Video game prices have remained the same for nearly 3 decades so why do we complain?

[bandicoot]

I don’t remember the $40 season pass for every game on top of the full price back on my NES, SNES, Genesis, N64, PS2, etc.

Really? Could've swore I had to pay 1.99 for every new level I unlocked on Super Mario 64.

 

[Turtlejuice]

I lurk the forums quite a bit, and never once have I seen him admit being wrong or having been corrected. Mostly the same with @Madmick so it's pretty enjoyable watching them do the same thing to one another.

Still love you, though Mick.

What a retarded statement. Most conversations do not have a "right or wrong". They're conversations. And I've made nearly 5000 posts in the 4 years I've been a member, without checking my profile, do you even know what the 5 most recent posts are?

And you've got 1 that thinks DLC and expansions are different things because they've got different names, and most people realising that expansions are DLC, and DLC are expansions. This dumbass thinks it's a different thing because it comes on a disc rather than a download file. An expansion is an expansion, regardless of where it comes from.

 

[rob mafia]

What a retarded statement. Most conversations do not have a "right or wrong". They're conversations. And I've made nearly 5000 posts in the 4 years I've been a member, without checking my profile, do you even know what the 5 most recent posts are?

And you've got 1 that thinks DLC and expansions are different things because they've got different names, and most people realising that expansions are DLC, and DLC are expansions. This dumbass thinks it's a different thing because it comes on a disc rather than a download file. An expansion is an expansion, regardless of where it comes from.

...wow.

8 pages and he STILL doesn't get it and thinks that "DLC are expansions"

and he evaded the ever living hell about the artwork/box/booklet and resell value, too (in physical vs dlc). the above even implies he doesn't even know what his own argument was!

same thing, though. totally!

for hopefully the last time... while downloadable expansions ARE dlc, most dlc aren't expansions.

 

[Turtlejuice]

...wow.

8 pages and he STILL doesn't get it and thinks that "DLC are expansions"

and he evaded the ever living hell about the artwork/box/booklet and resell value, too (in physical vs dlc). the above even implies he doesn't even know what his own argument was!

same thing, though. totally!

for hopefully the last time... while downloadable expansions ARE dlc, most dlc aren't expansions.

Resell value, artwork and box are irrelevant. What does having a box add to the game?

What does a DLC do to a game? Does the game remain identical to the original game once you've added your DLC to the game? Or is the game expanded? How does your brain not understand that? DLC literally expands the game. Is Skyrim a different game if you download it rather than buying a disc? No, it is not. It's the same. An expansion is the same regardless of whether you download it or buy it on a disc.

 

[the muntjac]

AAA games where I live if you want everything as it comes out can total $120-$150 so yeah

Are you talking about today’s pricing from stores reselling the games? Because I was referring to back in the day such as the 90s and early 2000s. I don’t buy the retro titles today because I still have mine.

Edit: Or sorry, are you talking about how much a new game costs today if you want the full experience? If so, yes, that’s a high number just to play a game.

 

[the muntjac]

Really? Could've swore I had to pay 1.99 for every new level I unlocked on Super Mario 64.

For those costs, Bowser can keep the princess.

 

[HereticBD]

Is Skyrim a different game if you download it rather than buying a disc? No, it is not. It's the same.

The game is, but the ownership is not. Make no mistake, digital distribution is on it's way to being exploited as much as possible. It won't be too long, before they do away with outright purchases, and move to a purely subscription based format. You won't be paying $60 to own a game. You won't own shit. You'll be paying 20$ a month to play them. They want a pay to play model where the cash flow never stops, and the consumer never truly owns anything.

It's so painfully obvious that the industry is heading this way, and unfortunately gamers seem more than willing to let them get away with it, with their indifference towards, and in a lot of cases, defense of the nickle and diming developers are currently applying to the industry.

 

[fdswer]

Are you talking about today’s pricing from stores reselling the games? Because I was referring to back in the day such as the 90s and early 2000s. I don’t buy the retro titles today because I still have mine.

Edit: Or sorry, are you talking about how much a new game costs today if you want the full experience? If so, yes, that’s a high number just to play a game.

Yeah that's new games. Americans pay less then everyone else I think they forget that when they make the $60 argument. Just the season pass for the new call if duty is $70.

 

[Turtlejuice]

The game is, but the ownership is not. Make no mistake, digital distribution is on it's way to being exploited as much as possible. It won't be too long, before they do away with outright purchases, and move to a purely subscription based format. You won't be paying $60 to own a game. You won't own shit. You'll be paying 20$ a month to play them. They want a pay to play model where the cash flow never stops, and the consumer never truly owns anything.

It's so painfully obvious that the industry is heading this way, and unfortunately gamers seem more than willing to let them get away with it, with their indifference towards, and in a lot of cases, defense of the nickle and diming developers are currently applying to the industry.

This is a different issue but one that is correct already to an extent. Origin already offer a subscription service that work exactly as you described, as well as psn and xbl to a lesser extent. I'm sure there are probably others as well.

If this worked with a single platform, steam for example, it wouldn't be so bad, as long as you're not tied in to a contract. If you had to sign up to individual companies then it wouldn't be so great.

 

[rob mafia]

Resell value, artwork and box are irrelevant. What does having a box add to the game?

it ADDs the ability to sell it on ebay and get $20 back when i'm done with it. just for starters.

What does a DLC do to a game? Does the game remain identical to the original game once you've added your DLC to the game? Or is the game expanded? How does your brain not understand that? DLC literally expands the game. Is Skyrim a different game if you download it rather than buying a disc? No, it is not. It's the same. An expansion is the same regardless of whether you download it or buy it on a disc.

so when the studio removes 20-50% of a game but then charges you for it, it's "expanded?"

so games are "expanded" when one buys 'gold' (or whatever in-game currency)?

so games are "expanded" when a cosmetic microtransaction is available?

i guess those stash tabs in poe are "expansions."

ahhh, "expansions."

 

[Turtlejuice]

it ADDs the ability to sell it on ebay and get $20 back when i'm done with it. just for starters.





so when the studio removes 20-50% of a game but then charges you for it, it's "expanded?"

so games are "expanded" when one buys 'gold' (or whatever in-game currency)?

so games are "expanded" when a cosmetic microtransaction is available?

i guess those stash tabs in poe are "expansions."

ahhh, "expansions."

In game currency is not DLC, nor does it expand the game. In most cases, probably all cases, it's used to buy content that is in game, not DLC. Yes, cosmetics that are downloaded and not included in the base game expand the game.

 

[rob mafia]

TIL someone is either ignorant enough or stubborn enough (this) to claim that cosmetic mtx are expansions.

of course, it's the same person who thought that buying physical discs = DLC... and who thinks that they're no difference in downloading something or having a physical medium, so it's not quiiiiiite as funny as it should be.

 

[Turtlejuice]

TIL someone is either ignorant enough or stubborn enough (this) to claim that cosmetic mtx are expansions.

of course, it's the same person who thought that buying physical discs = DLC... and who thinks that they're no difference in downloading something or having a physical medium, so it's not quiiiiiite as funny as it should be.

Guy who doesn't know what expansion means is the same guy that reads at the level of a 10 year old.

You keep saying that but I'm still waiting for you to show me where I said that.

 

[rob mafia]

you're right. being able to change the appearance of a pair of boots is definitely an expansion.

tell me more about the great dlc that was doom 2 or gta: london.

 

[Turtlejuice]

you're right. being able to change the appearance of a pair of boots is definitely an expansion.

tell me more about the great dlc that was doom 2 or gta: london.

When did I say they were DLC?

 

[Hyperglide]

I remember Shadowrun at TRU back in 1994 being 125 in Canadian. Thats a lot of snaps to put down for a game. Probably cause it was a niche title.

 

[Turtlejuice]

Can you stop poisoning this thread.
Rob is right, you are wrong.
Huge majority of DLCs are not expansions.
Word expansion has a meaning when in context of video games, and you don't get to redefine it.

And it doesn't mean what you think it means.

An expansion pack, expansion set, supplement, or simply expansion is an addition to an existing role-playing game, tabletop game or video game. These add-ons usually add new game areas, weapons, objects, characters and/or an extended storyline to an already released game.

An expansion in the context of a video game, is literally something that adds new content to a game.

 

[rob mafia]

When did I say they were DLC?

*ahem*

What? Costing more to make is not a valid excuse for selling more copies? Actually seems like a perfrctly valid reason to me.

Better or worse is a matter of opinion. Most indie games are garbage. And of the ones that aren't garbage, most of them are alright at best.

Do you criticise other companies in other industries for "making money"?

DLC is not something new, Doom 2 was essentialy a Doom "DLC". GTA London was a GTA "DLC". Loads of games have had additional content released, those 2 are just off the top of my head.

eta: it's pretty funny that you can't admit to being wrong to this degree, though.

 

[bandicoot]

*ahem*



eta: it's pretty funny that you can't admit to being wrong to this degree, though.

What did I tell you, buddy? He literally can't admit being wrong. One of the most horrible character traits a person can have.

 

[Hollywood Jack]

This is something I've never understood. Modern gamers are so spoiled. With the recent backlash against EA I find myself having mixed feelings. On one hand I do think EA could have handled this better but on the other hand I'm not completely against loot boxes. Things have changed a lot since the early days of gaming. Think of all the work that goes into making these beautiful cut scenes. Everyone wants hundreds of hours of content and nobody wants to read text anymore therefore companies are paying top voice talent to record character voices.

Now go back in time when we didn't have any of these things and guess what? I still paid the same price for those games. I remember buying some N64 games for 60 dollars or more when they were brand new. If I remember correctly Sega Genesis games were priced at 49.99.

So why are so many people complaining about DLC?

It's sort of a "you know it when you see it" thing. I'm perfectly happy to pay for DLC most of the time. But if people feel like they were ripped off, they probably were. Personally, I tend to buy less games and mainly buy from trusted companies. But it seems pretty obvious that a lot of companies are milking their fans for all they're worth.