games really are not that expensive...

[DoPo]

TLDR: games are very cheap, pirate's are wrong

So the whole thing was to disprove some imaginary pirates you were arguing with in your mind? Cool, I hope you won. That wouldn't work against real pirates but keep going, you might have a decent argument one day. And some time later you might even be ready to argue with pirates. I'll even give you a tip - get a lobotomy to be able to understand the justifications they give you.

no it was to show that although games are expensive if you buy on launch day, if you wait for sales and price drops games are really cheap, and that a lot of people I know pirate because "games are to expensive and I wasn't going to buy it for £40 anyway" which is a retarded argument

And besides I don't understand why you indulge in doublethinking so. I mean, you outright say that games are expensive but then claim that they aren't. They are. If you can buy them cheaper, that doesn't invalidate the first claim. And since you want them to not be expensive, then you do indeed only support that they are.

Finally, yes, you were arguing with imaginary people. You constructed your argument to "counter" what people who aren't here say. And this is strikingly similar to a straw man argument.

1. I say that games are expensive on launch, so the solution on that is not to buy them on launch, wait for price drops and sales and buy then, a brand new car is ridiculously expensive but I can get a decent used car for £300, same thing applies to games

2. um yes I was arguing against the main excuse I hear for piracy which is that "games are to expensive" and arguing that the solution to games being expensive isn't to complain to game company's or to pirate it is to "bargin hunt" and buy games cheap and on sale

also trying to insult me other the internet will not work and just makes you look immature

Insult you? I haven't made an attempt, I assure you. I stated things that you yourself confirmed (although it took you time to accept it) - games are expensive and you did construct an argument to refute an imaginary opposition. Not only that, but the opposition was pirates. I don't know why you felt insulted for me point things out. Tell me, how was I supposed to turn your attention to those details, if you thought it was insulting.

 

[HarryScull]

TLDR: games are very cheap, pirate's are wrong

So the whole thing was to disprove some imaginary pirates you were arguing with in your mind? Cool, I hope you won. That wouldn't work against real pirates but keep going, you might have a decent argument one day. And some time later you might even be ready to argue with pirates. I'll even give you a tip - get a lobotomy to be able to understand the justifications they give you.

no it was to show that although games are expensive if you buy on launch day, if you wait for sales and price drops games are really cheap, and that a lot of people I know pirate because "games are to expensive and I wasn't going to buy it for £40 anyway" which is a retarded argument

And besides I don't understand why you indulge in doublethinking so. I mean, you outright say that games are expensive but then claim that they aren't. They are. If you can buy them cheaper, that doesn't invalidate the first claim. And since you want them to not be expensive, then you do indeed only support that they are.

Finally, yes, you were arguing with imaginary people. You constructed your argument to "counter" what people who aren't here say. And this is strikingly similar to a straw man argument.

1. I say that games are expensive on launch, so the solution on that is not to buy them on launch, wait for price drops and sales and buy then, a brand new car is ridiculously expensive but I can get a decent used car for £300, same thing applies to games

2. um yes I was arguing against the main excuse I hear for piracy which is that "games are to expensive" and arguing that the solution to games being expensive isn't to complain to game company's or to pirate it is to "bargin hunt" and buy games cheap and on sale

also trying to insult me other the internet will not work and just makes you look immature

Insult you? I haven't made an attempt, I assure you. I stated things that you yourself confirmed (although it took you time to accept it) - games are expensive and you did construct an argument to refute an imaginary opposition. Not only that, but the opposition was pirates. I don't know why you felt insulted for me point things out. Tell me, how was I supposed to turn your attention to those details, if you thought it was insulting.

1. telling some one to get a lobotomy is insulting

2. I do not accept that games as a whole are expensive but that buying brand new games on release day is expensive, but that if you "bargin hunt" and wait for price drops you can have a great gaming experiencing for a really cheap cost

3. my opposition is not imaginary, one of the reasons I did this was because I have seen a lot of people on the internet and IRL claim pirating is correct because game prices are to high, I respectfully disagree claiming that games can be bought cheaply and that pirating games is unacceptable behaviour

 

[DoPo]

1. telling some one to get a lobotomy is insulting

"get a lobotomy to be able to understand the justifications they give you."

I thought the context was clear: the justifications are retarded, illogical, and quite frankly, insane. And you have to be in a similar state of mind to be able to understand them. Now, not managing to understand that is worthy of mocking.

3. my opposition is not imaginary, one of the reasons I did this was because I have seen a lot of people on the internet and IRL claim pirating is correct because game prices are to high, I respectfully disagree claiming that games can be bought cheaply and that pirating games is unacceptable behaviour

No - there is nobody there in front of you. The people you've heard aren't here to dispute it, they aren't here to make it clear what they mean, they are "out there". Furthermore, you know the views on piracy here. Even if somebody was to come along and try their hand at justifying piracy, they would most likely get the mods take action against them. So, first, you are attacking the point of just some people and we only have your word for it ("shh, trust me, it's really like that")[footnote]Yes, there are people who claim that is why they pirate. Keyword "claim" - it's just the reason they state to others. If you take whatever people say as absolute truth, you'll get very, very disappointed with the world.[/footnote] and second, nobody can even reasonably counter your points. You're just setting yourself up for an automatic "win".

 

[Chairman Miaow]

I don't think the argument has ever been that games are too expensive, just that the starting retail price is too expensive. It's no wonder people buy used.

 

[Thoric485]

That's pretty much how I buy all my games, for 5-10$ from Steam and GOG sales. If I really like a studio, I may get something from them at full price.

Though the average monthly salary in my country is about 500$. Compare that to the 3-4,000$ average of the US and the developed European countries, and you can see I'm not waiting a year or more for a deal, but for an acceptable price for my hobby.

It's the main reason piracy is so widespread in some countries - the cost is unrealistic compared to what most people make. Considering games are a product with minimal manufacturing costs, I think the the solution is easy. Steam already has adjusted prices [http://galyonkin.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/steam-proof.png] for Russia and the other former Soviet republics, and it's shown results [http://www.geekwire.com/2011/experiments-video-game-economics-valves-gabe-newell/] (Russia is now their second biggest continental European market).

But this type of price adjustment hasn't been applied anywhere else yet, and not on any other digital distribution platforms as far as I know. So if publishers and developers want to see some significant money from high piracy regions, they'll do the same, otherwise things will stay as they are.

TLDR: Games are cheap for you, but not for the majority of the world. Piracy is still a morally gray area.

 

[ElPatron]

I just used cars cuz it was the first thing that came to mind almost every industry is more expensive when things are new and shiny. Excuse me for using cars, I could be talking about laundry machines for all I care. The newer more high tech one is going to be more expensive than the older one. They will also go on sale. Don't complain they're expensive if you can get them for cheap but don't want to.

The problem is not using cars. The problem is that you used two factors (time and luxury) to describe the gaming situation.

The quality of a game is only revealed at launch. If you buy a Ferrari, you know it's going to be a Ferrari - even if it's the worst design Ferrari has ever made, the build quality of the engine will still be top notch. Now, you brought up laundry machines - you are again talking about "higher tech" which is a moot point because it introduces new elements to your analogy.

Thing is, cars drop prices because the distance they travel and their age means more problems. A game sitting on the shelves does not decrease value per se.

I am not complaining because I don't buy cheap games. I am complaining because I have to ship games from abroad to enjoy cheap games.

TLDR: Games are cheap for you, but not for the majority of the world. Piracy is still a morally gray area.

Here I pay around $100 for a new game. In Brazil it can cost up to $150. I doubt the "average" Brazilian can afford the luxury of buying a game every month.

 

[Johnson McGee]

Even at full price on new games, gaming is one of the most economical entertainment mediums by price per hour. The problem for most people is the large up-front cost associated with it. i.e. console/pc + games + internet, etc.

 

[spekkio9]

Wrong. It is only economical when compared to movies, and only if you purchase movies at $25 per copy. Many movies sell for 5-15 a pop in the US, even big blockbusters via retail sales.

If you consider other forms of entertainment (deck of cards for $2, for example, or a paperback book for $7, or a basketball for 30 but split 4-10 ways) gaming is one of the most expensive things you can do.

 

[Treblaine]

in my opinion games are an incredibly cheap source of entertainment, and pirating is just inexcusably wrong, you can access these games and pay for them and playing them without paying for them is ridiculous, you know what I cant afford? to rent as house in york but that doesn't give me permission to move into a house anyway and then complain to the tenant that they are in the wrong and act like I'm a victim

Weird, because if you break into a house in York when the owners aren't home and are able to change the locks quick enough (which consist of taking a sledge hammer to the lock locks and then screwing on a padlock latch) then you can claim squatters rights and it will be months (if not years) in court to get you evicted and you may be able to claim ownership of the house... and the worst/best part. The original owners have to keep paying off the mortgage!!!

But other than how fucking INSANE squatter's right are in the UK, there are many reasons not to compare houses to games.

1. Houses are VERY FINITE resources
Especially in a country with limited land you can build on, endless bureaucracy on building permission and limited skill-set and resources to make or upkeep houses mean supply is short. You cannot move houses around the country (economically) and you have to build houses close to resources like gas, electricity, communication, commerce and work.

2. Location Location Location
When you buy a house you don't just buy a house, you buy the location around it. If you are within walking distance of a beach that doesn't have either parking nor a timely bus route then you have bought access to that beach as well. And this applies for everything, including public services like good schools and reputable well-managed NHS hospitals.

3. Houses may (or may not) be luxurious, but they are not a luxury
People need houses. Without a roof over your head you have a good chance of dying and thousands of possibilities are denied from you. Think about how many things you need a home address to apply for. You can't get a driving licence of ID card without a house address to deliver it to. You can't do business, you can't have a bank account. And that's not to mention the weather, it is a fact of life that homeless people die on the streets when the weather gets bad. Without a house you cannot own any more than you can carry.

Games are not finite. They are digital. They can be perfectly copied INFINITELY without degradation. The market may be finite, it is limited by the number of people who own gaming devices or are willing to buy one. Demand. But game sales are no where near approaching that finite limit. That finite limit is approached by things like Facebook and Google, with almost everyone who has a computer connected to the internet can use them are using them. But even the huge sales of CoD series, less than 15% actually buy the game new.

So the supply of games is limited only by the market so the games price should go down as the market grows. You can see this in PC gaming where more people join an MMO game or a service like steam the price of new games trends down to make more money by selling to more.

Piracy isn't helping but with the way games are going with such competitive pricing and so many perks from going legitimate it isn't as much of an issue any more. But as equally significant financial issue (even if not a moral issue) is thedominance of Pre-Owned sales of games in the console market and the ham-fisted attempts to stop it like day-one DLC and network-passes.

 

[Frission]

Jim said it best. Games are a luxury. They're the first things to go in times of duress. So it's not expensive as "we can't afford it" it's expensive as "this is a drain that we have to get rid of". Those who buy games aren't the ones who get hurt. It's the publisher when it drives away potential customers, because they would rather not waste too much money.

 

[rob_simple]

It's not the high price of games that annoys me, I have no problem paying for something I enjoy playing; my problem lies in the way that most retailers artificially inflate prices on highly anticipated games and keep the prices unreasonably high on old games that they know there is still potential demand for. This happens with no other medium.

All major films retail at roughly the same price on release and drop at about the same rate --excluding things like sales and BOGOF offers-- so why is it that most new games will retail at £40 but a game everyone knows is going to sell, like Modern Warfare 3, goes on sale at £50?

Similarly, while some great games will plummet in price only a few months after release (I picked up Deus Ex:HR for a tenner about five months after it came out,) retailers will keep distinctly average but very popular games at high prices pretty much forever (the first Modern Warfare still retails for about £35 first-hand in most stores; that's a drop from RRP of five quid in as many years.)

There is absolutely no way to justify the price-structuring that retailers apply to games (but no other medium) other than they are greedy, exploitative sacks of shit and that is my objection.

 

[AngryFrenchCanadian]

Gaming doesn't have to be expensive if you're willing to wait, but not everybody can do this, as the success of a game is measured by the copies it sells at launch and a short time after.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

Gamers mostly behave and act like entitled children online (and in real life?) and thus expect, neigh, demand the latest and most fantastically over budget blockbusters be less than a tenth of their weekly income.

Basically: "Every new AAA release costs more than my pocket money. Games are expensive."

Logics.

 

[lunavixen]

Gaming is not too expensive. IF it's too expensive for YOU, just wait for a sale.

I'll use Amazon here (Note: 360 versions listed):
Mass Effect 3 already dropped to $43 (came out three months ago)
Prototype 2 already dropped to $40 (came out two months ago)
Max Payne 3 already dropped to $50 (shit, didn't this JUST come out)
Assassins Creed Revelation dropped to $30 (came out seven months ago and it's cut in half)

those prices that you stated depend on where you are, location and region can be factors in the price of a game, as regions have to be taken into account for consoles (without modding, consoles are region locked, like some DVD players, thus preventing some gamers from buying the games cheaper from overseas), if i want to import a game, i have to get it from the UK as they are the only ones who share the AU region, but you are right, purchasing online can be much cheaper than going to a game shop.

I myself wait for most games to come down in price, unless it is one i've had on preorder

 

[II Scarecrow II]

Hmm, you're purchasing last gen games over the internet that are on sale, so of course they're cheap. No-body is arguing that OLD games are cheap, the problem is with the NEW ones, or the big Triple-A titles. For example, Modern Warfare 2, or even WaW still retails in EB Games for $60, and that's a used copy in Australia. Brand new games usually average between $90-$110, depending on how much you shop around, and this can last for months depending on the title. BF3, which has been out for almost 8 months STILL retails at the full $90 price tag that I payed for it new.

Hmmm, are you from the future?

Because that's the only way I can see you truthfully stating that Limbo, Bastion, Shogun 2 and Fall of the Samurai are "last gen" or "old" games.

Is Dead Island last gen too? $12

What about F.E.A.R 3? $15,37

Saints Row: The Third? 10,19?

I'm not sure if you are referring to purely PC prices, but I think you are. I went into EB games just today to check the prices on those games. First of all, Limbo and Bastion are Indie releases, and thus are not going to be extremely expensive. However, Shogun 2 is still retailing in the store for $50-$60, Dead Island is still $50 on Xbox for a pre-owned copy, and SR3 is still $60. Yes, purchasing retail is obviously going to be more expensive, but unlike PC, console gamers rarely have the luxury of downloading their games, and all games are priced ridiculously high.

The only games that drop rapidly in price are either the real bad ones, or single-player games that get beaten and returned within a month. I walked in to EB, and they had probably 20 copies of pre-owned Skyrim, and it is still going to $70! I am not saying it's impossible to find cheap games, as you're right, Steam sales and Indie titles are all very cheap, but that doesn't change the fact that console gamers still get ripped off for new releases every time. And while you might argue that one could just wait a few months for the price to drop, the price may barely drop at all, and for huge multiplayer titles, those few months puts you at a huge disadvantage compared to the rest of players.

Sure, games can be worth it in time you sink into them. I have played 300 hours in Battlefield 3, which cost me $90 on release. Yes, that is a high price, but you are paying for a worthy amount of entertainment, right? WRONG, but more on this in a minute. The problem with this is that publishers are beginning to nikel-&-dime their customers with rather cheap tactics. Now, I play Battlefield on the Xbox, so in addition to the game I also pay a Live subscription to have the priviledge of online play. Since Battlefield uses dedicated servers, new game owners get an online pass to allow them access to these servers, but people that wait for a few months for the price to drop still get wammied with the price of the online pass that they have to purchase online. However, DICE/EA has since scrapped the officially supported servers, and now players have to rent their own at a rather high price (4000 MP for 3 months). What I cannot understand is why a game based around the multiplayer requires you to purchase the game, purchase the online pass and then purchase your own server so that you are able to play the game YOU PAID FOR. In addition, publishers are getting creative with their DLC rip-offs in an attempt to drag every possible cent from you as they can.

DLC, regardless of age, is all usually the same price within a set of brackets. Map packs and weapons are usually 800MP, Big Map Packs are usually 1200MP and then you get themes and avatar items at low prices, usually 80-240MP. The problem is that these prices NEVER DROP. Regardless of the age of the game, the price will remain the same for the DLC. In addition to that, publishers are now trying to get your money from you up front with season passes, or premium memberships to give you early access to all the DLC's. Using BF3 again as an example, they will soon be releasing a premium membership similar to CoD ELITE, that gives you access to all 5 DLC's at a price of 4000MP, even if you already have the first of the DLC packs. This premium membership will give people 2 weeks early access to the maps and weapon unlocks, give them access to exlcusive content and events and priority access to the servers that OTHER PEOPLE HAVE PAID FOR. This is what really irks me, as the people that don't buy this package will be at a disadvantage to those that have, and it splits the playing community into those that have paid and those that haven't. And people will buy this, thinking it is a deal, forgetting the fact that they might not be playing the game when the last DLC pack is released, but EA doesn't care, because they already have your money. So let's do some quick math. $80 for 1 year of Live, $90 for BF3 (including online pass), $150 to rent your own server for a year and then $50 to get premium access to DLC and servers. So are you tell me that $370 to play a SINGLE game for ONE YEAR is cheap, a game that you have been forced to pay for over and over again? People can keep saying "blah blah mindless sheep blah blah" but that does not change the fact that the pricing system in the games industry is inherently broken.

In this sense, EA is probably the worst with this money spinning. Even in Mass Effect 3, they have implemented a system that would be more common in a F2P game, as people have the option to grind for gear, or pay real money for a CHANCE to get the gear that they want. And this system is inherently broken as people can fork out hundreds of dollars in a gamble and STILL not get the items or gear that they want.

You can all throw around your insults about the stupidity of buying day 1 or waiting for the price to drop, but my point still remains that games are over-priced on their release, and publishers are getting more and more underhanded in their tactics to bleed you of every cent. And can everyone please stop using Indie games as an example? Yes, Indie games are cheap because they are simple. You cannot compare Angry Birds with Skyrim, because they are two completely different types of games in terms of their complexity and scope. And yes, Steam sales do provide incredible deals, but just remember that not all gaming avenues have the same kind of service.

 

[MASTACHIEFPWN]

Go to Astralia, mate.

There, they are. Some games are like 93 USD there.


But yeah, a majority of my games come from steam's bi yearly sales.

 

[Windcaler]

Like it or not $60 is still a substantial investment for a lot of people. For me $60 isnt all that much, I could buy a new AAA game every month and still be ok but I have a successful career and no major bills to pay. For someone less fortunate then me $60 can be the difference between eating or going hungry. You can add in older games and even free to play games but the problem is you either have to wait several years for such games to become cheap or in the case of many free to play games the experience is infinitely inferior to the pay to play experience (i.e City of heros). Then in the provided examples you lacked the cost of a console, PC, tablet, etc

To be fair, there are many games that are much cheaper and still amazing fun but most of these are indie games that have little to no marketing presence outside of word of mouth so its unlikely that the average person will hear about it. They tend to lack high production values of the AAA industry and that can turn a lot of people off but there are some real gems out there. Dungeon defenders was, for me, an amazing purchase for only $15 and Ive put hundreds of hours into it. The same can be said for legend of grimmrock although my time with that game was more in the dozens of hours

On the flip side you have some AAA games that offer hundreds of hours of play like Fallout 3/new vegas and skyrim. However theyre full price at $60 and then theres the DLC to tack on (Costing $5-20 each) assuming you dont wait a year or more for the full package at $60.

I just have to disagree. Even though I have a career and can afford to buy games pretty regularily I still think theyre to expensive for the average person. I, most certainly, do not fall in the realm of "average consumer"