Lysander wrote:Hygraed

How is that the word you always, without fail, spell correctly?

Also, is it just me, or does Riticello (sp) not look like the incarnation of evil in that picture? He looks like somebody's father who just realized he can't arm wrestle his sons and win anymore. Maybe he's just a guy who wants to maximize profit for his corporation and not a cash-thirty d-bag. Maybe you can be one or the other. All this time I just assumed you had to be both.

Yeah I was thinking about box office too, tickets are still, what, 10 bucks a pop, at the lowest? And that's jstu to view the movie one time. Granted that's where most films make their money, but even so, if you put games on display at EB or Best Buy or Fred Mire or Gamestop or where-ever and then charged people 10 bucks a pop there would be mutany. Hell, games and movies are (relatively) the same price, at least it's not got this crazy 3X+ inflation on it.

Hygraed might be closer with games taking longer to play, which is why people would be willing to plunk down teh cash, but it doesn't make the price anymore justified. How long a person chooses to get enjoyment out of a product can varry wildly from person to person; I love Destroy All Humans, for instance, and it took me months to get through it, and it is still fun for me, whereas someone else could whip through the thing in two hours, go "dud ths sucks lolzrz111", go write up a review comparing it unfavorably to Counterstrike despite them being completely fucking different genres and that's that. It has nothing to do with the cost of production.

Yeah I was thinking about box office too, tickets are still, what, 10 bucks a pop, at the lowest? And that's jstu to view the movie one time. Granted that's where most films make their money, but even so, if you put games on display at EB or Best Buy or Fred Mire or Gamestop or where-ever and then charged people 10 bucks a pop there would be mutany. Hell, games and movies are (relatively) the same price, at least it's not got this crazy 3X+ inflation on it.

Hygraed might be closer with games taking longer to play, which is why people would be willing to plunk down teh cash, but it doesn't make the price anymore justified. How long a person chooses to get enjoyment out of a product can varry wildly from person to person; I love Destroy All Humans, for instance, and it took me months to get through it, and it is still fun for me, whereas someone else could whip through the thing in two hours, go "dud ths sucks lolzrz111", go write up a review comparing it unfavorably to Counterstrike despite them being completely fucking different genres and that's that. It has nothing to do with the cost of production.

I think the fact that the consumer expects a game to last quite a bit longer than a movie factors heavily into the price disparity. If the average length of a console game was two hours, nobody would be paying $60 apiece for them.

Lysander wrote:I'm sure you get my point though. video games don't cost any more to make than most films, despite their added complexity, so why do they expect people to pay five times as much for them?

Probably because films can gross a shitload in the theater before ever going to dvd while games have less people paying for them and are just purchased on disk. I think i've paid for maybe three games in my lifetime and don't expect to pay for many in the future thanks to having purchased straw's modded consoles.

I would never pay more than $40 for a video game. I mean I never pay for video games anyway but...

Come on. CDs and movies cost the same. Which is ludicrous really--CDs should be cheaper and movies should be probably more expensive. They're certainly more expensive to make!

Average production cost of CD: $500,000; average production cost of major movie: $100,000,000


So by that logic if Snakes and Arrows cost $10 (like it fucking should) than Pirates of the Carribean should cost, oh, 2000 dollars per DVD. OF course that's not counting box office earnings which is apparently where everyone makes their money anyways so... tickets for $300? DVD for $700? Cool, cool. Glad you're all going with me on that.


I'm sure you get my point though. video games don't cost any more to make than most films, despite their added complexity, so why do they expect people to pay five times as much for them?

Lex wrote:Jesus Christ. Our 360 games are £45. Fucking suck it up.

That's, what, ninety bucks? Jesus Christ! And yet all these assholes launch in Europe last. That absolutely estranges me from reality. Why wouldn't you launch at the place paying the most for your wares on the planet? It's not like it's the Moon and people are so desperate for new games that they'd pay $300 for Blasto II.

The older I get, the more I realize that people running enormous, multi-national corporations are just as likely to have their head up their ass as the guy who demanded security torx.

hygraed wrote:

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:We are not counting the grand I dropped on Xenophobe, right? Right.

I think the rules could probably be waived for arcade cabs, since you're paying for a fair amount of hardware in addition to the game.

Right now, a hundred lurkers who bought the $700 3D0 when it was released are sighing with relief.

hahaha I'm just kidding, there weren't a hundred people who bought the 3D0.

burn!!

Jesus Christ. Our 360 games are £45. Fucking suck it up.

I can see it now

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:We are not counting the grand I dropped on Xenophobe, right? Right.

I think the rules could probably be waived for arcade cabs, since you're paying for a fair amount of hardware in addition to the game.

Vitriola wrote:

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:I think it came out to eighty bucks.

I NEED SOME GODDAMN CURTAINS AND SOME LIVING ROOM FURNITURE SO YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY ARE NOT PERCHING ON WOODEN STOOLS AS WE ENTERTAIN THEM.

Help me help you.

Well, it's probably not a good time to bring this up, then.

One can hope.

Maybe a decor that would match the Xbox 360 he'll buy?

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:I think it came out to eighty bucks.

I NEED SOME GODDAMN CURTAINS AND SOME LIVING ROOM FURNITURE SO YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY ARE NOT PERCHING ON WOODEN STOOLS AS WE ENTERTAIN THEM.

Help me help you.

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:

hygraed wrote:I have never once in my life paid $60 for a video game. I paid $50 for TrackMania United; that was the only time I have ever bought a video game for over $20. Command & Conquer: The First Decade and Total War: Eras don't count because they are compilations: I paid $30 apiece for those.

The most I've ever spent on a video game was probably when I bought Spike's Circus last year for the Vectrex. The author requested payment in Euros. I think it came out to eighty bucks. Spike's Circus is a great game but with how little the dollar is now, I don't know if I could justify a similar expense for the next Vectrex homebrew.

We are not counting the grand I dropped on Xenophobe, right? Right.

hygraed wrote:I have never once in my life paid $60 for a video game. I paid $50 for TrackMania United; that was the only time I have ever bought a video game for over $20. Command & Conquer: The First Decade and Total War: Eras don't count because they are compilations: I paid $30 apiece for those.

The most I've ever spent on a video game was probably when I bought Spike's Circus last year for the Vectrex. The author requested payment in Euros. I think it came out to eighty bucks. Spike's Circus is a great game but with how little the dollar is now, I don't know if I could justify a similar expense for the next Vectrex homebrew.

That makes sense. For some reason I thought EA's games were all $60 now.

I read it as "you had all better learn to 'deal with' $60 games because that is how much they are going to cost for the foreseeable future."

I have never once in my life paid $60 for a video game. I paid $50 for TrackMania United; that was the only time I have ever bought a video game for over $20. Command & Conquer: The First Decade and Total War: Eras don't count because they are compilations: I paid $30 apiece for those.

It could mean two things. The first is that EA is going to "deal with" $60 price tags (you have to love him calling it $59, though, as if every one of their fucking games isn't $59.99) by putting in in-game advertising and going to digital download ... and yet still charging the same price.

The second way to interpret that is to deal with it by moving it to $80.

Computer and console games can enjoy experiencing the same shit that comic books and arcade games went through. I won't regularly pay more than $0.75 for a game of pinball and $0.25 for an arcade game. "But, but -- inflation!!" screeches Electronic Arts. Tough shit.

Likewise comics. But that's a whole other thread.

$60 is as far as I'd go for a computer game, and Riccitiello (who I think has done more to stifle creativity and ruin video games more than any other human on the planet) can fucking deal with that perception because it's not anyone else's problem. That being said, he's got a built-in cult of zombies in the Madden football series that will pay whatever price he tells them to, for a game with no redeeming features that has never been the best football game in the market in any given year. So he'll probably be able to name his price after all.