I haven't seen anyone talk about the PC equivalent.. I would rather pay 45 or 50 for a PC version that's most likely more open to modding then $60 for a more restrictive version. (Like any source game)
I paid 60 euro, not dollars, for Crysis and i would pay the same for a game with the same or better quality if i like it. Games surely are a useless waste of time, but if you are bored... not all is work, work, and more work. Films are also a waste of time and money? People go to cinema and they waste more hehehe I bought…
Ever notice that with some games? Personally I think it is just companies being right gits. Like Nintendo with Twilight Princess. And CoD 4. Still the same price they released on! :thumbdown:
I don't mind paying $60 for games that SEEM like $60 games, but a LOT of games are simply priced at $60 because they're standardized. I think games should be priced according to the cost of development.
From the hobby perspective: Sure, some people have a hobby racing cars, which can easily get into the hundreds of thousands. But other hobbies, like fishing, can be dirt cheap. Comparing hobbies to values is not an even comparison.
yes.. considering the man power it takes to make them, and that even at 60 bucks most companies are still not making a profit... i paid 50 bucks for battletoads in 1991... i also paid like 100 bucks for phantasy star III... and that was 18 years ago... most people forget that back in the day people only had like 2 or 3…
depends on the game. some games, definitely. however, the 60 dollar flat rate for games i disagree with, i mean i have no qualms with having paid 60 bucks for fallout 3, but feel like it's too much for guitar hero or condemned.
Surely it would be better than for Okami to have been sold for less? Wouldn't that make people consider longer which to buy? (If they weren't FF freaks like me, of course. I am playing FFVII on my PSP right now and loving it all over again :) )