 |
| |
|
|
Kassiopeia
|
 |
Jyväskylä, Finland
Jul 2001
time: 07:21
|
|
This will certainly encourage pirates to actually buy games.
Oh wait.
The Doom 3 and WC 3 numbers are moot, both have a solid core of fans who are by now at the age where they can afford the newest installment, plus there's the whole multiplaying thing - although Doom 3 did downplay it. However, not so with WC3.
What I found most  -worthy was that in the article someone said it costs 10 megadollars to build the game, and another 10 to *hype* it. For the love of god, 50% of the budget to marketing?!
Of course, I hope some companies will refuse to raise the prices. Competition 
But then, here in almost-but-not-necessarily-quite-Europe console games are usually closer to the 60 euro than the 50 euro marker when launched, over it even, PC games are at the 50 euro marker - and an euro is worth, what, 1.20 dollars. So we're being ripped off already.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Moral Hazard
|
 |
of jack
Jul 1999
time: 01:21
|
|
Lowering money on advertising would be a collosal mistake. Advertising makes the more casual gamer buy your games. LOTM showed an industry which doesn't advertise much, and while it makes sense for them because their products don't appeal to casual gamers. Other games do; and since games have a far greater fixed cost than marginal costs, each additional sale actually allows them to charge less for their product.
50% has been standard for advertising for at least 5 years. I think it's safe to say that above a certain point, spending more money on a game will only marginally make a better game. A company should be very wary of trying to make a better game, by adding features etc once it's deep in development. Where as extra money spent on advertising will increase sales and can be done late in the development cycle meaning less risk for the game company.
quote:
so their statement that $50 was the standard price for 2 decades is NOT correct? Ive only been playing PC games for 6 years, and never buy first release games. Are we getting into the distinction between the first release price, and the price later on? IIUC $35 is still not an uncommon price for most games once theyve been on the market a couple of months - only the biggest sellers stay for long at their release price, no? |
Your correct that most games prices will drop quickly a few months after release. Especially after the main selling seasons (begining of summer, Christmas) . I'm going to find some old magazines, to verify my statement concerning release price.
I haven't bought a game at release in years. 1999-2001 produced a lot of great games, but it also taught me to wait a few months for patches and game players opinions and for the price to fall. The only games I still purchase around release are sports games and since ESPN now sells their games for $20. I don't plan on spending more than $35 for a game, again.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
child of Thor
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Adagio
In ~10 years, would you play a game released these years, like some do with games now released ~10 years ago?
I doubt I will play Doom 3 or Civilization III in 10 years, while I do play old games from time to time (C64 and Amiga games)
I wouldn't say games created today are much better than games created 10 years ago... most new games are more fun than classic games, but only for a short time, then they get boring. Most classic games are almost as fun as they where when they were released... |
True words well spoken 
I'm having a blast with Xcom UFO(and .....cough...the second and third xcoms games  - this is the first time i've been bad like this, but thank god for the site we cannot mention  ), its been a while since i last played this(lost cd's) - its still an all time classic, and i'd pay £50 for something like it today, maybe £100 if it was at least its equal.
And of course civ1/2 the reason we have this here Aployton site in the first place.
I've been having a blast with my xbox - but even the 'deep' and potential classic games on that format won't be being played over and over in a few years time, well its very unlikely anyway.
Are we more of a 'throw away' society these days, say compared to 5-10 years ago, maybe thats one possible reason why our games are becoming the way they are??
And good luck to the industry if it wants to increase prices 
Another nail in the coffin of computer games. They should just make good games. Good well designed games that offer good value for money and stop ripping(for the most part) Joe public off. May they all rot in the cesspit of their creation. I dont think many people appriciate paying 40 bucks now for a game they have finished before dinner. They wont learn untill its too late though. oh well.
Still we have a glorious history of some very excellent games that are still worth playing, and most can be found very cheap in bargin bins etc
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21.
Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-10-2004 02:01
|