Poll: How much money do you spend on each game?

[DementedSheep]

Um...well I usually buy complete editions and only when they're under $40 NZD although most games I buy are actually under $20 NZD so your poll is nowhere near close. This isn't always true of course, I think the most I've spent on game is around the $150 mark but that is very rare.

 

[EHKOS]

Usually I can get what I want under $25. Most times under $20. Funnily enough though, I shelled out $30 each for two games. I got addicted to Musuo games and bought Gundam 3 and One Piece 2. Hoping 3 is really coming out on PS3, if the Vita can handle it, even the 3's CELL should be able to. But it's the only version with a TBA date :/

But yeah, usually I'm super thrifty, unless I run into some money, then I get manic and spend it all.

 

[Something Amyss]

At this point I use my backlog heavily, so except for a handful of games a year, everything I buy is on sale. $65 for a game? I don't even know why you'd do that anymore for most titles.

Wait a year, you can get the "GOTY" Komplete edition on sale, with all of the DLC.

Indeed. And the funniest thing? The gaming industry has trained me to do this. They can't help themselves.

 

[Dalisclock]

I'm trying to remember the last time I bought any game for $60(aka at launch) and I think it might have been Bioshock Infinite(but I also got XCOM:EU with it). Most of the time I'll wait until it's somewhere around 30 bucks if I'm really into it or less then 20 when it's on sale.

And because my backlog is so fricken insane, there's no reason not to wait till it's cheap. Not only that, I've learned that buying after a several year wait means that not only will it be cheaper, It'll probably have a GOTY edition with all the DLC and hopefully all of the major bugs will be patched out.

It's too bad that I can't expect to get a fully working and content complete game at launch for $60, so I guess I'll have to settle for the same thing(hopefully) at $25 a year or so later.

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

probably 10-15 bucks honestly..i pretty much get 90% of my games through huge holiday sales or humble bundle, where things are dimes on the dollar, and I almost NEVER buy a game on release unless it is one major exception. (Witcher 3 being the exception in this case, and I don't regret it one bit.)

even then, I had that at 10-15% off from owning both the first two witchers on my account.

 

[babinro]

Couldn't vote because my pricing wasn't reflected.

I buy 95% of my games from steam sales and bundle sites. Meaning that it's rare to spend more than $15.00 on a single game and even more common to spend $5-$10 for multiple titles.

The remaining 5% are exceptions to the norm. Typically 1 a year where I'll choose to pre-order rather than wait patiently. This is often a digital special edition and therefore costs around $80.00 rather than just the base game.

Since I buy so few games brand new I can actually list them below:
- Dragon Age Inquistion
- Diablo 3 Reaper of Souls
- Diablo 3
- Mass Effect 3
From there things get hazy, I want to say Rock Band 3 (with Keyboard and replacement drumset) but I could be missing something.

 

[Something Amyss]

Yes, and now new generations are learning that lesson so quickly. Maybe the future is brighter than we think for that reason alone?

I don't know about that. Look at how fast Watch Dogs and AC Unity sold.

 

[Doom972]

I spend $5-$10 on a game. I use Steam. Some games are so great, that they're worth even as much as $20 in my opinion. If there's a game that I want and it's on Humble Bundle I spend less than $1 on it.
As for extra content, I only buy DLC that adds extra content rather than cosmetics or new weapons, and I only buy DLC for games I really like, and even then I wait for a discount.

 

[maninahat]

My rule of thumb is not pay more for a game than I would a book. That is to say, £4-8 per game, unless it was equivalent to a really good book (in which case I might be tempted to go up to £11)

 

[Frission]

Yikes. Are there people who really pay that much? You forget how expensive this hobby can be.
My upper quartile is more in the 20$ due to Steam Sales (and even that's pushing it). My mode would be more around >10$.

 

[Something Amyss]

There will always be fools, and more importantly, young people spending money that isn't really theirs. They can subsidize the sales and so on that the rest of us love so much.

Unfortunately, they're also the ones who make sure that Microtransactions, day one DLC, etc are a thing.

 

[CaitSeith]

Yikes. Are there people who really pay that much? You forget how expensive this hobby can be.
My upper quartile is more in the 20$ due to Steam Sales (and even that's pushing it). My mode would be more around >10$.

The irony is that there are people people paying thousands of dollars each month in F2P games. And you thought $200 was expensive...

 

[Something Amyss]

They do, but that was always going to happen, just like $10 popcorn at movie theaters. Just like movie theaters though, it's just a temporary (albeit maybe for most of our lives) situation.

Yeah, but would movie studios ever be so unscrupulous as to release definitive editions of movies, or split films into two parts?

 

[Frission]

Effectively bad business practices can only persist if there's someone who's willing to accept them.

Anyway, I'm mystified that anyone can play thousands of dollars per month on F2P games. How is that even possible? Is there an example?

 

[Something Amyss]

Heh, true, but who knew that consumers would ever be so empowered that they could ignore that and wait for their DVR, Netflix, Hulu and so on? The dynamics start to change, and while they will never be perfectly in our favor, I think we're in a very poor asymmetry from the consumer perspective that is bound to change as the technology continues to improve and spread.

The thing is, things seem to have largely gotten worse with technology here. And I think part of that is while the music industry and movie industry had to adapt based on past practices and current technology, games are part and parcel with technology. Games have had DRM since the 70s. Games have been locked and limited since at least the 80s. People will tolerate always-online DRM, and despite complaining, people will buy broken games. There's a similar issue in movies and music, which I generally refer to as the Michael Bay Effect because Bay said people will watch his movies anyway--and it seems like his biggest haters are his best customers--but I think there's an argument for a difference.

Record sales started dropping well before piracy. Movie ticket sales did, too. Gamers are in the middle of a consumer revolt, and the closest we've seen is the usual generation indecision. Not only are the Michael Bays not hurting, it looks like, for the most part, publishers aren't hurting and even indie devs don't seem to be hurting worse than before.

It actually seems the exception, rather than the rule, when bad developers get called out. Even Uwe Bolle's work was unsustainable once they closed those "Springtime for Hitler" tax loopholes, but video games?

This is one of the reasons I don't pay much for most games. Even a bad, broken, or possibly unplayable title can sell millions and be praised. I wouldn't mind paying more for legitimately good games, but I won't pony up the cash with all the apologetics from fans.