In 1990 games for NES sometimes were sold at 50 dollars if they were brand new or really popular, sometimes more. When Ninja Turtles came out for example, you know that awesome piece of crap that wasn't at all like the the arcade version, cost 50 bucks at some stores. So the prices for games in my eyes are pretty standard…
I agree with the # of hours thing. $3/hour seems fair to me, so for a $60 it'll have to give me at least 20 hours game time. But I also agree with having a limit, so $60 is the limit for a game - I wouldnt pay $120 for FF12 for example even though it did give me 40 hours of game time.
I'm might have something that puts games in perspectives. Richard, as a hobby. No, games are not expensive compared to some at least.. Example. My other hobby love (other than comics) is R/C Car Racing. Lets see, for the top of the line first class machine.. (1/10th Sedan) $420 Chassis kit Without Body/tires $250 Motor/ESC…
I think $60 is too much for most games. I do think that some games are more justified in the price, because more production has gone into them, but most games don't have the quality to justify the money. For example: I'm not a Madden kind of guy, but is it really worth $60 every year? Most of those sports type games don't…
I'd buy way more games if they were $20-$40. Thanks to Steam, a lot of them are! So I buy them again (if a year or two late). If retail feels like following suit, I'll buy more console games too. I've always been extremely opposed to the high price point of games because it encourages a reliance on blockbuster titles to…
yeah, depends on the game - I buy a LOT of games, and lately not only do I not have the money but I don't have the time, so I have to be really picky in what I buy, and I do a LOT of narrowing down until I have a select few I choose to purchase. some factors that go in are stuff like how much gameplay time will I get out…