they can.It makes me sad that people think 60 is a fair price wait until it goes up again to 70 then what? Gaming may lose its fun if they keep ripping off consumers especially with this DLC bullshit.It's sickening that some of this content is already in the game but you have to pay extra for it. DLC is one the worst things and the biggest scam that has come from the gaming industry in the past years its a real shame.
" So let me guess. You get money from mommy and daddy so you don't have to worry about prices. Once you get a job and start living on your own, you'll start to worry about the price point on everything. "I didn't really get into games until I obtained a full time job. I game when I can, if I can, and all the money that you supposedly think comes from "Mommy and Daddy" is earned through my hard work. I have the same concerns over price that many do, but I know when a game is worth the price and when it is not. The new Man vs. Wild to me is a complete rip-off, because I know that game will be a complete train wreck and not worth the price. But Mass Effect 2, which is essential a Game of the Year edition, I believe to be completely worth the price. So your assumptions are completely misguided, just because you think you know someone doesn't make it so. And to be honest, that whole "Mommy and Daddy" argument is extremely old and tired, give it a rest.
" 60 bucks for any game is ridiculous, From what I heard Console games are a extra 10 bucks because of a publisher fee and PC games don't have these fees but yet now companies like Activision, Ubisoft and EA are charging that price on the PC for no reason just because they can.It makes me sad that people think 60 is a fair price wait until it goes up again to 70 then what? Gaming may lose its fun if they keep ripping off consumers especially with this DLC bullshit.It's sickening that some of this content is already in the game but you have to pay extra for it. DLC is one the worst things and the biggest scam that has come from the gaming industry in the past years its a real shame. "I don't know, I guess it depends on the game you're speaking about. Like for me Oblivion was well worth the $60 price, but I can't say the same for Halo 3. It probably depends heavily on the person playing said game. I'm glad someone could shed some light on the PC portion of my blog, I had no idea what the extra $10 was for, but I've been in gaming since I was little (it was only when I was old enough to work that I fully got behind playing games) and still remember the awful Nintendo 64 prices. Although I'm mixed on the DLC argument...where I believe that if the content is on the disc then it's a rip-off that you have to pay extra to unlock it but I think some DLC is well worth the money to add some more story to the game, although I believe most map packs for online should be free, especially if you pay for Xbox live.
" Brand new, Mass Effect will be $90 here... some retail outlets will have it for over $100. It's most new games too, better off getting them online. The prices really are slightly too high in Australia. "Your wages are also crazy as well though
In some cases, true, but if you don't have a decent job then it gets hard to continue buying brand new games; for dudes like me going back to study, where do we get the money from? When I work, then no worries, I can afford them, but for a kid earning shitty minimums it makes all the difference." @Tsoglani said:
Your wages are also crazy as well though "" Brand new, Mass Effect will be $90 here... some retail outlets will have it for over $100. It's most new games too, better off getting them online. The prices really are slightly too high in Australia. "
I understand they add on a bit to the retail price for shipping, but it's frustrating when the rest of the world pays $50-60 for new games at retail.
EDIT: I have seen games retail at certain stores in Victoria for $110-120... and those were standard editions.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment