130 réponses à ce sujet

[FirstCitizen800]

Baldur's Gate, and Baldur's Gate 2 remain benchmarks in the computer gaming industry. With the advent of console dominance, it seems RPGs have been becoming simpler, and less encompassing. In this day and age, the market rules all. Dragon Age 2 didn't cost me any more than Dragon Age Orgins did, by recollection. I enjoyed the sequel, but not as much as the first. Everyone on this board is well aware of the conterversies surrounding Dragon Age 2. I have come to the concluson that I would would spend about a maximum of $159 on a game, with modern graphics, epic story, and true old-school RPG depth. That is about 3x what normal games sell for. Is such an economic model phesable is my question. Bioware dumbed down DA2 in hopes of getting more sales. Even if you aren't willing to pay 3 times as much for a good RPG, are you willing to pay more than the going 50-60 dollar price for a good 'old school' rpg?

Note, since $159 dollars is three times the cost of an average game, I'd only spend so much on pre-order of a title from a company I really trusted. And after DA2, there is no such company. Before DA2, I probably would have laid that much on the line for Bioware.

Dragon Age 2 Took me 42 Hours to Complete
A 2 Hour Movie Costs 10 dollars approximately.

I estimate I got about 43 dollars of enjoyment out of it, not including re-runs, and their diminishing returns.

Modifié par FirstCitizen800, 15 mars 2011 - 06:48 .

[Cody211282]

So what your asking is if I would shell out more money then the rippoff that $60 a game is. No, no I wouldn't.

[pomrink]

I'd be willing to pay more for a great RPG.

[AngelicMachinery]

No, 60 bucks is my limit on a game.

[yellow cake]

better be the best rpg ever

[Haplose]

Yes, but it would have to be a lot better then DA:O. Which was still a grindfest at it's core. With very poor game mechanics I dare say. At least the mechanics were greatly improved in DA2.

Now give me something with the depth and atmosphere of Planescape:Torment or Fallout 1&2. Game mechanics as perfect as Fallout 1&2. Then I'm willing to pay more.

I doubt I will ever see another game like that though.

[BeljoraDien]

I've said this before:
I pre-ordered The Witcher 2 Collectors edition for $140 and I'm not even interestied in a lot of the stuff it comes with (With the exception of the map and art book and things like that). I did it 'cause I want to support a game that I felt went above and beyond.

Similarly, with DAO, I bought all the DLC and the expansion despite knowing beforehand they would be mediocre.

Contrast: I rented DA2. It's already back at the store, so no DLC for me.

[Nightrain50]

$60 is more than enough for a game. Do the math. If they sold 3 million copies that's 180 million dollars. How much profit do you need? I don't buy this games are getting too expensive to make crap. It doesn't add up.

[sepir]

Probably not. I ordered DA:O online as all the stores has it at $110 here. Considering I buy a lot of movies, and have used the argument of cost of entertainment per hour being a lot less for games, it really isn't logical. I guess it feels like too much of an investment instead of a game purchase when the cost gets too high. A game half the price of the equipment to play and all that.

[hexaligned]

If it was tailored made to suit every one of my preferences? Yes. That will never happen though.

[errant_knight]

If I could be guaranteed that it would have the depth, gameplay, and overall tone of DA:O, as well as the replayability (and not look like DA2, either), I would. I've bought a couple of other games this year, but I keep putting them aside to replay Origins. I've basically played it over and over for a year. I'd absolutely be willing to pay more for the greater development time of a game like that, with that kind of long term entertainment value. I don't think I've ever bought a game that had so much value.

[morgueanna]

Why should I have to pay more for a 'better' game? Almost every new game is the same price, much as every new cd and every new movie is the same price. It's the developer's job to create a game that I find enjoyable to get me to spend my money. Why would I pay 'more' when I could just...not pay for a game I don't want?

Seriously, take an economics class.

[Merci357]

No. More then 60$ only in case of a collectors edition.

[sepir]

Nightrain50 wrote...

$60 is more than enough for a game. Do the math. If they sold 3 million copies that's 180 million dollars. How much profit do you need? I don't buy this games are getting too expensive to make crap. It doesn't add up.

Somehow it seems to be though. EA is running at a loss.

[Apollo Taren]

No. I'm paying too much for games as is. Companies need to work out their economic model before making me pay more than $100 for anything short of the undisputed best RPG ever, past, present, or future.

[ChillyBilly42]

If $80 guaranteed me a game that I would like then yes

[ilPianiste]

I might consider to pay 45 Euro (DA2 Amazon price at launch) for a game without draconian DRM, cut out content (to commercialize as DLC), dumb gore and splatter effects and ninja-fighting. And which has NOT been "streamlined" just for the purpose to be (relatively) cheap in production and just to appeal to folks, who traditionally don't care for the genre (which DA2 still is positioned in IMO).

[morgueanna]

sepir wrote...

Nightrain50 wrote...

$60 is more than enough for a game. Do the math. If they sold 3 million copies that's 180 million dollars. How much profit do you need? I don't buy this games are getting too expensive to make crap. It doesn't add up.

Somehow it seems to be though. EA is running at a loss.

Games have been the same price for years.  The ONLY thing that has changed is the marketing strategy- companies are spending tons more on marketing, research...basically all the crap they don't really need to spend to sell games, because real gamers will buy them anyway.

But they spend millions of dollars on commercials, billboards, ads in non-gaming magazines, just to get the 'casual consumer' to spend money.  I honestly don't think it pays off in the end.

Development is not more expensive.  It's all the extra crap they want to add on that makes them run in the red. 

[night0205]

I would have paid over a hundred for Origins if I had to... but I got it for like $29.99. I've gotten more value out of Dragon Age Origins then probably all the games I've ever bought put together, considering how much re-play value and hours I've put into it. Except maybe Morrowind... I put a lot of hours into that... but strangely I can say I didn't get as much value in comparison to Origins. The thing about Morrowind is you walk all over creation... literally... even to do minor quests. You spend I would say 80% of that game walking around if not more. Good thing the enviroment look frickin' awesome... unlike Oblivion, which was boring. For a RPG as good as Origins, and gives me as much content and value as Origins, I would pay a hundred... but I wouldn't have to... because it would never be that much.

[Andraste_Reborn]

New games are already around $100 in Australia. So, no, I would not pay $300 for a longer game.

[errant_knight]

morgueanna wrote...

Why should I have to pay more for a 'better' game? Almost every new game is the same price, much as every new cd and every new movie is the same price. It's the developer's job to create a game that I find enjoyable to get me to spend my money. Why would I pay 'more' when I could just...not pay for a game I don't want?

Seriously, take an economics class.

I think you missed the point here, pretty much totally. They don't have to make a game with deep gameplay like DA:O to make money. They can make a shorter, glitzier, and simpler game to make just as much money. Sadly, maybe more. It's not about ecconmics. Ecconomics says appeal to the lowest common denominator and push them out the door.

[BeljoraDien]

morgueanna wrote...

Why should I have to pay more for a 'better' game? Almost every new game is the same price, much as every new cd and every new movie is the same price. It's the developer's job to create a game that I find enjoyable to get me to spend my money. Why would I pay 'more' when I could just...not pay for a game I don't want?

Seriously, take an economics class.

Yeah, but then you get the situation where games appeal to the lowest common denominator to maximize profit. There are people, like me, who are looking for a video game that can be considered a high art. You pay more to eat at a fine dining restaurant than at McDonalds.

[Travie]

There are great RPGs coming out for 50. After playing DA2 there was no legitimate reason for charging 60.

[Flunkorg]

If I wanna play a "true" RPG, Il call a bunch of my friends up, make some foam weapons, wear a cape and call my self Sir Maximus.

[BeljoraDien]

Flunkorg wrote...

If I wanna play a "true" RPG, Il call a bunch of my friends up, make some foam weapons, wear a cape and call my self Sir Maximus.

You'd have to pay me WAY more than $60 to do that.