Video Game Makers Finally have a Chance to Raise Prices

A

Akuma

CAGiversary!
Feedback
1 (100%)
So I came across this story on yahoo.com

link:http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ibd/20050315/bs_ibd_ibd/2005314tech

Go ahead and let them raise their prices, we all know that they will fall in due time. The unwitting moms and dads and the early adopters/ fanboys will foot the bill until the prices come down. If the market will bear it so be it, welcome to capitalism 101 but I never pay above $20 for a game let alone $50. I'm sure we'll see $60 games with the release of Xbox 2, I'm curious to see if it sticks.

Feel free to discuss but for all of us CAGs it's a non-issue.
 
We've been paying $50 for a new game for 20+ years now. I can't believe it took this long... I still won't pay more than $20 and I'll be more inclined to buy used but whatever - like someone above said there are tons of morons out there who will foot the bill...
 
20 years is questionable - I remember seeing Virtua Racing on Sega Genesis sell for $99.99 when it first came out.

Now? You could probably find it for a dollar or less.

Would you have paid $99.99 back in the day for this?

Virtua%20Racing%20(GS-Cap).png


Can you believe we used to say "Damn, that looks real!" to that?
 
I haven't $50 for a game since Halo 2, but I can't hold out on Splinter Cell 3 and Doom 3. I'm getting those two games on launch, fo' sho'!
 
[quote name='Scorch']20 years is questionable - I remember seeing Virtua Racing on Sega Genesis sell for $99.99 when it first came out.

Now? You could probably find it for a dollar or less.

Would you have paid $99.99 back in the day for this?

Virtua%20Racing%20(GS-Cap).png


Can you believe we used to say "Damn, that looks real!" to that?[/quote]

yeah, I meant $50 give or take - Sony first party stuff has been $40 for a while and back in the N64 days some games were $70... also, is that really a pic of Virtua Racing? I thought for a second someone snapped a photo from their F1. :p
 
Dont forget, Phantasy Star IV clocked in at $99.99.

Also, several SNES games were $74.99 originally. I remember Street Fighter II cost that much at first.
 
sure they could charge more - they could start doing that now if they want...but I doubt they will - no matter what the ramp-up costs will be for the next gen consoles.

It's called volume people.

Probably what you will see happen is consolodation in the industry if costs are such a factor. The little guys will either call it quits or get swallowed up by the bigger fish.

I won't spend $50 on a game now, I'm sure not to spend any more on a game in the future.

I think they've set a trend in pricing for 10-20years and the public expects that.
 
All this would do is encourage piracy. I can't really see this becoming the norm.

Instead, I think you'll see a rise in "collector's editions" like the Halo 2 of Half-Life 2 special versions that cost extra.
 
Just skimmed the article, but it looks like it came from one of the speakers at GDC, and I read the whole transcript of that. And to be honest, I'm not so sure it's a bad thing...the way the speaker put it, it sounded like they would raise prices, but they would also release fewer crappy games (because they can't afford to have a game not do well), and that they would put more effort into making each game great. Also, there will be fewer games released. Who here doesn't spend enough money on games to be able to afford this? You might have to buy fewer, but what if you're guaranteed that they are going to be better? Does anyone here have time to play all the games they have anyway? Wouldn't you rather spend what little free time you have on games that are actually worth it?
That said, I'm not sure I believe them, and if the games do not improve in quality (and I certainly do not mean graphics, although those better be good as well), I know I will not be buying many games (still have to have Zelda).

One more note, the article I read talked about tactics to keep the prices from dropping, so I wouldn't count on always being able to get games for cheap...
 
[quote name='DenisDFat']why don't they ever make collector's editions for games that don't suck?[/quote]

i wonder how many times you have used the word suck in your lifetime??
 
"So now it's a matter of 'Let's try this out and see how consumers like it." - Because consumers really like higher prices, right?

It may work, if there are enough early adopters in the general public. MSRP means nothing to CAGs anyway, so this news doesnt affect us much.
 
I never buy systems on launch and I have a HUGE backlog of games as it is. It won't bother me at all if I have to stop buying for awhile.
 
[quote name='cthcky33'][quote name='DenisDFat']why don't they ever make collector's editions for games that don't suck?[/quote]

i wonder how many times you have used the word suck in your lifetime??[/quote]

You really opened yourself up on that one.
 
The only way I'll pay more then $50 for any game is if its a collectors edition for a game I really want.
If the price of games does raise to $60 I doubt it will last very long. Consumers are used to paying $50 for a game and I tdoubt they will be very happy if the SRP of games raise by $10.
 
Let em raise the price. Its so rare that I buy a game when it first comes out that I could care less. Look at Doom 3, been out 6 months now and you can usually get it for around $30 which is $30 less than it came out at. I'm a perfect little-CAG, I never pay full price for my games, NEVER. The higher the price a game debuts at, the faster it drops. No I don't have any sources or information for that because its simply my opinion.
 
I think the end result may be fewer games to reduce the risk, targeted to a wider audience to improve sale rather than an increase in price. Just because you can charge more money doesn't mean that sales will stay constant.
 
This is the most ridiculous part:

[quote name='article']Consumers will be getting more hours of entertainment for the extra money, says Robert Kotick, chief executive of Activision.[/quote]

My ass we'll be getting more hours out of the games. Tony Hawk games will still be as long as they are and I doubt that our extra $10 will translate to any more hours of entertainment. No need to make blatantly false remarks like that.
 
First off we don't know what will happen, a year or 2 ago, their were talks of EA charging you play online, and for roster downloads...that still hasn't happened yet...I would like to see more of the crappy and mediocre games dissappear..their is little to no need for them
 
Playstation/Saturn games were $60 when they first came out and that didn't last very long. The only way this will ever fly is we have another N64/Neo Geo situation were there is a shortage of games, but the games released are pure quality (oleander picked up on this).

Anyway, I think that competition will keep prices down despite developers' wishes unless something unforseen happens this next generation.
 
Where the hell have you people been for the last 15-20 years?

Most of my SNES games were more then $50!

All my Nintendo 64 games were way more then $50! I still have a few sealed ones w/ price stickers and the cheapest is $69.99!

I feel you guys are pretty much complaining about nothing. You wouldn't be so upset if you only buy the games you plan on keeping and playing instead of every single flippin game that comes out.

You are not being a cheap ass by buying many games at less then MSRP. You are probably spending more by buying many less expensive games then you would if you baught only a few games at normal prices.

I'll gladly pay $70 or $80 for a great game. Would you have payed $70 or $80 for Final Fantasy II or III, Chrono Trigger, Earthbound, and Mario RPG? I did, and don't regret it. I'd do it again too if Nintendo re-released SNES and the games.

One thing I've noticed is ever since games became the standard $40 and $50, they have really dropped in quality. Before I could spend $60, $70, or $80+ and get Mario 64 or Zelda Ocarine of Time or Earthbound. Now for $50 I get stuck with what? Super Mario Sunshine (not saying it's bad, just not nearly as good as Mario 64)? WTF!?

I look forward to seeing if increased prices also increases quality, because this gen of games and systems has been the worst yet. And ironically, it has also been the cheapest games have been.

Granted there have been a few gems here and there, but not many. My entire PS2 collection is maybe 10 games. My XBox collection consists of 0 games, and even though I have more gamecube games then I should, I like the Nintendo 64 more.


Chris
 
Every time the industry has tried to raise prices they have failed. The only reason it may work this time is due to conglomeration into lerger companies. Think EA. Otherwise this will be doomed to failure like all the rest.
 
[quote name='b3b0p']Where the hell have you people been for the last 15-20 years?

Most of my SNES games were more then $50!

All my Nintendo 64 games were way more then $50! I still have a few sealed ones w/ price stickers and the cheapest is $69.99!

I feel you guys are pretty much complaining about nothing. You wouldn't be so upset if you only buy the games you plan on keeping and playing instead of every single flippin game that comes out.

You are not being a cheap ass by buying many games at less then MSRP. You are probably spending more by buying many less expensive games then you would if you baught only a few games at normal prices.

I'll gladly pay $70 or $80 for a great game. Would you have payed $70 or $80 for Final Fantasy II or III, Chrono Trigger, Earthbound, and Mario RPG? I did, and don't regret it. I'd do it again too if Nintendo re-released SNES and the games.

One thing I've noticed is ever since games became the standard $40 and $50, they have really dropped in quality. Before I could spend $60, $70, or $80+ and get Mario 64 or Zelda Ocarine of Time or Earthbound. Now for $50 I get stuck with what? Super Mario Sunshine (not saying it's bad, just not nearly as good as Mario 64)? WTF!?

I look forward to seeing if increased prices also increases quality, because this gen of games and systems has been the worst yet. And ironically, it has also been the cheapest games have been.

Granted there have been a few gems here and there, but not many. My entire PS2 collection is maybe 10 games. My XBox collection consists of 0 games, and even though I have more gamecube games then I should, I like the Nintendo 64 more.


Chris[/quote]

Thank you! I absolutely remember OoT and Majora's Mask costing me $70...thank god for the end of the cartridge era!
 
[quote name='b3b0p']One thing I've noticed is ever since games became the standard $40 and $50, they have really dropped in quality. Before I could spend $60, $70, or $80+ and get Mario 64 or Zelda Ocarine of Time or Earthbound. Now for $50 I get stuck with what? Super Mario Sunshine (not saying it's bad, just not nearly as good as Mario 64)? WTF!?

I look forward to seeing if increased prices also increases quality, because this gen of games and systems has been the worst yet. And ironically, it has also been the cheapest games have been.
Chris[/quote]

There is some validity to the first point you made. I would have to disagree that this gen of games and systems has been the worst yet though. I think the 32-64 bit gen was a bit worse simply because the hardware couldn't handle what a lot of designers had in mind. Game design in those 3D worlds was largely experimental. Some were great, some weren't. It's no wonder that in the 32-64 bit era, 2D games are more sought after than their 3D counterparts (Paper Mario, Castlevania SOTN, Guardian Heroes). Quite frankly, the evolution of 2D game design really took off despite the fact Sony kept shoving 3D crap down our throats. Yes there has been a lot of crap this gen but there have been some amazing games out. There have been tremendous advances in gameplay, controllers, and multiplayer gaming. Also, remember that this gen includes the GBA SP which in my opinion takes the 16-bit glory days of the SNES and Genesis and improves them 10 fold.

Like I said, even if prices are raised, there are so many people with huge collections now that unless a MAJOR killer app comes out, most people wil be content with playing through their backlog of games. I don't plan on buying PS3, Xbox Next, or Revolution until a year after their launch. I have too many sealed games as it is.
 
I don't see prices going up to be a big deal as I never buy new games anyway. Why buy it at $50 when I can get it at $20. I have a big enough backlog I shouldn't even be buying them at $20. Have some patience and save some money.

Everyone complains about cartridges and I really don't like them for the amount of space they take up but...2 great things...no load times and they can take a beating...unlike CD's and DVD's.
 
It runs down like this, the reason games dont go up and shouldnt go up is basic supply and demand.

Back in the day, Nes games were 60-70 at release...they went down and by the time Sony rolled out a playstation it was a $50 no matter what.

You see, sure it cost more to make a game....some times up to $30 MILLION....but the movie Spiderman 2 cost over a $100 MILLION to make and the game cost $6 MILLION to make.

The Movie ticket is $8-10 bucks....

The game is $50....

Very Rarely does a movie sell a million tickets, but games break a million all the time (platinum collections...)

So you're getting fu(ked.....

The gaming industry is the top media industry in the world...beating movies....why? Because people are lazy and corprate loves to fu(k you.

If you pay $70 for a game. You're retarded.

It hurt enough paying $55 for Halo 2.
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']
Like I said, even if prices are raised, there are so many people with huge collections now that unless a MAJOR killer app comes out, most people wil be content with playing through their backlog of games. I don't plan on buying PS3, Xbox Next, or Revolution until a year after their launch. I have too many sealed games as it is.[/quote]

Amen to that! Not only is my backlog absurd, but the new systems will be incredibly expensive at first (I'm guessing $400 for Xbox 2).
Furthermore, I don't plan on early adopting again after putting up with PS2's technical kinks that weren't worked out until later versions.
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky']You see, sure it cost more to make a game....some times up to $30 MILLION....but the movie Spiderman 2 cost over a $100 MILLION to make and the game cost $6 MILLION to make.
[/quote]

Current development budgets for an A-list title average around $5 million, said David Doak, director of Free Radical Design, creators of the TimeSplitter series. For the upcoming consoles, "I expect the minimum will be two to three times the current costs," he said.

http://www.gameplanet.co.nz/mag.dyn/News/8340.html

I don't think there has been a game yet that cost $30 million yet.
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK'][quote name='Mookyjooky']You see, sure it cost more to make a game....some times up to $30 MILLION....but the movie Spiderman 2 cost over a $100 MILLION to make and the game cost $6 MILLION to make.
[/quote]

Current development budgets for an A-list title average around $5 million, said David Doak, director of Free Radical Design, creators of the TimeSplitter series. For the upcoming consoles, "I expect the minimum will be two to three times the current costs," he said.

http://www.gameplanet.co.nz/mag.dyn/News/8340.html

I don't think there has been a game yet that cost $30 million yet.[/quote]

Word, I kinda pulled that number out my ass thinking I heard it somewhere....anyways...you get my point.

When something goes plat.....they make 10X their cost. Very few businesses have return like that. Very, very few....

Pay more than $35? You got fu(ked....with a metal dildo.
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky']It runs down like this, the reason games dont go up and shouldnt go up is basic supply and demand.

Back in the day, Nes games were 60-70 at release...they went down and by the time Sony rolled out a playstation it was a $50 no matter what.

You see, sure it cost more to make a game....some times up to $30 MILLION....but the movie Spiderman 2 cost over a $100 MILLION to make and the game cost $6 MILLION to make.

The Movie ticket is $8-10 bucks....

The game is $50....

Very Rarely does a movie sell a million tickets, but games break a million all the time (platinum collections...)

So you're getting fu(ked.....

The gaming industry is the top media industry in the world...beating movies....why? Because people are lazy and corprate loves to fu(k you.

If you pay $70 for a game. You're retarded.

It hurt enough paying $55 for Halo 2.[/quote]

movies sell a million tickets all the time. a million tickets translates to around 9-10 million dollars. thats not very much money for a movie to make at all
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK'][quote name='b3b0p']One thing I've noticed is ever since games became the standard $40 and $50, they have really dropped in quality. Before I could spend $60, $70, or $80+ and get Mario 64 or Zelda Ocarine of Time or Earthbound. Now for $50 I get stuck with what? Super Mario Sunshine (not saying it's bad, just not nearly as good as Mario 64)? WTF!?

I look forward to seeing if increased prices also increases quality, because this gen of games and systems has been the worst yet. And ironically, it has also been the cheapest games have been.
Chris[/quote]

There is some validity to the first point you made. I would have to disagree that this gen of games and systems has been the worst yet though. I think the 32-64 bit gen was a bit worse simply because the hardware couldn't handle what a lot of designers had in mind. Game design in those 3D worlds was largely experimental. Some were great, some weren't. It's no wonder that in the 32-64 bit era, 2D games are more sought after than their 3D counterparts (Paper Mario, Castlevania SOTN, Guardian Heroes). Quite frankly, the evolution of 2D game design really took off despite the fact Sony kept shoving 3D crap down our throats. Yes there has been a lot of crap this gen but there have been some amazing games out. There have been tremendous advances in gameplay, controllers, and multiplayer gaming. Also, remember that this gen includes the GBA SP which in my opinion takes the 16-bit glory days of the SNES and Genesis and improves them 10 fold.

Like I said, even if prices are raised, there are so many people with huge collections now that unless a MAJOR killer app comes out, most people wil be content with playing through their backlog of games. I don't plan on buying PS3, Xbox Next, or Revolution until a year after their launch. I have too many sealed games as it is.[/quote]

I did not include any mention of Gameboy because those games have always been cheaper and you never really hear of people complaining about the price (except NES Classic Series. Which by the way I caved in and bought most of them and let me just say, it was worth it!).

How is the current generation of games NOT the worst yet? Mario Sunshine better then Mario 64 or Mario World or even Mario 3? Zelda Wind Waker better then Ocarina of Time or Majora's Mask or even Link to the Past? Final Fantasy X better the III, VII, or IX? Metal Gear Solid 2 better then Metal Gear Solid (Playstation)? Viewtiful Joe better then Mega Man (any of them!)?

Like I said there are some gems. Disgaea, Gran Turismo 3 and 4, Kingdom Hearts, Metroid. However, that is pretty much (there might be a few others) where my collection starts and ends for this generation.

If prices are raised I expect quality to be raised also. If not, I wil be penny pinching scrooge when it comes to buying video games.

You are right about the backlog. I still have games from NES, SNES, Nintendo 64, and Playstation I want to play that I never did.


Chris
 
Chris is 100% correct. Its all about quantity over quality these days.

And I vividly remember skipping school to pay 79.99 for Final Fantasy 3 on release day, as well as 64.99 of my b-day money going to Best Buy for Mega Man X.

Dave
 
Where have I been?

None of my SNES games were over $50 and I got a good number of my NES games for $20 or less.
 
[quote name='cthcky33'][quote name='Mookyjooky']It runs down like this, the reason games dont go up and shouldnt go up is basic supply and demand.

Back in the day, Nes games were 60-70 at release...they went down and by the time Sony rolled out a playstation it was a $50 no matter what.

You see, sure it cost more to make a game....some times up to $30 MILLION....but the movie Spiderman 2 cost over a $100 MILLION to make and the game cost $6 MILLION to make.

The Movie ticket is $8-10 bucks....

The game is $50....

Very Rarely does a movie sell a million tickets, but games break a million all the time (platinum collections...)

So you're getting fu(ked.....

The gaming industry is the top media industry in the world...beating movies....why? Because people are lazy and corprate loves to fu(k you.

If you pay $70 for a game. You're retarded.

It hurt enough paying $55 for Halo 2.[/quote]

movies sell a million tickets all the time. a million tickets translates to around 9-10 million dollars. thats not very much money for a movie to make at all[/quote]

True, true....what the fuck was I thinking lol....

Anyways....games make like 10x more that they cost.... and movies (Like Spiderman) make barely 3X....

There. Yay!
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky']It runs down like this, the reason games dont go up and shouldnt go up is basic supply and demand.

Back in the day, Nes games were 60-70 at release...they went down and by the time Sony rolled out a playstation it was a $50 no matter what.

You see, sure it cost more to make a game....some times up to $30 MILLION....but the movie Spiderman 2 cost over a $100 MILLION to make and the game cost $6 MILLION to make.

The Movie ticket is $8-10 bucks....

The game is $50....

Very Rarely does a movie sell a million tickets, but games break a million all the time (platinum collections...)

So you're getting fu(ked.....

The gaming industry is the top media industry in the world...beating movies....why? Because people are lazy and corprate loves to fu(k you.

If you pay $70 for a game. You're retarded.

It hurt enough paying $55 for Halo 2.[/quote]


I payed $80 for Chrono Trigger nearly 10 years ago. That was sure F'in stupid! I feel horrible still for doing it. Same for Earthbound and the first Street Fighter II, and... I don't think I will ever get over it. (Notice the sarcasm in this)


Wait let me get this straight? You paid $55 for what supposably is one of, if not the greatest shooter game ever made (never played it, so I would not know, but I did not like Halo) and you are bitching about $55 that it cost you? May I assume that you are of those that think this is one of the greatest games ever? If not, I would not like spending $55 either, but if you feel it was a truly wonderful, fun, and enjoyable game I don't see how the $55 was not well spent.

Ask anyone who originally bought a Earthbound, Chrono Trigger, Zelda Ocarina of Time, Super Smash Bros (N64), or Mario 64 whether they would pay the $60, $70, or even $80+ it cost them again for the same high quality game? I am pretty sure the vast majority of them will reply with a enthusiastic, YES!


Frankly, I think your the one that is retarted. What your implying is that by buying 3 games for $10 (in essence paying $3.33/game) from Wally World your not retarded and I am (and a good majority of us here) for buying Zelda for $70. That my friend is ludicrous!

The memories I have of playing the first Street Fighter II the day I got it was worth the $74.99 I payed. Not to mention the moments after.

By the way, movie tickets here are $3.75. Big screen, stadium seating, clean, and wonderful sound. I don't know where you get $8 to $10. You must be the one retarted enough to pay the $8 to $10 because I don't know anyone that pays that much.

Perhaps you missed the golden age where a great majority of games were actually fun (by your grammar you sound 10). In that case I guess you just don't know what a great game is and I am sorry.


Chris
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']Dont forget, Phantasy Star IV clocked in at $99.99.

Also, several SNES games were $74.99 originally. I remember Street Fighter II cost that much at first.[/quote]

That was in the days when media costs were a primary portion of game costs. SFII was the first 16-Mb cartridge for the SNES, back when that really meant something.

Except for portable using solid state memory, essentially the GBA and DS, media cost is no longer a big factor. The cost of manufactuirng a GameCube game is less than 10% of what it cost for a high capacity N64 game. Media cost really distorts the analysis when you also add in the price of media is constant for a game during its period of highest popularity. The ten millionth cartridge cost as much as the first. Development cost only occurs once and for a very successful game amortizes to near zero.

Game prices for systems that used mask ROMs cannot really serve as useful reference points for games on optical discs. Doing so clouds the real issue. The industry could have dropped prices considerably more on CD-ROM based systems than they did. If Sony had staked everything on much higher sales volumes per title, which I think was quite doable, they could easily have made $30 the top price for PS1 titles that didn't include special hardware like a Guncon. Sony, as new kid on the console block, didn't have the confidence to do that and prices have been at a level that constrained sales volumes.

The only console company executive I've seen take note of this is J Allard. He made a remark during GDC that to keep retail prices within the comfort zone the top selling high production cost games would have to go from selling 5 million units to 20 million. GTA III & IV isn't too far short of that if you include all platforms (PS2, Xbox, and PC) but that is a rare case. The game industry needs to achieve volumes like that of the home video business or flounder under sales limited by high retail pricing.
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky']
Anyways....games make like 10x more that they cost.... and movies (Like Spiderman) make barely 3X....
[/quote]

It might make barely 3X the amount in the theater, but think about the amount it makes once it gets to DVD...
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']Dont forget, Phantasy Star IV clocked in at $99.99.

Also, several SNES games were $74.99 originally. I remember Street Fighter II cost that much at first.[/quote]

And 6 months after Phantasy Star IV was released, I found it brand new for $20 in a clearance bin at Toysrus.

Me and my cousins pooled our money together to buy Street Fighter II for the SNES the day it came out. We figured we were going to be playing together, why pay full price for seperate copies for each of us?

Yeah, I was a cheapass gamer way back then too.

Let the developers raise their prices, I have the patience to wait them out. There are too many crappy games out as it is for me to waste my time and pay full price for them.

Also, you can only raise prices so much before the customer stops, and simply refuses to buy the product at that price. When I asked the Toysrus employee why Phantasy Star IV was only $20 when it had been $100 six month earlier (remember this was years ago when games hardly ever went on sale, I wanted to make sure that this sale was for real), his reply was: "We couldn't sell them at $100, so we had no choice to mark them down and get rid of them."
 
Tourist price $60, premium lap dance from an A-list adult movie performer, oftentimes with silicone enhancements.

Locals $20, two-for-one specials depending on DJs, often with optional free feels thrown in, mostly naturals.
 
[quote name='Scorch']20 years is questionable - I remember seeing Virtua Racing on Sega Genesis sell for $99.99 when it first came out.

Now? You could probably find it for a dollar or less.

Would you have paid $99.99 back in the day for this?

Virtua%20Racing%20(GS-Cap).png


Can you believe we used to say "Damn, that looks real!" to that?[/quote]

good point
 
Back in the day, there was no internet to help you out when the prices of games were 74.99 and 99 dollars. These days, the prices won't stick if they are raised because there are much smarter consumers. Yes, you will still get the impulse buyers and the ones that don't mind shelling out 60 dollars for new games, but too many high priced games have sucked that have put a sour taste in many peoples mouths. Let them raise the price to 60. They won't get my money until a price drop hits.
 
I really hate the quantity over quality argument. My thought is, the truely best games of any generation hold up over time. It's why Space Invaders is still playable.

But, why don't you remember the crap that use to come out. How about Bevis and Butthead or Aero the Acrobat? No one plays these games anymore, but they cost $50. How about Cybermorph on the Jaguar (shudders).

Really, if you look at the middle level games, they have gotten much better this generation. You can go buy a new game every month this generation and have a game worth playing. Let's be honest, if you had to buy 60 games for each system since the Atari 2600, and then you had to play the worst game in that bunch, the games of today would be much better.

Now, I think some of the love for the older systems is where you were in life when you played them. The games you played when you were 9-14 will forever be the best games of your life. No matter what comes out today, you're still going to love those older games.

Take this, if you can, put your prejudices aside, and play Mario 64 at the same time as Sunshine. I think Sunshine is technically better in everyway (and those 3D levels really blow away Mario 64). But, there is always something inside that draws you back to Mario 64 and that's nostalgia to when it came out.

Don't get me wrong, it's fine to be nostalgic, but I think it's unfair to rag todays companies and developers for something they can't control.
 
They could slap a $60 price tag on the Madden games and the douches would still buy it cuz it is after all "THE BEST FOOTBALL SIM EVAR!!!!!111!"
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']Dont forget, Phantasy Star IV clocked in at $99.99.

Also, several SNES games were $74.99 originally. I remember Street Fighter II cost that much at first.[/quote]

Phantasy Star 2 was as well. I bought Phantasy Star 4 for like $5 at Caldoor when they were closing...also got a 32X for $4. Barely missed getting a Sega CD for $4 also, though...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top